Points on your Internet driver's license (was RE: Even you can be

Sat Jun 12 14:35:44 UTC 2004

On Saturday 12 June 2004 14:53, Adi Linden wrote:
> > Been there, done that.  Got any new ideas?
>
> Provide a safe network connection. I believe an ISP should provide a safe
> environment to play, assuming the customer is innocent granny. Your
> average DSL network connection should be safe by default, so a default
> Win98 (or any other OS) can be connected without fear of compromise.
>
> I really don't agree with the "Internet driver's license" concept as
> presented. It really is not an "Internet driver's license" but a
> "Microsoft Safe Operating License". A one fits all type arrangement. Who
> sets the standard?
>
> The plug that connects to the internet world needs to scale with the level
> of expertise of the user. This needs to include a beginners level for the
> clueless with safe email and safe browsing.
>

The problem with this is one of who pays for it.

You are talking about an environment where the newcomers and non-experts 
require significantly more intervention in how things are done and what they 
can do than the more experienced hands.

Do you charge the newbies more to cover this level of protection, or do you 
spread the charges across your entire userbase to avoid impacting one 
segment?

If you raise the prices for newbies then you will automatically have newcomers 
going for the cheaper, more "raw", service and negating any advantages you 
have to a tiered product set with protection at the bottom.

If you spread the charges then the users who require less handholding are 
going to get upset when their prices are hiked to cover functionality they 
will never use.

The only real way to enforce product stratification on this scale where people 
are introduced safely and then educated and given more freedom is to enforce 
some kind of metric on what is a permissable clue level to move to the next 
stratum of service with less handholding. This means ISPs effectively having 
to vet all of their customers when they try to upsell. The alternative to 
this is a multilateral "driving license" whereby simply having the piece of 
paper gets you the cheaper, rawer service.

If handholding was for everyone then AOL would be the only service provider 
and the rest of us wouldn't exist. None of the suits who run the companies 
represented here are going to do anything to impact their bottom line, so 
refusing to take customers on a skill basis isn't going to happen.

I don't really see that it's the ISPs job to make the net less frightening for 
the customers. It should be down to the OS vendors of whatever shape and the 
application vendors to ensure that their products are as secure as they can 
reasonably be which is not currently the case. What you are proposing with 
the "protect granny at all costs" approach is giving software vendors an 
excuse to code crappy product because there won't be any impact. Do you fancy 
subsidising Microsoft in the long term?

P.