Logic dictates
@securenet.net
| I see too many conveniently selfish 'perspectives'
Post:
I seem to notice a lot of the "if you're not actively stopping me it must be OK" mentality in this thread. Since when does no opposition mean its ok to steal? If its not yours don't touch it. If the owner wanted you to play with it they would have put a "free wi-fi" sticker on their door like they do at taco bell.
Reply to above:
They DID put an electronic "free wi-fi sticker". It's included right in the broadcast message the router is putting out. It says "Anyone may connect to me".
My comment:
Well, that "Anyone may connect to me" thing is the DEFAULT setting of the router - IT IS NOT necessarily a conscious, voluntary decision that the owner of the router made. It's strange that no-one in those posts mentioned that the DEFAULT setting for routers is open access.
If the owner of the router simply doesn't know about routers, then he is stuck with the DEFAULT setting.
Obviously, the DEFAULT setting should be SECURE, and not OPEN ACCESS.
Or the signal should have a limit of 30 feet or so.
Or the router should come with some sort of material that would block the signal from exiting your house.
To expect everyone to have the technical knowledge to know that others can access their network is ridiculous.
I don't give a damn about the money that the internet providers are "losing" when people use someone else's signal. What I care about is that the individual transmitting the signal is not necessarily doing this voluntarily. And if the person taking that signal has no idea if he's hurting the person he's stealing from or not, then he shouldn't use the signal. The only way to know if he's hurting the owner of the signal is to find out who the owner is, and ask him if he has a limited or unlimited account.
Of course, doing illegal things (like child pornography) on someone else's connection is also wrong. But people who would do that likely wouldn't care that they're looking at naked children on a stolen signal.
Post:
"So how am I to know which open WiFi’s are intended to be used by the general public, and which are not.
If my computer requests access to someone’s WiFi and their WiFi obliges it would seem to me they have authorized my use."
My comment:
NO - it SHOULD NOT "seem to you" that the owner of the signal has authorized your use. If anything, it should "seem to you" that the owner of the signal does not know that his signal is reaching your house.
How dare you conveniently and selfishly assume that he has knowingly authorized your use. That's simply ignorance and selfishness combined. |
