[LINK] Security efforts hindered by untrained users
kim.holburn at gmail.com
Thu Jan 31 08:46:36 EST 2008
You talk as if a knowledgeable person would understand when seeing
the "pop up" what was happening and press the right button. Simply
not the case. Much software is very badly designed and doesn't
present the user with enough information to make any kind of informed
answer. I've seen experienced IT people stumped at times, so how is
the average user going to do? Not well.
On 2008/Jan/30, at 10:06 PM, Craig Sanders wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 07:05:15AM +1100, Stilgherrian wrote:
>> On 31/1/08 6:49 AM, "Craig Sanders" <cas at taz.net.au> wrote:
>>> there's also the fact (which can be attested to by anyone who has
>>> ever done tech support) that many otherwise quite intelligent people
>>> suddenly become incredibly stupid when faced with any technology
>>> more complicated than a toaster.
>> I think part of the problem is that many geeks blame perfectly
>> intelligent people who may be well-informed and capable in their
>> own field(s) for not immediately understanding the complicated,
>> non-intuitive (except to other geeks) and rapidly-changing technology
>> which we've forced upon them.
> no, that's not it at all.
> i'm talking about otherwise intelligent people who become useless
> idiots who aren't capable of and don't even bother trying to learn or
> understand even the simplest things about computers, no matter how
> or how patiently you try to teach them.
> it's like their brain just switches off - they've made the decision
> it's too hard or too much effort (or that it's "easier" to get someone
> else to do it for them) and they revert to being a pathetic, helpless
>> If perfectly intelligent people have trouble with the technology,
>> it's our fault for making poor technology, our fault for not training
>> them, and our fault for alienating them by calling them idiots.
> partly. mostly, though, it's THEIR fault for refusing to even attempt
> to learn anything about it....worse than refuse, they actively resist
> and resent any attempt to teach them.
> (and, frankly, anyone who *chooses* not to even attempt to learn even
> the basics about something that's important to their daily personal
> and/or working life *IS* an idiot. no matter how smart they might be
> BTW, on a related note: to borrow a misused term, there is such a
> thing as "irreducible complexity" - but not in the sense that loony
> creationists mean it. for a computer to be able to do all the things
> that people need it to do, a general purpose computing device for word
> processing, spreadsheets, web browsing, email, and numerous other
> absolutely *requires* at least a minimal level of complexity. it will
> not and can not ever be as simple to operate as a toaster (or even a
> VCR - something which otherwise intelligent people also have
>> It's also partially the fault of marketing departments for pushing
>> idea that complex technology is something you "should" understand "at
>> the push of the button",
> yes. definitely. they've created and fostered unrealistic
>> but geeks aren't helping.
> actually, many geeks ARE helping. many geeks have the same attitude
> to tech support that I do (i.e. "teach rather than spoonfeed when
> possible/appropriate") and many are (also like me) very good at
> translating complex technical concepts into everyday English that
> non-techs can understand - and frequently encounter resistance,
> resentment, and hostility for our efforts.
> many people actively do not want to learn.
> craig sanders <cas at taz.net.au>
> BOFH excuse #48:
> bad ether in the cables
> Link mailing list
> Link at mailman.anu.edu.au
IT Network & Security Consultant
Ph: +39 06 855 4294 M: +39 3494957443
mailto:kim at holburn.net aim://kimholburn
skype://kholburn - PGP Public Key on request
Democracy imposed from without is the severest form of tyranny.
-- Lloyd Biggle, Jr. Analog, Apr 1961
More information about the Link