At 11:56 23/08/00 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >At 09:01 PM 8/23/00 +0200, mouss wrote: >>This is true in an ideal world, however: >> >>- customers are "stupid" (not that these are supid people, but they may >>be considered >>as stupid customers, in the sense that you can sell them poducts using an >>irrational approach). > >Hmm, it appears one has to watch the Matrix a few more times to really >understand :) really? let me rephrase it. in many customer copanies, someone has been designed to buy a product. This guy generally has something else to do, and will sign where you ask him, if you ever take the time to give him a justification. I mean, he is not trying to be convinced, but onlyto get enough arguments to defend himself if someone asks him. while there are great people everywhere, there are far more many "not great" people. I am not judging these guys, they may be smart, skillfull, .. but victims of their company process. anyway, this part is not very important to me... >Companies don't understand their pain. They want to, but the doctor's that >are explaining to them are talking at such a high level, that they are >very confused. I'm not sure we're talking about the same thing, so I'll try again. Many people think that a reasonable person will maximize his gains and minimize his losses, in the absolute. This is imply untrue. In a given situation, you may chose to simply mae your situation better, without trying to maximimze it. In other words, going to the top is not necessary (this may be justified by the cost of going there!). but once again, this is not imprtant to me... >>- there is no effective way to judge people. you can only ask'em >>questions, hear'em >>talking, ... you can't get inside their brain. > >Yes, you can ask questions starting at the high level and work one's way >down to the trivial. It is called top down approach. Many programming >courses speak of it.. :) you can try, but you can never check out... >>so, the tree components (customer, company, employee) of the system can >>hrdly follow >>any rational model. Knowing that, you can hardly expect that any of these >>components >>will follow a rational process.... > >Untrue, I think there are few firewall developers who majored in >Psychology that may have differing opinions, but you never know.(Hi MJR) heh, you thought you'll ge "safe" just by making a sign to MJR? oh no boy! majoring in psy* makes your job easier. so, if you sell a product, you'll sell it relatively easily. but that won't change the world. Your psy* capacities may change the flow of money, but not the situation. the guy in face of you doesn't get more skill. In other words, the process of selling is everything but a rationnal process. >It is not about hiring hackers, the point of the topic are Online Security >Services Really Worth the Money? What value do they provide a typical >organization? Is their a trade off between having a security staff or >relying on some vendor that is backed by some VC or Big Six corp that just >wants to show market share and not really help anyone.. yes, I realized later that I was off topic... sorry for that. kind regards, mouss - [To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
