Are old people ready for the digital conversion?

In message , Andy Burns
writes
Java Jive wrote:

I can't watch the video, because I won't have Flash player on my PCs,

Then you'll occasionally miss humorous videos.

I don't think you need Flash Player to watch YouTube videos 'live' off
the internet. Of course, if you save them as FLV files, you will need FP
(or something else) to play them.
--
Ian

Java Jive wrote:
1) Can be a security loophole
2) Too many sites have time wasting welcome videos
3) I'm not actually sure on this point, but I get the impression it
is sometimes used to fill the desktop with advertising windows, though
of course javascript can do that too.

I'd stop worrying, life's short enough as it is !

--
Mark
Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply.

On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 18:32:19 +0100, Java Jive wrote:

1) There are more old people in the population

How will that affect my little scatter chart experiment?

2) Age is irrelevant anyway. If the problem is confusion, it doesn't
help solve it

It looked like a comedy video to me. I doubt it was there to help
solve anything. I'm not trying to solve anything either - I'm just
being argumentative, as usual.

by diverting attention from it onto a stereotype like
age.

I'm all for avoiding stereotypes, but are you seriously trying to
suggest that the percentage of technophobes doesn't sharply increase
above an age of, say, 70?

Cheers,

Colin.

On Saturday, October 18th, 2008 at 18:59:20h +0100, Java Jive wrote:
1) Can be a security loophole

1) It is good to be concerned about security.

2) As you are security conscious, you use a secure web browser
viz Firefox rather than the bag of holes Internet Explorer?

(Or better you are running an operating system with
a better security level than MS Windoze, eg GNU/Linux or
the even more secure NetBSD.)

3) If you are running Firefox, why have you not installed
Noscript to protect yourself even further.

4) Noscript protects you from javascript and *flash* automatically
being executed when you visit a web site.

5) For web sites you trust, you may turn on javascript and/or flash
activation.

http://noscript.NET

On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 19:30:12 +0100, Colin Stamp
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 18:32:19 +0100, Java Jive wrote:

1) There are more old people in the population

How will that affect my little scatter chart experiment?

If your sample population is weighted, so will be your results.

I'm all for avoiding stereotypes, but are you seriously trying to
suggest that the percentage of technophobes doesn't sharply increase
above an age of, say, 70?

Yes.

1) If there is confusion because of, say, dementia, than it will be
general, it won't just concern technology.

2) If the person is in full command of their faculties, they won't be
any more likely to be confused than a younger person.

When she was a young woman, my ex sister-in-law coined the phrase "The
Law Of Inanimate Hostility" to describe her unique ability to break
anything electrical.

Which is why I don't want to waste it watching site videos :-)

On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 19:18:15 +0100, Mark Carver
wrote:

I'd stop worrying, life's short enough as it is !

On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 20:53:34 +0200, J G Miller
wrote:

On Saturday, October 18th, 2008 at 18:59:20h +0100, Java Jive wrote:
1) Can be a security loophole

1) It is good to be concerned about security.

2) As you are security conscious, you use a secure web browser
viz Firefox rather than the bag of holes Internet Explorer?

As it happens, I use FF3 for most things, but over the last year or
so, I would guess that FF has had as many security patches as IE.

(Or better you are running an operating system with
a better security level than MS Windoze, eg GNU/Linux or
the even more secure NetBSD.)

I'm doubtful as to whether Linux is really that much more inherently
secure - for example you can change its configuration with nothing
more than a text editor, you can boot into a maintenance mode without
requiring a password - it's just that it's on too few PCs for the
virus writers to bother to target it. AFAIAA, it also doesn't has the
sort of software I require.

I have the same secure build on all my Windows PCs, which are kept
fully up-to-date with security patches - I applied my own security
template to the build, ran rootkit revealer, and checked the result
against Microsoft's Baseline Security Advisor.

I don't want to tempt fate, but so far I'm happy with my security.

3) If you are running Firefox, why have you not installed
Noscript to protect yourself even further.

4) Noscript protects you from javascript and *flash* automatically
being executed when you visit a web site.

5) For web sites you trust, you may turn on javascript and/or flash
activation.

http://noscript.NET

I doubt if I would trust youtube anyway.

What makes us any different to the youngsters when it comes to technology,
I'm not worried about the switchover got digital already. g

--
Joan Archer
http://www.freewebs.com/crossstitcher
http://lachsoft.com/photogallery

"Dave Farrance" wrote in message
news
Digital Conversion - Public Service Announcement (USA)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFuMO9oazwQ

--
Dave Farrance

On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 20:10:48 +0100, Java Jive wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 19:30:12 +0100, Colin Stamp
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Oct 2008 18:32:19 +0100, Java Jive wrote:

1) There are more old people in the population

How will that affect my little scatter chart experiment?

If your sample population is weighted, so will be your results.

There'll be a lot more dots at the higher end of the age axis. How
will that affect the position of those dots on the confusion axis?
I'm no statistician and I'm perfectly willing to accept I'm missing
something stupidly obvious, but I do need convincing. At the moment, I
can't see how your assertion can be correct.


I'm all for avoiding stereotypes, but are you seriously trying to
suggest that the percentage of technophobes doesn't sharply increase
above an age of, say, 70?

Yes.

1) If there is confusion because of, say, dementia, than it will be
general, it won't just concern technology.

Not *just* technology, but technology none-the-less. However, I wasn't
particularly talking about dementia. Elderly people who still have all
their marbles will still have a higher percentage of technophobes
amongst their numbers.


2) If the person is in full command of their faculties, they won't be
any more likely to be confused than a younger person.

What you're missing is the fact that this goes beyond the mental
abilities of the people themselves. It's all about the times they have
lived in. Someone who is 80 now is likely to have had vastly reduced
exposure to modern technology during their prime learning years than
someone who is 40 now. That's bound to have an impact on both the
ability and the inclination to deal with modern gadgets.

Of course, once our hypothetical 40 year-old gets to 80, he (or should
that be "I") might still know all about DVB-T, GPS and adaptive
cruise control, but it'll all be 40 years out of date - bugger!

When she was a young woman, my ex sister-in-law coined the phrase "The
Law Of Inanimate Hostility" to describe her unique ability to break
anything electrical.

Oh there's still plenty of young technophobes and old gadget freaks
around of course. Life isn't *that* dull.

Cheers,

Colin.

On Saturday, October 18th, 2008 20:30:38h +0100,
Java Jive postulated:

for example you can change its configuration with nothing
more than a text editor

But first you have to get root access, paralleling the Windoze
Administrator account. And on Windoze you can just use notepad
to mutilate system.ini or any of the other important high level .ini
files to change the configuration.

Do not forget that it was only with the advent of Windoze NT,
that a windoze system had any effective password login protection
mechanism.

you can boot into a maintenance mode without requiring a password

Assuming you mean single user mode, then this is incorrect and you still
need the root password. And if you use eg the grub boot manager, you
can even password protect what the computer boots into.

it's just that it's on too few PCs for the virus writers to bother to
target it.

Your argument of security by obscurity is bogus and you must not have
heard of the added security features of PAM and the even more rigorous
SElinux.

AFAIAA, it also doesn't has the sort of software I require.

Sort of software, or specific software?

Take a look at

http://www.linuxrsp.RU/win-lin-soft/table-eng.html

and

http://wiki.linuxquestions.ORG/wiki/
Linux_software_equivalent_to_Windows_software

And there is always wine to run Windows programs under Linux,
or alternatively the use of Xen or VMware to run guest operating
systems viz Windoze alongside GNU/Linux or a BSD system.

I doubt if I would trust youtube anyway.

What evidence leads you to that doubtful state of mind?