Fake popup study

[Steven M. Bellovin]

On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 18:52:24 -0400
Jim Youll <jim at cr-labs.com> wrote:

> 
> On Sep 24, 2008, at 6:39 PM, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
> >
> > The whole point of the study (which you feel had an "inappropriate
> > tone") and of such gedankenexperiments is to understand the problem
> > space better.
> 
> Clarification: not the study.
> 
> I believe the article had an inappropriate tone. Calling victims of
> inadequate user interfaces "idiots" is inappropriate and spits in the
> face of the evidence.
> 
> It's still a fact that when a majority of a population of operators
> of any
> equipment is experiencing poor outcomes just using it as normal
> people do, then there is a screaming need to fix that equipment.
> 
Yes.  Don Norman said it quite eloquently at
http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/23.07.html#subj10 -- "If we assume that
the people who use technology are stupid ("Bubbas") then we will
continue to design poorly conceived equipment, procedures, and
software, thus leading to more and more accidents, all of which can be
blamed upon the hapless users rather than the root cause --
ill-conceived software, ill-conceived procedural requirements,
ill-conceived business practices, and ill-conceived design in general." 
> 
> Human factors haven't received nearly enough attention, and as long as
> human factors failings are dismissed as the fault of "idiot users",
> they never will.
> 
Strong agreement.


		--Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb

---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo at metzdowd.com