Walt Mossberg's Last Column Calls For Privacy and Security Laws (recode.net)

70-year-old Walt Mossberg wrote his last weekly column Thursday, looking back on how "we've all had a hell of a ride for the last few decades" and revisiting his famous 1991 pronouncement that "Personal computers are just too hard to use, and it isn't your fault." Not only were the interfaces confusing, but most tech products demanded frequent tweaking and fixing of a type that required more technical skill than most people had, or cared to acquire. The whole field was new, and engineers weren't designing products for normal people who had other talents and interests. But, over time, the products have gotten more reliable and easier to use, and the users more sophisticated... So, now, I'd say: "Personal technology is usually pretty easy to use, and, if it's not, it's not your fault." The devices we've come to rely on, like PCs and phones, aren't new anymore. They're refined, built with regular users in mind, and they get better each year. Anything really new is still too close to the engineers to be simple or reliable.
He argues we're now in a strange lull before entering an unrecognizable world where major new breakthroughs in areas like A.I., robotics, smart homes, and augmented reality lead to "ambient computing", where technology itself fades into the background. And he uses his final weekly column to warn that "if we are really going to turn over our homes, our cars, our health and more to private tech companies, on a scale never imagined, we need much, much stronger standards for security and privacy than now exist. Especially in the U.S., it's time to stop dancing around the privacy and security issues and pass real, binding laws."

Comments

Dude's 70?

[Snotnose]

Followed him for years, always thought he was my age (58). He was right more than he was wrong, but he was always interesting.

Privacy is a rich man's problem

[rsilvergun]

Yeah, I know that's not a nice thing to say, but you're not going to get anywhere with privacy laws while 76% of the country lives paycheck to paycheck. You just won't be able to get the kinds of people in office that'll bother. The crooks will actively oppose it and anyone decent will be too busy with more pressing matters.

Re:Privacy is a rich man's problem

[ShanghaiBill]

Privacy is also a Western concern. In Asian and African countries people have very different expectations. I lived in China for several years, and I don't remember anyone ever knocking before entering a room. At the hospital I saw a nurse interrogating a patient about his impotence problem while other patients were queued directly behind him. Restrooms often had a row of toilets with no stall doors between them, although this did make it easier to ask someone to pass the toilet paper.

Re: Privacy is a rich man's problem

[Jesus H Rolle]

You're saying that the generation that invented pretty much everything to do with computers is too old to learn anything about them.

This is also the generation whose VCRs always flashed 12:00.

paradoxical effects?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Personal computers are just too hard to use

Here's the thing though. Since computers were harder to use in the 1970's and 80's, you had two kinds of people: those with no involvement whatsoever with technology, and those who more or less were technically literate.

Now, they have become easier to perform some common "canned" tasks, but that means there are two kinds of people: and both are now computer users: technically literate people, and technically illiterate. Whereas before the technically illiterate had no impact on the evolution of technology, they now dominate the story because they are the vast majority and it is it their purchasing choices and user choices that determine where things go.

When they insist on things being "simpler than they are", or when they decide in mass to give all their data to sad companies like Google and Facebook, that harms everyone in the end.

I'm not so certain that making computers too easy to use has been for the better. Sure, it has allowed more people to have access, but most of them are making terrible choices.

Re: "ambient computing" is a great term

[93 Escort Wagon]

This. I love being able to track my two kids that drive, but it is a little scary to think that someone else could too. I hate that Waze added the requirement to track all of the time. That really kills your battery.

On iOS you can at least choose to not let Waze run in the background. Given how I use Waze, doing so doesn't really affect the usefulness of the app (for me). I haven't found Waze's notifications (e.g. "You should leave early cuz traffic is bad") useful anyway, and as you noted it does tend to kill your battery.

Re:What privacy?

[ShanghaiBill]

People willing turn over their data to these companies for use of "free" products.

As long as the terms of the transaction are clear, there is nothing wrong with that. I use Google search, Google Docs, etc. They mine the data I give them, and I occasionally get ads for stuff I am actually interested in. If I don't want them to know about something, I use an incognito window or a different computer.

Re: "ambient computing" is a great term

[TheOuterLinux]

And when they do care about their privacy, they think Snap Chat and WhatsApp will do the trick. WhatsApp is owned by Facebook. The argument is that it uses open source code from the same people that make Signal. Ok, then why not just use Signal? Why are some countries allowing WhatsApp and not Telegram or vice versa? I'd just use a Tox client; it's like OpenVPN, but for messaging and most Tox clients do everything Skype does. Even when I'm watching a live stream (usually via streamlink and mpv to save RAM), I use IRC with SSL to join the chat.

I think that just because we see a generation of young people born with a computer in their laps, we assume that they are also responsible enough with it to stay informed and more proactive with its use; that's a big no. You've got a bunch of Hipsters too busy falsely fulfilling the fantasy of being a lumberjack with a man-bun and thousands of dollars of "comfortable" technology to entice women that want to be a Penny/Amy mash-up from The Big Bang Theory. The reality is, rich parents and barely qualified to work at Spencer Gifts because they are shocked that their major in civil rights studies with a minor in art didn't work out, on top of which you have 35 year-olds going through a midlife crises, doing the same crap. As long as they got weed and an over-the-top BS Facebook/Tumblr profile to attract women when they need them, they're okay.

Re:What privacy?

[dcollins]

"I occasionally get ads for stuff I am actually interested in."

I have seriously never understood this apology for ad-based services. You honestly like ads intruding on your workflow while you're trying to do something else? Instead of a push-messaging model, wouldn't it be better to have a pull-messaging model where, on the day you want or need X, you search for "product X" and you get a fair and objective listing of available X's on the market from which to compare?