[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
Grant Sewell wrote: > > One very simple answer to this... pose all questions as a negative, > thus making the default "Yes" reaction a beneficial one. :) That'll just train them to click "No". Pose half the questions with a "yes" and half with a "no", thus ensuring someone has to read them, and at least vaguely think. What happens then is people click the most obvious option that proceeds, and if that doesn't work come back and click one of the other. As this saves on "reading and thinking" which people find hard. Perhaps the second time it should have more options so people have to read through carefully, on the basis of if they got it wrong last time perhaps they don't know what is happening. The real problem is just too many pop-up questions with a certain OS, browser combination, and a philosophy at the company that adding more increases security. Some companies are also guilty of the adding more security features increases security. When in most cases improving infrastructure like components increases security, and adding features (including security ones) decreases security. There are some borderline cases, like SELinux or ACLs, which add complexity, but also add security infrastructure, they are probably a net gain, but you might be surprised by how little if your concept of IT security includes "making and keeping it all working", as well as "compromised by bad guys".
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html