So I don't think that Michael's statement applies to anyone here -- it applies to a specific group of people who don't bother even trying to find out how to secure their computers.
BTW, I feel that society does expect your average Joe off the street to be able to handle certain high-tech things that, even 10 years ago, it didn't. Let's take today's DSL connections. We've had DSL through two companies: Earthlink and Verizon. Earthlink sent a technician over and set up the line and equipment for us. Verizon, however, sent a package to our home and expected us to do all the hookup ourselves.
Certainly, Michael knows how to do that so it wasn't a problem for us. But I couldn't help thinking that your average user would have had a hard time with this assignment, even with technical help over the phone. (And this was technical help from their desk overseas ... Yes, outsourcing at work again!)
Also, no one briefed us on how to reliably secure our DSL, or the wireless network we've set up to let both computers use it. But we already know that. What scares me is those millions of users out there who have no idea that there's any danger to their computer in having a DSL connection. Verizon doesn't give them any inkling -- and most people will put on their DSL and be sitting ducks for any hack attack.
I think we are in an increasingly technical age, but the knowledge of the risks of the technology we're selling to end users "off the shelf" is not widely known. And sometimes the only way the end user learns about this is after a bad attack on their computer. And that's not right.
You see, a car is seen as something that can be dangerous (rightly so). Do we teach our kids growing up that a computer on the Internet can be dangerous too? No. But it can be. And that's where we fall down.
Michael and I have taught our kids that the Internet has dangers -- that it's a tool that must be used wisely. We don't let our kids go online without supervision. But we're not the norm here.
I don't think we can expect the end user to be anything but ignorant as long as we sell Internet access as just another commodity. I think that some form of Internet education is needed -- the license is one idea, but there are other ways this could be done. Some kind of short course, even instructions that must be given by anyone selling Internet access (some kind of warning) prior to setting it up. Perhaps a paper that the end user has to sign stating that he or she understands the risk of a direct Internet connection in the home. Then we can claim willful ignorance when a person does not take the steps to secure his or her internet access.
Judith
> Maybe that wasn't the right word for the idea I'm trying to convey. For
> example, my doctor doesn't expect me to be able to diagnose my own illness.
> Does it make me "stupid" for not knowing enough about my own body? What
> would he be if he expected me to know it?
>
> Marlon
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
