Hfx Wireless - options?
Dexter J
Hey folks, hop everyone's Christmas was everything it could be.
Was wondering, is there a wireless only sevice in Halifax? Not
pirated/hotspot - roaming connectivity?
Cheers and best wishes.
--
--
Radio Free Dexterdyne Top Tune o'be-do-da-day
Kathy Matea - 455 Rocket
http://www.dexterdyne.org/888/051.RAM
Real Alternative Player Rulez
demibee
> Was wondering, is there a wireless only sevice in Halifax? Not
> pirated/hotspot - roaming connectivity?
I wish there was... Chebucto's *trying* to create one...
<http://www.chebuctowireless.ca/>
... but since it's all done by people volunteering their own equipment
(and time), it covers only a very small area of the South End. The map's
here...
<http://www.chebuctowireless.ca/coverage.shtml>
I wish we'd go the way of Moncton and have free city-wide wireless. If we
did that, I'd ditch the landline (I'm on dialup) and just keep the cell.
db
kozmo
wrote:
> Salutations:
>
> Hey folks, hop everyone's Christmas was everything it could be.
>
> Was wondering, is there a wireless only sevice in Halifax? Not
> pirated/hotspot - roaming connectivity?
>
> Cheers and best wishes.
>
> --
> --
>
> Radio Free Dexterdyne Top Tune o'be-do-da-day
>
> Real Alternative Player Rulez
you can park outside my neighbour's place.
Brian Smith
> Salutations:
>
> Hey folks, hop everyone's Christmas was everything it could be.
>
> Was wondering, is there a wireless only sevice in Halifax? Not
> pirated/hotspot - roaming connectivity?
>
> Cheers and best wishes.
All the best of the season, Dexter.
Picasso
I don't know about moncton, but Fredericton has great coverage.
Jack
I think you mean Fredericton.
demibee
> I think you mean Fredericton.
Ah... okay. Whoever it is, we should follow their lead :)
db
Picasso
> Salutations:
>
> Hey folks, hop everyone's Christmas was everything it could be.
>
> Was wondering, is there a wireless only sevice in Halifax? Not
> pirated/hotspot - roaming connectivity?
>
> Cheers and best wishes.
>
demibee
> http://www.fred-ezone.ca/coverage.php
That's patchier than I'd imagined... It's a start, though... as, I
suppose, Chebucto's efforts are.
If I had the equipment (and the knowledge), I might even consider hosting
a node.
db
Ke...@mac.ca
>I wish there was... Chebucto's *trying* to create one...
>
>
>... but since it's all done by people volunteering their own equipment
>(and time), it covers only a very small area of the South End.
Actually, it's Chebucto's equipment which you pay $50. deposit on
[refundable when you return the equipment] and they set it up for you. You
need to leave it powered up at all times for the system to work but you
get your membership at half-price each year [as a reward for hosting a
node] and for that price, you get a high speed wireless account, your
regular Plus account and your text account. Unfortunately, I'm in the
north end so I don't qualify just yet but Bloomfield Centre may be hosting
a large node which would bring the signal to our area.
demibee
> Actually, it's Chebucto's equipment which you pay $50. deposit on
> [refundable when you return the equipment] and they set it up for you.
> You need to leave it powered up at all times for the system to work but
> you get your membership at half-price each year [as a reward for hosting
> a node] and for that price, you get a high speed wireless account, your
> regular Plus account and your text account. Unfortunately, I'm in the
> north end so I don't qualify just yet but Bloomfield Centre may be
> hosting a large node which would bring the signal to our area.
Geez, I didn't know that! (I really have to start reading the Chebucto
newsletters ;) That might just be the answer to my situation: I want to
ditch the landline, and just go with the cell. A friend here in the
building -- also on Chebucto dialup -- would benefit too.
I assume that, if there's a problem with the equipment, they'd come and
fix it??
db
Picasso
Yes, its patchier than I immagined after opening the map too.
They targeted the downtown, parks, schools and shopping areas first --
all the likely areas to have the most users. all the other areas
uncovered are residential areas.
I don't think, can't say for sure, they would mandate to cover a whole
city with wifi... i just can't see people substituting a home
connection with a free wireless service, unless they are a brief user
of the internet, send the odd email check weather etc.
demibee
> I don't think, can't say for sure, they would mandate to cover a whole
> city with wifi... i just can't see people substituting a home connection
> with a free wireless service, unless they are a brief user of the
> internet, send the odd email check weather etc.
I'm curious... why do you say that? I haven't used wireless much myself,
but it's gotta be better than dialup! :)
db
Picasso
Well just for the speed, I would say most wireless zones i've seen have
been either throttled, or are bottlenecked due to the number of people
using it. plus certain sites are blocked or filtered.
If you're comparing to dialup, yes it would be a step in the right
direction for sure, but for me theres no replacement for a wire to my
own router.
John
> On Fri, 1 Jan 2010 13:38:00 -0800 (PST), kozmo
>
> <novascrol...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Was wondering, is there a wireless only sevice in Halifax? Not
> >> pirated/hotspot - roaming connectivity?
>
>
> pirate anyone's signal that he can. He was complaining to me one
> morning about a specific network that had been accessible for a while
> but then was secured. Turned out it was my network. He didn't really
> appreciate me pointing out that this was theft.
My neighbour (a family member) used my wireless for a couple of years
with never a thanks or even acknowledgment toward the cost and with
high expectations of uninterrupted service. People are funny.
Rick Walker
"John" wrote:
My neighbour (a family member) used my wireless for a couple of years
with never a thanks or even acknowledgment toward the cost and with
high expectations of uninterrupted service. People are funny.
-------------
Family can be funnier.
Brian Smith
>
> My neighbour (a family member) used my wireless for a couple of years
> with never a thanks or even acknowledgment toward the cost and with
> high expectations of uninterrupted service. People are funny.
People are cheap.
Ke...@mac.ca
>Geez, I didn't know that! (I really have to start reading the Chebucto
>newsletters ;) That might just be the answer to my situation: I want to
>ditch the landline, and just go with the cell. A friend here in the
>building -- also on Chebucto dialup -- would benefit too.
>
>I assume that, if there's a problem with the equipment, they'd come and
>fix it??
Yes. It's a very simple PC box which just runs a card inside and does all
the work. It attaches to a small atenna which sits in your window to
receive and send signals to other nodes. Also, along with the wireless
ability, you still have the dialup available to you too (if you leave
your existing modem in your computer - the wireless setup uses a VPN) so
you can use that in a pinch if the wireless goes a little sketchy due to
weather etc.
James Warren
It depends on whether or not the service is oversubscribed. I am with Xplornet.
In the Maritimes its satellite, out west its wireless. All of us are very unhappy.
I think its oversubscribed. Service seems to be "at their pleasure". It comes and
goes willy nilly. I am connected now but I can't say for how long it will last.
--
jw (a.k.a. Nagilum)
Picasso
> On Sat, 2 Jan 2010 08:35:13 -0800 (PST), John <jvang...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >> I got a chuckle out of a down the hall neighbor of mine who will
> >> pirate anyone's signal that he can. He was complaining to me one
> >> morning about a specific network that had been accessible for a while
> >> but then was secured. Turned out it was my network. He didn't really
> >> appreciate me pointing out that this was theft.
>
> >My neighbour (a family member) used my wireless for a couple of years
> >with never a thanks or even acknowledgment toward the cost and with
> >high expectations of uninterrupted service. People are funny.
>
> stealing someone's signal. The very evening my techie former coworker
> connected the router for me, there were two people who immediately
> latched onto it. I got tired of booting them off and, within a short
> time, added security that even *I* have to unlock if I want to add a
> new device. Works like a charm.
I do realize that it is stealing, but it is up to the owner of the
router and the connection to secure it properly.
If i catch a router that is unsecured, this may even happen
unknowingly, I can't see how the owner of the router can be angry.
Secure your belongings, its the same as locking your car doors... if
you leave your car unlocked someone will most definatly sometime come
by and steal the coffee money from your ashtray.
Then again, locks only keep honest people out :)
Picasso
No, people are opportunists. Given the opportunity, they will take
what is available for free.
Brian Smith
>
> No, people are opportunists. Given the opportunity, they will take
> what is available for free.
Which can be described as being cheap or being thieves, whichever shoe
fits.
Richard Bonner
> > From: demibee <dem...@post.com>
> >I wish there was... Chebucto's *trying* to create one...
> >
> > <[5] http://www.chebuctowireless.ca/>
> >
> >... but since it's all done by people volunteering their own equipment
> >(and time), it covers only a very small area of the South End.
> Actually, it's Chebucto's equipment which you pay $50. deposit on
> [refundable when you return the equipment] and they set it up for you. You
> need to leave it powered up at all times for the system to work but you
> get your membership at half-price each year [as a reward for hosting a
> node] and for that price, you get a high speed wireless account, your
> regular Plus account and your text account.
*** Yup - three services for the price of one.
> Unfortunately, I'm in the north end so I don't qualify just yet but
> Bloomfield Centre may be hosting a large node which would bring the
> signal to our area.
*** I'm hoping that the Bloomfield deal will be a go this spring.
Richard
Richard Bonner
> db
*** Wireless coverage is prone to dropouts and slowdowns.
Richard
Al Smith
Wireless isn't bad if you've got a good signal. I've got four
computers hooked up to the same wireless router. My main computer
is plugged into it by wire, but the other three are on wireless,
and it is no trouble to download large files or browse the Web.
The signal never drops.
-Al-
Picasso
So you think you have no responsibility to secure your router?
Richard Bonner
> -Al-
*** I wasn't thinking of personal, in-home wireless setups. but
of commercial ones.
Richard
Jack
Yes they are..hence the fine invention of padlocks
Jack
and if you go with the newer "n" wireless protocol, its very fast..
Al Smith
Those I've never used, so I will bow to your greater experience.
-Al-
Al Smith
I actually defaulted my setup to the slower protocol, because XP
didn't seem to want to deal with the n-protocol. It seems fast
enough for all my purposes.
-Al-
kozmo
if you're broadcasting a signal that isn't protected you're giving it
away for free.
kozmo
>
> - Show quoted text -
and by securing your belongings, that means i don't want your
belongings on my property or i will use it.
Brian Smith
>
> if you're broadcasting a signal that isn't protected you're giving it
> away for free.
If you're not paying for a service or product, you're a thief.
Jack
yes..no different than leaving your front door unlocked...and someone
coming in...its a crime....
Brian Smith
>
> yes..no different than leaving your front door unlocked...and someone
> coming in...its a crime....
That's a fact, Jack! :^)
kozmo
actually it is, they're coming into my house and leaving their stuff.
no different than broadcasting radio or tv.
Jack
ahh..no..no different than US (Directv etc) satellite signals
"bombarding" you however you are not legally allowed to view them
demibee
> actually it is, they're coming into my house and leaving their stuff. no
> different than broadcasting radio or tv.
I suppose it *could* be compared to, say, an unscrambled satellite TV
signal coming across the border; if I could tune into a movie channel for
no cost, I wouldn't consider that stealing... I don't think most would
abstain from such a channel for moral reasons...
But doesn't the use of an unsecured wireless Internet signal cause
problems for the subscriber/broadcaster of that signal?
db
Brian Smith
>
> actually it is, they're coming into my house and leaving their stuff.
> no different than broadcasting radio or tv.
Actually the tracks they leave in your system could cause you legal
issues, which isn't the plan you had when you set your system up
(poorly). It's is still theft, no matter how you wish to describe it.
kozmo
those signals require decoding/descrambling before they can be viewed,
correct?
kozmo
> On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 16:46:54 -0800 (PST), kozmo
> equipment to pick up the signal. My router is broadcasting the signal
> *I* paid for from my living room to my bedroom. Anyone who uses *my*
> signal is a thief.
>
> It's more similar to satellite radio which is a subscription service
> you pay for and which no one else is allowed to pick up no matter how
> they manage do it.
>
> I can't imagine that you wouldn't be pissed if you were paying for a
> signal and buddy next door wasn't paying a cent by pirating your
> signal.
if i'm receiving "your signal" in my house, its mine and i'll do with
it what i please. i'm not dumb enough to be broadcasting "my signal"
without the proper security encryption measures. here's a link to
help you out.
http://compnetworking.about.com/od/wirelesssecurity/tp/wifisecurity.htm
James Warren
> On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 16:46:54 -0800 (PST), kozmo
> equipment to pick up the signal. My router is broadcasting the signal
> *I* paid for from my living room to my bedroom. Anyone who uses *my*
> signal is a thief.
>
> It's more similar to satellite radio which is a subscription service
> you pay for and which no one else is allowed to pick up no matter how
> they manage do it.
>
> I can't imagine that you wouldn't be pissed if you were paying for a
> signal and buddy next door wasn't paying a cent by pirating your
> signal.
>
Ask buddy to share the cost. If he won't lock him out. :)
--
jw
"Science is a candle in the dark" - Carl Sagan.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wV_REEdvxo
http://video.stumbleupon.com/#p=e5xdcxablf
kozmo
> On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 05:44:09 -0400, Brian Smith
i have my own wireless network and i know how to secure it, i don't
need to steal it. :-) too many people spend the money on the
equipment and have no idea how to use it.
kozmo
> On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 16:46:54 -0800 (PST), kozmo
>
> equipment to pick up the signal. My router is broadcasting the signal
> *I* paid for from my living room to my bedroom. Anyone who uses *my*
> signal is a thief.
>
> It's more similar to satellite radio which is a subscription service
> you pay for and which no one else is allowed to pick up no matter how
> they manage do it.
>
> I can't imagine that you wouldn't be pissed if you were paying for a
> signal and buddy next door wasn't paying a cent by pirating your
> signal.
suppose i have a wireless router that jams other routers within a 100
ft radius, should i be allowed to broadcast that and wipe out my
neighbour's internet access?
kozmo
> On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 09:21:21 -0800 (PST), kozmo
> realized the neighbor down the hall was stealing my signal.
>
> So does this mean that anyone who comes to your house can use anything
> that belongs to you without your permission because it's there in the
> open? Wow!- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
actually, they wouldn't be coming to my house to use it. i'm giving
it to them in their house, whether they want it or not. if someone
doesn't want their signal to be used, secure it or disable the SSID so
its not broadcasting constantly.
Jack
Look up Criminal Code of Canada:
Offenses in relation to data
342.1 (1) Every one who, fraudulently and without colour of right,
(a) obtains, directly or indirectly, any computer service,
(b) by means of an electro-magnetic, acoustic, mechanical or other
device, ********intercepts or causes to be intercepted, directly or
indirectly, any function of a computer system******,
(c) uses or causes to be used, directly or indirectly, a computer system
with intent to commit an offence under paragraph (a) or (b) or an
offence under section 430 in relation to data or a computer system, or
(d) uses, possesses, traffics in or permits another person to have
access to a computer password that would enable a person to commit an
offence under paragraph (a), (b) or (c)
is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term
not exceeding ten years, or is guilty of an offence punishable on
summary conviction.
Have a nice day...
Jack
No...as a wireless router is considered a radio device, Industry Canada
can investigate,shut it down, and charge you.
kozmo
so can i file a complaint with Industry Canada when someone is
broadcasting RF into my home without permission?
Jack
You can complain..all you want...but the router is doing what it is
designed to do...and has been approved for use in Canada..
JD
"Donna Whitman" <NSBoo...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:r855k5llka8km54e3...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 4 Jan 2010 11:24:07 -0800 (PST), kozmo
> <novasc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Jan 3, 4:28 pm, Brian Smith <Hali...@NovaScotia.Canada> wrote:
>>> On 1/3/2010 3:25 PM, Picasso wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > No, people are opportunists. Given the opportunity, they will take
>>> > what is available for free.
>>>
>>> Which can be described as being cheap or being thieves, whichever shoe
>>> fits.
>>
>>if you're broadcasting a signal that isn't protected you're giving it
>>away for free.
>
>
> free to take it? You don't "broadcast" a signal. You pay for a signal
> that you can legally send to another computer in your home Because
> it's sent over a wireless network doesn't mean anyone within range is
> allowed to use it.
Its not theft. It may be wrong, but it is not theft because it does not
deny the rightful owner use. The argument about pirating signals has been
around since cable TV first came out in the 70's and people figured out how
to defeat scramblers. Theft of signal or information is not considered
theft. Its best to just secure your routers.
My concern with not securing my wireless would have more to do with someone
doing something illegal using my signal; downloading child porn for example.
If traced, it would be the IP of my router that would show up.
JD
"Jack" <bigc...@yahoo.com.com> wrote in message
news:4b42a8fd$0$5326$9a56...@news.aliant.net...
That's true. That's because there is no law about recieving signals.
However, use of the information it contains without permission (or payment)
is a copyright violation; definitely illegal.
Rick Walker
"JD" wrote:
>
> My concern with not securing my wireless would have more to do with
> someone doing something illegal using my signal; downloading child porn
> for example. If traced, it would be the IP of my router that would show
> up.
We have ours secured for that reason too - I made sure it was secured after
the first laptop showed up around here, and recently double-checked when the
second one was added to the line-up.
JD
"demibee" <dem...@post.com> wrote in message
news:hnoa17-...@news.dal.ca...
It may slow it down a bit, but you wouldn't notice the difference unless you
had a large number of users.
JD
> equipment to pick up the signal. My router is broadcasting the signal
> *I* paid for from my living room to my bedroom. Anyone who uses *my*
> signal is a thief.
>
Not really. They are pirates, but not thieves.
> It's more similar to satellite radio which is a subscription service
> you pay for and which no one else is allowed to pick up no matter how
> they manage do it.
>
You can legally intercept the signal. You are not allowed to decode it
because you are not entitled to the information it contains.
> I can't imagine that you wouldn't be pissed if you were paying for a
> signal and buddy next door wasn't paying a cent by pirating your
> signal.
>
If it didn't affect me, I wouldn't care. However, my gear is secured
because I don't want said neighbour to do anything illegal that could get me
in hot water, nor do I want someone intercepting personal information that
is passing between my computer and my router.
Rick Walker
"JD" wrote:
>
> If it didn't affect me, I wouldn't care. However, my gear is secured
> because I don't want said neighbour to do anything illegal that could get
> me in hot water, nor do I want someone intercepting personal information
> that is passing between my computer and my router.
My wife uses hers for private real estate information - the kind of stuff
that's dangerous in the wrong hands. We had a fellow we know come up and
secure our router when it was first installed a couple of years ago. My
wife watched what he did, so after we hooked up the second laptop here she
knew right where to look, just to make sure.
Banking is a pretty secure thing (I believe) to do over the Internet; but I
wouldn't want that information getting around either, JD.
James Warren
If your ISP throttles you after so much usage then other people's use of your
signal would deny you your expected usage. In that sense maybe theft is a
proper description.
--
jw (a.k.a. Nagilum)
JD
"James Warren" <jwwar...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:_JCdnTM-S-ZdTN7W...@giganews.com...
If they are not doing anything illegal, the ISP won't throttle you. The
effective wireless speed is still slower than most of the ISPs supply to the
modem, and its already throttled; they only gurantee to a certain speed and
the backbone is capable of much faster.
I see your point, but we hashed this out a number of times in ethics courses
I have taken; the definition of theft. Signal piracy is an offence and
illegal in Canada, but it is not considered theft. Unauthorized use of the
information the signal contains is a copyright violation and, as Jack
pointed out, the unauthorized use of computer services is an offence; again,
not theft though.
Brian Smith
>
> Shhhh ...let him find out the hard way. :-)
LOL!
Brian Smith
>
> i have my own wireless network and i know how to secure it, i don't
> need to steal it. :-) too many people spend the money on the
> equipment and have no idea how to use it.
That wasn't what I or Donna was suggesting.
Brian Smith
>
> Amen! ...or the non-believer equivalent thereof. :-)
It's so simple a concept, only a criminal would have a difficult time
understanding it.
James Warren
For satellite internet subscribers the limit is 169MB/day. It would be fairly
easy for someone to cause me to be throttled back to 56K modem speeds. This
is denial of usage if not actual theft. Right?
--
jw (a.k.a. Nagilum)
kozmo
> "James Warren" <jwwarren...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:_JCdnTM-S-ZdTN7W...@giganews.com...
>
>
>
> > JD wrote:
>
> >> "Donna Whitman" <NSBookl...@gmail.com> wrote in message
thank you for clearing that up for them.
JD
Your name
>
> For satellite internet subscribers the limit is 169MB/day. It would be
> fairly easy for someone to cause me to be throttled back to 56K modem
> speeds. This is denial of usage if not actual theft. Right?
>
> --
>
were did you get te info of 169Mb/per day ???
Al Smith
I agree with you. It's amazing how many people can't get their
heads around the notion that electronic copying is not theft.
-Al-
James Warren
I remember searching the web back in 2005 I think it was when I first signed up with
Xplornet. It already existed in the states and the was a chat forum devoted
to satellite internet. It was much discussed there. I'm sorry I can't remember
the details for you. If it has changed I am not aware of it. I try not to download
programs or updates of more that 60MB because it takes forever and I don't want
to push my luck. If you discover some newer information please post it here.
I think the information was provided by insiders because it is not mentioned anywhere
in their public literature. It is called FAP I believe (Fair Access Policy).
--
jw (a.k.a. Nagilum)
Brian Smith
>
> It's a bit like a person who would steal someone's purse in a
> restaurant or other public place and then say "Well, you left it in
> the open". Theft is theft no matter how careless the owner may be.
I am in full agreement with you, Donna. It doesn't matter what one
wishes to call it, taking something that isn't owned by the person who
is taking it, makes it theft.
JD
> restaurant or other public place and then say "Well, you left it in
> the open". Theft is theft no matter how careless the owner may be.
>
But it isn't the same Donna. If I take your purse, you no longer have it,
nor do you have access to whatever is in it. If I use your wireless signal,
you still have it and the use of it.
Al Smith
> On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 20:17:36 -0400, Brian Smith
> <Hal...@NovaScotia.Canada> wrote:
>
> restaurant or other public place and then say "Well, you left it in
> the open". Theft is theft no matter how careless the owner may be.
>
Not the same concept. If an action doesn't deprive the other
person of anything, it isn't theft -- theft is when you take
something of value away from another person, so that the person no
longer has the use of the thing of value.
-Al-
Richard Bonner
> On Jan 4, 7:48=A0pm, Jack <bigcle...@yahoo.com.com> wrote:
> > Brian Smith wrote:
> > > On 1/4/2010 3:24 PM, kozmo wrote:
> >
> > >> if you're broadcasting a signal that isn't protected you're giving it
> > >> away for free.
> >
> > > =A0 =A0 If you're not paying for a service or product, you're a thief.
> >
> > yes..no different than leaving your front door unlocked...and someone
> > coming in...its a crime....
> actually it is, they're coming into my house and leaving their stuff.
> no different than broadcasting radio or tv.
*** So if a friend accidently leaves his cellphone in your house, you
own it? If you use his minutes for which he is paying, you are not
stealing?
Richard
Richard Bonner
> so can i file a complaint with Industry Canada when someone is
> broadcasting RF into my home without permission?
*** If it has a detrimental effect, yes.
Richard
Richard Bonner
> "demibee" <dem...@post.com> wrote:
> > ...doesn't the use of an unsecured wireless Internet signal cause
> > problems for the subscriber/broadcaster of that signal?
> >
> > db
> It may slow it down a bit, but you wouldn't notice the difference
> unless you had a large number of users.
*** Or unless the RCMP is arresting you for buddy's child porn viewing.
Richard
Richard Bonner
> "Donna Whitman" <NSBoo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 20:17:36 -0400, Brian Smith
> > <Hal...@NovaScotia.Canada> wrote:
> > It's a bit like a person who would steal someone's purse in a
> > restaurant or other public place and then say "Well, you left it in
> > the open". Theft is theft no matter how careless the owner may be.
> But it isn't the same Donna. If I take your purse, you no longer have it,
> nor do you have access to whatever is in it. If I use your wireless signal,
> you still have it and the use of it.
*** So if you make a copy of her credit card and use it, she still has
the original and use of it. Is that theft?
Richard
JD
"Richard Bonner" <ak...@chebucto.ns.ca> wrote in message
news:hi7pfk$m80$5...@Kil-nws-1.UCIS.Dal.Ca...
Yeah you are stealing; you are denying him use or access to those minutes.
JD
No she doesn't. She does not have use of the credit that has been used so,
yes, it is theft. Making a copy of the credit card may/or may not be a
crime. Using it is (stealing the credit dollars) is definitely theft.
JD
I believe that was covered earlier in the thread; its one of the reasons I
secure my network.
kozmo
they're not accidentally broadcasting into my home.
JD
> stealing it from theirs.
Actually they are. The broadcast is not that discriminating.
Rick Walker
"JD" wrote:
>
> "Donna Whitman" wrote:
>>
>> People with a router aren't broadcasting into your home, you're
>> stealing it from theirs.
>
> Actually they are. The broadcast is not that discriminating.
It's the people that make use of the broadcast that steal - the router's not
to blame.
kozmo
stop the broadcasting then. pretty simple to do.
Rick Walker
"kozmo" wrote:
"Rick Walker" wrote:
>
> It's the people that make use of the broadcast that steal - the router's
> not
> to blame.
stop the broadcasting then. pretty simple to do.
-----------------------
It is, kozmo. When we hooked up the first laptop in here a couple of years
ago, you could see the names (handles) of the others who were jumping on the
signal. That was stopped within a day - sure don't need that worry.
kozmo
exactly. takes 5 minutes to secure a wireless router and keep it from
broadcasting its SSID. people who don't know enough about wireless
security should stick with an ethernet cable.
Rick Walker
"kozmo" wrote:
------
I'll admit we didn't know what to do to secure it at first - but all it took
was a quick visit from a friend, and we were safe. As soon as my laptop's
back from getting Vista dumped I'll have no worries either.
Vista... what a slow, bulky O/S. I really don't know how my wife put up
with it for so long; then again, she's married to me. :)
kozmo
i lived with vista for about 6 months on the laptop before going back
to XP. i'm happy with XP.