you know, I didn't even think about it. When we set it up, the Telus guy was in my house telling me what to do, so we have password protected wifi. I probably would be okay with having it open, since our network seems to have gotten corrupted despite the password, at some point earlier this year... but I'm lazy. And I like knowing that I can still download stuff on our cheap-ass internet deal, without worrying that someone else has run us to our maximum download limit for the month.

I used to, Tay, before Keri made me change it...

I see. I thought you meant you also didn't buy his arguments in the quote that you provided.

Just curious though... anyone else on here make a conscious decision to keep their wifi network publicly accessible?

I've got a feeling I'm in the minority on this one, although I still stand by my decision.

HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO THE TOP DUCK.

Happy Birthday Percy! Where ever you are...

Sorry, I should have been more clear: I don't buy all his arguments. For sure, there's something to be said about share-and-share-alike. What you describe sounds most excellent (I would love to be able to check my email anywhere.) And if that's a possible future (and I'm not dismissing it) I'd love to see it. (That's why municipal wi-fi intrigues me so much, despite the fact that it's tied down to ridiculous bureaucracy and resisted by even more ridiculous corporate interest.)

But on the part of his argument about open networks decreasing your legal liability I remain unconvinced. There's a certain responsibility you bear with respect to use of your internet. And, while it's not a perfect analogy, I doubt you could argue that you have no liability for the hit-and-run your car was used for if you claim you just leave your keys in the car all the time.

Still, like I said, it's an argument worth considering.

haha, you don't buy his arguments for an open network? I came to the same conclusion as he did when I first set up my wireless network at home. I made a conscious decision to keep it as publicly accessible as possible. If I'm using public airspace I think it's just courteous that it be available to the public. Don't you wish you could set up your laptop ANYWHERE and find a decent wifi connection? If everyone left their networks open, this dream would be REALITY (and I could ditch my cell phone in favour of a voip-based portable phone and save a great deal of money).

I strongly believe in an anarchist approach to information access. I also view an open network policy as an extension to supporting freedom of speech.

Obviously, there's always the threat of network-spread viruses... but if we're constantly living in fear, the terrorists have won, haha.

Honestly though, that's a risk I'm totally willing to take. I've had no problems so far (2 years), and when I run "netstat" (run it as a command from cmd.exe if you've never tried it before) it's clear that my neighbours aren't abusing their privelleges. Not only that, but visitors to Castle Awesome regularly bring their own laptops and connect to the "castle awesome" network. And honestly I'd much rather they do that to check their e-mail than use my personal system.

I'm totally for open networks.

Why does Yul Brynner always look so damned creepy?

Claire Forlani? Haven't heard that name in a long time. But like I say people still have to eat.

From: Canada.com

Review: In The Name of the King

- based on a video game
- Burt Reynolds plays a medieval king
- tells the story of a farmer named Farmer (Jason Statham)
- who must rescue his kidnapped wife (Claire Forlani, sadly not named Wife)
- Matthew Lillard, who plays the king's snivelling nephew.
- many battles, one of which features the king's ninja bodyguards

- tour de force of something, and it's probably best viewed in an auditorium filled with drunken college students.


Wow. Now I actually want to see this movie.