Doug's Inner Net News

Internet Users' Problems and Trust

From the LA Times: No More Internet for Them. In this article, the author tells of several long-time computer users who have become fed up with various forms of malware and have decided just to turn off their computers.

It's rather amusing that the article refers to these users as being on the cutting edge!

Now the 50-year-old Seemayer is once again on the cutting edge: Sick of spam clogging his in-box and spyware and viruses crashing his system, Seemayer yanked out his high-speed connection.

It's interesting to read this article with the thought of "trust" in your mind. Indeed, the problems described all seem to be related to trust.

Here are some quick thoughts:

• In certain circles, we hear smart people sing the praises of the end-to-end principle in the Internet. The end-to-end principle is simply this: The network itself is as simple as possible, while the endpoints -- that's the PCs and server machines -- are intelligent and complex. We compare that to the telephone network, where it's the network that has complexity and it's the endpoint devices -- the phones -- that are dumb. Certainly the problems this article describes would not be possible without the end-to-end principle.

• If PC problems are too overwhelming, buy a Macintosh. I bet there are thousands of PC users who were fed up, but then switched to a Macintosh and found that they were free from PC malware. Linux is another alternative. (Disclaimers: I use a PC. I had a new Macintosh in 1988 which I used for about several years. I use Linux occasionally.)

It comes down to a matter of trust. Trust is a technology-neutral problem. Technology neither helps nor hinders trust.

Here's how this works: PCs, by design, run programs. Each user must decide what programs he will allow to run. If a user could know everything about a program, he could conceivably make a decision after weighing the program's benefits against its costs. The benefits of a program like Excel are very great. The costs of a virus are also very great. But most programs lie somewhere in the middle. And it's in the grey middle where technology and the law have difficulty. Besides, understanding clearly the benefits and costs of each program is beyond even the most advanced user's ability. So, in the end, it just comes down to a matter of trust. Do you trust the purveyor of the program? I allow Dell's support program to run on my laptop because I bought the laptop from Dell and I trust Dell. I don't run a screen saver downloaded from the Internet because I don't trust the company offering it.

If users are fed up with computer problems, it may be because they expect technology or the law to keep them safe. But as we know, the problems are in the grey middle, not in the black-and-white cases. Users must learn that it's a matter of trust. Whom should they trust? Even that question does not have an obvious answer, because it's not always clear whom one is being asked to trust. An email message with an attachment that claims to be from a friend may not be from that friend at all. A web page that claims to be from your bank may not be from your bank at all. So, every Internet user ought to have this banged into his head: Don't trust anyone or anything on the Internet unless you are absolutely certain, and even then think twice about it. In short, trust almost no one. And understand that identities can be forged. That's it in a nutshell.

Videophone Etiquette

We are probably on the verge of widescale adoption of videophones, based on VoIP. Packet8 may be ahead of the curve. On their website, they have a page entitled Videophone Etiquette: A Dozen Amusing Lessons

As we move into the realm of video phone calls, we will have to adapt. It's interesting to think how our behavior will change. When should you use video and audio, and when should you use only audio? Should you greet someone with a hand wave? Should you sign off with a hand wave? Will video calls be shorter, because they demand more of your attention? (That is, you can't browse your email while talking on the phone, and you can't walk into the next room with a wireless phone.) What percentage of our calls will have video? Will we learn to be better actors, not only using a happy voice but putting on a happy face as well?

Internationalized Domain Names 2

It seems that others also believe there are problems with IDNs. One concern is that allowing the use of different "names" -- that is, names that are meaningful to humans and not just identifiers -- requires identifying the language. Otherwise, how would a reader application, as used by a blind person, be able to read the name?

This internet draft is also worth reading: What's in a Name: False Assumptions about DNS Names. Here's an excerpt:

... there has been a strong demand to acquire domain names that have significance to people through equivalence to registered trademarks, company names, types of services, and so on. Such identifiers serve many business purposes, including extension of brand, advertising, and so on.

...

The essence of the problem is that humans will frequently make assumptions about a name based on their expectations and understanding of what the name implies. When these assumptions are wrong, the user might be surprised, but the system works, and the human can do something different having realized that its assumption was false. When an automaton makes similar assumptions, the system might fail, and it might fail systematically.