At 09:11 2016-02-04, Ken Dibble krdibble@stny.rr.com wrote:
[snip]
I could rant further, of course.
Three paragraphs more say yes. <BEG>
I am increasingly of the opinion that general purpose computers are unacceptably dangerous in the hands of people who don't know a very great deal about how to control them. People who just want to get email or browse the web should use a phone or a tablet that can't do anything else, or screw up anything else. Etc...
I see your point here.
And while that's an insurmountable problem in people's homes, I would argue that it's not insurmountable in a place of business. If, as a business owner or administrator, you put a general purpose computer into the hands of an employee, then you have a basic responsibility to know how to protect it and maintain it, or to hire, or contract with, someone who does.
It is not insurmountable in a home. It is that home user's usually do not want to spend anything on maintenance, etc. Still, I think that they have the responsibility you detail just as people should keep their car roadworthy.
That includes knowing whether it's a good idea to take the advice of a first-level help desk person or not. Would they let the person who runs the machine-tool lathe try fix it when it breaks down, or would they bring in the in-house mechanic? For that matter, would they let a clerical person try to fix the copier when it jams? Or would they call in the copier repair person? But for some reason, when it comes to computers, all bets are off. Anybody can use one and anybody can "fix" one.
You are categorising people into users and repairers. The division is not that sharp. For example, I would expect a clerical person to able to deal with paper jams without damaging the equipment.
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko