lol get rekked

Canonical’s Privacy and Data Collection Practices
Canonical has faced strong privacy-related criticism for Ubuntu’s default features. In Ubuntu 12.10 (October 2012) the Unity desktop began showing Amazon shopping results in search (“Dash”) queries. Search terms were sent (via Canonical’s servers) to Amazon to populate product links and images. Critics—including the Free Software Foundation’s Richard Stallman—called this “spyware,” and the Electronic Frontier Foundation warned it was “a major privacy problem”
pcworld.com
. Mark Shuttleworth defended the design by noting Canonical proxies the queries for anonymity (“we have root”)
pcworld.com
, but many users found it intrusive. By late 2014 Canonical announced Unity 8 would drop these Amazon results by default
pcworld.com
. Eventually (with Ubuntu 16.04 and later) the controversial shopping lens was made easily removable or disabled by default, and Canonical moved away from shipping it enabled. Outside of Amazon integration, Ubuntu’s other telemetry is limited and generally opt-in. Error-reporting (Apport) and package-use stats (the “popularity-contest” tool) have been available for years, but were user-controlled. For example, Ubuntu 18.04 LTS added an optional “Ubuntu Report” survey of hardware/software data: the first-login installer screen invites users to opt-in to sending anonymized system stats to Canonical
omgubuntu.co.uk
. By default new installs are opted in but can easily opt out
omgubuntu.co.uk
. Importantly Canonical publishes aggregated results and explicitly collects no personal data (no usernames, IP addresses or file paths)
omgubuntu.co.uk
. In sum, aside from the now-removed Amazon search, Ubuntu’s privacy model is fairly conservative, with telemetry disclosed and mostly opt-in. (Canonical even removed the popcon package from new installs in 2020
forum.tuxdigital.com
.)
Business Practices and Monetization
Canonical has tried various revenue strategies, some of which drew criticism as user-hostile. A well-known example is Ubuntu’s inclusion of an Amazon affiliate link. From Ubuntu 14.04 LTS onward, the default Unity launcher showed an Amazon icon (in Ubuntu’s default “Launcher” sidebar) that used Canonical’s affiliate tag
askubuntu.com
. Canonical admitted this was to “make a little money” from Ubuntu’s popularity
askubuntu.com
. Although the earnings were modest, critics said it felt like built-in advertising in a community OS. More recently, Ubuntu Pro (a paid extended support service) began displaying “news” or ads in ordinary system tools. In late 2022, an Ubuntu Pro update caused the command-line apt tool to print unsolicited Canonical news and promotional messages by default
techzine.eu
. Users reacted angrily, and Canonical quickly committed to adding an easy way to disable these messages
techzine.eu
. This wasn’t new to Ubuntu – Canonical had previously experimented with Amazon ads on the login screen and splash screen
techzine.eu
 – but it again reminded users of Ubuntu’s willingness to embed commercial notices. Canonical’s freemium business attempts have had mixed success. For example, Ubuntu One, a cloud storage service with free and paid tiers, was launched in 2010 but shut down in 2014
techcrunch.com
. Canonical CEO Jane Silber explained that competing with giants offering tens of gigabytes free (Dropbox, Google Drive, etc.) was not viable, and they opted to end investment in Ubuntu One
techcrunch.com
. Similarly, Ubuntu’s paid software store (built into the old Software Center) never thrived. By 2015 the paid-app side was essentially abandoned: developers complained that their commercial apps would not install on newer Ubuntu releases
pcworld.com
, and Canonical shifted focus to Snaps and the mobile app store
pcworld.com
pcworld.com
. Critics also noted that the Software Center mixed proprietary and open-source apps without clear labeling
pcworld.com
. In short, Canonical’s monetization moves (affiliate deals, ads, paid apps/services) have repeatedly generated controversy. Each experiment either met resistance (as above) or was quietly shelved (Ubuntu One, paid desktop apps). Today Canonical still offers subscription services (Ubuntu Pro, Landscape management, etc.), but these are marketed mainly at enterprise customers; in desktop releases Canonical has largely reverted to a pure-open-source ethos for included software (apart from the Snap store, discussed below).
Community Relations and Upstream Contributions
Canonical’s relationship with the broader Ubuntu community and open-source ecosystem has often been strained. Unlike Fedora/Red Hat or openSUSE/SUSE, Canonical developed Ubuntu more in-house, which led to accusations of sidelining community input and upstream projects
datamation.com
datamation.com
. Long-time Ubuntu developers lamented that major decisions were made behind closed doors. For example, Canonical’s move to online-only developer summits (versus in-person UDS meetings) and its declaration of a possible “rolling release” model upset some contributors because plans changed abruptly
datamation.com
. One flashpoint was Kubuntu. In 2012 Canonical ended paid support for the Kubuntu desktop (dropping funding for lead developer Jonathan Riddell)
lwn.net
. Riddell noted Kubuntu “has not been a business success” and left development to volunteers
lwn.net
. This decision – like later dropping funding for other flavors – reinforced a sense that Canonical prioritized its flagship Unity desktop over community editions. Ubuntu’s dev processes also caused friction. In 2013 community bloggers like Martin Owens publicly quit Ubuntu development, saying Canonical “ignored users” and undermined free-software norms
datamation.com
. Kubuntu’s Riddell fought Canonical on trademark/licensing issues (see below) and ultimately was pushed off the Ubuntu Council in 2013
cio.com
. Others saw Kubuntu’s successor (Kubuntu’s independent community lead) and the rise of Mint or elementary OS as partly driven by discontent with Canonical’s top-down approach. Even Unity itself was controversial: though Canonical touted Unity’s innovation, some GNOME developers felt Ubuntu had forked the desktop stack unnecessarily. (Canonical’s later retreat to GNOME in 2017
linuxjournal.com
 was welcomed by some as a realignment with the community.) On the other hand, Canonical has contributed significantly to Ubuntu and related projects (e.g. funding PulseAudio, Upstart/ eventually systemd discussions, Snap technology, etc.). But in raw upstream contributions (like kernel commits) Canonical has typically ranked well below other major companies. Many in Debian and GNOME note that Canonical’s unique paths (Unity/Mir) sometimes duplicated existing projects, which bred distrust. In recent years Canonical has tried to mend fences (e.g. adopting GNOME and Wayland, collaborating with the FSF on licensing). But longstanding tensions remain: as one commentator observed, the “Ubuntu community” now often feels like a Canonical-run community rather than a volunteer project
datamation.com
linux-magazine.com
.
Software Design Choices
Canonical’s design and packaging decisions have frequently been divisive. Most notoriously, Ubuntu pursued its own “all-Snap” strategy. Snap packages were introduced around 2016 as a universal Linux app format under Canonical’s control. Snap has conveniences (bundle dependencies, transactional updates) but many in the community have criticized it. Common complaints are slow startup times and large disk usage for Snap apps
news.itsfoss.com
, opaque update behavior, and the fact that the Snap Store (which distributes Snaps) is proprietary to Canonical. Unlike Flatpak’s open Flathub, the Snap Store runs only on Canonical’s servers and was found in 2024 to have inadequate vetting: malicious cryptocurrency wallet Snaps were uploaded and caused users to lose funds
bitdefender.com
osnews.com
. Ubuntu responded by instituting manual reviews and banning crypto apps
bitdefender.com
bitdefender.com
. Community reactions were sharp: one OSNews writer derided Snap as a “poorly maintained application store” ripe for scams
osnews.com
, and commenters called a “closed source, unauditable, corporate controlled app store” antithetical to open source values
osnews.com
osnews.com
. Snap’s prominence in Ubuntu (for example, Ubuntu 21.10 made Firefox a Snap by default
news.itsfoss.com
) has therefore remained controversial. Critics worry Canonical is “forcing” Snap at the expense of traditional package management. Canonical’s earlier display-server strategy also drew fire. In 2013 Canonical revealed Mir, its own graphics server intended to replace X11 on Ubuntu desktop and mobile. Canonical’s initial documentation lambasted Wayland, claiming it “suffers from multiple problems”
phoronix.com
. Upstream Wayland developers quickly rebutted these claims as unfounded
phoronix.com
. Canonical later quietly removed those criticisms from its wiki
phoronix.com
, but by then distrust had set in. In practice Mir became used mainly for Ubuntu Touch/IoT devices rather than the desktop; Ubuntu now uses GNOME with Wayland by default. Other design disputes include the old Unity desktop itself. While some users liked Unity’s workflow, many GNOME purists disliked Ubuntu’s departure from standard GNOME 3. In 2017 Canonical abruptly killed Unity and Unity8, reverting Ubuntu’s desktop to GNOME shell
linuxjournal.com
. (The community has since revived Unity as an independent Ubuntu flavor, but Canonical no longer backs it.) Default application choices have also upset some: for years Ubuntu’s default search and ‘Dash’ included online content (Amazon, Wikipedia, etc.), which privacy advocates decried
pcworld.com
. Even the Ubuntu Software Center once mixed proprietary and free apps, blurring lines for end users
pcworld.com
. In sum, Canonical’s history of in-house UI and packaging choices (Unity, Mir, Snap, online search) have often clashed with broader community expectations.
Licensing and Trademark Policies
Canonical has encountered multiple licensing disputes. Early on it faced backlash for its Intellectual Property policy on Ubuntu derivatives. Canonical’s old policy had effectively required any “Ubuntu-based” distribution to either remove all Ubuntu trademarks/logo or seek approval (a de facto license). Critics (including the FSF and the leader of Kubuntu, Jonathan Riddell) pointed out this conflicted with the GPL: free software can be modified without recompiling just to avoid trademarks
cio.com
linuxjournal.com
. In 2013 Riddell publicly argued that no license should be needed to rebuild Kubuntu (he was later forced off the Ubuntu Council for raising these issues)
cio.com
cio.com
. Canonical did eventually soften its stance: after two years of negotiations with the FSF and Free Software Conservancy, it rewrote its IP policy in 2017 to “unequivocally comply” with the GPL
cio.com
linuxjournal.com
. Even so, analysts warn the new terms remain complex and give Canonical final say in subtle cases
cio.com
linuxjournal.com
. Canonical also made controversial trademark moves. In 2012 it tried to shut down an EFF-led site (fixubuntu.com) that taught users to disable Ubuntu’s privacy-leaking features. Using trademark law, it demanded the domain; the EFF fought back and Canonical quickly withdrew, calling the action a “mistake”
cio.com
. Similarly, Canonical once told the Linux Mint project it needed a license to use Ubuntu’s packages (essentially Ubuntu’s trademark on its binaries). Mint reluctantly signed a deal (the terms undisclosed), angering free-software advocates. (Mint later avoided any bundle by shipping separate packages to comply with Ubuntu’s trademark rules, though this was seen as Canonical overreaching.) Even Ubuntu’s own flavors were not immune. By one account, Canonical’s IP policy did not require permission to use Kubuntu trademarks – only that the artwork be removed – yet confusion remained
cio.com
. Overall, many in the free-software community felt Canonical’s aggressive trademark/licensing positions (relying on lawyers rather than community engagement) ran counter to the spirit of open collaboration
cio.com
linuxjournal.com
.
General Community Perception
Canonical/Ubuntu occupies a mixed place in open-source culture. On one hand, Ubuntu became the world’s most popular desktop Linux, praised for ease of use and strong hardware support. On the other, many open-source purists resent what they see as Canonical’s corporate attitude. Critics have accused Canonical of “sticking it to” volunteers and ignoring user feedback
datamation.com
linux-magazine.com
. Veteran blogger Bruce Byfield noted in 2011 that Canonical’s model is closer to a mixed open/proprietary strategy like Google’s, and that some community outrage really reflected “unfulfilled expectations” of altruism
linux-magazine.com
linux-magazine.com
. By 2013 there were outright statements that the “Ubuntu community” as originally conceived was effectively dead, replaced by a Canonical-led project
datamation.com
datamation.com
. In summary, Canonical is often seen as a double-edged sword: it poured resources into Linux (Ubuntu Desktop, cloud images, IoT) but also pursued profit-driven strategies. Many in the FOSS community have voiced frustration that Ubuntu’s decisions sometimes prioritize business logic over openness and consensus. This is exemplified by statements like Stallman’s “spyware” jab
pcworld.com
 and the general wariness of Snap’s closed store
osnews.com
. Still, Ubuntu and Canonical retain broad user support, and some community members appreciate the software and infrastructure Canonical provides. Canonical’s overall image remains that of a capable but occasionally controversial custodian of a major open-source platform. Sources: A wide range of industry and community reports document these issues
pcworld.com
techzine.eu
datamation.com
cio.com
bitdefender.com
news.itsfoss.com
. Each controversy above is discussed in official announcements or tech journalism (see references).