5 ms·
It's not security fatigue, it's just old-fashioned laziness combined with ignorance, compounded by the "on-a-computer" rationale that makes 'normal' people turn
by jungletek 10y ago
It's not security fatigue, it's just old-fashioned laziness combined with ignorance, compounded by the "on-a-computer" rationale that makes 'normal' people turn their brain off because they treat this box like it's black magic rather than trying to understand it.
That they 'have' to use this box for work or recreation, rather than having a curiosity that fuels learning and exploration and therefore better understanding, leads to them feeling like they're at the mercy of the machine, rather than the master of it.
- ffggvv 10y agoYou can't be passionate about everything.
- ivraatiems 10y agoI think this is a mischaracterization. I'm a software developer for a living and for fun, too, and I get tired of dealing with endless parades of security breaches and new best practices and so on. Even motivated, curious people can get fatigued, bored or annoyed.
- geofft 10y agoIt's extremely ironic for an invective against laziness and ignorance to take the form of ignoring scientific research. If you really believed in curiosity and learning, you'd explain why you think the study is wrong.
- mordechai9000 10y agoI am mystified that people have so much trouble grasping basic computer concepts. But from the users' perspective, technologists have foisted a system on them that seems to be poorly made and requires a high level of expertise to use safely. Blaming the user when they are victimized by someone taking advantage of a shoddy system is, well, victim blaming.
- blacksmith_tb 10y agoIt's analogous to people understanding how their cars work. Many people are capable drivers but have no idea at all about what goes on in the engine, transmission, etc. Would understanding those improve their driving? Potentially (especially in cases where they fail), but clearly it isn't a requirement. But like you say, the bar seems to be higher for computing.
- mordechai9000 10y agoI was tempted to use a car analogy, but I resisted. It seems apt to me. I "have" to drive a car for work and recreation. I know a little bit about it, but I am not an expert, and I don't want to be. I have too many demands on my time already. I'm happy to pay the manufacturer and the mechanics to be the experts.
- serge2k 10y agoand if your computer is broken that makes sense. But you still probably know how to drive, pump gas, and do basic things like change a tire. You have controls that you understand for things like the radio or cruise control, and you will check the manual if you want to set the clock. On computers people just say fuck it.
- surge 10y agoYou make the mistake that "on a computer" is the only people are lazy or take short cuts or risks for the sake of convenience. Just look at driving behavior when someone's in a rush and floors it when the light turns yellow. Even with curiosity, the everyday stuff that's cumbersome still feels like a tedious unnecessity. Thinks like LastPass, and ssh private keys, or even 2FA are successful because they remove the tediousness yet still somehow add value in terms of security.
- lotyrin 10y agoEven if that were the case, would the prescription be any different? Regardless of how the user fails to behave according to our designs, the designs which included their unrealistic behavior were wrong.
- serge2k 10y ago> the "on-a-computer" rationale that makes 'normal' people turn their brain off because they treat this box like it's black magic rather than trying to understand it. Pretty much. "How did you get so good with computers?" "I actually try."
- ridgeguy 10y agoDownvoted because you offered a uselessly simplistic characterization of many peoples' responses to complicated phenomena.