On Thu, Sep 05, 2002 at 10:21:48PM -0700, Ian Clarke wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 05, 2002 at 09:23:58PM -0500, Travis Bemann wrote:
> > But still, we should be extremely firm in warning users about the use
> > of M$IE and the insecurity of it. I personally think that even
> > ALLOWING users to view fproxy beyond a rejection page with links to
> > other browsers one can get is a stretch. I think that a good
> > compromise would be to put up a warning page where the user has to
> > type "I do know that Micro$oft Internet Explorer is an insecure piece
> > of shit" as specified by the page into a text item in a form (the $
> > would be mandatory) and then press a button to actually use fproxy, to
> > keep people from simply clicking through without paying real serious
> > attention to the warning. :)
>
> Er, no ;-) I don't like the attitude I see every now-and-then which
> suggests that we should prohibit users from doing stuff that we believe
> might be bad for them. Rather, the correct approach is to clearly
> explain the risk to them, but allow them to take that risk if they are
> willing to do-so.
Hence my compromise of having them directly acknowledge their own
idiocy by making them copy a passage into a text form to submit that
explains that to the user to use fproxy with M$IE. Maybe Javascript
and or a Java applet could be used to keep them from simply copying
and pasting the passage (and because they're using M$IE for starters,
we can expect them to have Javascript and or Java on). Requiring the $
just helps get the point further across. :)
--
Yes, I know my enemies.
They're the teachers who tell me to fight me.
Compromise, conformity, assimilation, submission, ignorance,
hypocrisy, brutality, the elite.
All of which are American dreams.
- Rage Against The Machine
_______________________________________________
devl mailing list
devl at freenetproject.org
http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
