Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="bazang" data-source="post: 1105201" data-attributes="member: 114717">The prevailing &quot;model&quot; when it comes to consumer (home user) security solutions, is this:1. It is too much for consumers to read the manual.2. It is too much for consumers to gain the knowledge to become more secure.3. It is too much for consumers to prioritize security.4. The best thing we can do in security software is to compensate for the hoomans by making the software as simple as possible because the hoomans cannot cope with settings, alerts, notifications, etc - and this is actually backed-up by many user and software usability studies from credible, reliable research.5. &quot;Making software as simple as possible&quot; can only be accomplished by as few settings and configuration options - usually less than about twenty (20). Any hidden settings or configurations is a disqualification to &quot;simple&quot; and the argument &quot;Home users do not look at or bother with the settings&quot; is absurd. Anything more than the twenty (20) of the most simple, stupid-as-a-rock-can-understand the settings CANNOT meet the industry-wide definition of &quot;simple, easy, usable software for the masses.&quot;The most idiotic part in all of this is the concept that software can compensate for people and all the &quot;stuff&quot; that they do or do not do is... it just is not possible. Even the latest and greatest AI can be unraveled by consumers.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="bazang, post: 1105201, member: 114717"] The prevailing "model" when it comes to consumer (home user) security solutions, is this: 1. It is too much for consumers to read the manual. 2. It is too much for consumers to gain the knowledge to become more secure. 3. It is too much for consumers to prioritize security. 4. The best thing we can do in security software is to compensate for the hoomans by making the software as simple as possible because the hoomans cannot cope with settings, alerts, notifications, etc - and this is actually backed-up by many user and software usability studies from credible, reliable research. 5. "Making software as simple as possible" can only be accomplished by as few settings and configuration options - usually less than about twenty (20). Any hidden settings or configurations is a disqualification to "simple" and the argument "Home users do not look at or bother with the settings" is absurd. Anything more than the twenty (20) of the most simple, stupid-as-a-rock-can-understand the settings CANNOT meet the industry-wide definition of "simple, easy, usable software for the masses." The most idiotic part in all of this is the concept that software can compensate for people and all the "stuff" that they do or do not do is... it just is not possible. Even the latest and greatest AI can be unraveled by consumers. [/QUOTE]

Verification