Paul G. Allen wrote:
> Bob is the one that fsck'd up, not me. He is the one that had enough
> knowledge to install an AP. Apparently he does not have enough knowledge
> to lock it down. Not my fault, his. Not my fault my computer connected
> to it, his. He has the burden to make sure it's secure, just as I have
> the burden of making sure my stuff is secure (whether tangible or
> intangible property). No one will do it for me, unless I ask them to.
> Being Joe Dumb User, I'm probably not smart enough to know it should be
> secured, but that's my fault for getting into something before I know
> anything about it.
So you are saying that the other guy's ignorance is inexcusable buy yours is
not? Nice.
Since when are we talking about the ethics of stupid users? Is it ok for you
to send child pornography out someone else's AP, because they left it open? Is
it ethical for you to use it for sending SPAM, since he left it open? At what
point do you consider the use of someone's open AP a violation of ethics?
--
Neil Schneider pacneil_at_linuxgeek_dot_net
http://www.paccomp.com
Key fingerprint = 67F0 E493 FCC0 0A8C 769B 8209 32D7 1DB1 8460 C47D
I help busy professionals diversify their self-directed IRAs and portfolios
with real estate they don't have to manage. Please let me know if you or
someone you know would like more information.
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
