RE: [MLUG] Looking 4 mad cheap PCI wireless cards

[Mike Miller <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004, Pepper, Mike wrote:

> I think that the main difference between the 2 arguments, is that the 
> bandwidth is not free it is being purchased by the person. If it were 
> free to all like the drapes open scenario, then I could agree. But I 
> feel that this is more like trespassing.

He doesn't really purchase bandwidth, he purchases a sort of variable cap 
on allowed bandwidth and if he uses lots or none, he pays the same money. 
Therefore, if someone connects to his wifi access point, he does not incur 
a cost.  He pays the same monthly payment (in every contract I'm familiar 
with).  The additional user is not taking anything away from the owner. If 
the owner does not want to share, he should not broadcast an invitation to 
people in his neighborhood.  When I turn on my computer, and the name of 
his wifi access point appears in my wireless configuration window, that 
isn't because I've asked for it - he sent it to me without my permission. 
Maybe I should sue him!


> I have a driveway. It may be handy for you, and I may not use all of it, 
> yet does that give you the right to park your vehicle <even though it's 
> not in my way> in my driveway?

It also does not give me the right to pull into your driveway to turn my 
car around, right?  Yet I do that all the time and have never heard that 
it is illegal.  If you don't want people to turn around in your driveway, 
you'd better put up a gate.  I don't think the police will help you with 
that one.

Mike
_______________________________________________
members mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/members