# The great technical divide



## Satcomer (May 1, 2006)

I write this to point out a disturbing trend that I am noticing (at least in the US). The divide between the computer users that actually know how a computer and TC/IP works is deepening among the young adults coming out today. I am talking about the most very basic understanding of TCP/IP. Now with the coming of IPv6 the vast majority of computer users will be completing lost in the transition even some tech companies will be lost because people seem to be ignoring IPv6. 

I believe the IVP6 transition will be much worse then that stupid year 2000 fiasco. Most computer users here don't even know what I am talking about. Bob, Frank and the other moderators know what I am talking about but the every day users here will have to look up IPv6 information to join this discussion even though their OS X machine is already ready. I cringed at so called tech experts users saying (a couple of months ago) to fix a networking problem on OS X by disabling IPv6 to fix a networking problem. The real problem probably resided in their network setup including Hubs, Switches and Modems not able to handle IPv6.


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (May 1, 2006)

Heh... are you trying to say "TC*P*/IP" and "I*PV*6"?  

Also, we won't be transitioning from TCP/IP to IPV6 -- IPV6 will still use TCP/IP.  I think you mean the transition from IPV4 to IPV6, no?

I don't think this will cause too many problems for those that don't know how IPV4 works... I mean, it's just another addressing scheme, and they'll still be typing "google.com" into their browsers.  IPV4 vs. IPV6 won't make much of a difference here -- it'll be pretty transparent to the end user.

As for sysadmins and the IT departments, yes, it will take some time and headaches transitioning over -- but it's a necessity.  We'll soon run out of IP addresses with IPV4, and the transition and need for IPV6 will soon be evident.

Just like any lazy sysadmin can screw up an IPV4 network, so they'll also be capable of screwing up an IPV6 network.  I would think that those sysadmins that are good at networking wouldn't have much trouble with the transition to IPV6 (since IPV4 and IPV6 can co-exist simultaneously) -- if they know "networking" in general and know how to set up a network correctly, then there shouldn't be too many problems.

The Y2K fiasco was blown out of proportion.  VERY few home users actually had a computer that was affected by the Y2K "bug" -- it mainly affected large corporations with massive legacy hardware.  If you were a sysadmin running modern flavors of Windows or UNIX at the time, then you were pretty much in the clear.


----------



## jh2112 (May 1, 2006)

Let me get this straight......
I use a computer and therefore should know the finer points of TCP/IP, IPv4, IPv6 etc...
I drive a car, should I know the composition of the rubber on my tyres?
I use a washing liquid (and a washing machine!) to clean my clothes, should I know which enzymes clean my clothes?
I use a remote control on my tv, should I understand the comms protocol that makes it work?

The entire basis for your post is flawed. You may care, I don't.
I don't need to know how TCP/IP works in order to utilise it on a daily basis.
I don't care if it's using IPv4 or v6.
I don't even have to know its name!


----------



## Satcomer (May 1, 2006)

That is the problem with a lot of users, they don't care. The divide is of those why have a BASIC understanding of how data works. This is the direct reason of why there are so many unsecured private home networks. People don't realize how much info can be gathered by that. With identity thefts increasing this is becoming a real issue, all over the world. The technical divide is causing this and people are getting hurt financially. 

The technical divide is becoming much more prevalent than in the past. I am simply flabbergasted at the state of a lot of young people toward technology and this is going to hurt them in the long run.  Sure a lot of kids today play the latest games and use chat program but if you even say TCP/IP or even UDP most kids today look totally lost. I am talking about the most basic forms of TCP/IP and UDP. 

I guess me crusade about the teaching of basic network technology today to today's kids is fruitless because people don't generally care.


----------



## Thank The Cheese (May 1, 2006)

I'm siding with jh2112 on this one. I don't think he is saying people shouldn't have a basic knowledge of how things work, but TCP/IP and IPv6 is an "under the hood" sort of thing. 

If you drive a car, you don't need to know how an engine works, but you do need to know that it is there, and that you should be changing the fluid and checking your tires and re-filling the fuel tank so that it stays in good working order. 

For computers, I dont think we should expect everyone to know about the technical inner workings, but they should know about the stuff "on the surface" like virus scanners and network encryption and other good practices that keep your computer in good working order. 

Of course, if you're talking about tech experts then yes, they should know about it in its entirety -- it's their job to know (same way that you would expect a mechanic to know how an engine works). Not everyone knows and likes computers, it's what makes life interesting. 

This reminds me of the thread where someone couldn't understand how someone could not know the name of the computer they were using.


----------



## Satcomer (May 2, 2006)

I disagree about computer to car analogy. When I help a computer user understand about basic networking I most always use the Post Office(ISP) and a letter as data, the house the person lives in as the IP address (not withstanding DHCP) and their Social Security as their Mac Address. That very simple analogy helps the people I am trying to explain TCP/IP.


----------



## fryke (May 2, 2006)

All analogies are inherently wrong. Why talk about cars if the subject is *NOT* about cars? The only thing it _might_ show is a basic non-understanding of the things talked about in this very thread. 

Satcomer: I get you. I hear you. But I think it's just the way things go. IPv6 is coming - and most people won't notice or even care. And I guess that's a good thing, too. If we can't make it happen without burdening the user, then there's something wrong with the process. Like you said: Mac users are basically ready for it, anyway.

Even today (and yesterday), most users have no idea about TCP/IP (IPv4). I'm always stunned how I have to simplify explanations for users. E-Mail settings: Same thing. Most users don't understand that webmail is somehow different to "real" E-Mail. They don't know about POP3 and IMAP4 and their differences. Most users don't have to care, though. Someone sets up their computer, and basically, it works. That's fine for them.

"The great technical divide" you're talking about is nothing new, and certainly isn't specifically about IPv6. There was a time when I explained everytime someone didn't get what I meant by IIRC, AFK, RTK etc. - but then I simply stopped. If someone was _really_ interested in understanding those, they could look it up. If they don't know how to google, evolution will solve the problem eventually.


----------



## Satcomer (May 2, 2006)

I knew you would understand Fryke. I have come to learn that you are the type of person that isn't satisfied just using something. You the type (like me) that has to understand how that machine/process is doing what it is doing. 

I just seem to see that since the late Eighties and early Nineties, when people were using the networking principle because the the technology was so new, saw the evolution of networking. Today kids are coming along that just know how the game, piece of gaming software runs, but does not have a real handle on where the data is going once it leaves the computer. The divide is growing larger just because the explosion of popularity of the Internet brought in all the Masses. 

To me is just the state (the least in America)of teaching is not stressing basic networking. I see people being taken advantage of by ISP and web sites. It make me almost made because I wish people the best and a little knowledge can go a long way. I guess the car analogy may not be so bad after all.


----------



## jh2112 (May 2, 2006)

Whilst you are all very smug safe in the knowledge of your superior (in both knowledge and attitude!) networking genius, I am surprised that the majority simply could not understand my point. (I thank the cheese for Thank the Cheese!)

To spell it out (in terms that _may_ be understood):

A person cannot possibly know all of the knowledge and information that goes into making his or her daily lives.
We each make a choice (subconscious or not,) on the level of information we require to live our lives.

I choose not to know what the composition of rubber in my car tyres consists of, in the same way as I choose not to care if the web address I type in is interpreted as 32bit or 128bit. It makes NO difference to my life. Or to many other people. Only to Sysadmins etc. My advice to those people is to leave your house and find a life.


----------



## fryke (May 2, 2006)

Okay. So there _is_ a "great technical divide". As long as it doesn't stop "most users" (those who don't care about the rubber in tyres and those who have no idea what address translation is etc.) from _using_ the web/e-mail/chat etc., it's just not really a problem. I don't want to go into car analogies (look at my previous message), so I'm staying with the actual "problem". I think network technologies will _have_ to evolve into something that "just works". The same thing is true for sooooooo many things. Vector graphics. For years, printers have told their users not to use too many gradients. Users didn't _know_ about how they tortured the printers (both the machines and the people at them, I mean) with some of their stuff. They shouldn't _have_ to. Now finally Adobe is catching up with all those gradient-creators by giving PostScript some abilities about them. Computer networks are similar. Some stuff simply can't be done with POP3. That's where newer protocols come in. The user, at the end, just isn't the one who should *have* to be the expert. That's where you come in. And maybe me. I personally filter my knowledge, too. And so do you. You're not an expert in *everything*. There are things where you're more on the developer side knowledge-wise, some things you're probably a genius in, and maaaaaaaany things you're *no* expert in. Does my sister, who teaches 10-year olds, *really* have to know that she now uses an IMAP mail server instead of the POP-server she's been using before I changed the setup of her machine and E-Mail account? Does she even have to know how exactly the server is configured which forwards the mail going to whatever@nicedomain.chrup to her IMAP-account? No. She shouldn't have to. And in ten years, many would probably wonder what POP and IMAP ever was, because both have been surpassed by Gmail3.


----------



## nixgeek (May 2, 2006)

jh2112 said:
			
		

> ...Only to Sysadmins etc. My advice to those people is to leave your house and find a life.



But if we did that, then who would fix the included cup-holder on the computer of those who don't care one way or another?  You'd be *lost* without us! 

::ha::


----------



## jh2112 (May 3, 2006)

lol, is that what that is??

I nearly sent my pb back to Apple when I saw it was missing that accessory!
I quickly calmed down as I saw that (the very kind and generous,) Apple have a drip tray for my cup right in the middle of my powerbook. Thanks Apple.

Now do I need a new thread for this?.......
My mouse doesn't work!.......


----------



## nixgeek (May 3, 2006)

jh2112 said:
			
		

> lol, is that what that is??
> 
> I nearly sent my pb back to Apple when I saw it was missing that accessory!
> I quickly calmed down as I saw that (the very kind and generous,) Apple have a drip tray for my cup right in the middle of my powerbook. Thanks Apple.
> ...




Did you give the mouse some food?  Otherwise that poor thing will starve!

Sorry, couldn't resist.....back on topic from now on...I promise...







(crossing fingers)


----------



## Blisterphish (May 10, 2006)

I appreciate your concern but the fact of the matter is most people dont need to know how IP works.  That is why were here.    I think the reference to cars is correct in that it is a tool we expect to work without us knowing the intricacies.  If the car is not working properly then we take it to the professional whos made it his job to know how to fix it.  I believe knowing the basics of car maintenance will make you safer and that ties closely to your point of network safety.  I do think however that IP configuration falls into the realm of intricacies along with setting the timing on your Pinto.

As far as identity theft is concerned.  I think a quality paper shredder would go further to protect the identity of the average home user than a secured wireless router.  Both would be ideal though.

Dave.


----------

