Tracy R Reed wrote:
DJA wrote:
Why does everyone like to characterize it as stealing?
EXACTLY. And this is why we keep getting into bogus analogies.
All the tortured analogies do is prove that we can all craft one that
fits our particular point of view. Oddly this is doubly true in
conversations about open wireless, which seem to bring about the most
convoluted "It's as if..." statements.
Personally, I don't think one is needed, as we all understand the
technical aspects of what is going on here.
This
isn't stealing. It may or may not be right but it isn't stealing. We
need a new word.
I call it "rude" myself.
My mother taught me that using something that wasn't mine without
explicit permission is being ill-mannered.
Whether that be a toy car or a wireless connection, the same rules
apply. "If it isn't yours, ask".
Now, it's also true that someone blasting a full-powered wireless signal
to every house on the block when they could easily use half-power and
keep the signal contained is being boorish. Since the spectrum available
to wireless signals is limited, we should all do our part to share the
allocation.
However, most users of wireless networking aren't even aware they can
turn down the signal strength, let alone aware of how to do it.
They are being rude out of ignorance.
Deliberately connecting to a wireless network you don't have permission
to use is discourteous. And, no, the simple fact that WEP/WPA/filtering
isn't being used does not mean you have permission, as much as some
would like to believe it does.
Doing so is being rude intentionally and that is the greater fault in my
mind.
-ajb
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
