At 12:05 PM -0500 3/31/06, Tom R. no spam wrote:
I would like to point out, in a friendly way, that non-techy
people may have to learn some techy stuff to be able to protect
themselves. It's like when you start driving a car, you have
to learn some automobile-techy stuff to be able to enjoy
safely the new tool;
~~~~~~~~~~
Sorry, iBozz got it right.
I want LS to protect my machine and to leave me in peace as much as
possible whilst it is
doing it. When it wants my confirmation of something I want simple
explanations.
I accept that simple explanations can be irksome for those who do
know their stuff, but a
reasonable compromise would be much appreciated.
~~~~~~~~~~
Your analogy about autos flops. The amount of techie knowledge
required is minimal. The auto -- and a lot of other highly
complicated devices -- are appliances.
The point of spending money and effort to use LittleSnitch is to have
an appliance that will, with minimal investment on the user's part,
protect the user against malicious exploitation of the user's
ignorance.
Take all the energy you put into condescension and focus it on
explaining how to make a rational decision about Allow - allow until
quit - deny and stuff like that.
_______________________________________________
Littlesnitch-talk mailing list
Littlesnitch-talk@obdev.at
http://at.obdev.at/mailman/listinfo/littlesnitch-talk
