maemo.org - Talk - View Single Post - Man arrested for stealing (wifi) broadband

	Texrat	2007-08-23 , 18:30
	Posts: 11,700 \| Thanked: 10,045 times \| Joined on Jun 2006 @ North Texas, USA	#25

Originally Posted by Liam1

Texrat,

Do you have a personal issue with my posts? A lot of other posts do not agree with your views, but I do not see you taking your precious time for personal attacks on them.

No personal issue, just that in 2 threads now you show a tendency to prefer sarcasm and disingenuity over reasonable discourse, and I pointed it out. Your right to use whatever mode of communication you like, of course, but surely you're aware that such tactics will be taken to task.

I am not going to rebut every single post created, either, but rather the most egregious examples of flawed reasoning. I'm also not going to argue with those with whom I mildly disagree, either, or over points of pure opinion.

I did not comment on the 2-way argument as it is flawed to begin with, however you seem to conveniently agree with anything that remotely agrees with your views, and disregarding multiple posts by different people that have other ideas on the issue.

I'm sure if you think about what you just said about agreement there you'll be able to spot the silliness. And the 2-way argument is not flawed at all, but critically relevant to the issue. That should be self-obvious and needing no further explanation than what has been provided.

A wifi stream can only be two way like the light and flashlight example, if somebody retaliated with another wifi stream into the initial wifi stream owner's house. Then its a two way wifi stream, just like the flashlight example. As you can see, the two way stream is not a valid argument, and so is the flashlight example.

No. Completely wrong. It is 2-way because there is advertisement (out) and usage (in).

And you misunderstand the flashlight example. Try again (see Barry's clarification).

Arguing on analogies for this issue is futile, which as I said is a slippery slope. My only point was (which you conveniently ignored) while the law deems unauthorized wifi usage illegal, reasonable doubt can immediately be established by a competent lawyer.

Your last comment is why we have a legal system. Every accused has his/her right to plead their case. Now, if you want to posit that arrest for wifi infringement is over-the-top, I'd be inclined to agree. I think it should be a civil fine.

As far as analogies go, arguing valid ones is only futile when people argue to win, or solely to argue, as you appear to do. Get in line though; you have some competition here on those grounds. You'll find such trolling is not very welcome here.

Last edited by Texrat; 2007-08-23 at 18:32.