I can only assume you’ve never worked in desktop support if you think that is something the general populace is remotely interested in. Smartphones are a step in the right direction for the tech illiterate and uninterested. There is zero reason to give lay users enough rope to hang themselves with despite that being the opposite of what I or most users of this site would like for ourselves.
I actually did work with customer support in my very first job :) We had a limited IT crew, so programmers on-site would often go to the users' office to help with software and hardware issues.
My anecdote is the opposed of yours: they were interested in knowing why something wasn't working, but only as long as you're willing to be patient, talk slowly, and explain any unknown concepts to them, if required.
Insulting them, or just telling them it's their fault something wasn't working would be a sure way to get a negative reaction instead.
Fair enough. Many of my end users were indeed eager or at least willing to learn as you say. A non-insignificant portion were not though, and those are the ones I'm speaking of. But that was also a professional environment. Your interested users had some obligation to the company and the support of professionals like yourself to guide them.
Additionally, I don't think these people are stupid, and I'm not demeaning them. They simply do not care to know and that's perfectly fine. I wouldn't demean someone for not understanding how their car works, or even failing to get their oil changed. The computer is a tool to file taxes and shop on amazon for most people, they have a million other priorities in their lives that come before making sure windows is up to date, let alone actually considering its security. It's the job of these companies to ensure their technology can be used safely without consideration by the end user.
> I don't think these people are stupid, and I'm not demeaning them.
Sorry if it sounded like I was implying you thought that, or called them stupid, I didn't mean it that way. That statement wasn't trying to 'refute' anything you said either - it was just expanding on my anecdote of what I saw that it worked or not, whether in a professional environment or somewhere else.
Now, replying to your recent post,
> It's the job of these companies to ensure their technology can be used safely without consideration by the end user.
I think we just hard disagree here. I believe ultimately the user is/should be on control of how their own computer is used.
No worries, I agree with you in principle and for my own usage but, in practice I don’t want my grandma to have to think about security at all and I’d prefer if there were very few ways she could be social engineered to circumvent what security is there.
Beyond that I think total control can still be achieved in the realm of hobbyists who can run Linux or flash alternative firmwares etc.
