[LINK] Perspective on security! [was: Security efforts hindered by untrained users]

[Stephen Wilson]

Hi Stil,

No, I didn't mean to group you with contempt-showers.  Sorry for any 
imputation.  I lost track of who said what and when in the thread, and 
just used the quoted passage as a launching pad.

Cheers,

Steve Wilson.



Stilgherrian wrote:
> On 31/1/08 11:32 AM, "Stephen Wilson" <swilson at lockstep.com.au> wrote:
>> Jeez ...
>>
>>>> it's like their brain just switches off - they've made the decision that
>>>> 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
>>>> child.
>>> Yes, noticed this too. I think there must be some fundamental brain
>>> mechanism at work here -- the equivalent of rabbits freezing in the
>>> headlights, maybe?
>> I'm surprised by the naked contempt displayed in many of these comments
>> for regular computing users.  Even the self-evident jokes in this thread
>> drip with sarcasm reflecting an unhelpful air of superiority. [snip]
> 
> Stephen, just to be clear, I'm actually agreeing with you on this issue --
> and was also considering using the early auto industry as an analogy (but
> got distracted by some other things before writing).
> 
> I'm not sure whether you *intend* to group me with the contempt-showers, but
> since your comment comes immediately after quoting a paragraph I wrote, I'm
> worried that you are. I'd therefore like to repeat an earlier paragraph I
> wrote:
> 
>> If perfectly intelligent people have trouble with the technology, then it's
>> our fault for making poor technology, our fault for not training them, and our
>> fault for alienating them by calling them idiots.
> 
> As for the rabbit-in-spotlight comment... I've actually seen this. A dialog
> pops up and people do literally freeze in place, completely unsure as to
> what to do next. So frozen, in fact, that they don't think to read the words
> in front of them.
> 
> (Of course it doesn't help if the words are meaningless to them.)
> 
> And I stress again, some fundamental human mechanism must be at work here --
> which we need to understand to move forward.
> 
> While I did make a tongue-in-cheek comment about "natural selection in
> action", I do wonder whether there might not be some truth in this. Our
> brain is a wonderfully complex thing, and while to you and me it might look
> like undifferentiated slush, perhaps there are different structures in
> different people. Could not we see the emergence of brains which can better
> handle many, short-duration inputs (from watching TV or many data inputs on
> a computer screen), or more abstract concepts (ditto) rather than being able
> to react to a pouncing tiger?
> 
> I don't see this as being any more critical of people as humans than saying
> some people have evolved to have more melanin in their skin because of the
> environment their ancestors grew up in.
> 
> Possibly I have over-reacted to your comment. But it did come after quoting
> me, so...
> 
> Stil
> 
>