It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

WIFI - Conspiracy or Scam... ?

page: 3
2
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 09:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Tiloke
 


LOL
Now you're comparing me, a college student with barely any income who decides to sparingly use a neighbor's wifi connection, to a RAPIST??

This is just pathetic.

It is exactly that kind of thinking in this country that gives more jail time to nonviolent drug users than to actual rapists or violent offenders.

Seriously, take it down a notch.

And yes, you're right. I WILL have a short-lived stay on ATS, if others on this site show the same lack of any logic.

BTW, the fact that I'm doing this for free while you're paying makes it that much sweeter.




posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 10:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by XL5
You can not treat radio or soundwaves that are transmitted as "items". If the neighbours have their music turned up too loud and I can hear it, can I get the police to send them to jail because its a PUBLIC PREFORMANCE? If I can, then ungaurded WiFi is also a public preformance as well.


So, I can listen in on your cell phone calls right? Nope, that's a felony.



If it rains on my property and I stop using tap water, am I stealing from whoever I pay for water?


No, but you are if you hook up to your neighbors supply and use that.

If two of my neighbours are having sex and are being way too loud, am I invading their privacy?

No, but if you join in without them knowing (like stealing internet) by spying through the window it is a different story.


This kind of thing is not an "item" as it washes over and through you.


Neither are cell phone minutes, does that mean if you don't use them all in one month I am entitled to use your phone to make calls?

The signal may not be an "item" but MY router and MY internet connection are. Leaving them open by no means means you are allowed to help yourself anymore then you leaving your apartment open entitle me to enter and use your facilities.


[edit on 13-3-2009 by Tiloke]



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 10:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by badkarma90
reply to post by Tiloke
 


LOL
Now you're comparing me, a college student with barely any income who decides to sparingly use a neighbor's wifi connection, to a RAPIST??

This is just pathetic.


Then don't use the same rationale that they do.


It is exactly that kind of thinking in this country that gives more jail time to nonviolent drug users than to actual rapists or violent offenders.

Seriously, take it down a notch.


Gotcha, it's all my fault that druggies are in prison.



And yes, you're right. I WILL have a short-lived stay on ATS, if others on this site show the same lack of any logic.

BTW, the fact that I'm doing this for free while you're paying makes it that much sweeter.


Good riddance.



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 10:17 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 


XL5

posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 10:37 PM
link   
If you did not use a hack device/software, then yes, listen to my calls. If I don't lock it knowing that its open to people who want to listen, then its MY duty to lock the signal, if you hack it, then and only then is it illegal.

As per the sex, I'm only talking about the sounds. If they know I can hear it, they can not say I was invading their privacy, I said nothing about joining them. I'm not talking about the physical, because its NOT.

If its a physical object, its different. If area51 put (non encriptid/protected) top secret pdf. files on the WWW or even links to their servers even though you need top secret clearance to see/use without a lock, its their problem. Would that be grounds to sue ATS?


[edit on 13-3-2009 by XL5]



posted on Mar, 13 2009 @ 10:48 PM
link   
Well anyone who has wifi without full encryption and passwords is an idiot.
However even with these, it is possible for someone with very advanced expensive equipment to sit outside your home and collect the data.
And try and decrypt it.
So yes the government could record your wifi data and find out what it is.
However why would they go to the trouble to do this, when they can just monitor you through the fiber optic pipes?



posted on Mar, 14 2009 @ 01:32 PM
link   
Simple fact, you let your wifi access open without any encryption and someone is using it : your own fault and dont complain

Your wifi use a password and someone cracked it: that person is stealin your bandwith

simple FACT !!!

you have to learn to stop whining and compare peoples to rapist for such ridiculous events

If your wifi acces is not encrypted , its YOUR fault and you only can blame YOURSELF .



posted on Mar, 15 2009 @ 11:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by XL5
If you did not use a hack device/software, then yes, listen to my calls. If I don't lock it knowing that its open to people who want to listen, then its MY duty to lock the signal, if you hack it, then and only then is it illegal.


I didn't ask for your opinion. I asked what the LAW says. If I did that, no matter how I did it it would be a felony.


As per the sex, I'm only talking about the sounds. If they know I can hear it, they can not say I was invading their privacy, I said nothing about joining them. I'm not talking about the physical, because its NOT.


Bullcrap, You are PHYSICALLY LOGGING IN TO MY ROUTER. Wether it's done with wires or radio-waves makes ZERO difference. You are not simply listening.



posted on Mar, 15 2009 @ 11:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by OTTOKARMA
Simple fact, you let your wifi access open without any encryption and someone is using it : your own fault and dont complain

Your wifi use a password and someone cracked it: that person is stealin your bandwith

simple FACT !!!

you have to learn to stop whining and compare peoples to rapist for such ridiculous events

If your wifi acces is not encrypted , its YOUR fault and you only can blame YOURSELF .







Yet another "she was asking for it" response.


XL5

posted on Mar, 16 2009 @ 12:58 AM
link   
Tiloke, you said "So, I can listen in on your cell phone calls right? Nope, that's a felony". So why ask my opinion then "possibly" edit in the felony part? Even if you didn't edit it in, thats redundent.

So if you consider radio waves to be an item and want to be 101% legal then have a look at this link.
downloads.trendnet.ru...(v2).pdf

"Operation of these devices in a residential area is likely to cause harmful interference which will make the user responsible for the appropriate remedial action at his/her own expense."

Alot of WIFI units say this on the back or in the booklet. So givin that you know the law, does this mean, if some ones WIFI gives me bad radio reception I can get them to turn it off at their expense. Does it mean that if my computer logs on to his WIFI because his signal is stronger and my computer uses the stonger signal by default, that he is responsible for putting a password on it at his expense? Which is it, has to be one of the two or both.

en.wikipedia.org...

"Piggybacking is often unintentional. Most access points are configured without encryption by default, and operating systems such as Windows XP SP2 and Mac OS X may be configured to automatically connect to any available wireless network. A user who happens to start up a laptop in the vicinity of an access point may find the computer has joined the network without any visible indication. "

So if I'm at the airport or starbucks, do I need to find and ask the owner if its free? Is it the airports wallet or is it yours, do they state "free WIFI" in the airport or starbucks?

The FCC has regulations for radio stations and their broadcasting, it is the responsibility of the station to make sure no one swears or that death threats are not aired. The station transmits, we tune in for free, they can not charge for a signal that can be recieved for free from an unhacked device, thus, they are responsible for the outgoing signal. WIFI is not something people need a licence for, but if the FCC states that the user thats trasmitting the WIFI signal is responsible for the outgoing interference then they are responsible for any "damages". It does not define that the damages only pertain to OTHER peoples stuff, nor does it state the type of damage or harmful interference.



posted on Mar, 16 2009 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Tiloke
 


A wireless router isn't passive, or contained within the home or business of the owner. It actively broadcasts a radio signal dozens or hundreds of feet in 360 degrees. If you can see your neighbor's network on your computer, that means he's breaking into YOUR house, not that you're breaking into his. That signal penetrates your walls and your body (the full effect on health has yet to be determined conclusively) and, of course, your computer. He's affecting to a small degree what's going on inside your computer. (What gives him the right to use YOUR property?)

If you connect via the signal of your neighbor's router, you're connecting to something that is inside your home, and has been placed inside your home without your permission. So it's not like breaking into your neighbor's house to eat his food. It's more like your neighbor breaks into your house without your permission and leaves his food in your refrigerator. If you eat it, the legality or ethics of that usage or consumption is different, isn't it?

Of course, the law is the law, and using someone's Wi-Fi network has been prosecuted in the past. I'm not saying you should break the law, and "steal" bandwidth via someone else's Wi-Fi network.

But I am saying that it shouldn't be illegal to use an open Wi-Fi network, nor should it be considered unethical. I'm saying the laws should change, and our thinking about it should change, too.

If anyone doesn't want people using their network, all they have to do is configure their router to stop granting permission.



posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 12:07 AM
link   


Yet another "she was asking for it" response.


what a proof of subtil comparison......

in your mind using your neighbor WIFI because he didnt set a password is equal to raping someone ?

Please.......go back to school and try to learn something.

[edit on 17-3-2009 by OTTOKARMA]



posted on Mar, 17 2009 @ 01:25 AM
link   


So if I'm at the airport or starbucks, do I need to find and ask the owner if its free? Is it the airports wallet or is it yours, do they state "free WIFI" in the airport or starbucks?


Actually, many do. My library, the coffee cafe downtown, the Perkin's restaurant, all have signs or little posters or messages stating "Wi-Fi HotSpot" or "Free Wireless Access" or something in that nature. My library even has a little flier that they give out that explains all about their service, who actually pays for it, etc.

I wanted to add, regarding that Wi-Fi signals come into someone's house / etc - what about satellite ( like Dish, DirecTV, etc ) those are beaned all over - including into my home. I can go to a radio shack or online, get a box or instructions to make a box and get those signals and watch TV for free. But, is it free? Its coming into my home, isn't it?




top topics



 
2
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join