Simon

Cumbria

IT

I can see where Peter is coming from, but he still seems to labour the idea of a free lunch ! These services are not free, just as the soap etc provided in the hotel room is not really free - it is paid for somehow, the difference is that it seems the places he talks about have figured that they can use it as a marketing tool.

The hotels havn't done it out of a sense of public spirit, they are doing it because (correctly it seems) they can use it as a differentiator from those that don't. The sandwich vendor is obviously doing it because he believes that he will make more from selling a few extra sandwiches than it costs to provide the service.

I don't have a problem with allowing people to use any spare capacity on my networks (though I don't at present control any with wireless), but only as long as those using it respect the other side of the 'social contract' involved - ie that they don't abuse it. Since there are regular stories of people abusing other peoples networks, I very much doubt if I could realistically allow totally unfettered and unrestricted use of any network - I would want to put in place sufficient safeguards that I would not find myself having to 'take the blame' for something unpleasant having been done via my network, and also put in place measures to ensure that I did not find my own use of the network compromised by public use. So for me the question would not be "do I do it", but "does the cost/effort of protecting myself and my network justify doing it" ?