Help, my neighbour turned off their wifi!

[iago]

http://mashable.com/2010/02/22/stolen-wifi-confusion/

Too funny. A woman calls a tech support show when he neighbour turns off his wifi that she's been using for over a year

[Blaze]

I like that tech show.  Leo Laporte is awesome. 

[Sidoh]

Hahaha.  I forget who linked that to me, but I think it was someone here

[Towelie]

I like how he compares it to stealing groceries because you think they're too expensive. People are idiots-- especially the guy who didn't turn encryption on

[Sidoh]

I like how he compares it to stealing groceries because you think they're too expensive. People are idiots-- especially the guy who didn't turn encryption on

I think there's a difference between using open wifi and stealing: as long as you're not being an ass, you're not hurting the person you're "borrowing" from at all.

[iago]

I like how he compares it to stealing groceries because you think they're too expensive. People are idiots-- especially the guy who didn't turn encryption on

I think there's a difference between using open wifi and stealing: as long as you're not being an ass, you're not hurting the person you're "borrowing" from at all.

Well, you have to trust that they aren't evil (and they have to trust that you aren't).

[Sidoh]

I like how he compares it to stealing groceries because you think they're too expensive. People are idiots-- especially the guy who didn't turn encryption on

I think there's a difference between using open wifi and stealing: as long as you're not being an ass, you're not hurting the person you're "borrowing" from at all.

Well, you have to trust that they aren't evil (and they have to trust that you aren't).

That's irrelevant.  I'm addressing a hypothetical.

[Towelie]

I like how he compares it to stealing groceries because you think they're too expensive. People are idiots-- especially the guy who didn't turn encryption on

I think there's a difference between using open wifi and stealing: as long as you're not being an ass, you're not hurting the person you're "borrowing" from at all.

Well, you have to trust that they aren't evil (and they have to trust that you aren't).

That's irrelevant.  I'm addressing a hypothetical.

I completely agree, it isn't really harming the person (unless you completely whore their bandwidth). But, it still is stealing.

[iago]

I like how he compares it to stealing groceries because you think they're too expensive. People are idiots-- especially the guy who didn't turn encryption on

I think there's a difference between using open wifi and stealing: as long as you're not being an ass, you're not hurting the person you're "borrowing" from at all.

Well, you have to trust that they aren't evil (and they have to trust that you aren't).

That's irrelevant.  I'm addressing a hypothetical.

I don't disagree, I've used people's wifi before too, especially when I'm travelling and lost. I always encrypt my connection, though, because I don't trust people.

My point is, though, that even though neither is likely going to hurt the other, either one of them can be malicious and the other would never ever know.

[Sidoh]

I like how he compares it to stealing groceries because you think they're too expensive. People are idiots-- especially the guy who didn't turn encryption on

I think there's a difference between using open wifi and stealing: as long as you're not being an ass, you're not hurting the person you're "borrowing" from at all.

Well, you have to trust that they aren't evil (and they have to trust that you aren't).

That's irrelevant.  I'm addressing a hypothetical.

I completely agree, it isn't really harming the person (unless you completely whore their bandwidth). But, it still is stealing.

I'm objecting to the claim that "it's stealing".  In countries where bandwidth limits are more relevant, I might have to agree.  Here in the states, though, you're not really taking anything away anything.

[Towelie]

I'm objecting to the claim that "it's stealing".  In countries where bandwidth limits are more relevant, I might have to agree.  Here in the states, though, you're not really taking anything away anything.

What if I used it to torrent?

[deadly7]

I'm objecting to the claim that "it's stealing".  In countries where bandwidth limits are more relevant, I might have to agree.  Here in the states, though, you're not really taking anything away anything.

You're not the person that's paying for it. You didn't even *ASK* to use it. It's not your property and it's not a communal right. If you keep your keys in your car (unsecured wifi) and someone drives it off and brings it back, you'd be fully right to press charges against him.

[Sidoh]

I'm objecting to the claim that "it's stealing".  In countries where bandwidth limits are more relevant, I might have to agree.  Here in the states, though, you're not really taking anything away anything.

You're not the person that's paying for it. You didn't even *ASK* to use it. It's not your property and it's not a communal right. If you keep your keys in your car (unsecured wifi) and someone drives it off and brings it back, you'd be fully right to press charges against him.

I don't agree that your analogy accurately describes using an unsecured wireless connection.  If you take someone's car, you're depriving them of the chance to use it for the period in which you borrow it.

If you use an unsecured connection in the correct manner, you deprive the owner of nothing.

[iago]

I'm objecting to the claim that "it's stealing".  In countries where bandwidth limits are more relevant, I might have to agree.  Here in the states, though, you're not really taking anything away anything.

You're not the person that's paying for it. You didn't even *ASK* to use it. It's not your property and it's not a communal right. If you keep your keys in your car (unsecured wifi) and someone drives it off and brings it back, you'd be fully right to press charges against him.

I don't agree that your analogy accurately describes using an unsecured wireless connection.  If you take someone's car, you're depriving them of the chance to use it for the period in which you borrow it.

If you use an unsecured connection in the correct manner, you deprive the owner of nothing.

I don't disagree with your argument.

What I'm saying is, it's a bad idea.

[deadly7]

I don't agree that your analogy accurately describes using an unsecured wireless connection.  If you take someone's car, you're depriving them of the chance to use it for the period in which you borrow it.

If you use an unsecured connection in the correct manner, you deprive the owner of nothing.

On a legal standpoint, that doesn't really matter. You could be a 90-year old granny that just e-mails once a month. If you paid for it, you can use your Internet all you want. If you're piggybacking, there is a fine precedent that, too fucking bad it's your ass.
http://compnetworking.about.com/od/wirelessfaqs/f/legal_free_wifi.htm

[Sidoh]

I don't agree that your analogy accurately describes using an unsecured wireless connection.  If you take someone's car, you're depriving them of the chance to use it for the period in which you borrow it.

If you use an unsecured connection in the correct manner, you deprive the owner of nothing.

On a legal standpoint, that doesn't really matter. You could be a 90-year old granny that just e-mails once a month. If you paid for it, you can use your Internet all you want. If you're piggybacking, there is a fine precedent that, too fucking bad it's your ass.
http://compnetworking.about.com/od/wirelessfaqs/f/legal_free_wifi.htm

I don't care about legality.  That's not what I'm addressing.

[deadly7]

I don't care about legality.  That's not what I'm addressing.

You can't say something is stealing without a legal footing. Except under extreme situations (e.g. post Katrina NO residents "stealing" food from groceries) stealing has a legal definition. Whether your moral definition is the same doesn't really matter. Nor does your ISP give a shit if you think it's immoral to have a secured WIFI connection: if it's in their TOS that you don't distribute it they can kick you off.

[Sidoh]

I don't care about legality.  That's not what I'm addressing.

You can't say something is stealing without a legal footing. Except under extreme situations (e.g. post Katrina NO residents "stealing" food from groceries) stealing has a legal definition. Whether your moral definition is the same doesn't really matter. Nor does your ISP give a shit if you think it's immoral to have a secured WIFI connection: if it's in their TOS that you don't distribute it they can kick you off.

Uh, yes I can.  What's legal is based on some philosophy, and it's the philosophy I'm interested in, not the resulting conclusions.  I can define stealing outside of a legal context, and I can arbitrate what's legal and not without mention of the law.

Again -- I don't care what the ISPs think, and it's completely irrelevant to the discussion I'm interested in.

[Ender]

I don't care about legality.  That's not what I'm addressing.

You can't say something is stealing without a legal footing. Except under extreme situations (e.g. post Katrina NO residents "stealing" food from groceries) stealing has a legal definition. Whether your moral definition is the same doesn't really matter. Nor does your ISP give a shit if you think it's immoral to have a secured WIFI connection: if it's in their TOS that you don't distribute it they can kick you off.

Uh, yes I can.  What's legal is based on some philosophy, and it's the philosophy I'm interested in, not the resulting conclusions.  I can define stealing outside of a legal context, and I can arbitrate what's legal and not without mention of the law.

Again -- I don't care what the ISPs think, and it's completely irrelevant to the discussion I'm interested in.

Yeah, I pretty much agree with Sidoh. Torrenting music is also illegal and I think everyone here does that. You can't say that piggybacking off an unsecured wifi is stealing if you don't agree that torrenting music is stealing. And if you do admit to this, then you must admit that stealing is not necessarily so bad, is it?

This is why we are more interested in the morality of the issue. Stealing money from someone does harm to them because you are taking away their resources. But stealing wifi does no harm. In fact, stealing music online is even worse than stealing wifi, because you actually take money away from the artists and producers.

[Hitmen]

In fact, stealing music online is even worse than stealing wifi, because you actually take money away from the artists and producers record labels.

Fixed!

[iago]

In fact, stealing music online is even worse than stealing wifi, because you actually take money away from the artists and producers record labels assuming you were going to buy the music in the first place, but you didn't because you downloaded it instead.

Fixed!

Fixed some more.

[Ender]

You could apply the same argument to stealing wifi. It's only stealing "assuming you were going to pay for your own wifi, but you used your neighbor's instead".

iago you're just digging yourself a deeper and deeper hole.

[iago]

You could apply the same argument to stealing wifi. It's only stealing "assuming you were going to pay for your own wifi, but you used your neighbor's instead".

The only argument I've really supported in this is that I think it's ok to steal wifi on occasion, but that it's dangerous. That actually supports it -- stealing wifi full time isn't right, but it's ok if you need a temporary connection.

iago you're just digging yourself a deeper and deeper hole.

That's one of those unnecessary lines/hooks that warrior (and others) use to turn debates into conflicts -- they don't solve anything, but they piss people off at each other. I'd appreciate it if you (and others) didn't use them.

[Ender]

My argument is that stealing wifi is no worse than stealing music online. Do you disagree, iago?

[iago]

My argument is that stealing wifi is no worse than stealing music online. Do you disagree, iago?

Nope. In fact, I wouldn't even call either 'stealing' -- it's copyright infringement for music, and piggybacking for wifi.

I don't think either are right in every situation, and I think both pose some risk to both the user and the supplier. And naturally, they have their own nuances that make them somewhat different. But, by and large, I don't think there's a significant difference.

[Ender]

Ok. Cool. Well deadly, I think you're pretty much beaten here, because I assume you download music illegally, so you'll have to admit to yourself being a thief.