The 2014 Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS) will bring together an interdisciplinary group of researchers and practitioners in human computer interaction, security, and privacy. The program will feature technical papers, a poster session, panels and invited talks, lightning talks and demos, and workshops and tutorials. This year SOUPS will be held at Facebook in Menlo Park, CA.
Original Post Here.
Friday, January 10, 2014
Saturday, June 6, 2009
A Brief Introduction to Usable Security
A Brief Introduction to Usable Security
Bryan D. Payne, Georgia Institute of Technology
W. Keith Edwards, Georgia Institute of Technology
Researchers have studied usable computer security for more than 20 years, and developers have created numerous security interfaces. Here, the authors examine research in this space, starting with a historical look at papers that address two consistent problems: user authentication and email encryption. Drawing from successes and failures within these areas, they study several security systems to determine how important design is to usable security. Their discussion offers guidelines for future system design.
Source - http://www2.computer.org/portal/web/csdl/doi/10.1109/MIC.2008.50
Monday, May 18, 2009
HCI 2009 - register now for conference that celebrates people and technology
HCI 2009 - register now for conference that celebrates people and technology
The annual UK conference on Human Computer Interaction comes to Cambridge in the first week of September. HCI 2009 will include hands-on demonstration of the latest interactive technologies from commercial and university labs, as well as new design methods and recent user research results.
The conference includes tutorials on usability and user experience techniques, and a number of specialist workshops on new research topics.
Early-bird registration discount is available until 31 May.
For more details, and online registration, visit http://www.hci2009.org
The 23rd BCS conference on Human Computer Interaction celebrates the people who use technology, the people who create new technologies, and the relationship between them.
Taking place from 1-5 September 2009, it is hosted by Cambridge University and Microsoft Research Cambridge. The conference programme and accommodation will be located at Churchill College Cambridge. The Open House Festival of Interactive Technology will be hosted on the Cambridge University West Cambridge site.
Monday, April 27, 2009
Digital Divide: The Three Stages
Jakob Nielsen's Alertbox, November 20, 2006:
Digital Divide: The Three Stages
Summary:
The economic divide is a non-issue, but the usability and empowerment divides alienate huge population groups who miss out on the Internet's potential.
The "digital divide" refers to the fact that certain parts of the population have substantially better opportunities to benefit from the new economy than other parts of the population. Most commentators view this in purely economic terms. However, two other types of divide will have much greater impact in the years to come.
Stage 1: Economic Divide
In its simplest form, the digital divide is manifested in the fact that some people can't afford to buy a computer. Although politicians always talk about this point, it's growing more irrelevant with each passing day -- at least in the industrialized world. We should recognize that for truly poor developing countries, computers will remain out of the average citizen's reach for 20 years or more.
In areas like North America, Europe, Australia, and Asia's advanced countries, computer cost is no longer an issue. Dell's cheapest computer costs $379 (with a monitor) and is about 500 times as powerful as the Macintosh Plus I used to write my Ph.D. thesis. While it's true that a few people can't even afford $379, in another five years, computers will be one-fourth their current price. Would that all social problems would go away if we simply waited five years.
Stage 2: Usability Divide
Far worse than the economic divide is the fact that technology remains so complicated that many people couldn't use a computer even if they got one for free. Many others can use computers, but don't achieve the modern world's full benefits because most of the available services are too difficult for them to understand.
Almost 40% of the population has lower literacy skills, and yet few websites follow the guidelines for writing for low-literacy users. Even government sites that target poorer citizens are usually written at a level that requires a university degree to comprehend. The British government has done some good work on simplifying much of its direct.gov.uk site information, but even it requires at least a high school education to easily read.
Lower literacy is the Web's biggest accessibility problem, but nobody cares about this massive user group.
Senior citizens face the second-biggest accessibility problem, but again there is little interest in the guidelines for making websites easier for older users. Companies don't even have the excuse that it doesn't pay to cater to this audience, because retirees are rich these days. Even though seniors are the main remaining source of growth in Internet use, companies are still endlessly fascinated by young users and ignore older, richer users who would be much more loyal customers -- if only someone bothered to sell to them.
Whereas the economic divide is closing rapidly, I see little progress on the usability divide. Usability is improving for higher-end users. For this group, websites get easier every year, generating vast profits for site owners. Because they now follow more e-commerce user experience guidelines, companies that sell online typically have conversion rates of around 2%, which is twice the conversion rate of the bubble years. That's all great news for high-end users, but the less-skilled 40% of users have seen little in the way of usability improvement. We know how to help these users -- we're simply not doing it.
Stage 3: Empowerment Divide
We have the knowledge needed to close the usability divide, and I remain hopeful that we'll get the job done. The empowerment divide, however, is the hard one: even if computers and the Internet were extraordinarily easy to use, not everybody would make full use of the opportunities that such technology affords.
Participation inequality is one exponent of the empowerment divide that has held constant throughout all the years of Internet growth: in social networks and community systems, about 90% of users don't contribute, 9% contribute sporadically, and a tiny minority of 1% accounts for most contributions.
In researching how people use search engines for my seminar on fundamental guidelines for Web usability, we've found that many users don't know how to use search to truly master the Web. People don't understand advanced search features, they rarely employ query reformulation, and many uncritically select the first search results. Also, many users don't understand how search engines prioritize their listings, and some users don't even know that the euphemistic label "sponsored links" refers to paid advertisements. (For more info, see Consumer Reports' study of what users know about search ads.)
Because they lack the initiative and skill to take matters into their own hands, some users remain at the mercy of other people's decisions. For example, people sometimes accept the default home page chosen by their computer vendor or ISP rather than select one that's better suited to their needs. Again, this means that the user's attention can be sold off like a sheep to slaughter, as indicated by deals where search engines pay computer vendors millions of dollars to be the default setting on shipping PCs.
Similarly, some users limit themselves to "free" Web applications that display ads. What such users don't realize is that better applications (more appropriate, powerful, and liberating ones) are available at a cost that's far less than the value of the time they waste trying not to look at the ads.
Prospects for Bridge Building
The Internet can be an empowering tool that lets people find good deals, manage vendors, and control their finances and investments. But it can just as easily be an alienating environment where people are cheated. Members of the Internet elite don't realize the extent to which less-skilled users are left out of many of the advancements they cheer and enjoy.
Ultimately, I'm extremely optimistic about the economic divide, which is vanishing rapidly in industrialized countries. The usability divide will take longer to close, but at least we know how to handle it -- it's simply a matter of deciding to do so. I'm very pessimistic about the empowerment divide, however, which I expect will only grow more severe in the future.
Digital Divide: The Three Stages
Summary:
The economic divide is a non-issue, but the usability and empowerment divides alienate huge population groups who miss out on the Internet's potential.
The "digital divide" refers to the fact that certain parts of the population have substantially better opportunities to benefit from the new economy than other parts of the population. Most commentators view this in purely economic terms. However, two other types of divide will have much greater impact in the years to come.
Stage 1: Economic Divide
In its simplest form, the digital divide is manifested in the fact that some people can't afford to buy a computer. Although politicians always talk about this point, it's growing more irrelevant with each passing day -- at least in the industrialized world. We should recognize that for truly poor developing countries, computers will remain out of the average citizen's reach for 20 years or more.
In areas like North America, Europe, Australia, and Asia's advanced countries, computer cost is no longer an issue. Dell's cheapest computer costs $379 (with a monitor) and is about 500 times as powerful as the Macintosh Plus I used to write my Ph.D. thesis. While it's true that a few people can't even afford $379, in another five years, computers will be one-fourth their current price. Would that all social problems would go away if we simply waited five years.
Stage 2: Usability Divide
Far worse than the economic divide is the fact that technology remains so complicated that many people couldn't use a computer even if they got one for free. Many others can use computers, but don't achieve the modern world's full benefits because most of the available services are too difficult for them to understand.
Almost 40% of the population has lower literacy skills, and yet few websites follow the guidelines for writing for low-literacy users. Even government sites that target poorer citizens are usually written at a level that requires a university degree to comprehend. The British government has done some good work on simplifying much of its direct.gov.uk site information, but even it requires at least a high school education to easily read.
Lower literacy is the Web's biggest accessibility problem, but nobody cares about this massive user group.
Senior citizens face the second-biggest accessibility problem, but again there is little interest in the guidelines for making websites easier for older users. Companies don't even have the excuse that it doesn't pay to cater to this audience, because retirees are rich these days. Even though seniors are the main remaining source of growth in Internet use, companies are still endlessly fascinated by young users and ignore older, richer users who would be much more loyal customers -- if only someone bothered to sell to them.
Whereas the economic divide is closing rapidly, I see little progress on the usability divide. Usability is improving for higher-end users. For this group, websites get easier every year, generating vast profits for site owners. Because they now follow more e-commerce user experience guidelines, companies that sell online typically have conversion rates of around 2%, which is twice the conversion rate of the bubble years. That's all great news for high-end users, but the less-skilled 40% of users have seen little in the way of usability improvement. We know how to help these users -- we're simply not doing it.
Stage 3: Empowerment Divide
We have the knowledge needed to close the usability divide, and I remain hopeful that we'll get the job done. The empowerment divide, however, is the hard one: even if computers and the Internet were extraordinarily easy to use, not everybody would make full use of the opportunities that such technology affords.
Participation inequality is one exponent of the empowerment divide that has held constant throughout all the years of Internet growth: in social networks and community systems, about 90% of users don't contribute, 9% contribute sporadically, and a tiny minority of 1% accounts for most contributions.
In researching how people use search engines for my seminar on fundamental guidelines for Web usability, we've found that many users don't know how to use search to truly master the Web. People don't understand advanced search features, they rarely employ query reformulation, and many uncritically select the first search results. Also, many users don't understand how search engines prioritize their listings, and some users don't even know that the euphemistic label "sponsored links" refers to paid advertisements. (For more info, see Consumer Reports' study of what users know about search ads.)
Because they lack the initiative and skill to take matters into their own hands, some users remain at the mercy of other people's decisions. For example, people sometimes accept the default home page chosen by their computer vendor or ISP rather than select one that's better suited to their needs. Again, this means that the user's attention can be sold off like a sheep to slaughter, as indicated by deals where search engines pay computer vendors millions of dollars to be the default setting on shipping PCs.
Similarly, some users limit themselves to "free" Web applications that display ads. What such users don't realize is that better applications (more appropriate, powerful, and liberating ones) are available at a cost that's far less than the value of the time they waste trying not to look at the ads.
Prospects for Bridge Building
The Internet can be an empowering tool that lets people find good deals, manage vendors, and control their finances and investments. But it can just as easily be an alienating environment where people are cheated. Members of the Internet elite don't realize the extent to which less-skilled users are left out of many of the advancements they cheer and enjoy.
Ultimately, I'm extremely optimistic about the economic divide, which is vanishing rapidly in industrialized countries. The usability divide will take longer to close, but at least we know how to handle it -- it's simply a matter of deciding to do so. I'm very pessimistic about the empowerment divide, however, which I expect will only grow more severe in the future.
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
CALL FOR POSTERS -- SOUPS 2009
CALL FOR POSTERS -- SOUPS 2009
Symposium On Usable Privacy and Security
July 15-17, 2009
Mountain View, CA, USA
http://cups. cs.cmu.edu/ SOUPS/
Poster submissions due May 29, 2009
The 2009 Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS) will
bring together an interdisciplinary group of researchers and
practitioners in human computer interaction, security, and
privacy. The program will feature technical papers, workshops
and tutorials, a poster session, panels and invited talks,
and discussion sessions. Detailed information about poster
submissions appears below. For information about other submissions
please see the SOUPS web site
http://cups. cs.cmu.edu/ soups/2009/ cfp.html.
POSTERS
We seek poster abstracts describing recent or ongoing
research or experience in all areas of usable privacy and
security. Submissions should use the SOUPS poster template
(MS Word: http://cups. cs.cmu.edu/ soups/2009/ soups2009- proceedings- template. doc
or LaTeX: http://cups. cs.cmu.edu/ soups/2009/ soups2009- latex-templates. zip)
and be at most two pages. Accepted poster abstracts will be
distributed to symposium participants and made available on the
symposium web site. Please follow the final submission
formatting instructions when preparing your poster abstract to
avoid the need to revise poster abstracts after acceptance
decisions are made. In addition, SOUPS will include a poster
session in which authors will exhibit their posters. Note,
poster abstracts should be formatted like short papers, not
like posters. Authors of accepted posters will be sent
information about how to prepare and format posters for the
conference.
Submit your poster using the electronic submissions page
[http://cups. cs.cmu.edu/ soups/2009/ submit.html].
A successful submission will display a web page confirming it,
and a confirmation email is sent to the corresponding author.
Please make sure you receive that confirmation email when you
submit, and follow the directions in that email if you
require any follow up.
We also welcome authors of recent papers (2008 to 2009) on
usable privacy and security to present your work at the SOUPS
poster session. Please submit the title and abstract of your
conference paper, full citation, and a link to the published
version.
Submissions will close at 5pm, US East Coast time, the
evening of May 29.
General Chair:
Lorrie Cranor, Carnegie Mellon University
Posters Co-Chairs:
Dirk Balfanz, Google
Rob Miller, MIT
Symposium On Usable Privacy and Security
July 15-17, 2009
Mountain View, CA, USA
http://cups. cs.cmu.edu/ SOUPS/
Poster submissions due May 29, 2009
The 2009 Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS) will
bring together an interdisciplinary group of researchers and
practitioners in human computer interaction, security, and
privacy. The program will feature technical papers, workshops
and tutorials, a poster session, panels and invited talks,
and discussion sessions. Detailed information about poster
submissions appears below. For information about other submissions
please see the SOUPS web site
http://cups. cs.cmu.edu/ soups/2009/ cfp.html.
POSTERS
We seek poster abstracts describing recent or ongoing
research or experience in all areas of usable privacy and
security. Submissions should use the SOUPS poster template
(MS Word: http://cups. cs.cmu.edu/ soups/2009/ soups2009- proceedings- template. doc
or LaTeX: http://cups. cs.cmu.edu/ soups/2009/ soups2009- latex-templates. zip)
and be at most two pages. Accepted poster abstracts will be
distributed to symposium participants and made available on the
symposium web site. Please follow the final submission
formatting instructions when preparing your poster abstract to
avoid the need to revise poster abstracts after acceptance
decisions are made. In addition, SOUPS will include a poster
session in which authors will exhibit their posters. Note,
poster abstracts should be formatted like short papers, not
like posters. Authors of accepted posters will be sent
information about how to prepare and format posters for the
conference.
Submit your poster using the electronic submissions page
[http://cups. cs.cmu.edu/ soups/2009/ submit.html].
A successful submission will display a web page confirming it,
and a confirmation email is sent to the corresponding author.
Please make sure you receive that confirmation email when you
submit, and follow the directions in that email if you
require any follow up.
We also welcome authors of recent papers (2008 to 2009) on
usable privacy and security to present your work at the SOUPS
poster session. Please submit the title and abstract of your
conference paper, full citation, and a link to the published
version.
Submissions will close at 5pm, US East Coast time, the
evening of May 29.
General Chair:
Lorrie Cranor, Carnegie Mellon University
Posters Co-Chairs:
Dirk Balfanz, Google
Rob Miller, MIT
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Fisheye Strategy
Interesting article on Fisheye effect.
Fisheye Strategy Cassie Thomas cassie@cs.umd.edu
Fisheye Strategy
VRML (Virtual Reality Modeling Language)
VRML (Virtual Reality Modeling Language) was developed around 1994 as a means to share 3D environments, targeted primarily at the world-wide web. Its specification includes several environmental primitives, including a surrounding cube. The cube is texture-mapped, and provides a backdrop behind a scene composed otherwise of polyhedral objects. This cubic environment map is the one advocated by Greene in his 1986 paper.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
