There's an incentive to ignore the trivial BS that other humans relentlessly waste your time with. Reading EULAs and watching ads are not the path to success. People are trained to ignore information constantly.
Intelligent apes surrounded by wiggling bushes stop paying attention to wiggling bushes and get munched on by a predator eventually, no?
> Reading EULAs and watching ads are not the path to success.
Agreed, but unlike a login prompt, those things are there for the benefit of others - not you. To continue the analogy: blowing through a login (or changing traffic signal, regardless of color) is like an ape exposing his belly to any silhouette vaguely shaped like a trusted member of the troop.
> ..stop paying attention to wiggling bushes..
Dunno, he could also have a breakdown - lab rats are known to practically lay down and die when you suddenly reverse the role of external stimuli in a system of punishment and reward. But I don't see how that fits here, the user isn't being plagued by nonsensical login prompts constantly springing into existence.
My point was just that whatever mental heuristics we use to decide whether information is worth parsing or not are built up over our lives. As with all such approximating things, there is trade-off between false positives and false negatives. The large amount of junk information one encounters in modernity could lead to aggressively-tuned heuristics, resulting in more false positives relative to negatives, effectively sending useful information to a mental spam folder.
Intelligent apes surrounded by wiggling bushes stop paying attention to wiggling bushes and get munched on by a predator eventually, no?