5 ms·

Because freeloaders and/or malicious actors will abuse my generosity

wizzwizz4 2y ago
Freeloaders? Well, yeah: isn't that the whole point? We're all freeloaders, in some sense, unless you think you've earned the water you drink and the air you breathe. By giving back to the Freeloader-available Resource Pool (the commons), you're becoming less of a freeloader. Malicious actors? That relies on there being malicious actors physically near you, which isn't necessarily a valid assumption. Set up a DMZ, try it, and see.
- sandworm101 2y ago
  Your view will change once you see your home IP address on the search warrant. And no, i am not going to invite the public to share in my vpn too.
  - wizzwizz4 2y ago
    (A) That's not how search warrants work. (B) Having your computers spuriously seized for a police investigation is a risk shared by every computer user, but those investigations cost money. They don't tend to seize your hardware frivolously, except to intimidate (fairly common for security researchers, for some reason). If you have a public Wi-Fi network, and there's no reason to believe you're a culprit, they're more likely to ask you to keep MAC address logs, or shut down the public Wi-Fi network, than assume you dunnit and try to prosecute with insufficient evidence. You're at far more risk running a Tor exit node than a public Wi-Fi network, and most Tor exit nodes don't get raided by the police. Your neighbours are probably not cybercriminals. It's probably okay to be nice to them.
    - sandworm101 2y ago
      >> having your computers spuriously seized for a police investigation is a risk shared by every computer user Not where i live. We have layers of rules specifically designed to prevent random actions by police.
      - wizzwizz4 2y ago
        It's not the street-level police who sign the warrants for seizing computer hardware. Yes, the risk is quite low, but it's a risk shared by any occupant of an INTERPOL member state.
- throwaway22032 2y ago
  Well, I've certainly earned the plumbing system that supplies the water to my house, I pay for it and my labour indirectly supports the building out of that system. WiFi isn't some sort of aether, it is created.
- dylan604 2y ago
  > unless you think you've earned the water you drink Earned? WTF logic is that? I pay for the water I drink. What in the world are you on about?
- stackghost 2y ago
  >Set up a DMZ, try it, and see No, I don't think I will. I will continue to keep my wifi password protected so that randoms can't degrade my Internet speed by torrenting movies 24/7, send death threats to public officials from my IP address, or engage in other unsavory activities. Not sure why you are equating a natural resource like air with a paid service like Internet connectivity, but it comes off as bizarre and naive at best.
  - sulandor 2y ago
    probably worlds colliding some ppl view "internet service" similar as access to drinking water, which some countries have legal obligations for and the public sentiment would be very much against you if you deny it to any stranger. some countries/ppl not so much
    - wizzwizz4 2y ago
      Worse than that, some jurisdictions double-dip: regulate internet access like a utility, but treat it as a private resource (allowing regional monopolies that provide barely-usable service and set their own prices); make an internet connection legally mandatory (via a combination of employment, banking, and anti-homeless laws), but decline to fund public libraries (which provide internet access to those who otherwise don't have it).

Freeloaders? Well, yeah: isn't that the whole point? We're all freeloaders, in some sense, unless you think you've earned the water you drink and the air you breathe. By giving back to the Freeloader-available Resource Pool (the commons), you're becoming less of a freeloader. Malicious actors? That relies on there being malicious actors physically near you, which isn't necessarily a valid assumption. Set up a DMZ, try it, and see.

sandworm101 2y ago
Your view will change once you see your home IP address on the search warrant. And no, i am not going to invite the public to share in my vpn too.
- wizzwizz4 2y ago
  (A) That's not how search warrants work. (B) Having your computers spuriously seized for a police investigation is a risk shared by every computer user, but those investigations cost money. They don't tend to seize your hardware frivolously, except to intimidate (fairly common for security researchers, for some reason). If you have a public Wi-Fi network, and there's no reason to believe you're a culprit, they're more likely to ask you to keep MAC address logs, or shut down the public Wi-Fi network, than assume you dunnit and try to prosecute with insufficient evidence. You're at far more risk running a Tor exit node than a public Wi-Fi network, and most Tor exit nodes don't get raided by the police. Your neighbours are probably not cybercriminals. It's probably okay to be nice to them.
  - sandworm101 2y ago
    >> having your computers spuriously seized for a police investigation is a risk shared by every computer user Not where i live. We have layers of rules specifically designed to prevent random actions by police.
    - wizzwizz4 2y ago
      It's not the street-level police who sign the warrants for seizing computer hardware. Yes, the risk is quite low, but it's a risk shared by any occupant of an INTERPOL member state.
throwaway22032 2y ago
Well, I've certainly earned the plumbing system that supplies the water to my house, I pay for it and my labour indirectly supports the building out of that system. WiFi isn't some sort of aether, it is created.
dylan604 2y ago
> unless you think you've earned the water you drink Earned? WTF logic is that? I pay for the water I drink. What in the world are you on about?
stackghost 2y ago
>Set up a DMZ, try it, and see No, I don't think I will. I will continue to keep my wifi password protected so that randoms can't degrade my Internet speed by torrenting movies 24/7, send death threats to public officials from my IP address, or engage in other unsavory activities. Not sure why you are equating a natural resource like air with a paid service like Internet connectivity, but it comes off as bizarre and naive at best.
- sulandor 2y ago
  probably worlds colliding some ppl view "internet service" similar as access to drinking water, which some countries have legal obligations for and the public sentiment would be very much against you if you deny it to any stranger. some countries/ppl not so much
  - wizzwizz4 2y ago
    Worse than that, some jurisdictions double-dip: regulate internet access like a utility, but treat it as a private resource (allowing regional monopolies that provide barely-usable service and set their own prices); make an internet connection legally mandatory (via a combination of employment, banking, and anti-homeless laws), but decline to fund public libraries (which provide internet access to those who otherwise don't have it).