Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Internet Explorer Users Have Low Risk Intelligence

Unknown Lamer posted more than 2 years ago | from the lemmings-browsing-the-web dept.

The Internet 264

First time accepted submitter benne2011 writes "A hoax report earlier this year claimed that people who used Internet Explorer had a lower IQ than those using other browsers. Inspired by this bit of fun, Projection Point decided to carry out a real study comparing the risk intelligence (RQ) of people using different browsers. We found that Internet Explorer users performed worse than everyone else; they had lower RQ scores and were grossly overconfident."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Please no... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38352142)

Don't slurp the graveyard fog off of my cheeks...

Don't slurp my bootyass...

Please, no! I beg you!

Re:Please no... (2)

cshark (673578) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352542)

I laugh, but only because I wonder if it's a real study, or a page with pretty graphs, because people on slashdot can't tell the difference.

Re:Please no... (4, Funny)

mwvdlee (775178) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352748)

It's psychological research... ofcourse it's not a real study.

Re:Please no... (5, Interesting)

hairyfeet (841228) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352960)

Well I can tell you as a guy that has to fix the PC after they fuck it up that the IE users are a HELL of a lot more likely to fall for the major social engineering scams from what I've seen. Windows has actually gotten pretty damned hard to crack so being smart little bastards the malware guys just figured out how to get the users to do the dirty work and the IE users? Easy prey.

From what I've seen the big three are, in no particular order, the "ZOMFG you got teh viruz! Run "Iz_Not_Viruz_Iz_Cleaner" to kill it ZOMFG!" that has how you get your AV 20xx and Security tool variants, the "U want teh lezboz? We GOT teh lezboz! Just run "Iz_Not_Viruz_Iz_Codek" to see all teh lezboz!" which is where many of the trojans and spambot crap comes from, and finally the "Hey U R on teh IM? I'm on teh IM to! Please check out "Iz_Not_Viruz_Iz_cute pikz" to see me!" which is where a lot of the nasty rootkit and also spambot crap.

Funny part, second biggest cause of spam? firefox users that have yahoo accounts. The malware guys have figured out how to get Firefox to load an invisible iFrame that lets them load the Yahoo account and silently spam their address book while they look at "free porn" sites thanks to infected ads. This trick doesn't seem to work on the other browsers, not even IE, and it don't seem to work with hotmail nor Gmail, just Yahoo and FF.

I've found if you want to keep a PC clean a combination of Comodo Dragon or Chromium with ABP on Windows 7 with Avast Free works like magic. win 7 has sandboxing along with ASLR and DEP, Dragon and Chromium also sandbox and use low rights mode as does IE, and Avast Free (you can also use Comodo Security Suite which is free for business as well as home, but Avast is less fiddly) does scan before load on all web pages so any nasty crap on a page never gets loaded. Personally i prefer Dragon because of the Comodo secure DNS option, which doesn't mess with the system DNS and which is damned good at blocking phishing sites. Can't comment on Opera or Safari as i haven't really put them through the paces so i don't know how well they hold up.

But of all the systems that come through my shop it never fails that the IE users are the worst infected, bar none. be that because of TFA or because of flaws in the browser I can't tell you, hell it may just be PEBKAC, but if the user has IE only i know its gonna be a nasty mess.

Salt in the wound? (5, Funny)

EdIII (1114411) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352144)

So first we called them stupid, and now they are grossly overconfident according to another study.

I predict the next study will show that their mothers are fatter than average, and ugly.

Re:Salt in the wound? (5, Insightful)

pipingguy (566974) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352154)

Perhaps many IE users are at work and don't care...

Re:Salt in the wound? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38352330)

totally agree, and may be they totally deserve employer who forces them to use IE...

Re:Salt in the wound? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38352332)

Ohhhhh, Jesuuuuuuuuuuus, caaaaaaaaaaaan youuuuuuu interpreeeeeeeeeeeeeeet... what's insiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiide myyyyyyyyyyyyyyy underweeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeear?

Re:Salt in the wound? (0, Flamebait)

EdIII (1114411) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352432)

Ohhhhh, Jesuuuuuuuuuuus, caaaaaaaaaaaan youuuuuuu interpreeeeeeeeeeeeeeet... what's insiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiide myyyyyyyyyyyyyyy underweeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeear?

ROFL.

Ok. I don't care what anybody says... that's funny! Mods be damned, that is funny. +5 Sarcasm.

Re:Salt in the wound? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38352612)

Or use SAP at work, which seems to require IE (note: I've had some success with Firefox and SAP but it tends to be hit or miss, depending on the version of Firefox).

I think the big story (or re-hashing the obvious for some folks) is people treat their computer like an appliance, not knowing or thinking changing something core like the default browser is too hard, voids the warranty or some other crap like that.

I'd like to see how the RQ rating of large pools of the population are before saying IE users have lower RQ...

Re:Salt in the wound? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38352706)

Perhaps many IE users are at work and don't care...

Boys have a penis, girls have a virgina... Typed in IE9...

Re:Salt in the wound? (5, Funny)

DigiShaman (671371) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352174)

Lets go a step further. Droid users would rather vote for Ron Paul where as Apple users would re-elect Barack Obama. If you're going to throw gasoline onto the fire, at least learn to do it right.

Re:Salt in the wound? (1)

phantomfive (622387) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352186)

Droid users... Apple users......If you're going to throw gasoline onto the fire, at least learn to do it right.

And they both suck!

Re:Salt in the wound? (-1, Flamebait)

lister king of smeg (2481612) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352368)

so what is web os Ron paul, and tezin/mego/moblin/or_what_ever_the_hell_it_is_called_now would be nader. none of them have a chance of winning but the all keep trying and wasting resources that would be better spent elsewhere.

Re:Salt in the wound? (3, Informative)

GuldKalle (1065310) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352482)

You're doing it wrong. If you mock people based on their consumption choices, you have to state your own choice so we can mock you in return.
Watch and learn:IE socks! Telnet+Lynx FTW!

Re:Salt in the wound? (4, Funny)

phantomfive (622387) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352592)

Fine. Android and iPhone both suck. I make my communications over a celestial golden jaw harp.

Re:Salt in the wound? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38352968)

WTF is a jaw harp? Did you mean Jew's harp? It isn't racist you know.

Re:Salt in the wound? (1)

MacGyver2210 (1053110) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352842)

Is it wrong that I actually enjoy browsing with Lynx? It's like the internet equivalent of listening to a crystal radio.

Re:Salt in the wound? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38352602)

Instead of codenaming releases "ice cream sandwich" and whatnot, they should use names of presidential candidates.

Re:Salt in the wound? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38352488)

ugly.....like your mom

Re:Salt in the wound? (4, Funny)

SeaFox (739806) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352666)

So first we called them stupid, and now they are grossly overconfident according to another study.

Don't worry. Most will have to ask someone what "grossly overconfident" means so few will feel the sting.

Re:Salt in the wound? (5, Funny)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | more than 2 years ago | (#38353016)

Don't worry. Most will have to ask someone what "grossly overconfident" means so few will feel the sting.

You sound pretty sure about that...

Re:Salt in the wound? (2)

Ihmhi (1206036) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352732)

Once again, Slashdot continues the tradition of unnecessarily complex story titles. The word "Risk" is unnecessary.

Re:Salt in the wound? (3, Interesting)

RoLi (141856) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352950)

Well, Microsoft said they had "no obligation to return data" [in-other-news.com] to their customers.

You have to be both grossly overconfident and very naive to do business with that company.

And to all MS-apologists: No, it is not the case that "everybody does this". Most companies do provide guarantees to their customers, especially when it comes about handling data. What is the point of storing something in "the cloud" when the company boldly tells you that they have "no obligation" to even give you the data back? Of course there are some things where MS cannot be avoided, but it is your choice to minimize or maximize your exposure.

So when MS screws you over [xda-developers.com] , don't complain. Also I just don't get the philosophy to shut down all servers when some deadline runs out - it would cost MS practically zero to just keep the servers running - but no, they must turn everything off to inflict maximum pain for their (hopefully ex-) customers.

This is serious Confirmation (4, Insightful)

solune (803114) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352150)

...Of my lack of faith in these studies.

Dammit (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38352152)

I was sure this would be first post.

Re:Dammit (0)

ksd1337 (1029386) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352194)

I bet you were "sure" about it because of a study you read, no?

Where's the test? (5, Insightful)

cowtamer (311087) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352164)

This study would be a lot more believable if they didn't use phrases like " users of monopoly software" and actually linked to the test they gave.

(For the record, I'm not an IE user either. But the article isn't too far from spelling Microsoft with a dollar sign)

Re:Where's the test? (5, Funny)

GoodNewsJimDotCom (2244874) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352224)

Yes, why do we care if they're good at Monopoly when that has completely different rules than the Risk?

Re:Where's the test? (3, Insightful)

fluffy99 (870997) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352394)

This study would be a lot more believable if they didn't use phrases like " users of monopoly software" and actually linked to the test they gave.

(For the record, I'm not an IE user either. But the article isn't too far from spelling Microsoft with a dollar sign)

And perhaps they could give the error margins for their results. I'd put money on the error margin being a lot bigger than differences in the user group results.

Re:Where's the test? (4, Insightful)

LordLucless (582312) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352444)

It's not a study. It's an online poll. The participants self-selected

Re:Where's the test? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38352736)

Shame the poll didnt work on Firefox or Opera...

Re:Where's the test? (1)

AK Marc (707885) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352890)

Where's the poll, I want to see where I fit, and it's not in TFA...

Re:Where's the test? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38352790)

I'm no fan of Microsoft and stay far from their products, but a "study" of this nature harms the free software movement more than it helps.

Why I use IE7 instead of Firefox and Chrome (4, Interesting)

billstewart (78916) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352808)

Ok, it's not strictly instead of Firefox and Chrome, but it's my default browser on my primary work machine. I'm currently running VMware Player, with a Linux machine on it, and that runs Firefox, which crashes Way Way Too Often, usually because of Flash. I do most of my web browsing there, and have NoScript, Ghostery, and AdBlock Plus, and usually a couple of other safety tools. And I keep another Virtual Machine around, with a stripped-down Linux distro with Firefox in Private Browsing Mode, which I use to read Facebook, because I don't want Facebook contaminating anything else, stealing cookies and history files, or whatever. (If there's a way to keep VMware Player paged in, using the whole 1GB I have allocated for it, instead of swapping itself out when it's not busy even though there's spare hardware RAM left, I'd appreciate pointers; I haven't found them.)

I'm also running Chrome natively, mostly for a bunch of electronics blogs like Hackaday, and occasionally for Gmail, and it's really bloated - burns almost 2GB if I have it turned on with my usual set of tabs. I'm not sure I entirely trust Google to behave themselves with Chrome, but they already know everything about my Gmail account (which I don't use for anything sensitive), and the electronics stuff doesn't get much personal information except when I'm buying equipment.

I used to run Firefox natively as my default browser, but there are a couple of problems with it - it Crashes Way Too Often, and it's also a memory hog (though better than it used to be, and not as bad as Google), and there are a couple of work applications that don't run cleanly except on IE. Until recently, it was my default browser, so if I clicked on a link in an email message, FF would either start from scratch or open another tab, spin the disk for a while while it sucked down memory, and then run, hopefully without crashing itself or crashing something else by hogging memory, and then be its usual friendly self. But I found that usually when I'm clicking on links from my work email, they're either sites I trust, or else they're work related sites like the HR website or web conference bridge that are happier running in IE, and I got tired of that.

That takes us to IE. It's IE7 because the Desktop Support department at work finally let us use IE7 instead of IE6, but is too scared to go to IE8, at least on Windows XP, and they made their saving throw against Windows Vista a couple of years ago - my next set of hardware will run Win7. And it has tabs, so it's not totally obnoxious to use, and it really doesn't crash much, so it's less obnoxious than Firefox, and it usually doesn't use a lot of memory, because I don't usually let it keep more than a couple of tabs open at a time, though it would happily be a memory pig if I let it.

(And then there's Safari and Opera, which I used to have installed - the IT department run little scanning robots that rat you out within a day if you install them, for reasons that sound more like the Software License Police rather than the IT department's normal reticence to have useful software running on our machines, and you get a call from some guy in India who's going to walk you through uninstalling them whether you like it or not. So I no longer run them.)

I suppose there's also Konqueror or other Linux-oriented browsers that I could be running in the Linux VM - are there times it's worth using them instead of Firefox?

You must be an IE user (1)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352910)

The link to the test is at the bottom of the article.

Problem with the test however is that it is American centric, lots of stuff a non-American is less likely to know like the starting line of the decleration of independence. I guessed that the given sentence is not it because that is what everyone thinks and in these kinds of things, what everyone thinks is always wrong but it was a guess, not something I actually once learned in school or read because it was relevant to me... oh wait, that is just like an American. Never mind.

{Shudder} (3, Funny)

Black Parrot (19622) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352168)

What if some of them also watch FOX News?

Re:{Shudder} (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38352436)

I've got a study that shows that Marxists think they're smarter than everyone else, on all things. You can find this study here [slashdot.org] .

Re:{Shudder} (3, Insightful)

smart_ass (322852) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352504)

Watching is OK ... its believing that can get you in trouble.

Re:{Shudder} (2, Insightful)

Mashiki (184564) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352538)

I think it'd be more of an issue for the masses that watch MSNBC, or listen to NPR.

Re:{Shudder} (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38352608)

I think it'd be more of an issue for the masses that watch MSNBC, or listen to NPR.

Ah- perfect example of what happens to your brain when you watch FOX.

Despite a constant stream of Papa Bear ranting about how he gets better ratings than any other opinion show (which is true), his stupid watchers still spread the conspiracy nonsense about "liberal MSNBC masses.''

If you idiots had half a brain, you'd be able to see the contradiction and hypocrisy.

Re:{Shudder} (0)

Mashiki (184564) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352654)

Ah- perfect example of what happens to your brain when you watch FOX.

Really AC? And you know this how, ah I see. You're assuming, thus massing an ass out of yourself. Good call, good call. See even those of us up in this place called Canada, can tell how badly leaning MSNBC and NPR are, much like the CBC.

This just in... (1)

KevMar (471257) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352180)

Of the people that bought cars this last year, the ones that bought electric cars are more educated on environment issues than those that bought sports cars.

Re:This just in... (2)

Dracos (107777) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352212)

So how do Tesla Roadster buyers fit into that?

Re:This just in... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38352222)

Of the people that bought cars this last year, the ones that bought electric cars are more educated on environment issues than those that bought sports cars.

Actually, it's the other way around. The efficiency of electric cars is about the same as a diesel-car, but the electric is way more polluting during manufacture!

Re:This just in... (2)

pbjones (315127) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352270)

depending on the sulphur content of your fuel, the polluting balance will tip the other way over the life of the vehicle.

Re:This just in... (5, Informative)

Anthony Mouse (1927662) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352430)

All first world countries have required ultra low sulfur gasoline about as long as they've required emissions controls, because sulfur will poison a catalytic converter. The trucking industry fought it for several decades, but as of 2010 even diesel fuel is required to be ultra low sulfur in the US.

I suppose you could be talking about some kind of African country where high sulfur fuel is still allowed.

Re:This just in... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38352750)

I can tell by your answir that you are not an Internet Explorer user. No Internet Explorer user cude give such an intellijent, well thought out, high IQ answir.

As for myself, I'm going to switch from Internet Explorer to Apple Safari because I'm taking my SATs this spring, and I want to get into a good collage so that I can become a rich banker.

Re:This just in... (2)

fotbr (855184) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352256)

Educated and caring are two different things.

In my case, I simply don't give a rat's ass, and will have the car that's actually fun to drive -- and also still happens to manage 30+ mpg combined highway & city.

Then again, if by "sports cars" you mean the return of ill-handling V8 powered land yachts, you may very well be right.

Re:This just in... (1)

DigiShaman (671371) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352334)

2012 Bugatti Veyron averages 10Mpg from a 16 cyl, 8L engine. More than just a "sports car". It's an exotic. Hardly ill-handling at that.

Re:This just in... (2)

viperidaenz (2515578) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352980)

but it only goes 40% the speed of sound

New research shows that..... (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38352182)

firefox users think they are smart,
chrome users are the douchebags of the internet,
opera users are superficial,
safari users are fashion hippies with deep pockets or high credit bills
and ofcourse....
netscape users are still on dial-up and
bbs users have something naughty to hide

Re:New research shows that..... (3, Funny)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352418)

And lynx users are bad at imagination, but good at texting.

Re:New research shows that..... (1)

cshark (673578) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352586)

Epiphany users are just like IE users, but nowhere near as demanding.

IE Users who watch Fox News (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38352196)

IE Users who also watch Fox News are more likely than most to be in a coma and on life support, but on their own dime... cause even in a coma, they didn't need no damn government assistance!

Re:IE Users who watch Fox News (1, Offtopic)

stillpixel (1575443) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352220)

IE Users who also watch Fox News are more likely than most to be in a coma and on life support, but on their own dime... cause even in a coma, they didn't need no damn government assistance!

That was me.. failing to login before posting.

Re:IE Users who watch Fox News (2)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352438)

IE Users who also watch Fox News are more likely than most to be in a coma and on life support, but on their own dime... cause even in a coma, they didn't need no damn government assistance!

That was me.. failing to login before posting.

So you've been a Fox News watching IE user? :-)

Of course, but meaningless ..... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38352206)

Of course IE users are dumber than users of FireFox, Opera or Chrome. If you look at the demographic of these other browsers they are used by "early adopters" and similar personalities that exhibit high levels of intelligence. At the same time, this is completely meaningless as IE does not cause the dumbness either and there are plenty of other items or activities that separate out people with a high IQ.

For example, you could also say the same thing about C/C++ coders since they compared to the public at large are smarter. (Not that they are so smart but rather that the general population is not.) It would be hard to argue that everybody should write code in C/C++ -- including your hair stylist -- because those who code in C/C++ are smarter than those who don't.

Re:Of course, but meaningless ..... (3, Funny)

hedwards (940851) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352236)

I don't know, last time I loaded up IE, I got the irresistible urge to watch Fox News.

Re:Of course, but meaningless ..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38352918)

That doesn't make much sense. You can't spell MSNBC without MS.
Of course, all of those FireFOX users...

Re:Of course, but meaningless ..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38352240)

You're an idiot.

Re:Of course, but meaningless ..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38352510)

That's certainly what the little half-green, half-red pill icon by his user ID tells me.

Re:Of course, but meaningless ..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38352620)

A viable argument.

Re:Of course, but meaningless ..... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38352604)

Internet Explorer does not create idiocy, it merely empowers it.

Not fair. (5, Insightful)

slackware 3.6 (2524328) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352210)

Most of your Window users are technologically illiterate. IE is there it works why fart around with it. To use a sort of car analogy how many people look under the hood of their car? Never mind improve it beyond stock. Now I bet the guys that heavily modify their cars have higher intelligence than the average stiff. Any person inclined to tinker with or improve things most likely is smarter than the average Joe. Average Joe is most likely to push the largest shiniest button with a flashing red light whatever the case may be, especially is the button say "Do not touch".

Re:Not fair. (2)

bmo (77928) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352292)

To use a sort of car analogy how many people look under the hood of their car?

Wait, what? I thought this is a rite of passage for anyone buying his first car and showing it off to his buddies - pop the hood and everyone stands around looking at the engine. Beer in hand.

Not that half the people looking know what they're looking at, but that's besides the point.

Now I bet the guys that heavily modify their cars have higher intelligence than the average stiff.

It's got nothing to do with intelligence, and everything to do with looking at machines (a computer is just a machine after all) as what they really are - just things, not magic boxes. People who see a magic box instead of a machine become afraid of it. Afraid to use and modify. The rest of us don't have that fear.

--
BMO

Re:Not fair. (1)

Waffle Iron (339739) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352372)

I thought this is a rite of passage for anyone buying his first car and showing it off to his buddies - pop the hood and everyone stands around looking at the engine.

That's kind of pointless these days. If you open the hood on a modern car, usually all you get to see is a big piece of black plastic covering up anything of interest. I'm not sure why.

Re:Not fair. (1)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352452)

I thought this is a rite of passage for anyone buying his first car and showing it off to his buddies - pop the hood and everyone stands around looking at the engine.

That's kind of pointless these days. If you open the hood on a modern car, usually all you get to see is a big piece of black plastic covering up anything of interest. I'm not sure why.

So they literally made it a black box.

Re:Not fair. (1)

bmo (77928) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352786)

So instead of standing there with a timing light and tweaking the carb, you buy (or program your own) performance eeprom and drop it in. The hotrod rags are full of ads for these things.

Same ideas. Different methods. Just machines.

Indeed, the new way means it's easier to pass emissions. Plug in factory chip, get emissions tested, get the sticker, put in performance eeprom, drive serenely away.

Again, just machines.

--
BMO

Re:Not fair. (3, Interesting)

jrumney (197329) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352556)

Most of your Window users are technologically illiterate. IE is there it works why fart around with it.

Yes, but ... I'd have expected the opposite result myself - technologically illiterate people who are risk adverse would be more likely to not try installing third party software on their PCs. Overconfident types would install every browser from everywhere without consideration for where it came from and what trojans it might harbour.

Of course, it could be that this study is just as much of a hoax as the original.

Re:Not fair. (1)

JWSmythe (446288) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352616)

    Hey, I resemble that remark. :)

    As a matter of fact, I ordered parts to upgrade one of my cars, which hopefully will be here by the weekend. And ya, I tune my PCs and their OSs to work better than average. And if I ever found a button that said "Do not touch", I'd probably just ask why, and/or investigate the reason for it. No button would ever be installed to never use. Obviously that switch has a purpose, and an intended time to be used. :)

    Average Joe would just push it 'cause they don't know better.

    BTW, I like your alias.

Re:Not fair. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38352844)

"Don't push that button! Jeezus, Fred,
Don't push that button! Use your head.
You don't know what it's hooked to, you don't know what it does.
You start that foolin' 'round and we'll be worse off than we wuz.

from "Don't Push That Button"
Copyright © Duane Elms- All Rights Reserved
http://www.ovff.org/pegasus/songs/dont-push-that-button.html [ovff.org]

Re:Not fair. (1)

FaxeTheCat (1394763) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352788)

To use a sort of car analogy how many people look under the hood of their car?

So you can open the cover of your car? Doesn't that void the warranty?

Nothing new, move along - (5, Informative)

Pubstar (2525396) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352232)

From Wikipedia: The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which unskilled people make poor decisions and reach erroneous conclusions, but their incompetence denies them the metacognitive ability to recognize their mistakes. The unskilled therefore suffer from illusory superiority, rating their ability as above average, much higher than it actually is, while the highly skilled underrate their own abilities, suffering from illusory inferiority. Dunning-Kruger Effect [wikipedia.org] Study was done in 99, so they are only 12 years late on this one.

Re:Nothing new, move along - (1)

fluffy99 (870997) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352410)

From Wikipedia:
The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which unskilled people make poor decisions and reach erroneous conclusions, but their incompetence denies them the metacognitive ability to recognize their mistakes. The unskilled therefore suffer from illusory superiority, rating their ability as above average, much higher than it actually is, while the highly skilled underrate their own abilities, suffering from illusory inferiority.
Dunning-Kruger Effect [wikipedia.org]

Study was done in 99, so they are only 12 years late on this one.

So that explains why 85% of drivers consider their driving skills to be above average.

Quite possibly, the most useful study EVER (3, Interesting)

mcrbids (148650) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352532)

The Dunning-Kruger effect is perhaps the most useful effect to use when trying to make sense of modern politics. Listen to any die-hard politico, and the more sure they are of their response, the more certain you can be of how inexperienced they are.

In today's politics, a sure, unwavering certainty is almost a sure sign of success: a "flip flopper" will get nowhere, (Mitt Romney, John Kerry take note) while idiots who never change their opinions (EG: George Bush Jr) get lots of press for "holding true" despite all the evidence to the contrary.

So, the loudest political advocates are either the idiots, or somewhat less loudly, those who actually have some idea what's going on. For those who just want to "do the right thing", without a lot of effort, it's damnably difficult to tell the difference.

Re:Quite possibly, the most useful study EVER (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38352740)

George Bush Jr. was blackwhite and he lead us to glorious victory against our enemies.

Quit hatin'.

Re:Quite possibly, the most useful study EVER (1)

blahplusplus (757119) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352848)

"The Dunning-Kruger effect is perhaps the most useful effect to use when trying to make sense of modern politics."

That's one part of the equation, here is the other - human reasoning doesn't work like the enlightenment thought it did:

http://bit.ly/dYaWUc [bit.ly]

ASCII Penises for World Peace (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38352252)

Zoinks! They've discovered my secret room behind the bookcase containing a large gallery of ASCII penises! Why, even the furniture is made up of ASCII penises constructed from legos!

You cannot fight the swarm of ASCII penises, do not even try.

makes sense to me (0)

pbjones (315127) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352258)

IE = Windows = overconfident.

IE users are mostly noobs... (1)

Zargg (1596625) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352276)

so is this like saying people who don't know anything about cars who think their cars don't need regular maintenance will make bad decisions about their car? (yay first car analogy!)

No big surprise if you look at normal people (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38352314)

If you look at normal people, not geeks, it is very easy to understand why it is like this.

IE == I do not care, I use whatever is default
Safari == I have heard that an Apple computer does not need antivirus, so I am taking less risks if I buy a such.
Firfox/Chrome == I am using Windows with antivirus, but I have heard Firefox/Safari is more safe choice

The difference is pretty small between each group as not everybody thinks like that. For example some buy Apple products just because they are expensive and they want to show to the rest of the world they have money. But in general i think the reasoning applies in many cases.

Uh, (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38352348)

there's no such thing as "risk intelligence". It's a fucking made-up word by the idiot blogger in TFA. Go ahead, TRY to look it up.

Re:Uh, (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38352574)

there's no such thing as "risk intelligence". It's a fucking made-up word by the idiot blogger in TFA. Go ahead, TRY to look it up.

well it has a wikipedia article, so it's automatically a thing

Re:Uh, (2, Informative)

thegarbz (1787294) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352858)

How your drivel got modded insightful I'll never know. Google "Risk Intelligence" brings up 184000 hits. The second result is this one [wikipedia.org] which references its use and definition.

Opera (2)

irockash (1265506) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352388)

I'm sure Opera is missing because all 17 users saw no point in taking the test. -posted from Opera Mobile

No proof (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38352400)

A sample size of 351 and the scores are 57.5, 59.8, 60.2, and 61.8. That proves what exactly?

Re:No proof (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38352578)

A sample size of 351 and the scores are 57.5, 59.8, 60.2, and 61.8. That proves what exactly?

The margin of error is +/- 5%

Domain Registration (-1, Offtopic)

domain2host (2523086) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352422)

We provide services of Domain Booking Through Debit Card and Domain Registration With Debit Card In Chennai. Domain Registration [domain2host.in] | Web Hosting Chennai [domain2host.info] | Domain Registration Debit Card [domain2host.info] | Domain registration Credit Card [domain2host.info] | Domain Booking Through Debit Card [domain2host.in] | Domain Registration With Debit Card [domain2host.in] | Website Registration [domain2host.in] | Register Domain [domain2host.info] | Domain With Debit Card [domain2host.in] | Domain Purchase [domain2host.in] | Web Hosting in Chennai [domain2host.in] | Domain Registration India [domain2host.in] | Buy Domain [domain2host.in] | Cheap Domain Registration [domain2host.in] | Cheap Domain Registration India [domain2host.in] | Register Domain in India [domain2host.in]

Is this a case of hoax 2.0 (a hoax of a hoax)? (5, Insightful)

UBfusion (1303959) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352424)

From their website: "We define Risk Intelligence as the ability to estimate probabilities accurately."

Are they not aware of the pioneering and Nobel prize awarded studies of Tversky and Kahnemann in the 70's which demonstrated beyond any doubt that humans are terrible at estimating any kind of probability (especially risk-related ones)?

What about the 10-step percentage scale they used? Seriously, is any person able to differentiate between being "70% sure" and "80% sure" regarding any statement?

What about latent variables like the OS used? How can one possibly compare any feature of a Windows user with features of Mac or Linux user?

I can't locate any samples of the questionnaire used and I don't need to see any, because I'm 89.345943% sure they don't know what they're talking about.

Re:Is this a case of hoax 2.0 (a hoax of a hoax)? (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38352570)

What about the 10-step percentage scale they used? Seriously, is any person able to differentiate between being "70% sure" and "80% sure" regarding any statement?

I play a lot of DnD, and it's amazing how useful knowing that sort of shit is for your saving throws.

Re:Is this a case of hoax 2.0 (a hoax of a hoax)? (2)

binarstu (720435) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352792)

I can't locate any samples of the questionnaire used and I don't need to see any, because I'm 89.345943% sure they don't know what they're talking about.

Not only that, but I didn't see anything about how the study subjects were selected or how balanced the numbers of subjects in each category were. And there appeared to be no real statistical analysis of the results at all. Without a lot more information, I don't see how this qualified as front page material on Slashdot.

In another study (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38352550)

In another study, most people have low risk intelligence.

Low Risk Intelligence? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38352664)

Low Risk Intelligence? That means that their intelligence is pretty safe, right?

Old media recommends the Exploider (1)

tbf (462972) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352690)

...or they are just causal users, following advice given in consumer protection TV shows: Just yesterday I zapped into Planetopia yesterday (show in Germany), where they "compared" browsers and came to the conclusion Chrome for speed, Firefox for customization, Explorer for security. Sponsored report, or just a clueless reporter?

Late adopters (1)

Citizen of Earth (569446) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352718)

If there is any validity to this kind of study, it is merely detecting that people who use IE tend to be late adopters to new technology and that late adopters have many other properties, including low "risk intelligence". I'd also expect them to be outside of the 18-49 demographic.

Re:Late adopters (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38352836)

If there is any validity to this kind of study, it is merely detecting that people who use IE tend to be late adopters to new technology and that late adopters have many other properties, including low "risk intelligence". I'd also expect them to be outside of the 18-49 demographic.

There are two ways to interpret the study.
If you're a scientist, you would say "People who have lower IQ's tend to be less computer savvy, and thus will stick with the default browser."
If you're a Troll or a Dick, you would say "People who use IE have lower IQ's"

I have less of a problem with the methodology of the "study" than I do with the bullshit interpretation of the data.

People that need to read textbooks... (4, Informative)

queazocotal (915608) | more than 2 years ago | (#38352756)

The study size was 350 participants.

If you break down the percentages, they are variations of two or three people in each sample.

This is so far from statistically significant, it's laughable.

Grossly overconfident (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38352806)

"We found that Internet Explorer users performed worse than everyone else; they had lower RQ scores and were grossly overconfident."

So they're on Slashdot too?

IE users are not so unique. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38352810)

Reading the comments in this thread [slashdot.org] it seems Slashdot users don't fair too well in the 'clicky linky' stakes.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?