zlacker

> and I've had people get mad at me when I suggest that they do. lol that's a new one, why?

>>tough+(OP)
Not the op but I have that experience frequently. These are perceived as geeky needy techie things that are not for normal people (sprinkle quotations as needed). It's the same as people getting upset at suggestion to add lock of some sort to their phone (face, fingerprint, whatever) or backup their phone.

After some pondering I think it's peoples' insecurity misfiring. They use these complicated layered and potentially risky and dangerous pieces of technology, aware they don't fully understand them, that they work as magic that could stop any moment. Trying to understand and secure them is a massive rabbit hole. So I think there's kind of a rejection to go down that hole or acknowledge the problem or, most of all, face the vulnerability and exposure.

My 100 Croatian lipa fwiw :-)

>>tough+(OP)
Ultimately it boils down to "it should just work" but to be more specific one person said "I shouldn't have to do anything different!" and directed their anger towards me instead of the ads they were previously complaining about.

People that aren't tech-savvy don't want to think about tech any more than they already do. Having to understand something new about tech is just another problem to them. I'm not saying that as an insult - just an observation.

>>tough+(OP)
I’ve had someone say they want to support the content, which I understand. If only they knew how their data was being abused.

>>Nikola+C
I can see it at which point I just install it for them, tell them how it works and how to disable if it gets and the way and move on.

But you gotta have a very good relationship with someone to just do that I guess