Bright House Tampa Bay rings in a very Happy New Year to most customers for 2006

[amc11890]

MAN some people in this forum really need to relax and stop starting arguments over something that doesnt even concern them

[amc11890]

That's what I figured, but I would still be sure that you do have his consent, just to CYOA.

I fail to see my responsibility to do this.

Yeah ill prob get there consent and also let them no that they have a open wirless network that should be secured

[resopalrabotnick]

I fail to see my responsibility to do this.

i never said you were responsible for it, but it would be the responsible thing to do. besides, you would be helping out a guy that has at least one guy and possibly more leaching his speed. he is probably wondering why his net is always so much slower than advertised speeds. and if one of the leechers dl's stuff in violation of the law he ends up responsible for it.

help educate the world one user at a time. and i'm not telling you to rat out amc, just to inform bright house that they have a user that needs help.

[Guest thecableguy]

i was complaing about the rates not just for internet but for cable TV as well.

[amc11890]

You never mentioned anything about cable rates.  Besides, there are 3 cable companies in this area, check the prices, they are all within about $4.00 of each other on the average persons bill.  You want to complain about something.  Complain about the state, local and federal taxes that must be added to each and every cable bill.  On the average it's about $4.00 for the state, $4.90 for the local and about $2.10 for federal.  And thats not per year.....but per month. 

yeah i guess or i can just install a splitter on someones cable and get it for free as well

of course i have no clue on how to do this and would never do it even if i new how

[Guest thecableguy]

yeah i guess or i can just install a splitter on someones cable and get it for free as well

of course i have no clue on how to do this and would never do it even if i new how

Then how do you know what a splitter is and how it would be used for exactly that purpose?  stop while you are ahead....your case was better when you appeared to just a be a clueless kid trying to have some fun at the neighbors expense.  Anyway...this is way off topic....the original topic was that people in this market are getting a break this year.  And that's good news any way ya slice it.

Have a happy.....

[resopalrabotnick]

yeah i guess or i can just install a splitter on someones cable and get it for free as well

of course i have no clue on how to do this and would never do it even if i new how

splitters only work for the analog cable. digital cable usually has a settop box like directv or dish network that has one decoder card per box to descramble the signal, deal with pay-per-view etc. etc.etc.

[amc11890]

Then how do you know what a splitter is and how it would be used for exactly that purpose?  stop while you are ahead....your case was better when you appeared to just a be a clueless kid trying to have some fun at the neighbors expense.  Anyway...this is way off topic....the original topic was that people in this market are getting a break this year.  And that's good news any way ya slice it.

Have a happy.....

ummm.....actually i learned this from a sitcom.. i would never actually do this

[FallowEarth]

Yeah ill prob get there consent and also let them no that they have a open wirless network that should be secured

The perfect response.  There, I believe the issue is settled.

[amc11890]

I think that is enough arguments for today

[Guest thecableguy]

The perfect response.

They might just give him a $20 for helpin them out.  Then again they could be the paranoid clueless neighbor from **** who freaks out upon the news and has the cops there in 20 minutes.  Ahhh the risks we take just being honest.....makes life spicey don't ya think!

[resopalrabotnick]

now he walks over tp the neighbor, gives his spiel, and it turns out that the guys router /is/ secured. so now the person who's implied consent to use the connection he had isn't the one that has the connection he is using. uh oh. how will the other guy who'm he doesn't know so well react when he tells him that he has 'accidentally' used his connection....

[amc11890]

i have 3 wirless networks in range so ppl around me trust each other

Hey maybe ill open mine up and we can be one big internet sharing family

[Guest thecableguy]

I think that is enough arguments for today

Now AMC, helping the neighbor lock his network down does not mean you also keep a copy of the WEP key (assuming you use only WEP...please.....don't just use WEP....hackable in minutes in most cases).  Just messin with ya.....you are a good sport....keep it up....exploring and being curious is good, just be prepared for what you might find and always do the right thing in the end....

[Guest thecableguy]

now he walks over tp the neighbor, gives his spiel, and it turns out that the guys router /is/ secured. so now the person who's implied consent to use the connection he had isn't the one that has the connection he is using. uh oh. how will the other guy who'm he doesn't know so well react when he tells him that he has 'accidentally' used his connection....

Yer eeevillll!

[resopalrabotnick]

lack of knowledge of a security problem is not trust. it's ignorance. why do you think aohell is still in business. because there are many people out there that just don't know any better.

every open network in range of you is probably the result of the user buying a router tyo hook up the 2 or 3 desktops in his house and the wireless being on unsecured by default. he comes home from radio shack where they of course sell him the more pricey wireless model router and plugs it in and voila! free internet for anyone in range. without his knowledge, hence without his trust.

[FallowEarth]

i have 3 wirless networks in range so ppl around me trust each other

That may well be true, but you may want to get their consent to use their network so that you are not violating their trust.

[Guest thecableguy]

lack of knowledge of a security problem is not trust. it's ignorance. why do you think aohell is still in business. because there are many people out there that just don't know any better.

every open network in range of you is probably the result of the user buying a router tyo hook up the 2 or 3 desktops in his house and the wireless being on unsecured by default. he comes home from radio shack where they of course sell him the more pricey wireless model router and plugs it in and voila! free internet for anyone in range. without his knowledge, hence without his trust.

And I always thought that AOLHELL was still in business because its nearly impossible to get them to stop billing your credit card......shy of closing the credit card account that is....

[amc11890]

And I always thought that AOLHELL was still in business because its nearly impossible to get them to stop billing your credit card......shy of closing the credit card account that is....

i used to have aol had spam coming out of my ears

[FallowEarth]

I believe AOL is still a major contender because they appeal to the non-techy peeps; the majority of Internet users, believe it or not.

[resopalrabotnick]

exactly the kind of people that inadvertently run a wireless access point.

[FallowEarth]

exactly the kind of people that inadvertently run a wireless access point.

True, but then, how would you know to secure the signal if you don't know anything about the technology, and nobody has told you?  I think that maybe the fault is the lack of education on the end of the vendor or ISP.  Then again, the router probably comes with a manual....

[Guest thecableguy]

exactly the kind of people that inadvertently run a wireless access point.

Actually, most AOL Broadband customers who actually pay a local ISP for an AOL specific account are VPN tunnled to AOL.

[Guest thecableguy]

True, but then, how would you know to secure the signal if you don't know anything about the technology, and nobody has told you?

[resopalrabotnick]

all of which confirms my point about an open net being a result of ignorace, not trust. implying trust in a case like that would probably be seen as malicious abuse knowing full well consent is not given by any jury.