4 ms·
If you're using a car it's taken for granted that you learn how this thing works. If you're using it without learning how it works, it's your own fault, if you
by gst 15y ago
If you're using a car it's taken for granted that you learn how this thing works. If you're using it without learning how it works, it's your own fault, if you have an accident.
Why should this be any different with computers? The risk that you pose to others is pretty low, so there shouldn't be any requirement to have a "license". But I wouldn't call it arrogance, if I'll assume that someone using the network has a minimum knowledge about how things work.
- blahedo 15y ago> If you're using a car it's taken for granted that you learn how this thing works. Only to a point. I own a car and am perfectly competent to use it, but I have only the vaguest of understanding as to what things like spark plugs and catalytic converters do. I know what a manifold is in mathematics, and I suppose it's a bit similar in a car engine. I deem myself knowledgeable to open the bonnet and add windshield wiper fluid when that's low, but anything more complicated I'll take to a mechanic. > If you're using it without learning how it works, it's your own fault, if you have an accident. It's my fault if I drive without, say, learning how to operate the brake pedal, or learning how to turn on the turn signal. But if the accident is due to something wrong with the internals that I know very little about? I don't think any reasonable person believes that getting licensed to drive should require one to have the knowledge of an automobile mechanic.
- thwarted 15y agoThis isn't the equivalent of spark plugs. It's the equivalent knowing how the windows work. If you drive around with the windows down while yelling at the person in the passenger, seat, don't be surprised if other people can hear you. And you can't use as a defense that you didn't know that you needed to have the windows up.