Slashdot Mirror
The Impact of Technophobes
fsharp writes "Most of us have experience with average folks requesting technical support. I have friends and family members that would be lost without my support. I opt for a sliding scale payment plan, usually dinner. At any rate, The New York Times has a nice piece on the impact of technophobes on the Internet (vis-a-vis MyDoom and other email-borne viruses) and their technologically adept friends and family."
That is what the computer industry is about, makeing computers accessable to the end users. If we do not help them, then we are self defetting.
It is our jobs to make it easy to use. Be it as a programmer, a sysadm, or a help desk person. The end goal is to get the end user to use the product.
Actually, its the ones who think that they know what's wrong who are the most difficult to help. They tell you all the information that led them to their conclusion, ignoring the one fact right in front of their nose which would contradict it...
- "History shows again and again how nature points out the folly of men" -- Blue Oyster Cult, 'Godzilla'
that particular sentence is particularly annoying. if you go to china, YOU learn chinese or hire a translator. otherwise you don't go to china.
if she want to use a computer, she will have to learn how to deal with them. i work for an isp, when i receive a virus infected email, i cut off their internet access plain and simple. they can call back to have it reactivated after they get someone competent to disinfect it.
the burnout for those on the other end of the phone when you call tech support is like 8 or 9 months... talk about a hard demanding job.
Evolution or ID?
Can we really blame the users though?
Yes. Yes, we can.
I often use the analogy of the car when describing tech tasks: no one expects to buy a car and have it run forever (and remain safe) without maintenance. Most people understand the need to check tires (treadwear, air pressure), get the oil changed, etc. Draw parallels to these items for technically-challenged folks and they seem to understand. YMMV.
No one should purchase potentially problematic machines (computers, blenders, cars, etc.) without understanding in a general sense how these things work. I would like to think that would be common sense, but common sense is often neither common nor sense. Discuss.
I want to drag this out as long as possible. Bring me my protractor.
Parents prefer their beloved children. After all they spent years changing our diapers, cooking meals for us, helping with homework, getting us out of scrapes at school, supporting us through college: it's payback time.
I'm less patient with my compemporaries, I make them pay.
Technoclowns need nothing more than a "glorified appliance" and they should be able to treat them as such. My mother should never have a need to "recompile a kernal" or anything like that. All she needs to do is "Turn the picture thing on" and maybe click the email icon.
If there is email in her box it should be:
1)her email
2)the system should be smart (or dumb) enough not to provide her with something that is going to infect itself.
Expand these 2 rules to any other application that her appliance should do.
Example - Looking up movie times. Application should:
1)Show movie times
2)the system should be smart (or dumb) enough not to provide her with something that is going to infect itself.
The problem is forcing mega machines on people that only need an information appliance (or maybe allowing those people to buy them)
Post: Sigged, for your pleasure.
Interestingly, this entire discussion stems from the limitations of semi-literate (read: average computer users) that many of us forget about when we discuss the latest trends and technologies. My concern is that the gap between the computer literate and the semi-literate could possibly be greater now than it was in the mid 1980s, when computers were quirky and used mostly by hobbyists and very specific business-related activities, and few people owned them for home use in the public at large.
The frustration seems to stem from not just the myriad of viruses, but also the necessity of weekly anti-virus updates, spyware, and the absolutely requirement for some type of firwall on Windows-based computers. I dare say that the level of technical knowledge to maintain a computer today is higher than it was twenty years ago. People seem to gloss over ideas like this but having been involved with computers for more than twenty years, I think it's important to reflect on this once and a while. Regards, Goalive - who was given 'bad karma' on Slashdot because not everyone shares his sense of humor :-/
Personally, I've found this "I'm ignorant and proud of it!" attitude to be a fairly common reaction to being unable to get one's head around something new. Of course, it's a lot more pathetic when it's a 24 year old (what 24 year old can't use a computer, fer chrissake?!?)
At one point, I sort of assumed that anybody could sit down and figure out a computer if they got past the intimidation factor and just took time to understand the basic paradigm by which things happen. I don't think that anymore -- instead, I've glommed onto the more cynical viewpoint that many people reach a certain age beyond which they're just basically incapable of picking up new things.
IMO, it's not *just* an age thing (look at Ms. Tauber). If you stall out learning new things for a couple of years, you lose the knack. That's why my 84 year-old grandfather can use the 'net for email, news and horse races (the guy knows more about streaming video than I do) but my various aunts and uncles can't get their heads around finding the Caps Lock key.
Anyhow, this started worrying me when I got out of college. That's why I feel it's important to read nonfiction or learn new skills (cooking, carpentry, Tae Kwon Do, whatever) and aggressively seek out new things to know.
Use it or lose it.
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
Look here's the deal. I'm willing to do work for you, many hours of work in some cases. I'll fix what geeksquad, compusa, or whatever other halfass outfit has fucked up for free. But I expect you to sit down with me and learn how to prevent what got hosed. I don't mind teaching, I've mentored a lot of techs over the years, but I do mind if people dont implement what I teach them.
It's a little like having someone's engine freeze because they ran out of oil. You explain to them that they need to get an oil change, you tell them the enormous number of hours involved, and you repair their engine for them. They thank you and you forget about it, until a year later their now rebuilt engine once more seizes because it ran out of oil. There are only so many times you will fix it before telling them to take care of it on their own.
The issue is not the doing, the issue is the redoing when someone now knows better. I think the solution may be a really basic newbie web page somewhere that teaches people very basic lessons. It has to be made so as not to be patronizing, or people will dismiss it and ignore.
If it covered just these 5 things the Internet would be a much better place.
Dont open attachments from anybody that hasn't verbally told you they one.
Get a popup blocker and do not accept any "offer" that you didn't go looking for.
Antivirus software, use it, update it, and run it at least once a week - all of which can be automated.
Get Ad-Aware and use it. Treat it just like you do your antivirus.
Patch your computer! Go to the appropriate OS update site and use it.
People need to take some responsibility for their own computers. As tempting as the idea for a license is, it would become to easy to politicize. Perhaps we should start holding inviduals financially responsible when their system gets hijacked and inflicts damage on other systems?
Oh lord God, yes! Friends, relatives, even friends of friends... A couple years ago I simply informed everyone I would now simply refuse to help out with any computer-related problems, at least from clueless people. I realised that most of those easy problems could be solved by reading a book and simply gaining some understanding of the machines and that by fixing their computers for them I was just perpetuating the problem. So I threw some darwinism at them, either they adapt or they give up.
A computer should more aptly be treated like a motor vehicle; yeah, you can go have some fun in it but you'd better drive defensively and know how to operate the thing properly. You don't just take it out of the box and start pressing buttons.
Right! This is exactly the analogy I had in mind. The difference is there's very little people can do to be malicious to a car in the same way as a virus wreaks havoc on your PC, short of letting the air out of the tires or other foolish stunts. Perhaps a better comparison would be if someone went around randomly dumping sugar in the gas tank of anyone whose car didn't have a security system installed.
From the article...
"Go out, get a book," suggests Zack Rubenstein, 28, who has for years provided free technical support for his extended social network. "You went to college and you got a degree, you obviously can learn something. Play around with it; it's not going to kill you."
Hmm...I wonder if he tinkers with his car? Me, I know the basics of how a car engine works, and sure, I understand electronics and wiring and so forth. But I have no clue what goes on in today's modern multi-processor-controlled engine -- it might as well be a black box to me. Actually, it is -- my car is a tool, a device to get me from point A to point B in reasonable comfort.
But I happen to know that there are certain rules of the road to be obeyed, and, if those are not obeyed, then the consequences could be rather painful and/or expensive. What are those rules? Why, I had a nice little booklet that laid the fundamentals out. Had to prove I understood it, too, by taking a test. Oh, and I also had to be passed by an examiner who observed me driving for half an hour before I was allowed on the roads by myself.
And I also know that, on a regular basis, that car needs certain maintenance -- oil changes, fan belt replacements, that sort of thing. If I can't or don't want to do it myself, I have to take it to someone and pay them to do it. Fine by me -- I can earn more by working for half an hour than it costs me to pay someone to have the oil changed, and I'd just as soon not get my hands dirty.
Make sense? After all, isn't a modern PC, with all the complexities of a modern OS and a modern suite of applications, just as internally nebulous to the casual user as is a car? The difference is we pay heaps for cars and are told repeatedly we have to take care of them on a regular basis or that money will be wasted. Oh, and we're carefully checked for basic skills and knowledge before being turned loose in a car.
Computers, though -- they're sold at a (relatively) cheap price and the vendors never advertise that, hey, guess what, you actually need to take care of the thing. (And geeks like Zack Rubenstein perpetuate the myth that anyone can fix a PC with little effort. Come on, a show of hands of all those whose learning-by-experience includes a few good late night sessions of try to fix, break, try to fix again, break even worse, before you finally figure it out. I sure wouldn't risk doing that with a car.)
Most home computers SHOULD be glorified applainces. The average user doesn't need all of the complexity of the current generation of computers and really shouldn't have to deal with it. It is not the fault of the user that they know so little about systems so easily broken. Not everyone has the time, energy or desire to learn about all of the ways in which Windows can self-immolate.
The problem is that computers are designed by geeks for geeks. They need to be designed by skilled industrial designers for complete morons.
And for us gearheads there should be the option to buy complex and tempramental computers/OSes, just like people can still buy cars with manual transmissions.
The age of "you must be a computer nerd" are over and it's time that software designers recognized that fact.
Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
I completely agree. Some of the worst viruses do not really even begin to exploit the OS weaknesses of windows. They are activated by the ignorance of users. Anyone could write an executable piece of code for macs that would function the same way these viruses and worms operate. Same for Linux. Really, these users are literally ASKING their computers to run a piece of code and send copies to everyone in their address book. This has less to do with the OS and more to do with the computer simply doing as it is told.
Those that suggest you "dance like no one is watching" really want to see you make a complete fool of yourself.
I think this article points out one of the major weaknesses in the IT profession currently: a lack of people skills and empathy for the end user.
I've been a computer professional for over 25 years now. I'm still aghast at system administrators who take servers down on the last day of the month for maintenance, with total disregard of the fact that the company's biggest transaction volume occurs that day. Or help desk people who answer the phone in an impatient tone of voice, as if it's a major annoyance that someone is disturbing them.
Computing SHOULD be an appliance, it SHOULD be invisible. Sure, it was cool in the early days of the Internet to be among the priesthood and the elite, but that's not where it's at today. The clueless are not at fault here; it's we geeks who are at fault for designing systems for ourselves, instead of for everyone.
To answer another poster's assertion that the Internet is like a car, you can't just drive, you have to have some knowledge, I'd say this: sure, you have to know how to USE the car. But you shouldn't have to be expected to understand its architecture and occasionally pull the carburetor as well.
My solution for friends and family that ask for technical support is simply that I will help them out if they have a Macintosh. Otherwise, there is no way I have the time to troubleshoot and support Windows, Linux or other Unix operating systems.
In other words, to paraphrase "I am no longer competent to administer or help out with anything more complicated than a toaster, as I haven't worked in the field in years. But rather than admit my own shortcomings, I'm going to blame my atrophied skillset and laziness on you and make you feel guilty for having chosen to run an operating system I am no longer familiar with. Furthermore, I'm going to take that guilt and leverage it into evangelizing the One and Only Computer System(tm) according to My Doctrine(tm): Apple."
Which would be fine, except for the blaming others, guilt trips, and blind evangelism.
I too encourage anyone and everyone who will listen to use something (anything!) other than Microsoft products, and actively encourage people to switch to FreeBSD, Linux, or Apple, but I do not refuse to help friends and family out when they're in a bind, regardless of what they use, and I certainly don't mask my own incompetence in blind evangelism, and make them feel somehow inadequate for my own failings.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
I learned my lesson working at the help desk of the dorm computer lab. People go for the path of least resistance. I once had a girl sit down at a machine, immediately turn to me and ask "where's the internet?" becuase I was right next to her and she knew I worked there. She didn't even look at the screen! She didn't even take the time to look for the internet explorer icon and click on it, because it was easier to turn her head and ask me to do it for her. I now hide in the office. There are various signs around the lab which take care of most problems like - Zip drives DO NOT read floppies, please do not put a floppy in the Zip drive. I haven't had to break out the tweezers since I posted a few of those. When I sat out at the desk, people would just yell out questions from across the lab. It's much less convinient to walk to the office, pop your head in, and ask. If they have to go through the effort of walking across the room, they're much more likely to figure things out on their own, or bother the person at the machine next to them. If they do come to office, we know it's something that they probably really do need help with and we try to teach them. We have a policiy of never doing anything for anyone. We make them sit at the computer and we just talk them through what to click on. Even if it is the 100th time I've had to show someone how to click on Attach File to attach a file to their email.
I've also been the victim of the "you know computers, can you help me" club. I now limit that interaction to close friends and some family (who fortunately are all at least 500 miles away). For everyone else, my answer is this: My time is valuable. If you want me to fix your computer, I charge $70/hr, minimum of 30 minutes. I reached the point where I was getting tired of being taken advantage of.
That being said, I see two larger issues in all this techno illiterate world. The first is obvious to anyone who knows about Windows vs. Linux. Simply put, you can't secure a system that is inherently insecure. Windows users run as "root". Period. Apps that run on it have free reign. App design deficiencies are a real close second though. MyDoom doesn't affect systems that don't use Outlook. Lotus Notes and Eudora spring to mind. My wife was unaffected my MyDoom. Monoculture is not good, kids.
I can't really blame the users fully. They don't know any better and I think it is arrogant of the technoelite (of which I consider myself a member) to expect the rest of the world to bow down to our ideals and expectations of what someone has to know to use a computer.
Which brings me to my second point. The problem isn't the users, it's the computers themselves. Specifically, their interfaces. We've had GUI interfaces for almost 20 years now and frankly, we are still no further ahead in usability. GUI's were supposed to make things easier. All they've done is increase confusion and create new and wonderful ways to breed complexity.
You'd figure after 20 years that we would be coming up with ways of making computers know a little more about how to get things done. I'm not talking Utopian dreams of voice or 3D interfaces, but the building of knowledge into the system. I'm sorry, kids, listening to a CD, ripping some music, sending e-mail or watching a video clip on a computer should not be a chore! People do not care whether a document is .doc, pdf, .txt or .sxw, a video clip is an MPG, RM or an AVI. They get angry when it doesn't work when they just want it to. If the plug-in or player isn't present, give the computer the knowledge to know where to go get it, download it , guide the user through installation and then do the original task. Some programs do better than other at this but it is still often obtuse and fraugth with peril.
We should be listening to these users. Ask them: "How do you think this task should be done?". Have them explain it in terms they know. Get from them the picture in their head of how they think it should be done. It is the hardest thing to do in the world because what they think they want vs. want they really want are often two very different things.
As a result, the following maxim can apply:
The complexity of an application or task is inversely proportional to how simple the user thinks it is. - Matt Pickering
Translated: The easier someone thinks it is to do on a computer, the harder it will be for the developer to write. Conversely, the harder or complicated the user thinks the task is, the easier it usually is to write. I have observed this phenomena over the years and the maxim holds true. The more complicated someone thinks something is to do often I find to be straightforward. Then they come up with things that seem simple to them and they turn out to be devilishly difficult to produce (if not impossible).
Instead of us continuing to create more complex, feature-rich and elaborate applications and environments, we should be embracing these users (people like my parents who are computer clueless) and ask them how we should be
...Since I know a lot of people who DO neglect their cars. A LOT of people think that it's time to change the oil when the oil light comes on and would not give it any thought before then. Those same people only pay attention to tires when they go flat or it's time to out the Winter set on, and will drive both their sets of tires until they're bald. You can forget about them thinking about ATF, flushing the cooling system once in awhile or changing brake pads before they wear out and grind rivet grooves into the rotors.
Car makers have done a WAY better job in usability and reliability than PC/software makers. Even east-European and South Korean cars made today are better than almost all PCs on the market today. I've heard the argument that people ought to have computer operators licenses--after all, we all learn the rules of the road and obey them to avoid fatal accidents...well, MOST of the time...But ponder what it would be like if Microsoft and Intel made cars and see how many people would die on the highways:
1. You'd have to take your car in for monthly service to remove tar-like deposits from your engine and have the ignition control system 'defragmented'.
2. The location of the gas, brake and clutch would change with each new model year, and each model would be different as well. Also, the steering wheel would be a different size or shape and the gears on the gearshift would chage orders.
3. The leading carmaker would make their new cars use a different fuel, and using the wrong fuel in the wrong car would make the engine catch fire. The new fuel is meant to "increase performance and relibility" of their new models but conveniently destroys competitors models and their own older models.
4. You will be forced to buy a brand new car after 5 years because they stop making parts for it, and use legal tactics to keep anyone else from using their precious obsolete IP to make replicas.
5. Cars spontaneously crash much less than they did a few years ago, but they still often stall on the side of the road for no apparent reason, you cant turn on the headlights while using cruise control and it's common knowledge that when the turn signals stop working, you must fully shut of the car and all occupants must exit and shut the doors behind them, wait 30 seconds then get back in and re-start the car. These problems have existed for 20 years but are of such low priority that they linger on.
6. Every car is required by the manufacturer to be equipped with OnStar-style tracking system "for safety reasons". It's handy when your call stalls so frequently and it costs nothing extra. However, the OnStar system is polluted with marketers broadcasting spam to all the cars, which make your radio tune to stations you don't like and interfere with vital engine systems, reducing your top speed to 50 km/h and increasing gas consumption 400%. Time to "get the engine defragged" again...
Along the same lines; Would a doctor perform an operation without first performing a thorough examination and asking enough questions to get the full picture? Your Mom likely thought that she was giving you enough info by saying: "My printer won't print." Don't ask, don't tell...right?
Not a personal dig, as I've done the exact same thing, I'm just highlighting a point. Most users with problems don't even have the language or knowledge to properly describe said problem.
-Ben
You've absolutely hit the nail on the head... how many people cannot even change a tire on a car anymore?
It's pretty much our own fault, though. Back in the old days, we'd show off our efforts in an attempt to hook new people into the hobby. Our attempts at "helping them understand how simple it is" typically came off as being "way over my head", and the precedent was born.
Apple then capitalized on it, with their "Computers for the rest of us" campaign. Think about that... what moron would buy such a machine based on that slogan? Why, a person who considers themself a moron, of course! The merits of the Mac were irrelevent, the selling point was purely based on a stupid person being able to use it, and buying into that pitch means you forego any hope of comprehension.
Combine that with an "immediate gratification" mentality, and you've got today's society. Don't know, don't care, don't need to. Just give it to me.
Sadly, we're suffering from it the hardest in the fire service. I'm one of six "new guys" that have joined our (medium sized) department in the *past decade*. I'm told there used to be a waiting list of several years to get in, now we get about... oh, three recruits per year. Maybe one per year will actually stick, every other year. Of the six of us "new guys", I'm the only one who's ever used a chainsaw, or an axe... never mind a K12 saw or something hydraulic. I must confess, helping to teach some of them how to correctly use a chainsaw was (so far) one of the scariest points in my career.
But I still ask various people to join, and they always say "No." The typical reasons? "I don't know how", "It's too hard", "It's way over my head." I explain that it's about as blue-collar as you can get, which makes it fun! Besides, we've got tons of training available from ourselves, the county, the state, whatever. All of this goes to no avail. They continue to make excuses, and intend to remain incompetent.
Why? Well, we should start by blaming ourselves. We tried to show them how cool things were, without them having enough foundation to understand it. We alienated them in the process.
Then we can also blame the market. It's in the market's best interest to enslave the consumers, to convince them that they're helpless, and that only that market can provide for their needs. "Computers for the rest of us." Thanks a lot, guys.
help me i've cloned myself and can't remember which one I am