.....And why should anyone believe the Bible? I know of no logical reasons.....
There are no LOGICAL reasons to BELIEVE the Bible. But then there are no logical reasons for any of the other beliefs either. Giving those or any beliefs a mathematical formula or calling them "science" doesn't change the fact that they are still only beliefs. There are very few so called "scientific" journals or articles that do NOT contain faith words. All of science, just like any other human activity is colored by our beliefs, our world view. The absence or presence of a belief in God is one foundational belief that determines everything in life. If there is no God, then there is no truth either, only 6 billion or so opinions. The majority doesn't hold a monopoly on truth either. History has shown that. All the majority can do and has ever done and can do, is to force their opinion down the throat of those who have different opinions.
You believe there is no afterlife and I believe that there will be an accounting for everybody. We will all find out whose belief was correct someday. I believe that the same mind that formulated the laws of physics, also made certain rules for humans. We cannot, ultimately choose which of these rules we wish to obey and which not.
In everything we humans do, we formulate these actions and designs first in our minds as concepts and ideas. A bridge or a computer chip begins its existence in one or more minds, sometimes long before it becomes physical reality. Is then so illogical that the universe and all life did not also have its beginning in a mind, one far greater than all human minds put together? Science is part of the fascinating quest to try and figure out how this reality we find ourselves in operates and originated. You KNOW that a computer chip came from a mind, even if you never met nor likely will never meet the one(s) in whose mind it was first conceived. You do not deny the existence of a mind behind a computer chip, but are you willing to deny that there is also a designer in whose mind the computer between your ears, your brain originated? In my thinking, such a denial is highly illogical.
In short, modern cosmological speculations are fun, just as the star wars movies are fun, but they are not logical.
.....However, if we do not assume that the rules of physics are essentially constant........
There is a difference between the "rules" of physics and assuming that these do not change and some so called "constants", such as the speed of light being invariant over long periods of time. It is an experimentally established fact that the speed of light varies according to the medium in traverses. If the nature of the medium of space changes, and there is evidence that it has, then the speed of light and associated constants governing the way light is emitted by atoms, will also change. The fact that the red shift is "QUANTIZED" is evidence against the doppler interpretation. Postulating that the redshift is NOT due to doppler removes the necessity for fictional constructs such as dark matter and energy to explain the motions of galaxies.
,,,,,,You need an outside view to determine how the Universe started, and, last I checked, we're all inside,,,,,,,
Indeed that is true. The God who exists, as revealed to us in the Bible is the One who is outside of, apart from our time-space universe. Outside revelation, there is no way for any man to find out anything about how we got here and about the God who put us here. That is why all human speculations about origins, whether called science or religion are entertaining fiction. Now everyone has the choice to BELIEVE what God has revealed about Himself or not. Anyone may also believe the speculations of these scientists. However, as you stated insightfully, there is no way to KNOW for sure how it all began for anyone currently stuck INSIDE our time-space existence. All we can do right now is believe one thing or another. Everyone will know for sure when we all stand before the judgment seat of God.
....I'm also interested in the MacBook Pro so I can dual boot Windows and Mac OS and thus won't lose any current functionality switching to a Mac.....
I just bought a Macbook for my son who is graduating from high school. I also looked at other brands, Dell in particular. The Macbook has Windows XP running with Parallels Virtual to allow simultaneous use with Mac OSX. There is NO other computer that will do everything which this Macbook will do, at a lower price. If you know of one, I'd like to hear from you. If you already have a PC that works reasonably well for games, keep it for a while and possible upgrade it a bit at a time as the money supply allows and use the laptop for real work.
If you want to do video in a professional manner, Final Cut is indeed THE program to get. However, the included iMovieHD and iDVD and garage band software alone will allow the making of content no Windows box will permit. You'd have to spend much more than any possible difference in hardware price on equivalent Windows software to get even close. Plus on the Mac that all comes pre-installed, ready to go and it 'just works'.
It was easy to import and edit the video of my daughter's wedding (a week ago) and burn a DVD, all using the software that comes with every Mac.
If you have not yet bought a laptop, look at the total price for all the hardware and software you need to buy to produce the pretty darn good content that can be made with a $1200 Macbook out of the box. When calculating costs, don't forget to add in the malware protection software and its update subscription which every Windows user must have. The Windows installation on the Macbook has its networking access disabled and thus cannot get infected. All network access is for the Mac only. Files and the clip-board however may be freely copied to/from Windows. Save your $$$ for a while and get a Mac, you will not be sorry. Later after forgoing a few luxuries, you may scrape together enough for Final Cut Pro.
....all DRM breaks is the ability to make copies, something that most people don't do......
As hard drives bigger, especially in laptops, many want to watch their movies they bought without having to drag their DVD collection along. Others want to have a server on their home network to stream content to other rooms.
There are a number of reasons why the bits that represent some form of entertainment might be used in perfectly legal ways, all of which are thwarted by DRM. The ONE thing that DRM has never stopped and never will is the "pirating" of content for profit.
..... But I don't understand why DirectTV and the cable companies seemed to have figured out how to lock down their content.......
They can change the keys and the encryption as often as they like since the receiver is always connected to the transmitter. This is not the case with discs. Once they are recorded, both the keys and the material cannot be changed. Only if all DVD players were REQUIRED to be connected to a network, could the contents be harder to hack. So far that has not been economically feasible.
....The idea is to keep this from being possible with new generation discs......
If all that is needed is to make an exact copy, there is no need to decrypt at all. Just make a bit for bit copy of the original. This may require hacking the drive. That is something the real pirates can easily do. All that copy protections has ever done and will ONLY ALWAYS do is to inconvenience the consumers. It has never stopped those who "pirate" for money and it never will.
I sincerely hope that the EMI/ITUNES DRM free experiment works well and shows the content providers that people will pay extra for DRM less and higher quality music.
.....Is somebody who cannot afford a flatbed scanner.......
Scanners are cheaper than fax machines. Tiger sells one for about $60. The person who has email and scanner might still have to communicate with someone who has no computer and is still in the fax dark age. Therefore a fax might still be needed at times. The old mac Classic serves that for us.
.......Today's cars have seat belts, air bags, traction control, electronic stability control, cd players, navigation systems, satellite radio and steering wheel controls.......
All true, but the basic function and cost of getting from A to B are still the same. That old 1952 Buick was very heavy got about 12 miles to the gallon and gave a very comfortable ride. Modern cars get better mpg but the cost for each mile, adjusted for inflation is not much different today that it was back then.
...I've got an old Mac Classic that won't stay on for more than 15 minutes without locking up.......
Mine is a fax/answering machine that until recently did run 24/7 without any problems. Now we only fire it up when we ned to send/receive a fax from/to those benighted, behind the times people who have no email yet.
.....but they all seem to cost more with out enough added performance......
Only true if you are dealing mostly with text. As soon as you begin to deal with audio, video and photography, the Macs do give better results. There is, for example no consumer video editing program for Windows that is anywhere nearly as powerful and easy to use than the free iMovie program which comes with every Mac. Mac laptops are no more expensive than other systems if you need to create, rather than only consume above mentioned media. Websurfers, emailers and other media consumers can buy the cheapest pile of chips and wires available and these do a serviceable job.
Early computers dealt almost exclusively with text and numbers. For that, a Mac, even way back then was overkill since it also did much better with graphics and desktop publishing than windows did, even ten years after the Mac Plus came out.
The real reason that computer productivity has not increased anywhere near in proportion to raw computer performance is that all computers are still operated by people, largely in the same way they have always operated them. Computers today are still digital devices operated by the ten digital appendages and the output is still perceived by human eyes staring at a screen. Voice I/O is not yet ready for universal use. Even if it were, it may turn out that most users would not talk and listen to a computer in the same way as to a live person. I know I hate these computerized phone systems which many businesses are using to attempt to save money on payroll costs. It seems that for many companies, it is getting harder and harder to get a real live human on the other end. Even if there is a human, the foreign accent is sometimes very hard to understand.
..... get rid of the stupid cops and idiot lawyers who think unsecured access points can be considered private,......
I agree with you, but I think the root of the problem is one level or more up. Get rid of the stupid politicians who make such nutty laws which zealous cops and lawyers can use to harass ordinary citizens. The cops just think they are doing their jobs and the lawyers all are only interested in making money. Few, if any, in government today, are concerned with common sense and justice any longer.
....You paid for these things and I didn't, so what gives me the right to them?......
I give you the right to some of my beer and pizza when I consent to invite you in and tell you to help yourself or instruct a friend of mine to invite you. I do this when my router, which is in effect my friend, replies to your computer's request for an IP address: "Sure, here is one. You may use this to share my Internet pizza and Internet beer" I should have the right to be hospitable in cyberspace in the same manner as I have that right in the physical realm. The government has no right to tell me who I may associate with or invite into my physical house. Neither does the government have a right to specify who I may invite or include in my cyberspace.
So what dies this have to do with power of attorney? If I allow a visitor into my house, I do not give him/her power of attorney. Neither does this happen if I allow someone to use my network. I just through my router, "Sure, come and use my network". Power of attorney has to do with me granting power to another to accomplish legal matters on my behalf. There is nothing of that sort even remotely involved here.
....but not in major metropolitan areas like Boston, Atlanta, NYC, etc......
Only in small portions of the east coast does the population density of even metropolitan areas of the US approach that of most of Europe. Western cities are especially spread out and therefore require miles of expensive cables. Most Europeans live in multi family dwellings. In the US, even in metropolitan areas, there are far more single family houses to be serviced individually.
.....If you're in a block of flats it must make sense to pool resources and share a large connection.......
Some of the more progressive Landlords provide a fast symmetrical Internet connection for the entire complex. Each apartment has an ethernet outlet and a cable connection. The cost is often lower and the service far better than for each tenant subscribing individually. Interested tenants pay the cost with their rent bill. Sometimes, a fast proxy server is provided for serving popular websites. Tenants need a password, but may provide their own WAP to connect to their ethernet jack. Nobody from the outside can get to the internet, even if the individual WAPs are totally open, unless they know the network password. The word "Flat" is generally not used here in the US.
.....A router is a piece of inanimate hardware, it can no more grant legal authority than can an equally inanimate doorknob.....
A router is NOT an inactive thing like a door knob. It is the owners representative and ACTIVELY gives my representative (my computer) a special magic number (IP address) so it can access the owner's network. The owner may instruct the WAP to not give this active permission.
.....If you put a private wireless router up without encryption, it's an attractive nuisance.......
I'd call it a public service, not a nuisance. For whom is it a nuisance? What business is it of the state to tell me whom I am allowed to be friends with. If I consider anyone who knocks on my door a friend, why should anyone be allowed to tell me otherwise?
......As always, there's a solution: just ask........
That's the whole point. The computer, as my representative does ASK. The WAP as the owner's representative gives explicit permission by giving my computer access to the network by issuing a special key, the IP address. If the owner of the WAP does NOT want his/her representative to give such access, it must specifically instruct it by adding a password or other requirements.
......Legally, since you can't transfer power of attorney to an inanimate object, this is legally dubious.......
Not true. Any door to any business that is open or unlocked speaks for the shop owner: Please come in and do business with us. I can go into most stores, look around and then not buy anything. Last time I looked, doors were an inanimate object. A free router is such an open door in cyberspace. This has nothing to do with a power of attorney.
....The burglar - the pro - doesn't get a free ride because his victims don't know how to install a high security lock......
However, if I invite the potential burglar into my house, he ceases to be a burglar in the eyes of the law. If I give my router the authority to invite anyone who happens within range, to be able to grant them entrance to my network, how is this any different? A technology ignorant lawyer might not be able to explain this to the judge. It appears to have been so here.
....then you have no right to complain about someone using it......
But in this case, the owner did NOT complain. However, the neighbors (legislature, cop) did and tried to assert their authority in an area where they have neither authority nor understanding. The problem is that most of those who deal with laws (lawyers, judges and politicians) generally don't have even the faintest knowledge of technology and therefore make and enforce laws in the light of their ignorance. In the physical world, if I want to invite anyone off the street into my house, I have the perfect right to do so. It seems that the legal folks don't understand that this is no different in cyberspace and therefore make and try to enforce laws against it. This poor fellow was just caught in the web of their ignorance.
Anyone here on/. who knows any of these legal types, might educate them a bit about technical matters, if the opportunity presents itself. Who knows, it might prevent such a nightmare from happening to someone on this forum.
....The onus is upon you to verify that you are not trespassing before proceeding.......
Totally wrong! All computers asks for permission by requesting a special number, an IP address via DHCP from the owner of the open WAP. If this special number is sent back, then that is the invitation to join the network and use it in the same manner as the owner's computer(s).
In the baseball analogy it means that the owners of the ballpark have given explicit permission to watch the game AND and cheer my team.
.....IMHO, if an access point is unsecured and available, it should be fair game for public use.......
Indeed true. I visited someone in a large apartment complex recently and there were 6 useable unsecured WiFi nodes. I picked the strongest one and had no trouble getting my mail and surfing a bit for the latest news. Why should that be illegal? On the other hand, it would have been polite of the freeloader to go into the coffee shop and order a cup of coffee, tea or whatever. Certainly, if I were a renter in such apartments I would get my own connection.
It could be to the alibi advantage of any owner of an open access point if said owner is ever accused of illicit activity, based solely on the IP address assigned to that router by the ISP at the time. If no other evidence is found, the fact that there is an open access router would introduce a very large probability that the owner of such a freely accessible WiFi node may not be guilty.
......Macs DO cost more, and are advertised as being better suited for these purposes..........
Anyone who needs to have such perfect color should not be using a laptop computer in the first place, with its necessarily limited hardware, including the display. Apple sells professional desktop systems with high quality monitors for the truly picky. There are also a number of expensive suitable monitors available from others. Apple laptops are not really significantly more expensive than equivalent offerings from other name brand computer makers. Little touches, such as the magsafe connector and the sudden motion sensor are special Apple touches that are only appreciated, like a sort of insurance, when the calamity these are provided against actually happens. Other manufacturers do not supply these 'superfluous' extra cost niceties. Many people do appreciate the attention to details which Apple alone provides.
This appears to be another effort by a bunch of hungry lawyers to get a piece of the handsome profits Apple has been making lately. If the present trends continue, litigation will be the next biggest percentage of the US GDP growth, coming in right after Government and health care.
Slashdot Mirror
.....And why should anyone believe the Bible? I know of no logical reasons.....
There are no LOGICAL reasons to BELIEVE the Bible. But then there are no logical reasons for any of the other beliefs either. Giving those or any beliefs a mathematical formula or calling them "science" doesn't change the fact that they are still only beliefs. There are very few so called "scientific" journals or articles that do NOT contain faith words. All of science, just like any other human activity is colored by our beliefs, our world view. The absence or presence of a belief in God is one foundational belief that determines everything in life. If there is no God, then there is no truth either, only 6 billion or so opinions. The majority doesn't hold a monopoly on truth either. History has shown that. All the majority can do and has ever done and can do, is to force their opinion down the throat of those who have different opinions.
You believe there is no afterlife and I believe that there will be an accounting for everybody. We will all find out whose belief was correct someday. I believe that the same mind that formulated the laws of physics, also made certain rules for humans. We cannot, ultimately choose which of these rules we wish to obey and which not.
In everything we humans do, we formulate these actions and designs first in our minds as concepts and ideas. A bridge or a computer chip begins its existence in one or more minds, sometimes long before it becomes physical reality. Is then so illogical that the universe and all life did not also have its beginning in a mind, one far greater than all human minds put together? Science is part of the fascinating quest to try and figure out how this reality we find ourselves in operates and originated. You KNOW that a computer chip came from a mind, even if you never met nor likely will never meet the one(s) in whose mind it was first conceived. You do not deny the existence of a mind behind a computer chip, but are you willing to deny that there is also a designer in whose mind the computer between your ears, your brain originated? In my thinking, such a denial is highly illogical.
In short, modern cosmological speculations are fun, just as the star wars movies are fun, but they are not logical.
.....However, if we do not assume that the rules of physics are essentially constant........
There is a difference between the "rules" of physics and assuming that these do not change and some so called "constants", such as the speed of light being invariant over long periods of time. It is an experimentally established fact that the speed of light varies according to the medium in traverses. If the nature of the medium of space changes, and there is evidence that it has, then the speed of light and associated constants governing the way light is emitted by atoms, will also change. The fact that the red shift is "QUANTIZED" is evidence against the doppler interpretation. Postulating that the redshift is NOT due to doppler removes the necessity for fictional constructs such as dark matter and energy to explain the motions of galaxies.
,,,,,,You need an outside view to determine how the Universe started, and, last I checked, we're all inside,,,,,,,
Indeed that is true. The God who exists, as revealed to us in the Bible is the One who is outside of, apart from our time-space universe. Outside revelation, there is no way for any man to find out anything about how we got here and about the God who put us here. That is why all human speculations about origins, whether called science or religion are entertaining fiction. Now everyone has the choice to BELIEVE what God has revealed about Himself or not. Anyone may also believe the speculations of these scientists. However, as you stated insightfully, there is no way to KNOW for sure how it all began for anyone currently stuck INSIDE our time-space existence. All we can do right now is believe one thing or another. Everyone will know for sure when we all stand before the judgment seat of God.
....I'm also interested in the MacBook Pro so I can dual boot Windows and Mac OS and thus won't lose any current functionality switching to a Mac.....
I just bought a Macbook for my son who is graduating from high school. I also looked at other brands, Dell in particular. The Macbook has Windows XP running with Parallels Virtual to allow simultaneous use with Mac OSX. There is NO other computer that will do everything which this Macbook will do, at a lower price. If you know of one, I'd like to hear from you. If you already have a PC that works reasonably well for games, keep it for a while and possible upgrade it a bit at a time as the money supply allows and use the laptop for real work.
If you want to do video in a professional manner, Final Cut is indeed THE program to get. However, the included iMovieHD and iDVD and garage band software alone will allow the making of content no Windows box will permit. You'd have to spend much more than any possible difference in hardware price on equivalent Windows software to get even close. Plus on the Mac that all comes pre-installed, ready to go and it 'just works'.
It was easy to import and edit the video of my daughter's wedding (a week ago) and burn a DVD, all using the software that comes with every Mac.
If you have not yet bought a laptop, look at the total price for all the hardware and software you need to buy to produce the pretty darn good content that can be made with a $1200 Macbook out of the box. When calculating costs, don't forget to add in the malware protection software and its update subscription which every Windows user must have. The Windows installation on the Macbook has its networking access disabled and thus cannot get infected. All network access is for the Mac only. Files and the clip-board however may be freely copied to/from Windows. Save your $$$ for a while and get a Mac, you will not be sorry. Later after forgoing a few luxuries, you may scrape together enough for Final Cut Pro.
....all DRM breaks is the ability to make copies, something that most people don't do......
As hard drives bigger, especially in laptops, many want to watch their movies they bought without having to drag their DVD collection along. Others want to have a server on their home network to stream content to other rooms.
There are a number of reasons why the bits that represent some form of entertainment might be used in perfectly legal ways, all of which are thwarted by DRM. The ONE thing that DRM has never stopped and never will is the "pirating" of content for profit.
..... But I don't understand why DirectTV and the cable companies seemed to have figured out how to lock down their content .......
They can change the keys and the encryption as often as they like since the receiver is always connected to the transmitter. This is not the case with discs. Once they are recorded, both the keys and the material cannot be changed. Only if all DVD players were REQUIRED to be connected to a network, could the contents be harder to hack. So far that has not been economically feasible.
....The idea is to keep this from being possible with new generation discs......
If all that is needed is to make an exact copy, there is no need to decrypt at all. Just make a bit for bit copy of the original. This may require hacking the drive. That is something the real pirates can easily do. All that copy protections has ever done and will ONLY ALWAYS do is to inconvenience the consumers. It has never stopped those who "pirate" for money and it never will.
I sincerely hope that the EMI/ITUNES DRM free experiment works well and shows the content providers that people will pay extra for DRM less and higher quality music.
.....Is somebody who cannot afford a flatbed scanner .......
Scanners are cheaper than fax machines. Tiger sells one for about $60. The person who has email and scanner might still have to communicate with someone who has no computer and is still in the fax dark age. Therefore a fax might still be needed at times. The old mac Classic serves that for us.
.......Today's cars have seat belts, air bags, traction control, electronic stability control, cd players, navigation systems, satellite radio and steering wheel controls.......
All true, but the basic function and cost of getting from A to B are still the same. That old 1952 Buick was very heavy got about 12 miles to the gallon and gave a very comfortable ride. Modern cars get better mpg but the cost for each mile, adjusted for inflation is not much different today that it was back then.
...I've got an old Mac Classic that won't stay on for more than 15 minutes without locking up.......
Mine is a fax/answering machine that until recently did run 24/7 without any problems. Now we only fire it up when we ned to send/receive a fax from/to those benighted, behind the times people who have no email yet.
.....but they all seem to cost more with out enough added performance ......
Only true if you are dealing mostly with text. As soon as you begin to deal with audio, video and photography, the Macs do give better results. There is, for example no consumer video editing program for Windows that is anywhere nearly as powerful and easy to use than the free iMovie program which comes with every Mac. Mac laptops are no more expensive than other systems if you need to create, rather than only consume above mentioned media. Websurfers, emailers and other media consumers can buy the cheapest pile of chips and wires available and these do a serviceable job.
Early computers dealt almost exclusively with text and numbers. For that, a Mac, even way back then was overkill since it also did much better with graphics and desktop publishing than windows did, even ten years after the Mac Plus came out.
The real reason that computer productivity has not increased anywhere near in proportion to raw computer performance is that all computers are still operated by people, largely in the same way they have always operated them. Computers today are still digital devices operated by the ten digital appendages and the output is still perceived by human eyes staring at a screen. Voice I/O is not yet ready for universal use. Even if it were, it may turn out that most users would not talk and listen to a computer in the same way as to a live person. I know I hate these computerized phone systems which many businesses are using to attempt to save money on payroll costs. It seems that for many companies, it is getting harder and harder to get a real live human on the other end. Even if there is a human, the foreign accent is sometimes very hard to understand.
..... get rid of the stupid cops and idiot lawyers who think unsecured access points can be considered private,......
I agree with you, but I think the root of the problem is one level or more up. Get rid of the stupid politicians who make such nutty laws which zealous cops and lawyers can use to harass ordinary citizens. The cops just think they are doing their jobs and the lawyers all are only interested in making money. Few, if any, in government today, are concerned with common sense and justice any longer.
....You paid for these things and I didn't, so what gives me the right to them?......
I give you the right to some of my beer and pizza when I consent to invite you in and tell you to help yourself or instruct a friend of mine to invite you. I do this when my router, which is in effect my friend, replies to your computer's request for an IP address: "Sure, here is one. You may use this to share my Internet pizza and Internet beer" I should have the right to be hospitable in cyberspace in the same manner as I have that right in the physical realm. The government has no right to tell me who I may associate with or invite into my physical house. Neither does the government have a right to specify who I may invite or include in my cyberspace.
...as it cannot be given Power of Attorney....
So what dies this have to do with power of attorney? If I allow a visitor into my house, I do not give him/her power of attorney. Neither does this happen if I allow someone to use my network. I just through my router, "Sure, come and use my network". Power of attorney has to do with me granting power to another to accomplish legal matters on my behalf. There is nothing of that sort even remotely involved here.
....but not in major metropolitan areas like Boston, Atlanta, NYC, etc......
Only in small portions of the east coast does the population density of even metropolitan areas of the US approach that of most of Europe. Western cities are especially spread out and therefore require miles of expensive cables. Most Europeans live in multi family dwellings. In the US, even in metropolitan areas, there are far more single family houses to be serviced individually.
.....If you're in a block of flats it must make sense to pool resources and share a large connection.......
Some of the more progressive Landlords provide a fast symmetrical Internet connection for the entire complex. Each apartment has an ethernet outlet and a cable connection. The cost is often lower and the service far better than for each tenant subscribing individually. Interested tenants pay the cost with their rent bill. Sometimes, a fast proxy server is provided for serving popular websites. Tenants need a password, but may provide their own WAP to connect to their ethernet jack. Nobody from the outside can get to the internet, even if the individual WAPs are totally open, unless they know the network password. The word "Flat" is generally not used here in the US.
.....A router is a piece of inanimate hardware, it can no more grant legal authority than can an equally inanimate doorknob.....
A router is NOT an inactive thing like a door knob. It is the owners representative and ACTIVELY gives my representative (my computer) a special magic number (IP address) so it can access the owner's network. The owner may instruct the WAP to not give this active permission.
.....If you put a private wireless router up without encryption, it's an attractive nuisance .......
I'd call it a public service, not a nuisance. For whom is it a nuisance? What business is it of the state to tell me whom I am allowed to be friends with. If I consider anyone who knocks on my door a friend, why should anyone be allowed to tell me otherwise?
......As always, there's a solution: just ask........
That's the whole point. The computer, as my representative does ASK. The WAP as the owner's representative gives explicit permission by giving my computer access to the network by issuing a special key, the IP address. If the owner of the WAP does NOT want his/her representative to give such access, it must specifically instruct it by adding a password or other requirements.
......Legally, since you can't transfer power of attorney to an inanimate object, this is legally dubious.......
Not true. Any door to any business that is open or unlocked speaks for the shop owner: Please come in and do business with us. I can go into most stores, look around and then not buy anything. Last time I looked, doors were an inanimate object. A free router is such an open door in cyberspace. This has nothing to do with a power of attorney.
....The burglar - the pro - doesn't get a free ride because his victims don't know how to install a high security lock......
However, if I invite the potential burglar into my house, he ceases to be a burglar in the eyes of the law. If I give my router the authority to invite anyone who happens within range, to be able to grant them entrance to my network, how is this any different? A technology ignorant lawyer might not be able to explain this to the judge. It appears to have been so here.
....then you have no right to complain about someone using it......
/. who knows any of these legal types, might educate them a bit about technical matters, if the opportunity presents itself. Who knows, it might prevent such a nightmare from happening to someone on this forum.
But in this case, the owner did NOT complain. However, the neighbors (legislature, cop) did and tried to assert their authority in an area where they have neither authority nor understanding. The problem is that most of those who deal with laws (lawyers, judges and politicians) generally don't have even the faintest knowledge of technology and therefore make and enforce laws in the light of their ignorance. In the physical world, if I want to invite anyone off the street into my house, I have the perfect right to do so. It seems that the legal folks don't understand that this is no different in cyberspace and therefore make and try to enforce laws against it. This poor fellow was just caught in the web of their ignorance.
Anyone here on
....The onus is upon you to verify that you are not trespassing before proceeding.......
Totally wrong! All computers asks for permission by requesting a special number, an IP address via DHCP from the owner of the open WAP. If this special number is sent back, then that is the invitation to join the network and use it in the same manner as the owner's computer(s).
In the baseball analogy it means that the owners of the ballpark have given explicit permission to watch the game AND and cheer my team.
.....IMHO, if an access point is unsecured and available, it should be fair game for public use .......
Indeed true. I visited someone in a large apartment complex recently and there were 6 useable unsecured WiFi nodes. I picked the strongest one and had no trouble getting my mail and surfing a bit for the latest news. Why should that be illegal? On the other hand, it would have been polite of the freeloader to go into the coffee shop and order a cup of coffee, tea or whatever. Certainly, if I were a renter in such apartments I would get my own connection.
It could be to the alibi advantage of any owner of an open access point if said owner is ever accused of illicit activity, based solely on the IP address assigned to that router by the ISP at the time. If no other evidence is found, the fact that there is an open access router would introduce a very large probability that the owner of such a freely accessible WiFi node may not be guilty.
......Macs DO cost more, and are advertised as being better suited for these purposes..........
Anyone who needs to have such perfect color should not be using a laptop computer in the first place, with its necessarily limited hardware, including the display. Apple sells professional desktop systems with high quality monitors for the truly picky. There are also a number of expensive suitable monitors available from others. Apple laptops are not really significantly more expensive than equivalent offerings from other name brand computer makers. Little touches, such as the magsafe connector and the sudden motion sensor are special Apple touches that are only appreciated, like a sort of insurance, when the calamity these are provided against actually happens. Other manufacturers do not supply these 'superfluous' extra cost niceties. Many people do appreciate the attention to details which Apple alone provides.
This appears to be another effort by a bunch of hungry lawyers to get a piece of the handsome profits Apple has been making lately. If the present trends continue, litigation will be the next biggest percentage of the US GDP growth, coming in right after Government and health care.