Their motivating example was something like “golang stopped working on clean macos, and no one noticed for months”, which kind of proves my point.
The whole point of the proposal is that things could be improved with some telemetry.
Now of course you could weigh the tradeoffs and say the potential for improvement doesn't outweigh the risk of misuse, but it seems clear to me that reasonable people can disagree.
> I don't think they need telemetry. Go is clearly a successful language and community without it.
Right! So why "pee in the soup"?
> things could be improved with some telemetry
Or they could not do those things? (I read "Why Telemetry?" and remain unmoved.)
> you could weigh the tradeoffs
I have.
> the potential for improvement doesn't outweigh the risk of misuse
That's not my argument. It's not even misuse that I care about here (I do care about that, but that's a separate concern, and one that doesn't arise if you don't collect data in the first place, eh?), I care about use. I don't want my compiler to make network connections to Google or anybody, for any reason.
> reasonable people can disagree
That's what I said.