Comments 1 - 6 of 6 Search these comments
I can really tell on my own wifi when someone else is watching a video. Throughput just plummets.
But I deliberately share my wifi with my next door neighbor. The deal is he bought the wifi router and I provide the service but I can keep the router.
If someone is running an open connection, I have found that it's usually because;
a) they don't care, or have a similar situation as Patrick
b) don't understand how to secure it
If you could guarantee reliability, I would do it. YMMV.
Would I? I was on dial-up until November or so. My neighbor has wireless, and I'm using it as we speak. They are well aware, and I've offered to help pay but so far they've declined. I even bought a booster - a wonderful piece of equipment. They've asked me not to download movies, and I'm cool with that.
Well, technically neighbor Wi-Fi pools are still a violation of user agreement, so it will be filed under a breach of contract category :) Given that provider can't either easily detect violation or enforce the rule, it seems to be only a user moral choice. I guess it’s a clear example of new productive forces (technology) at conflict with old business practices. Something has to give eventually, and if Marx is correct, it will be business practices. Naturally, heavy lobbying by businesses forced to change will be involved in the process. Just look what has happened to long distance rates, same thing will happen eventually to internet access, watching video, using software...
But I deliberately share my wifi with my next door neighbor. The deal is he bought the wifi router and I provide the service but I can keep the router.
Jeez, Patrick, you really are hard up with your pine table etc.
I considered subletting my wireless router and service when they came out and were really expensive, but it's every man for himself these days...
Well, technically neighbor Wi-Fi pools are still a violation of user agreement, so it will be filed under a breach of contract category Given that provider can’t either easily detect violation or enforce the rule, it seems to be only a user moral choice. I guess it’s a clear example of new productive forces (technology) at conflict with old business practices. Something has to give eventually, and if Marx is correct, it will be business practices. Naturally, heavy lobbying by businesses forced to change will be involved in the process. Just look what has happened to long distance rates, same thing will happen eventually to internet access, watching video, using software…
Since I don't have a wireless account, I don't know beans about the user agreement. But just like when my ex-husband planted bamboo that ran shoots into the neighbor's lawn and the neighbor complained that we should have put down a root barrier - my ex told him that we had a root barrier - the property line. So, if the wireless company doesn't want me using the neighbor's wireless, they can put up a barrier...
By the way, my neighbor's home is at least 200 feet away from mine. This range expander is a lovely investment.
Suppose your neighbor had an unsecured wireless access point that you had a good realiable connection to. Would you cancel your service and just use his?
 This question pretty much goes along the same lines as downloading pirated software, music and Movies. My personal opinion is that these multi-national companies are not hurting for money, so why not.  I have been know to download an occasional movie or ten, as well as music and software. I just seen, "Land of the Lost", last night, and I'm just thankful I didn't pay for it.   I still go to the movies on occasion, as well as buy a music CD or computer game, but the bulk of my entertainment comes from other sources.
So my answer would be absolutely, why pay for something if you can get it for free? Immoral? That's a rich persons word. Us working slobs that can barely make ends meet don't know what that word means.  :-)