Re: [GD-General] Collecting info from players

[Colin F. <cp...@ea...>]

2003 July 10th
Thursday

I really dislike the idea of sending the information by
default, and hiding the disable checkbox.  That is so
lame.

Hiding the checkbox starts with putting it deep within
an option menu hierarchy.  Then the checkbox is given
a confusing label, like "[x] Make app run better" or
"[x] User Data Availability".  Then one could set it up so
that changes to the checkbox state are forgotten if the 
user doesn't hit the "Apply" button and restart.  Finally,
the checkbox silently reverts to its default on the 
dinkiest patch offered by your company, like "upgrading"
a tiny clause in the EULA to alert the user that the
checkbox will be set to the default and can never be
changed again!  (They have the option of never upgrading
again if they don't like these new terms!)


If I wished to gather information from a user's machine,
I would pop-up a plain-text dialog box that contained the
exact text I wish to send to my servers.  I would have a
very direct and honest explanation of how this information
would be used -- and the LIMITS of the use of this information.
If a user clicks "Don't Send", that's the end of it.

If I cannot convince a user that the information can be
used to improve their personal experience with the software
in the short term or long term, then I must respect their
decision.  Maybe the user is being irrational, or maybe the
user has real concerns about information being gathered.
It is shockingly easy to take seemingly impersonal information
and eventually build up a profile of a specific person.

When one shares information with another party, there is
some amount of trust involved.  How many of us get tons of
spam from the "affiliates" of "opt-in" advertising firms?


If you hide the checkbox because "the user may be irrational
and won't know what's best", then you may eventually become
comfortable regarding the user as oblivious livestock.
Users are too stupid to deserve privacy!

If you cannot make your case to the user, defending your
desire to collect certain pieces of information (which
you show on the screen in plain text), then I think you
should respect the user, even if this decision seems 
irrational.

Also, if you don't show users the information you wish
to collect, and subject it to their approval, then what
is to stop you from collecting all kinds of information?
If users are carefree enough to not search for the hidden
checkbox to disable sending information to your servers,
then what limits are there to the information you can
gather?!  Why not search the disk for names of other 
applications...uh, for "compatibility" statistics!
Oh, and note if KaZaA or Direct Connect is on the disk.
Collect "aggregate" statistics on cracked games and
mp3's.  Share your data with RIAA.


Okay, I have a gift for hyperbole and extrapolation, but
I am personally shocked by the abuse of power of software
developers over users.  Maybe you aren't proposing to 
make the next Jupiter, Inc spyware app, but I hope you 
see how your thinking is on the same continuum.

I understand the value of knowing the platform, the graphics
card, desktop resolution, the type of CPU, the total memory,
etc, and I realize that most game developers sincerely want
to improve the user experience.  Seeing that roughly 80% of
people running the Unreal Tournament 2003 client were using
Windows XP was very enlightening.

I believe that demonstrating your respect for the user will
ultimately pay off.  If I feel that an organization is 
concerned about my privacy, but is also committed to improving
my experience with their product or service, and I can see
how certain pieces of information can help, then I am often
delighted to share this information.

If I develop my own commercial software product, I will
reflect on my own experiences as a user.  If there is a
certain pattern found in other software designs that is
annoying, frustrating, or lacks respect for the user,
I will do my best to avoid that pattern.

There will ALWAYS be some company that is pushing the 
envelope of invading privacy and compelling users to 
act a certain way, like Microsoft, Real Networks, 
Jupiter, etc.  I think ICS / CSE students graduating today
believe it is perfectly reasonable to do some of the things
pioneered by the great innovators.  It's like telling
"white lies" and collecting unemployment when one is not
really seeking a job; somehow it has become the norm.

I'm sorry if some of my comments went a little beyond the
scope of the question.  I submit plenty of forms with personal
information on the Internet, and I am all for asking (not
perpetually nagging) for information to help improve a
product.  But if something strikes you as being manipulative,
it probably is!  Do YOU want to be duped or manipulated?
Also, is it actually irrational for a user to be suspicious
about how "aggregate" statistics will really be used?
I'm serious.  I recently visited paypalsucks.com, and there
was an interesting thread about how the CORPORATION can
PROMISE security, but all it takes is one employee to totally
destroy that promise.  Whoops!  I put a backup of the 
database on a subnet shared by a wireless LAN, and a 
drive-by "war chalker" downloaded it.  Total plausible
deniability...or perhaps an innocent accident.  Okay, again,
maybe this scenario is extreme, but why do you deserve the
user's trust if you resort to tricking them to "volunteer"
information (just because they're too stupid or lazy to
search for a hidden checkbox)?

I had a vision that one day common public toilets would have
EULAs printed on the lids or back panels.  Any material you
deposit in the toilet becomes the property of Progressive 
Genetic Solutions, Inc, and can be used for "aggregate"
statistics.  There would be promises that no correlation 
would be made between your DNA, the time and date of your
toilet use, and, uh, evidence that you ate at Burger King
or McDonald's recently.  If the toilet should verbally
recommend Pizza Hut as a good change for you, and thank
you by name for using Progressive, Inc's toilets, it's
just a feature to better serve you.

* This e-mail brought to you by: paranoia about the future! *

--- Colin "Paranoid" Fahey

cp...@ea...