NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #27/NN_1992_27.iso/spool/alt/internet/services/1669

Internet Message Format | 1992-11-24 | 3.6 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!olivea!spool.mu.edu!sdd.hp.com!cs.utexas.edu!torn!csd.unb.ca!news.ucs.mun.ca!cs.mun.ca!thom
From: [e-mail] (Thomas Clancy)
Newsgroups: alt.internet.services
Subject: Re: TALK
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 23 Nov 92 15:52:50 GMT
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>  <[e-mail]> <B3r0s*[e-mail]>
Organization: CS Dept., Memorial University of Newfoundland
Lines: 57

[e-mail] (Ernest J. Gainey III) writes:

>In article <[e-mail]>, Matthew A Appler writes:

>> Well, for some there is no option, as telnet is the only way to enter
>> some accounts.  What is the reasoning behind losing ones account for
>> allowing someone else access?  The gain access only to your accuont,
>> and you are responsible for waht occurs with your account.  I'm not
>> flaming, >I'm just curious about the reasoning behind this.
>>

>The reasoning? Well... 1st, you don't belong on the remote system ;-)

>Lets see... Technically, logging into another computer and using someone
>elses account is theft of services... if you don't have an account yourself
>on that system, your not authorized to be there.. and therefore are
>'stealing'... and if they wanted to be jerks, could try to sue you
>or even put you in jail... [note: this is from personal experience *frown*]

Hmm... I fail to see how it is "theft". Take for example, someone buys
a season pass to a swimming pool, Somedays, the person doesn't wish to
go so he lends it to a friend. Now, the "pass" has been paid for and
it entitles one to unlimited [or even limited] access, which means he
can take up "one" spot at any given time [paid for]. What is wrong with
him sending someone in his place? [a proxy perhaps?]. Now I can hear you
screaming "But he didn't PAY for the account", I don't know his particular
situation, but many DO pay in SOME form or other... Whether it be an
outrageous university tuition fee or something else. Of course, here it
is possible to have multiple persons logged in under the one account,
at the SAME time - some would say this is not fair... BUT, what about the
people who log in and jump from machine to machine running a backround
task or two. They would take up as much time/effort/resources/money/etc
as multiple people logged into the one account. 8-) [I am not exactly
sure on the process, just trying to make logical deductions here - perhaps
more modems {if calling from remote} or "physical" terminals would be
taken up - but overall they shoukld be the same no?]

 At any rate, no matter how unfair or illogical it may seem, the person
 shouldn't do it. Why?, simply because it *IS* prohibited. There are
 rules and reg's [some vague and unwritten, some that are even
 constructed "on the fly" ;-) ] for everything, and if you want to use
 something belonged to someone else, regardless if you are paying
 "rent" or not, you still have to follow their rules [landlords lease]
 or lose all priviliges associated with said machine, apartment, car, etc;

Thomas


>                  ______|Home:      [e-mail]
>  Ernest J. Gainey III          \/__\/|Internet: [e-mail]
>                   \\// |Other:    [e-mail]
>Why is it that, as a culture,    \/  |           [e-mail]
>We are more comfortable seeing two  +-----------------------------------------
>Men holding guns than holding hands?|Amiga The Creative Choice! ;-)
>------------------------------------+
>Automated Quote:
>And on the seventh day, He exited from append mode.