4 ms·

The tone you employ - "users" having "a problem", needing to be "convinced" and "forced" - doesn't help. It's reminiscent of PEBKAC [1]. [1] https://www.cio.co

The tone you employ - "users" having "a problem", needing to be "convinced" and "forced" - doesn't help. It's reminiscent of PEBKAC [1]. [1] https://www.cio.com/article/274775/it-organization-luser-pebkac-and-other-ways-it-insults-users.html https://www.cio.com/article/274775/it-organization-luser-peb...

naikrovek 4y ago
> The tone you employ - "users" having "a problem", needing to be "convinced" and "forced" - doesn't help. My tone here is borne out of users shooting themselves in the foot and then complaining about the pain and inability to walk. At every opportunity that I have taken to give computer users the choice to do the thing that is good for them, the overwhelming majority have failed to make that choice. The people who visit this site are mostly not that kind of person, though there are plenty here who are. We have shown Microsoft that we simply will not update our operating system or even reboot unless forced. Many, many times we have made this clear, even though patching is overwhelmingly a net positive for both MS and its users, generally speaking, users simply won't do it. They just won't. History bears this out. Updating is a short-term inconvenience in exchange for long-term security and stability, and people do not think about those things logically. The importance of the immediate future is amplified by a large factor, and the importance of the future is attenuated by a large factor, in most people, especially when it comes to people who view their computer as a tool. Sitting in front of a computer is indicative of a user wanting to complete a task, and manual updates impede the ability to perform that task. That makes installing updates and stopping work to reboot a non-starter for those people. They just won't do it. I don't know how else to say it. It's not a matter of tone so much as it is a matter of fact.
- nonrandomstring 4y ago
  Thanks for your thoughtful reply, I hope my additional remarks are taken as sincere and not in any way personal, except in a good way. > My tone here is borne out of users shooting themselves in the foot Frustration. I hear you. Sure, it's frustrating that they exercise choice (however misguided you see that) and then "complain". It's very nice if you've written code, and even nicer that you care for your customers. But, as developers, they aren't our children. I've been there and it's galling, and feels like a rejection, but to accept what is unrequited is sometimes harder than giving it. > the choice to do the thing that is good for them, This is the elitists' dilemma. Please don't be insulted by that word, I'm using it literally and appropriately without value judgement (I am foremost an elitist, and secondarily a peoples' champion, and it is a position that can only ride on a measure of arrogance - which must be tempered) The fact is, it's not your computer. And that really is the long and short. One must respect that if "users" do not wish to take advantage of bug fixes more speedily available through telemetry, then it's their choice to have suboptimal, buggy programs. In other news, our children will listen to shit music and get into drugs and relationships we disapprove of etc. > We have shown Microsoft that we simply will not update our operating system or even reboot unless forced. For very good reasons. Microsoft have shown themselves to be utterly untrustworthy. I really don't think that's even debatable. And it's a shitshow because I do not believe trust can ever be repaired. It leaves the reality that one of the biggest vendors on the planet is in the position of forcing users because it has squandered the reputation necessary to do good-faith business, to propagate its updates. That's tragic because they probably see no way out except doubling down on abuse, authoritarianism and beating users to their will - and ultimately that confrontation will be the end of so much we have built. What makes this worse is that security is about more than personal choice (think vaccinations). In other words the damage that Microsoft (and other big-tech abusers) have done goes far beyond simply destroying the individual trust relations with their customers. They've corroded the social fabric of trust in computer security at a more general level - a cost that is incalculable. > people do not think about those things logically. You are right. And we should not assume that they should. Emotion is a powerful reasoning tool, and only a fool ignores that force of psychology. Once burned twice shy - and we as developers have been burning a lot of peoples' fingers these past 30 years. > I don't know how else to say it. It's not a matter of tone so much as it is a matter of fact. I see it means a lot to you. That is a good thing in itself. You care, which is x10 above the norm. But we cannot force them to be what we wish them to be. Especially not "for their own good" which is where all tyranny begins. We cannot force people to adopt products, customs, behaviours, sing the party line, or any of that hegemonic nonsense without invoking an age of "consumer communism". It saddens me that in 2022 we still need to address the patrician attitude. It's not the way forward. It's sad to see such a deterioration. But so long as companies like Microsoft persist a culture of smug superiority, cavalier conceit and intransigent disrespect to the dignity of their users we will have to accept "fuck you" decision making. And frankly, more power to those courageous enough to say it.

naikrovek 4y ago

> The tone you employ - "users" having "a problem", needing to be "convinced" and "forced" - doesn't help. My tone here is borne out of users shooting themselves in the foot and then complaining about the pain and inability to walk. At every opportunity that I have taken to give computer users the choice to do the thing that is good for them, the overwhelming majority have failed to make that choice. The people who visit this site are mostly not that kind of person, though there are plenty here who are. We have shown Microsoft that we simply will not update our operating system or even reboot unless forced. Many, many times we have made this clear, even though patching is overwhelmingly a net positive for both MS and its users, generally speaking, users simply won't do it. They just won't. History bears this out. Updating is a short-term inconvenience in exchange for long-term security and stability, and people do not think about those things logically. The importance of the immediate future is amplified by a large factor, and the importance of the future is attenuated by a large factor, in most people, especially when it comes to people who view their computer as a tool. Sitting in front of a computer is indicative of a user wanting to complete a task, and manual updates impede the ability to perform that task. That makes installing updates and stopping work to reboot a non-starter for those people. They just won't do it. I don't know how else to say it. It's not a matter of tone so much as it is a matter of fact.

nonrandomstring 4y ago
Thanks for your thoughtful reply, I hope my additional remarks are taken as sincere and not in any way personal, except in a good way. > My tone here is borne out of users shooting themselves in the foot Frustration. I hear you. Sure, it's frustrating that they exercise choice (however misguided you see that) and then "complain". It's very nice if you've written code, and even nicer that you care for your customers. But, as developers, they aren't our children. I've been there and it's galling, and feels like a rejection, but to accept what is unrequited is sometimes harder than giving it. > the choice to do the thing that is good for them, This is the elitists' dilemma. Please don't be insulted by that word, I'm using it literally and appropriately without value judgement (I am foremost an elitist, and secondarily a peoples' champion, and it is a position that can only ride on a measure of arrogance - which must be tempered) The fact is, it's not your computer. And that really is the long and short. One must respect that if "users" do not wish to take advantage of bug fixes more speedily available through telemetry, then it's their choice to have suboptimal, buggy programs. In other news, our children will listen to shit music and get into drugs and relationships we disapprove of etc. > We have shown Microsoft that we simply will not update our operating system or even reboot unless forced. For very good reasons. Microsoft have shown themselves to be utterly untrustworthy. I really don't think that's even debatable. And it's a shitshow because I do not believe trust can ever be repaired. It leaves the reality that one of the biggest vendors on the planet is in the position of forcing users because it has squandered the reputation necessary to do good-faith business, to propagate its updates. That's tragic because they probably see no way out except doubling down on abuse, authoritarianism and beating users to their will - and ultimately that confrontation will be the end of so much we have built. What makes this worse is that security is about more than personal choice (think vaccinations). In other words the damage that Microsoft (and other big-tech abusers) have done goes far beyond simply destroying the individual trust relations with their customers. They've corroded the social fabric of trust in computer security at a more general level - a cost that is incalculable. > people do not think about those things logically. You are right. And we should not assume that they should. Emotion is a powerful reasoning tool, and only a fool ignores that force of psychology. Once burned twice shy - and we as developers have been burning a lot of peoples' fingers these past 30 years. > I don't know how else to say it. It's not a matter of tone so much as it is a matter of fact. I see it means a lot to you. That is a good thing in itself. You care, which is x10 above the norm. But we cannot force them to be what we wish them to be. Especially not "for their own good" which is where all tyranny begins. We cannot force people to adopt products, customs, behaviours, sing the party line, or any of that hegemonic nonsense without invoking an age of "consumer communism". It saddens me that in 2022 we still need to address the patrician attitude. It's not the way forward. It's sad to see such a deterioration. But so long as companies like Microsoft persist a culture of smug superiority, cavalier conceit and intransigent disrespect to the dignity of their users we will have to accept "fuck you" decision making. And frankly, more power to those courageous enough to say it.