From Talk:Policies/Telemetry Policy
Viewing a history listing
Time User Activity Comment
07:10, 3 April 2018 Vkrause (talk | contribs)

New reply created

(Reply to Is OPT-IN ID (from KEXI) understood?)
21:56, 2 April 2018 Jstaniek (talk | contribs)

Comment text edited

19:47, 2 April 2018 Jstaniek (talk | contribs)

New thread created


Referring to version

There seems to be emphasis on assuring that OPT-IN unique identification (like in KEXI, OPT-IN ID in short below) is never used by compliant KDE projects. I'd like to understand a specific measure that shows opinion of our user base and our contributors. That these groups A) understood the OPT-IN ID and its scope correctly and B) the OPT-IN ID is rejected as something negative (explanation needed backed by facts)

To be able to move closer to the answer I'd like to know if OPT-IN is seen in conflict with this point or not:

ANONIMITY "We do not transmit data that could be used to identify a specific user. In particular: [..] we will not use any unique device, installation or user id"

Disclaimer: From the very beginning I started to use telemetry in KEXI with no intent to be in conflict with such policy. The ID is not based on device properties, OS properties or user identity. It's a big random number, the same technique as used by web application in cookies. Reason to have it is ONLY to compute statistics based on unique users per given pattern (such as users of a "1024" screen resolution). That's the same measurement as number of unique web visitors.

19:47, 2 April 2018

It does not matter how exactly the unique user id is generated, the relevant aspect is that it identifies a user.

Whether or not using such an id is acceptable depends on what we want (my understanding of the discussion at Akademy 2017 was that we do not want this), and the legal implications (GDPR even considers IP addresses personal data, so I assume unique ids are also moving us from "data" to "personal data" there).

07:10, 3 April 2018