Joe Crowe

There is real arguement that no matter how well complex medical procedures are explained to a patient, they can never truly have informed consent. This is _not_ because the doctors are smarter. Doctors have the training, background and experience to fully realize the ramifications. In my mind technology is much the same. We can meet with interested parties every so often and talk about patches, switches, operating system vulnerabilities etc, but I honestly do not think that would be productive.

Another way of looking at this issue:

You go out to eat at a sit down restaurant. You order a steak (medium rare), a baked potato (with butter..hold the sour cream), and a side salad (with honey mustard on the side). The salad is okay, as is the potato. The steak isn't tasting too good as it's got a lot of gristle. You decide to send it back. Typically you inform your server of what you don't like about your steak, they whisk it away and attempt to bring out a more pleasing version. You don't ask to stand in the kitchen and tell the cooks what kind of meat to use, what spices to use, when to flip the steak...Doing this is not productive.

Now, for anyone outside of UCS reading this, please don't misunderstand me. I think that we as an organization NEED to step up our regular forms of communication. We distributed a survey to find out from you how to best get info out. We not only want, but NEED your input to determine what it is you want to do (like placing your order). We also NEED the particular details (like ordering dressing with your salad). Once we have that information, the best course is to let us do our job, and prepare your digital food for your approval. If you don't like the meal...as long as you can point to the gristle in your steak, we'll do our best to serve you up a more pleasing version.