5 ms·

Users don't read, they smash Ok buttons without understanding.

kgwgk 6y ago
Make them sign several clauses on a contract and send back a scanned copy. Really, if they still go through it without understanding what they are doing it will be on them.
- mattnewton 6y ago
  Signed copies protect you from litigation in court, not loss of brand value in the court of public opinion. Plenty of people bitten by it will just never use a backup product from you again, and every time apple sneezes a flurry of journalists are there to document it.
  - UnFleshedOne 6y ago
    I guess the idea here is to make enabling the option enough of a pain so that only people who need it are going to use it, and button smashers will be spared.
Nextgrid 6y ago
In this case, should we also ban power tools and heavy machinery because some idiots aren't careful and get hurt?
- mattnewton 6y ago
  No, but it’s perfectly fine for a company to not want to be in the table/chain saw industry if they have a brand identity around “just works.” It’s unfortunate because apple has the cash and panache to take it mainstream, but they probably don’t have any market incentive to do so, at least until someone else figures out the ux that doesn’t cut clueless user fingers off.
- rootusrootus 6y ago
  This seems uncharitable. Most people can intuitively understand the danger of a table saw. Just the sound alone sends a shiver up your spine even if you aren't a woodworking expert. But we've conditioned users to accept a million dialog boxes to confirm random choices that are mostly inconsequential CYA.
- gruez 6y ago
  The analogy isn't helpful because you're actively aware of the dangerous machine when you're close to it, whereas losing a password is something you unintentionally do because you forgot about it 6 months after setting it up. A better analogy would be ammonia refrigerators that occasionally leaked and killed people in their sleep, which are banned.
mywittyname 6y ago
Make it difficult to find unless the person is actively looking for it.
- mattnewton 6y ago
  Apple’s ultimate goal is to sell iPhones, not solve privacy unfortunately. Why would they invest in a feature they actively hide and discourage users from using? They can’t put it in the keynote as a feature to buy an iPhone, and then hide it from all the users they just advertised to.
gsich 6y ago
So you ask them multiple times. You remind them via mail every n months. I repeat this is solvable. If people chose willingly ignore multiple warnings, then it's their fault. Don't assume your users are immature just because they use a computer. This assumption is only with computers, I don't know why.
- Brian_K_White 6y ago
  I like this "There are things you can do". If the easy/simple first idea after giving it zero seconds of thought isn't good enough, the possibility actually exists to give it more than zero seconds of thought and try more than one thing. It's also possible that the simple warning does work just fine, after it's ubiquitous for a while. Everything about a computer was baffling originally, and now grandma scans documents to create pdfs and attaches them to emails. She's still grandma, she stil is baffled by many things, but there is a whole pretty big body of good understanding that she DOES have, just like she knows how to operate many other parts of her life. The irreversable nature of protected data could perfectly well become one of these things that everyone knows. All it probably requires is simply being a feature of ordinary life for some amount of time. And maybe a little more standardization around terminology and ui so that people can tell when they are dealing with a secure thing vs an ordinary thing.

Make them sign several clauses on a contract and send back a scanned copy. Really, if they still go through it without understanding what they are doing it will be on them.

mattnewton 6y ago
Signed copies protect you from litigation in court, not loss of brand value in the court of public opinion. Plenty of people bitten by it will just never use a backup product from you again, and every time apple sneezes a flurry of journalists are there to document it.
- UnFleshedOne 6y ago
  I guess the idea here is to make enabling the option enough of a pain so that only people who need it are going to use it, and button smashers will be spared.

Nextgrid 6y ago

In this case, should we also ban power tools and heavy machinery because some idiots aren't careful and get hurt?

mattnewton 6y ago
No, but it’s perfectly fine for a company to not want to be in the table/chain saw industry if they have a brand identity around “just works.” It’s unfortunate because apple has the cash and panache to take it mainstream, but they probably don’t have any market incentive to do so, at least until someone else figures out the ux that doesn’t cut clueless user fingers off.
rootusrootus 6y ago
This seems uncharitable. Most people can intuitively understand the danger of a table saw. Just the sound alone sends a shiver up your spine even if you aren't a woodworking expert. But we've conditioned users to accept a million dialog boxes to confirm random choices that are mostly inconsequential CYA.
gruez 6y ago
The analogy isn't helpful because you're actively aware of the dangerous machine when you're close to it, whereas losing a password is something you unintentionally do because you forgot about it 6 months after setting it up. A better analogy would be ammonia refrigerators that occasionally leaked and killed people in their sleep, which are banned.

mywittyname 6y ago

Make it difficult to find unless the person is actively looking for it.

mattnewton 6y ago
Apple’s ultimate goal is to sell iPhones, not solve privacy unfortunately. Why would they invest in a feature they actively hide and discourage users from using? They can’t put it in the keynote as a feature to buy an iPhone, and then hide it from all the users they just advertised to.

gsich 6y ago

So you ask them multiple times. You remind them via mail every n months. I repeat this is solvable. If people chose willingly ignore multiple warnings, then it's their fault. Don't assume your users are immature just because they use a computer. This assumption is only with computers, I don't know why.

Brian_K_White 6y ago
I like this "There are things you can do". If the easy/simple first idea after giving it zero seconds of thought isn't good enough, the possibility actually exists to give it more than zero seconds of thought and try more than one thing. It's also possible that the simple warning does work just fine, after it's ubiquitous for a while. Everything about a computer was baffling originally, and now grandma scans documents to create pdfs and attaches them to emails. She's still grandma, she stil is baffled by many things, but there is a whole pretty big body of good understanding that she DOES have, just like she knows how to operate many other parts of her life. The irreversable nature of protected data could perfectly well become one of these things that everyone knows. All it probably requires is simply being a feature of ordinary life for some amount of time. And maybe a little more standardization around terminology and ui so that people can tell when they are dealing with a secure thing vs an ordinary thing.