Comments on: In Defense of “Piggybacking” http://techliberation.com/2006/03/05/in-defense-of-piggybacking/ Keeping politicians' hands off the Net & everything else related to technology Fri, 19 Mar 2010 23:45:28 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Shawn http://techliberation.com/2006/03/05/in-defense-of-piggybacking/comment-page-1/#comment-53762 Shawn Tue, 25 Apr 2006 23:35:05 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/03/05/in-defense-of-piggybacking/#comment-53762 You guys are letting the small details obscure the big picture..... Big dollar computing companies never want you to have anything for FREE, henceforth the media bias of piggybackers portrayed as thieves.<br><br>If computer users start getting stuff for free, then people that drive BMW's and Escalades might have to drive more sensible vehicles like the rest of us. You guys are letting the small details obscure the big picture….. Big dollar computing companies never want you to have anything for FREE, henceforth the media bias of piggybackers portrayed as thieves.

If computer users start getting stuff for free, then people that drive BMW’s and Escalades might have to drive more sensible vehicles like the rest of us.

]]> By: Shawn http://techliberation.com/2006/03/05/in-defense-of-piggybacking/comment-page-1/#comment-32878 Shawn Tue, 25 Apr 2006 22:35:05 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/03/05/in-defense-of-piggybacking/#comment-32878 You guys are letting the small details obscure the big picture..... Big dollar computing companies never want you to have anything for FREE, henceforth the media bias of piggybackers portrayed as thieves. If computer users start getting stuff for free, then people that drive BMW's and Escalades might have to drive more sensible vehicles like the rest of us. You guys are letting the small details obscure the big picture….. Big dollar computing companies never want you to have anything for FREE, henceforth the media bias of piggybackers portrayed as thieves.

If computer users start getting stuff for free, then people that drive BMW’s and Escalades might have to drive more sensible vehicles like the rest of us.

]]> By: Peter http://techliberation.com/2006/03/05/in-defense-of-piggybacking/comment-page-1/#comment-32877 Peter Tue, 07 Mar 2006 03:06:55 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/03/05/in-defense-of-piggybacking/#comment-32877 Okay, let me get this straight: It's okay to FORCE people to pay for wireless all over with a taxpayer funded wi-fi, but.... <p> ...it's NOT OKAY for people to SHARE their wi-fi on personal expense? </p> Okay, let me get this straight:

It’s okay to FORCE people to pay for wireless all over with a taxpayer funded wi-fi, but….

…it’s NOT OKAY for people to SHARE their wi-fi on personal expense?

]]> By: Peter http://techliberation.com/2006/03/05/in-defense-of-piggybacking/comment-page-1/#comment-53761 Peter Tue, 07 Mar 2006 03:06:55 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/03/05/in-defense-of-piggybacking/#comment-53761 Okay, let me get this straight:<br><br>It's okay to FORCE people to pay for wireless all over with a taxpayer funded wi-fi, but....<br><p><br>...it's NOT OKAY for people to SHARE their wi-fi on personal expense?<br></p> Okay, let me get this straight:

It’s okay to FORCE people to pay for wireless all over with a taxpayer funded wi-fi, but….

…it’s NOT OKAY for people to SHARE their wi-fi on personal expense?

]]> By: Tim http://techliberation.com/2006/03/05/in-defense-of-piggybacking/comment-page-1/#comment-32876 Tim Mon, 06 Mar 2006 19:10:40 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/03/05/in-defense-of-piggybacking/#comment-32876 Oh, that's another important difference. Oh, that’s another important difference.

]]> By: Tim http://techliberation.com/2006/03/05/in-defense-of-piggybacking/comment-page-1/#comment-53760 Tim Mon, 06 Mar 2006 19:10:40 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/03/05/in-defense-of-piggybacking/#comment-53760 Oh, that's another important difference. Oh, that’s another important difference.

]]> By: Ned Ulbricht http://techliberation.com/2006/03/05/in-defense-of-piggybacking/comment-page-1/#comment-32875 Ned Ulbricht Mon, 06 Mar 2006 18:47:12 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/03/05/in-defense-of-piggybacking/#comment-32875 <p>Hmmm...</p> <p>That isn't quite the "amplification" argument I was making. With SMTP relay, a single incoming transaction with multiple RCPT TO addresses (<a href="http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2821.txt" rel="nofollow">3.3; p.15</a>) can result in multiple outgoing sessions.</p> Hmmm…

That isn’t quite the “amplification” argument I was making. With SMTP relay, a single incoming transaction with multiple RCPT TO addresses (3.3; p.15) can result in multiple outgoing sessions.

]]> By: Ned Ulbricht http://techliberation.com/2006/03/05/in-defense-of-piggybacking/comment-page-1/#comment-53759 Ned Ulbricht Mon, 06 Mar 2006 18:47:12 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/03/05/in-defense-of-piggybacking/#comment-53759 <p>Hmmm...</p><br><p>That isn't quite the "amplification" argument I was making. With SMTP relay, a single incoming transaction with multiple RCPT TO addresses (<a href="http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2821.txt" rel="nofollow">3.3; p.15</a>) can result in multiple outgoing sessions.</p> Hmmm…

That isn’t quite the “amplification” argument I was making. With SMTP relay, a single incoming transaction with multiple RCPT TO addresses (3.3; p.15) can result in multiple outgoing sessions.

]]> By: Tim http://techliberation.com/2006/03/05/in-defense-of-piggybacking/comment-page-1/#comment-32874 Tim Mon, 06 Mar 2006 14:24:49 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/03/05/in-defense-of-piggybacking/#comment-32874 Right, with SMTP, the problem is that the whole world is your neighbor, so even if only one in a million people is up to something bad, that still leaves several hundred people who could do bad things with your open relay. In contrast, I only have half a dozen neighbors, so the odds that one of them will do something really bad with my Internet connection is very small. Right, with SMTP, the problem is that the whole world is your neighbor, so even if only one in a million people is up to something bad, that still leaves several hundred people who could do bad things with your open relay.

In contrast, I only have half a dozen neighbors, so the odds that one of them will do something really bad with my Internet connection is very small.

]]> By: Tim http://techliberation.com/2006/03/05/in-defense-of-piggybacking/comment-page-1/#comment-53758 Tim Mon, 06 Mar 2006 14:24:49 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/03/05/in-defense-of-piggybacking/#comment-53758 Right, with SMTP, the problem is that the whole world is your neighbor, so even if only one in a million people is up to something bad, that still leaves several hundred people who could do bad things with your open relay.<br><br>In contrast, I only have half a dozen neighbors, so the odds that one of them will do something really bad with my Internet connection is very small. Right, with SMTP, the problem is that the whole world is your neighbor, so even if only one in a million people is up to something bad, that still leaves several hundred people who could do bad things with your open relay.

In contrast, I only have half a dozen neighbors, so the odds that one of them will do something really bad with my Internet connection is very small.

]]> By: Ned Ulbricht http://techliberation.com/2006/03/05/in-defense-of-piggybacking/comment-page-1/#comment-32873 Ned Ulbricht Sun, 05 Mar 2006 19:38:51 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/03/05/in-defense-of-piggybacking/#comment-32873 <p>In a certain sense, this reminds me of the old arguments for and against closing promiscuously open email relays. The chief difference I see is that open wireless access points don't have a multiplier effect like <a href="http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2821.txt" rel="nofollow">(E)SMTP</a> relay does. Without an amplifying factor, there doesn't seem to be a similar detrimental impact on global system stability.</p> <p>Further, in a world of global ip connectivity there really isn't much of a case favoring (non-abusive) third-party email relay. Contrariwise, increased ip connectivity sounds like a general good.</p> In a certain sense, this reminds me of the old arguments for and against closing promiscuously open email relays. The chief difference I see is that open wireless access points don’t have a multiplier effect like (E)SMTP relay does. Without an amplifying factor, there doesn’t seem to be a similar detrimental impact on global system stability.

Further, in a world of global ip connectivity there really isn’t much of a case favoring (non-abusive) third-party email relay. Contrariwise, increased ip connectivity sounds like a general good.

]]> By: Ned Ulbricht http://techliberation.com/2006/03/05/in-defense-of-piggybacking/comment-page-1/#comment-53757 Ned Ulbricht Sun, 05 Mar 2006 19:38:51 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/03/05/in-defense-of-piggybacking/#comment-53757 <p>In a certain sense, this reminds me of the old arguments for and against closing promiscuously open email relays. The chief difference I see is that open wireless access points don't have a multiplier effect like <a href="http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2821.txt" rel="nofollow">(E)SMTP</a> relay does. Without an amplifying factor, there doesn't seem to be a similar detrimental impact on global system stability.</p><br><p>Further, in a world of global ip connectivity there really isn't much of a case favoring (non-abusive) third-party email relay. Contrariwise, increased ip connectivity sounds like a general good.</p> In a certain sense, this reminds me of the old arguments for and against closing promiscuously open email relays. The chief difference I see is that open wireless access points don’t have a multiplier effect like (E)SMTP relay does. Without an amplifying factor, there doesn’t seem to be a similar detrimental impact on global system stability.

Further, in a world of global ip connectivity there really isn’t much of a case favoring (non-abusive) third-party email relay. Contrariwise, increased ip connectivity sounds like a general good.

]]>