Text 1869, 370 rader
Skriven 2005-01-10 15:07:12 av Rich (1:379/45)
Kommentar till text 1859 av Ellen K. (1:379/45)
Ärende: Re: Usage history
=========================
From: "Rich" <@>
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0491_01C4F726.108B2970
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I agree there are a great many people that have no interest in or =
familiarity with exercising the control available to them. That will = always
be true. =20
Rich
"Ellen K." <72322.enno.esspeayem.1016@compuserve.com> wrote in message =
news:7og4u0pj8f0nq10sm8t2covkac7q75oj1s@4ax.com...
Well, I think this conversation is all over the place regarding who we
are talking about when we talk about users. The folks here are an
entirely different animal from the famous great unwashed masses.
On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 01:40:28 -0800, "Rich" <@> wrote in message
<41e0fbe8@w3.nls.net>:
> Because you are in control, my point to george.
>
>Rich
>
> "Ellen K." <72322.enno.esspeayem.1016@compuserve.com> wrote in =
message news:qgb1u01q9d446o8qo18nepf463e0rnhi41@4ax.com...
> I don't have any functionality enabled on any of my machines that =
would
> permit the OS to remember my credit card number.
>
> On Mon, 3 Jan 2005 23:40:57 -0800, "Rich" <@> wrote in message
> <41da4628@w3.nls.net>:
>
> > The key distinction is that with the former you are in control =
while with the latter the other party is.
> >
> > I have plenty of examples of the latter. The former has never =
been a problem for me or anyone I know. George hasn't given any = indication
it has ever been for him. Has it been for you?
> >
> >Rich
> >
> > "Ellen K." <72322.enno.esspeayem.1016@compuserve.com> wrote in =
message news:m5ekt0pm0n26m9nh71mdteqcod1trf9g4e@4ax.com...
> > You and Rich are talking past each other and both of you are =
making
> > valid points.
> >
> > I agree with you about letting the O/S remember stuff like =
credit card
> > numbers.
> >
> > I agree with Rich about what the people to whom I freely GIVE my =
credit
> > card number are doing with the information.
> >
> > On Mon, 3 Jan 2005 22:28:18 -0500, "Geo" <georger@nls.net> wrote =
in
> > message <41da0bfb$1@w3.nls.net>:
> >
> > >But do you trust your telephone to store your information or =
are you required to provide that information via the telephone? There is = a
difference, if your telephone recorded your CC number and would play = it back
whenever someone hit the correct 3 digit number sequence, how = would that
change your view of that secure telephone?
> > >
> > >I don't think people have a problem with using a computer to =
purchase stuff, they just have a problem (or are learning to have a = problem)
with the computer remembering too much sensitive information.
> > >
> > >Try thinking of both the telephone and the computer as simple =
communications devices, they really are quite similar in that regard.
> > >
> > >Geo.
> > > "Rich" <@> wrote in message news:41d98d5e@w3.nls.net...
> > > I still disagree. You are mixing trust in the computer =
and trust in the content viewed with the computer. I don't trust =
telemarketers but I do not confuse that with trust of the telephone. = I'm
sure you make the latter distinction. Don't you make the former? = You have
made plenty of claims in this groups that indicate that you do.
> > >
> > > If you think people should be afraid of folks listening in =
then you should be encouraging folks to fear their ISPs. That is the =
analogous scenario. Your telephone analogy is a bad one because people = have
been exploited by folks listening in on mobile phones and maybe = land lines
too. Someone else claimed a paranoid fear of law enforcement = which has a
long history of listening to phone conversations. Now my = concerns are very
different from yours. I don't fear someone listening = to me communicating a
CC number or other PII. My concern is the = business to which I communicate it
doesn't protect the information. = There are plenty of examples of this. Try
asking your bank if they can =
tell you which of their employees has seen your SSN and when?
> > >
> > > Rich
> > >
> > > "Geo" <georger@nls.net> wrote in message =
news:41d92728$1@w3.nls.net...
> > > "Rich" <@> wrote in message news:41d891c8$1@w3.nls.net...
> > > >> I disagree with your conclusion and even more with the =
suggestion that
> > > your example supports it. In fact your story argues =
against your
> > > conclusion. People do trust their computers and the web =
sites they visit
> > > and the email they receive. If they did not many problems =
these people
> > > encounter would not exist as they rely on the users =
trusting something they
> > > should not.<<
> > >
> > > That is what proves my point, I said people are learning =
not to trust their
> > > computers, they learn this by getting rooted or getting =
infected by an email
> > > attachment.
> > >
> > > >> When using the Internet, of all the components to =
trust, the PC is the
> > > one most worthy of trust as it is the only one over which =
you have any
> > > control. Even non-techical users have control as you do =
not need to
> > > understand how things work to control them (e.g. TV). <<
> > >
> > > There is a difference between trusting a computer like you =
trust a telephone
> > > and trusting it like you would trust someone with your =
credit card. I have
> > > no problem telling a vendor my CC number over the telephone =
because it's
> > > unlikely someone is listening in, I do have a problem with =
allowing the
> > > telephone to remember my CC number because it's not a =
device I trust to be
> > > secure with storing that sort of information.
> > >
> > > Geo.
------=_NextPart_000_0491_01C4F726.108B2970
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.3790.1289" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> I agree there are a great =
many people=20
that have no interest in or familiarity with exercising the control = available
to=20
them. That will always be true. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Rich</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Ellen K." <<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:72322.enno.esspeayem.1016@compuserve.com">72322.enno.esspe=
ayem.1016@compuserve.com</A>>=20
wrote in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:7og4u0pj8f0nq10sm8t2covkac7q75oj1s@4ax.com">news:7og4u0pj8f0=
nq10sm8t2covkac7q75oj1s@4ax.com</A>...</DIV>Well,=20
I think this conversation is all over the place regarding who =
we<BR>are=20
talking about when we talk about users. The folks here are=20
an<BR>entirely different animal from the famous great unwashed=20
masses.<BR><BR>On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 01:40:28 -0800, "Rich" <@> =
wrote in=20
message<BR><<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:41e0fbe8@w3.nls.net">41e0fbe8@w3.nls.net</A>>:<BR><BR>&=
gt; =20
Because you are in control, my point to=20
george.<BR>><BR>>Rich<BR>><BR>> "Ellen K." <<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:72322.enno.esspeayem.1016@compuserve.com">72322.enno.esspe=
ayem.1016@compuserve.com</A>>=20
wrote in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:qgb1u01q9d446o8qo18nepf463e0rnhi41@4ax.com">news:qgb1u01q9d4=
46o8qo18nepf463e0rnhi41@4ax.com</A>...<BR>> =20
I don't have any functionality enabled on any of my machines that=20
would<BR>> permit the OS to remember my credit card=20
number.<BR>><BR>> On Mon, 3 Jan 2005 23:40:57 -0800, =
"Rich"=20
<@> wrote in message<BR>> <<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:41da4628@w3.nls.net">41da4628@w3.nls.net</A>>:<BR>><=
BR>> =20
> The key distinction is that with the former you are =
in=20
control while with the latter the other party is.<BR>> =20
><BR>> > I have plenty of examples of the=20
latter. The former has never been a problem for me or anyone I=20
know. George hasn't given any indication it has ever been for =
him. =20
Has it been for you?<BR>> ><BR>> =
>Rich<BR>> =20
><BR>> > "Ellen K." <<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:72322.enno.esspeayem.1016@compuserve.com">72322.enno.esspe=
ayem.1016@compuserve.com</A>>=20
wrote in message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:m5ekt0pm0n26m9nh71mdteqcod1trf9g4e@4ax.com">news:m5ekt0pm0n2=
6m9nh71mdteqcod1trf9g4e@4ax.com</A>...<BR>> =20
> You and Rich are talking past each other and both of you =
are=20
making<BR>> > valid points.<BR>> =
><BR>> =20
> I agree with you about letting the O/S remember stuff like =
credit=20
card<BR>> > numbers.<BR>> =
><BR>> =20
> I agree with Rich about what the people to whom I freely =
GIVE my=20
credit<BR>> > card number are doing with the=20
information.<BR>> ><BR>> > On Mon, 3 Jan =
2005=20
22:28:18 -0500, "Geo" <<A=20
href=3D"mailto:georger@nls.net">georger@nls.net</A>> wrote =
in<BR>> =20
> message <<A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:41da0bfb$1@w3.nls.net">41da0bfb$1@w3.nls.net</A>>:<BR>&=
gt; =20
><BR>> > >But do you trust your telephone to =
store=20
your information or are you required to provide that information via =
the=20
telephone? There is a difference, if your telephone recorded your CC =
number=20
and would play it back whenever someone hit the correct 3 digit number =
sequence, how would that change your view of that secure=20
telephone?<BR>> > ><BR>> > =
>I don't=20
think people have a problem with using a computer to purchase stuff, =
they just=20
have a problem (or are learning to have a problem) with the computer=20
remembering too much sensitive information.<BR>> > =20
><BR>> > >Try thinking of both the telephone =
and the=20
computer as simple communications devices, they really are quite =
similar in=20
that regard.<BR>> > ><BR>> > =20
>Geo.<BR>> > > "Rich" <@> wrote in =
message=20
<A=20
=
href=3D"news:41d98d5e@w3.nls.net">news:41d98d5e@w3.nls.net</A>...<BR>>=
=20
> > I still disagree. You =
are mixing=20
trust in the computer and trust in the content viewed with the =
computer. =20
I don't trust telemarketers but I do not confuse that with trust of =
the=20
telephone. I'm sure you make the latter distinction. Don't =
you=20
make the former? You have made plenty of claims in this groups =
that=20
indicate that you do.<BR>> > ><BR>> =
> =20
> If you think people should be afraid of =
folks=20
listening in then you should be encouraging folks to fear their =
ISPs. =20
That is the analogous scenario. Your telephone analogy is a bad =
one=20
because people have been exploited by folks listening in on mobile =
phones and=20
maybe land lines too. Someone else claimed a paranoid fear of =
law=20
enforcement which has a long history of listening to phone=20
conversations. Now my concerns are very different from =
yours. I=20
don't fear someone listening to me communicating a CC number or other=20
PII. My concern is the business to which I communicate it =
doesn't=20
protect the information. There are plenty of examples of=20
this. Try asking your bank if they can tell you which of =
their=20
employees has seen your SSN and when?<BR>> > =20
><BR>> > > Rich<BR>> > =
><BR>> > > "Geo" <<A=20
href=3D"mailto:georger@nls.net">georger@nls.net</A>> wrote in =
message <A=20
=
href=3D"news:41d92728$1@w3.nls.net">news:41d92728$1@w3.nls.net</A>...<BR>=
> =20
> > "Rich" <@> wrote in message <A =
=
href=3D"news:41d891c8$1@w3.nls.net">news:41d891c8$1@w3.nls.net</A>...<BR>=
> =20
> > >> I disagree with =
your=20
conclusion and even more with the suggestion that<BR>> =
> =20
> your example supports it. In fact your =
story=20
argues against your<BR>> > > =20
conclusion. People do trust their computers and the web sites =
they=20
visit<BR>> > > and the email =
they=20
receive. If they did not many problems these =
people<BR>> =20
> > encounter would not exist as they =
rely on=20
the users trusting something they<BR>> > =20
> should not.<<<BR>> > =20
><BR>> > > That is what =
proves my=20
point, I said people are learning not to trust their<BR>> =
> =20
> computers, they learn this by getting rooted or =
getting=20
infected by an email<BR>> > > =20
attachment.<BR>> > ><BR>> > =20
> >> When using the Internet, =
of all=20
the components to trust, the PC is the<BR>> > =20
> one most worthy of trust as it is the only one=20
over which you have any<BR>> > =
> =20
control. Even non-techical users have control as you do not need =
to<BR>> > > understand how =
things work=20
to control them (e.g. TV). <<<BR>> =
> =20
><BR>> > > There is a =
difference=20
between trusting a computer like you trust a telephone<BR>> =20
> > and trusting it like you would trust =
someone=20
with your credit card. I have<BR>> > =
> =20
no problem telling a vendor my CC number over the telephone because=20
it's<BR>> > > unlikely someone =
is=20
listening in, I do have a problem with allowing the<BR>> =
> =20
> telephone to remember my CC number because it's =
not a=20
device I trust to be<BR>> > > =
secure=20
with storing that sort of information.<BR>> > =20
><BR>> > > =20
Geo.<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_0491_01C4F726.108B2970--
--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5
* Origin: Barktopia BBS Site http://HarborWebs.com:8081 (1:379/45)
|