Funny that you should say that, because not only has that theory been brought up & torn down before, but the same has occured in the discussion of this same/. article:
Actually, it is 100% possible for you to set up traffic bandwidth shaping so that any particular IP is only allowed a certain amount of bandwidth, for example.
Use a UNIX-like machine as a router/firewall for your network, and you suddenly have amazingly detailed networking possibilities within your reach. I strongly suggest reading the Linux Network Administrator's Guide. Even though it's getting a little outdated it has some downright cool-ass information within.
Of course, few users are technically adept enough to actually set up a router like this, but I'm sure it has been used a lot for people who want to keep their wifi access "open", but safely limited.
For sure, I definitely agree. Actually, a small amount of wireless-network-piggybacking is probably acceptable in essentially all cases. I know very very few people who actually hit their ISP's bandwidth limits - actually, just one family. They are using the absolute lowest & cheapest broadband connection, which only offers them something like 10gb/month up & down. They actually get calls all the time from the ISP telling them to either stop going over the limit, or move up to the next higher price point (and at the same time get a *way* faster connection)...
Anyway, when people start complaining to me about evil wireless-network hackers, it really falls on deaf ears. If someone hops onto your network to check some email, what's the big deal?
Of course, if such a user starts doing malicious things, cracking their file-shares, sniffing traffic on their network etc. then that's definitely cause for anger and frustration. At the same time it's trivial to enable 104-bit encryption, and will prevent most problems - most wardrivers/wifi-piggybackers will just move onto the next wide open network (I know I do)...
Re:Bandwidth-based pricing would stop this, and ot
on
Neighborhood WiFi Security
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I think it's probably because the fairly large percentage of low-bandwidth users (simply email & minimal surfing, no mp3s/videos/p2p) would be a total loss of profit to the ISPs, if they started charging based on actual bandwidth usage.
They can make an unbelievable amount of money because while the ISP might pay for their connection by bandwidth used, their users (you and I) are paying a flat-rate (and probably artificially large) monthly fee regardless of bandwidth usage.
What I'm trying to get across is, they can charge a nice high monthly fee, which might easily cover, let's say, 20gb of up/down bandwidth per month. If an ISP's user is only using 1-2gb per month for their email, random family photo attachments, and maybe a few mp3s from iTunes... Well.. the ISP just got enough money to cover 20 gb of bandwidth, but only 2gb were used.
This situation has existed for a very long time in regards to net access - since dialup net access because a common thing, essentially. I remember fixing a family's computer and for whatever reason having to check out their dialup account configuration at their ISP. I noticed they only spent like 10 hours online per month, but of course their package allowed something like 100 hours. The ISP surely loved them...
In a semi-related story... I was at a friend's place last week and I wanted to transfer to him some audio-recordings of my band's recent practice. I asked him, "Do you have a wireless network or anything set up here?"... He said how he didn't want to "get into that wireless stuff" because there are apparently so many people who would hack into his wifi network or whatever. That, and there are people who drive around in vans with gear to hijack peoples' wireless networks.
During the minute or so that he was going on about this stuff, I found about 3 open wireless networks in range. I connected to one of them, logged into MSN Messenger and laughed as he saw a little notification pop up on his PC screen that indicated that I had just come online.
That's pretty cool. I've heard of people proposing the same thing regarding cars or motorcycles.. of course the potential for abuse is plainly obvious - what is to stop someone from borrowing one of the cars and totally trashing it? heh... A new avenue for aimless destructive rebellion, or whatever...
Yeah well, how else are they supposed to make money? No one wants to buy their generic shitty releases so they've got to make money somehow, right?.... *sigh*
haha, it's a laptop! The software will probably be supported longer than the hardware lasts - especially because I'm using it for live music performance in a heavy industrial-electronic band;) Not to mention, the only thing I need vendor support for is the hardware. As long as SOMETHING runs on this machine, I'm happy - no need for the absolute latest system software, really.
Well, from my personal experience, MS pda-phones are just as ass-backwards as Windows is, whereas the few times I've used a BlackBerry I found it pretty straightforward and had no problem at all getting to the functions I wanted to use. Frankly the only reason I see to use MS' new device(s) is to maintain a high level of synchronization with an office-place workstation with contacts, calendar and emails... Which AFAIK BlackBerry does anyways, so...
(not to mention RIM doesn't seem to have that same "take over the planet with profitable crappy tech" attitude)
3. A talent, endowment, aptitude, or inclination.... 2. To endow with.
Great! Thus we have "gifted" as a versatile and very useful adjective for pointing out certain qualities in the female gender... e.g. "Hey, she's pretty gifted!"... "Yes, Sarah is certainly a gifted student." I can just picture the lawsuits. But other than that, definitely a useful new term borne out of the abuse of language!:D
Except.. these developers were NOT told "the more 'effort' you spend the more likely you are to get a sweet new Mac laptop"... In fact, they weren't promised any reward of any sort. In this way Apple's reward has gone to what are very likely to be totally deserving contributors, as opposed to cheaters etc. since none of the developers knew beforehand that Apple was going to give such stuff to the top 12 contributors.:)
Well, it's not quite the same thing. These developers were rewards *after* doing a lot of work. They did the work without any knowledge of any potential "reward". That's what makes this situation a little different.:)
That's irrelevant, that your shares are "read only". Exploits don't care about your regular settings, your "security". Exploits usually abuse flaws in software regardless of how the user has configured it.
Having no firewall between your machine and others opens you up to any network-based exploit, unless your machine has every single security flaw patched for every piece of software installed.
Just try plugging your machine directly to the net sometime, and turn off the firewall. It won't be long before some kind of exploit is used on your machine.
Slashdot Mirror
Funny that you should say that, because not only has that theory been brought up & torn down before, but the same has occured in the discussion of this same /. article:
5 2&cid=14856776
http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1793
Actually, it is 100% possible for you to set up traffic bandwidth shaping so that any particular IP is only allowed a certain amount of bandwidth, for example.
... It's a bit technical but a useful resource nonetheless.
Use a UNIX-like machine as a router/firewall for your network, and you suddenly have amazingly detailed networking possibilities within your reach. I strongly suggest reading the Linux Network Administrator's Guide. Even though it's getting a little outdated it has some downright cool-ass information within.
Of course, few users are technically adept enough to actually set up a router like this, but I'm sure it has been used a lot for people who want to keep their wifi access "open", but safely limited.
On a related note there are pre-built linux firewall packages out there which will surprisingly easily allow you to do what I was just talking about.
Also, here is the Linux Advanced Routing & Traffic Control HOWTO
For sure, I definitely agree. Actually, a small amount of wireless-network-piggybacking is probably acceptable in essentially all cases. I know very very few people who actually hit their ISP's bandwidth limits - actually, just one family. They are using the absolute lowest & cheapest broadband connection, which only offers them something like 10gb/month up & down. They actually get calls all the time from the ISP telling them to either stop going over the limit, or move up to the next higher price point (and at the same time get a *way* faster connection)... Anyway, when people start complaining to me about evil wireless-network hackers, it really falls on deaf ears. If someone hops onto your network to check some email, what's the big deal? Of course, if such a user starts doing malicious things, cracking their file-shares, sniffing traffic on their network etc. then that's definitely cause for anger and frustration. At the same time it's trivial to enable 104-bit encryption, and will prevent most problems - most wardrivers/wifi-piggybackers will just move onto the next wide open network (I know I do)...
I think it's probably because the fairly large percentage of low-bandwidth users (simply email & minimal surfing, no mp3s/videos/p2p) would be a total loss of profit to the ISPs, if they started charging based on actual bandwidth usage.
They can make an unbelievable amount of money because while the ISP might pay for their connection by bandwidth used, their users (you and I) are paying a flat-rate (and probably artificially large) monthly fee regardless of bandwidth usage.
What I'm trying to get across is, they can charge a nice high monthly fee, which might easily cover, let's say, 20gb of up/down bandwidth per month. If an ISP's user is only using 1-2gb per month for their email, random family photo attachments, and maybe a few mp3s from iTunes... Well.. the ISP just got enough money to cover 20 gb of bandwidth, but only 2gb were used.
This situation has existed for a very long time in regards to net access - since dialup net access because a common thing, essentially. I remember fixing a family's computer and for whatever reason having to check out their dialup account configuration at their ISP. I noticed they only spent like 10 hours online per month, but of course their package allowed something like 100 hours. The ISP surely loved them...
In a semi-related story... I was at a friend's place last week and I wanted to transfer to him some audio-recordings of my band's recent practice. I asked him, "Do you have a wireless network or anything set up here?" ... He said how he didn't want to "get into that wireless stuff" because there are apparently so many people who would hack into his wifi network or whatever. That, and there are people who drive around in vans with gear to hijack peoples' wireless networks.
During the minute or so that he was going on about this stuff, I found about 3 open wireless networks in range. I connected to one of them, logged into MSN Messenger and laughed as he saw a little notification pop up on his PC screen that indicated that I had just come online.
That's pretty cool. I've heard of people proposing the same thing regarding cars or motorcycles.. of course the potential for abuse is plainly obvious - what is to stop someone from borrowing one of the cars and totally trashing it? heh... A new avenue for aimless destructive rebellion, or whatever...
Ordinarily upstanding people are tapping in. As they do, new sets of Internet behaviors are creeping into America's popular culture.
Yeah, like computer users getting sued by the RIAA when they have never used any P2P software on their machine, for example...
Yeah well, how else are they supposed to make money? No one wants to buy their generic shitty releases so they've got to make money somehow, right? .... *sigh*
ROFL dude.. "Vista for Developing Nations" and it will come bundled on that new bright-green $100 laptop... !! hahaha
.. rofl
Practically spat out my coffee on the screen when I saw that
haha, well, all I hear about Skype is that it sucks, so that doesn't surprise me.
haha, it's a laptop! The software will probably be supported longer than the hardware lasts - especially because I'm using it for live music performance in a heavy industrial-electronic band ;) Not to mention, the only thing I need vendor support for is the hardware. As long as SOMETHING runs on this machine, I'm happy - no need for the absolute latest system software, really.
Well, from my personal experience, MS pda-phones are just as ass-backwards as Windows is, whereas the few times I've used a BlackBerry I found it pretty straightforward and had no problem at all getting to the functions I wanted to use. Frankly the only reason I see to use MS' new device(s) is to maintain a high level of synchronization with an office-place workstation with contacts, calendar and emails... Which AFAIK BlackBerry does anyways, so...
(not to mention RIM doesn't seem to have that same "take over the planet with profitable crappy tech" attitude)
Well, anyways, at least this makes me more glad that I bought my Apple iBook before the x86 switch. Good ol' PowerPC. ;)
You forgot a couple zeroes on your year-estimate there. ;)
Sorry that link was a piece. Check it, text version here:
http://www.sigg3.net/myself/fuck.html
Guess you haven't heard "the word 'fuck'" - http://shop.store.yahoo.com/laughstore/wordfuck.ht ml hehehe ;)
3. A talent, endowment, aptitude, or inclination. ...
... "Yes, Sarah is certainly a gifted student." I can just picture the lawsuits. But other than that, definitely a useful new term borne out of the abuse of language! :D
2. To endow with.
Great! Thus we have "gifted" as a versatile and very useful adjective for pointing out certain qualities in the female gender... e.g. "Hey, she's pretty gifted!"
"Gift" as a verb? Wow, and I thought "preemptive counter-attack" was bad...
Except.. these developers were NOT told "the more 'effort' you spend the more likely you are to get a sweet new Mac laptop"... In fact, they weren't promised any reward of any sort. In this way Apple's reward has gone to what are very likely to be totally deserving contributors, as opposed to cheaters etc. since none of the developers knew beforehand that Apple was going to give such stuff to the top 12 contributors. :)
Well, it's not quite the same thing. These developers were rewards *after* doing a lot of work. They did the work without any knowledge of any potential "reward". That's what makes this situation a little different. :)
i lolled
"Once your bank account has 10 digits, you're pretty much immune to anything short of complete and utter economic collapse."
;)
Yeah, that or being sued by the RIAA/MPAA/etc...
"There's also cases of people dying in real life and the community coming together to remember them."
Case in point: http://www.applenova.com/
They pretty much took down the main page and replaced it with that memorial type page (with links to the other sections still, of course).
78.35% of statistics made up on the spot!
This and other exciting stories tonight at 11...
That's irrelevant, that your shares are "read only". Exploits don't care about your regular settings, your "security". Exploits usually abuse flaws in software regardless of how the user has configured it.
Having no firewall between your machine and others opens you up to any network-based exploit, unless your machine has every single security flaw patched for every piece of software installed.
Just try plugging your machine directly to the net sometime, and turn off the firewall. It won't be long before some kind of exploit is used on your machine.