If you make the access point have the maximum security enabled by default it will be completely unusable to 90% of your customers. It's hard enough getting the minimum amount of security to work, let alone the crazy shit you can enable on an access point.
I've bought at least 3 different wireless hubs and every one I've bought came with a neat little instruction booklet which explained what wireless security was, why I should enable it and how. I've also fiddled with way too many wireless cards and know how rediculously hard it is to get the damn things to find the access point.. with or without encryption. So yeah, if Microsoft could please fix their wireless support so it is remotely usable that'd be great.
Did you forget that looking suspicious is now a shootable offense in the US? Paranoid fantasy is now the status quo. He might have been looking up bomb receipes!
Boy oh boy. Where to begin. How am I in any way responsible for upholding a contract between you and your service provider? Seeing as you think the guy is guilty of a crime, how about naming the crime and maybe even justifying the existance of that law. Finally, fined for being creepy. Oh. My. God. You're serious too aint ya.
Or it's like, umm, leaving a hotdog on the front seat of your car in the midday sun.. it just keeps gettin' hotter man. Ya know, prior to The Enlightenment there was only two forms of argument. The first form was the usual "appeal to your sense of humanity" emotional bullshit argument favoured by mothers and republicans of all eras. This argument usually starts with the five most stupid words you can ever use to start an argument: How would you feel if.. The second form of argument available was the "appeal to analogy" style or, to use a fancy name for it, Case Based Reasoning. That's the kind that summary girl used and you just compounded, where you try to dumb down the situation so people who have never thought anything through in their lives can make a snap decision about the moral standing of a unique and complicated situation. Following the middle ages we received another kind of argumentive style. Some might call it a "modern" style of argument, but I prefer to say that it is a logical form of argument. This is where you state a number of basic axioms and then using easy to follow rules you present a string of statements which one can follow to arrive at the current situation. For example, you might present the axioms:
People exist in time.
People feel pain.
Pain is unpleasant.
Actions can be taken by one person to make another person feel pain.
Sometimes people can be provoked into performing such actions.
Causing pain without provokation is unjustified.
From these axioms you can easily make the argument that beating people up for fun is not justified. By introducing just a few more axioms you might make the argument that drivers should be licensed to ensure a minimum level of competency in order to prevent unprovoked pain to others, etc.
But hey, feel free to keep making arguments the old fashioned way. After all, it's not like you ever claimed you weren't intellectually lazy. It's not like you're posting on a site where one of the most treasured attributes of the target audience is their intellectual superiority or anything.
Right now you're accessing network that you have no received permission to access. Guarenteed. How can I possibly know? Well heck, you're posting on Slashdot. The whole concept of the Internet is based around a default policy of openness. It is assumed that we have permission to access anything connected to the Internet and that assumption is only revoked by layering an authentication system on top. These people who buy a wireless router, connect it to their network, don't even bother to turn on the authentication system and expect it to be private are just pissing in the pool.
Yeah, see, that doesn't follow. The whole purpose of society and commerce is to have others do things on your behalf. Many times I've sat down and tried to use 3d Studio Max (and other 3d modelling programs) and time and time again I've learnt that I just can't do it. Does this mean I should refuse to play 3d video games? If I don't am I not being consistent? You may think my argument is rediculous, but that's just because you have an emotional response to rabbits. I'll give you another example. I once had a "real" job where I got up at dawn, went out into the cold and collected rubbish from people's homes. After 4 weeks I just couldn't do it anymore. It's a hard and terrible job. Now, am I being inconsistent by putting my trash out on thursdays? No, because some people are willing to do that work on my behalf, even though I am not willing to do it myself.
Yes, you can think of a thousand situations where there is actually a 'cost' that is hidden and in those situations it makes sense to consider the complete cost of the product. But that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about people refusing to buy a product in order to change the behaviour of those who make it. I simply don't think this has the desired affect 99% of the time, and if we all did it we'd have no products at all.
Thank you. Unfortunately I think many people today have fallen into what I call the vegetarian trap. They think that buy changing their personal purchases they can change the world. It's such an easy way to make yourself feel special but unfortunately it isn't very effective at actually changing the world.
How can you claim that programmers need to be paid what they are paid when people who live in the exact same communities as programmers get paid so much less? We all know we get paid too much. The only thing that makes it possible for us to demand such large salaries is the scarcity of programmers. Well hey, our masters have found a solution to that problem, they've expanded the market of available programmers to find people who are willing to do the job for cheaper than we are.
Yes, and I've always considered that kind of marketing to be belittling and hoped that the majority of consumers were actually capable of ignoring it and comparing two similar products to determine which one is best. Surely you're not suggesting that people who go out and buy products based on which has the better advertisements are responsible, are you?
Yep. Makes perfect sense. I refuse to buy this laptop that is half the regular market price because the company who makes it refuses to hire people with criminal records. I refuse to buy this mountain bike, which has the most advanced suspension I've ever seen on a mountain bike because the director of the company was quoted as saying that the steel union has become corrupt and greedy over the last ten years. Woe is me! Why can't I find a cheap laptop to strap onto my mountain bike which has sufficient suspension so the laptop's harddrive doesn't receive a battering that causes bad sectors? Oh that's right, cause I tried to use my dollars to force other people to believe my particular idiology over their own instead of just supporting the market system by evaluating the product not the producer.
WTF? Seriously, what's hard to understand here, you should buy the product that is the best value, not the product which is made by your favourite idiological organisation. Worst of all are the people who buy a more expensive product because x% of the purchase price goes to charity. For fuck sake, just buy the cheaper product and donate the money to charity yourself if that's what you want to do.
Isn't the fact that workers in third world countries can do your job for cheaper than you enough to make you think that you're asking too much for your labor? I laugh the hardest when I think about programmers complaining that their jobs have been offshored. I'm a programmer btw. We've had it so sweet for so long we've actually forgotten that we were getting a free ride. There's all these quasi-programmers now that didn't exist 20 years ago (Perl programmers, Excel programmers, etc) and they've slowly learnt what we knew all along programming really isn't that hard. Now all the US programmers (who earned 3 times as much as I do here in Australia, which is twice as much as programmers earn in Japan, which is 10 times as much as programmers earn in India) are whining that their playboy lifestyle is being taken away from them. Boo hoo. Guess you'll have to go get a job where at the end of the day you actually feel tired.
First of all, it's really hard to understand your point when you can't even use the language properly. I presume you ment YOU'RE, otherwise your sentence doesn't parse. That straight, no, I'm not fucking up the system. The system works because people buy the best value product. How they value the product varies from person to person but it is not debatable that valuing the product is a different and seperate concern from valuing the process used to make the product. If two products are identical except one is cheaper than the other you should buy the one that is cheaper. If you buy the one that is more expensive because the people who make the one that is more expensive share some of your beliefs you're just fucking up the system. You're basically paying someone to follow your beliefs. If that's what you want to do, fine, go stand on the street corner and hand out dollars to anyone who is willing to accept your prefered idiology. But if the company that is making the cheaper product goes out of business as a result of you confusing valuing the product with valuing the producer then we're all fucked. The shelves will be full of expensive products claiming to be supporters of your particular idiology or someone else's particular idiology. Instead of buying the apples that are $1 cheaper per bushel you'll buy the apples that are made at the communist workers farm. Someone else will buy the apples that are made by the Ayn Rand Apple Farm and yet someone else will buy the apples that are made by the Happy Green Vegetarian Apple Farm. The market force that drives the price of apples down will be totally fucked and we'll all end up paying more for our apples than we want to. Then we'll stop buying apples all together because our particular idiological group is not selling apples at a price that we are willing to pay for them and we feel like traitors if we go buy apples from a competing idiology.
You're one of those hippies aint ya? When someone says "why do you drink Pepsi when I know you prefer Coke?" you give an answer like "Coke was sued for underpaying blacks in the 1990's and I've never forgiven them!" Choose the best and most cost effective product. Don't judge the company that makes it. Otherwise you're just fucking up the system. Instead of the most superior products being on the shelves we'll have substandard products dominating the market share because the people who make them care about the environment or share some other wacky political ideal with the boycotting public.
Excuse me, no. The French are the most oppressed, disliked and unaccepted people in Western Europe. Gypsies are the most oppressed, disliked and unaccepted people in Eastern Europe. And if you happen to join IRC and have your channel taken over or have some IRCWarrior flood your machine, chances are they are connecting from romania, land of the gypsies. So it's a bit hard to defend them when even their internet spawn are so disliked.
Slashdot Mirror
Hey! Good idea. If being a sleazebag and being "up to no good" was a crime we could arrest all the politicians and half the lawyers!
There's way more public water fountains provided by private interests than there are water fountains provided by tax dollars.
If you make the access point have the maximum security enabled by default it will be completely unusable to 90% of your customers. It's hard enough getting the minimum amount of security to work, let alone the crazy shit you can enable on an access point.
Says the guy with no knowledge of the history of property or its moral justifications. Go read Locke and STFU.
So phone companies are irresponsible for offering pay phones. Are you on crack?
I pity the fool who leaves his access point unsecured!
Maybe he just wanted to look up alien web sites without being monitored by the government.
I've bought at least 3 different wireless hubs and every one I've bought came with a neat little instruction booklet which explained what wireless security was, why I should enable it and how. I've also fiddled with way too many wireless cards and know how rediculously hard it is to get the damn things to find the access point.. with or without encryption. So yeah, if Microsoft could please fix their wireless support so it is remotely usable that'd be great.
Did you forget that looking suspicious is now a shootable offense in the US? Paranoid fantasy is now the status quo. He might have been looking up bomb receipes!
Boy oh boy. Where to begin. How am I in any way responsible for upholding a contract between you and your service provider? Seeing as you think the guy is guilty of a crime, how about naming the crime and maybe even justifying the existance of that law. Finally, fined for being creepy. Oh. My. God. You're serious too aint ya.
From these axioms you can easily make the argument that beating people up for fun is not justified. By introducing just a few more axioms you might make the argument that drivers should be licensed to ensure a minimum level of competency in order to prevent unprovoked pain to others, etc.
But hey, feel free to keep making arguments the old fashioned way. After all, it's not like you ever claimed you weren't intellectually lazy. It's not like you're posting on a site where one of the most treasured attributes of the target audience is their intellectual superiority or anything.
Right now you're accessing network that you have no received permission to access. Guarenteed. How can I possibly know? Well heck, you're posting on Slashdot. The whole concept of the Internet is based around a default policy of openness. It is assumed that we have permission to access anything connected to the Internet and that assumption is only revoked by layering an authentication system on top. These people who buy a wireless router, connect it to their network, don't even bother to turn on the authentication system and expect it to be private are just pissing in the pool.
it's just like theft!!
Clearly not. If I was a subscriber to this service I'd demand a refund.
Yeah, see, that doesn't follow. The whole purpose of society and commerce is to have others do things on your behalf. Many times I've sat down and tried to use 3d Studio Max (and other 3d modelling programs) and time and time again I've learnt that I just can't do it. Does this mean I should refuse to play 3d video games? If I don't am I not being consistent? You may think my argument is rediculous, but that's just because you have an emotional response to rabbits. I'll give you another example. I once had a "real" job where I got up at dawn, went out into the cold and collected rubbish from people's homes. After 4 weeks I just couldn't do it anymore. It's a hard and terrible job. Now, am I being inconsistent by putting my trash out on thursdays? No, because some people are willing to do that work on my behalf, even though I am not willing to do it myself.
Yes, you can think of a thousand situations where there is actually a 'cost' that is hidden and in those situations it makes sense to consider the complete cost of the product. But that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about people refusing to buy a product in order to change the behaviour of those who make it. I simply don't think this has the desired affect 99% of the time, and if we all did it we'd have no products at all.
Thank you. Unfortunately I think many people today have fallen into what I call the vegetarian trap. They think that buy changing their personal purchases they can change the world. It's such an easy way to make yourself feel special but unfortunately it isn't very effective at actually changing the world.
How can you claim that programmers need to be paid what they are paid when people who live in the exact same communities as programmers get paid so much less? We all know we get paid too much. The only thing that makes it possible for us to demand such large salaries is the scarcity of programmers. Well hey, our masters have found a solution to that problem, they've expanded the market of available programmers to find people who are willing to do the job for cheaper than we are.
Yes, and I've always considered that kind of marketing to be belittling and hoped that the majority of consumers were actually capable of ignoring it and comparing two similar products to determine which one is best. Surely you're not suggesting that people who go out and buy products based on which has the better advertisements are responsible, are you?
Yep. Makes perfect sense. I refuse to buy this laptop that is half the regular market price because the company who makes it refuses to hire people with criminal records. I refuse to buy this mountain bike, which has the most advanced suspension I've ever seen on a mountain bike because the director of the company was quoted as saying that the steel union has become corrupt and greedy over the last ten years. Woe is me! Why can't I find a cheap laptop to strap onto my mountain bike which has sufficient suspension so the laptop's harddrive doesn't receive a battering that causes bad sectors? Oh that's right, cause I tried to use my dollars to force other people to believe my particular idiology over their own instead of just supporting the market system by evaluating the product not the producer.
WTF? Seriously, what's hard to understand here, you should buy the product that is the best value, not the product which is made by your favourite idiological organisation. Worst of all are the people who buy a more expensive product because x% of the purchase price goes to charity. For fuck sake, just buy the cheaper product and donate the money to charity yourself if that's what you want to do.
Isn't the fact that workers in third world countries can do your job for cheaper than you enough to make you think that you're asking too much for your labor? I laugh the hardest when I think about programmers complaining that their jobs have been offshored. I'm a programmer btw. We've had it so sweet for so long we've actually forgotten that we were getting a free ride. There's all these quasi-programmers now that didn't exist 20 years ago (Perl programmers, Excel programmers, etc) and they've slowly learnt what we knew all along programming really isn't that hard. Now all the US programmers (who earned 3 times as much as I do here in Australia, which is twice as much as programmers earn in Japan, which is 10 times as much as programmers earn in India) are whining that their playboy lifestyle is being taken away from them. Boo hoo. Guess you'll have to go get a job where at the end of the day you actually feel tired.
First of all, it's really hard to understand your point when you can't even use the language properly. I presume you ment YOU'RE, otherwise your sentence doesn't parse. That straight, no, I'm not fucking up the system. The system works because people buy the best value product. How they value the product varies from person to person but it is not debatable that valuing the product is a different and seperate concern from valuing the process used to make the product. If two products are identical except one is cheaper than the other you should buy the one that is cheaper. If you buy the one that is more expensive because the people who make the one that is more expensive share some of your beliefs you're just fucking up the system. You're basically paying someone to follow your beliefs. If that's what you want to do, fine, go stand on the street corner and hand out dollars to anyone who is willing to accept your prefered idiology. But if the company that is making the cheaper product goes out of business as a result of you confusing valuing the product with valuing the producer then we're all fucked. The shelves will be full of expensive products claiming to be supporters of your particular idiology or someone else's particular idiology. Instead of buying the apples that are $1 cheaper per bushel you'll buy the apples that are made at the communist workers farm. Someone else will buy the apples that are made by the Ayn Rand Apple Farm and yet someone else will buy the apples that are made by the Happy Green Vegetarian Apple Farm. The market force that drives the price of apples down will be totally fucked and we'll all end up paying more for our apples than we want to. Then we'll stop buying apples all together because our particular idiological group is not selling apples at a price that we are willing to pay for them and we feel like traitors if we go buy apples from a competing idiology.
You're one of those hippies aint ya? When someone says "why do you drink Pepsi when I know you prefer Coke?" you give an answer like "Coke was sued for underpaying blacks in the 1990's and I've never forgiven them!" Choose the best and most cost effective product. Don't judge the company that makes it. Otherwise you're just fucking up the system. Instead of the most superior products being on the shelves we'll have substandard products dominating the market share because the people who make them care about the environment or share some other wacky political ideal with the boycotting public.
Excuse me, no. The French are the most oppressed, disliked and unaccepted people in Western Europe. Gypsies are the most oppressed, disliked and unaccepted people in Eastern Europe. And if you happen to join IRC and have your channel taken over or have some IRCWarrior flood your machine, chances are they are connecting from romania, land of the gypsies. So it's a bit hard to defend them when even their internet spawn are so disliked.