Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:It *is* unethical to steal wi-fi (Score 1) 849

by jbash (#23858691) Attached to: Confessions of a Wi-Fi Thief

1. Simple solution: Don't do illegal activities on their network. If you are doing illegal activities, you're probably not terribly concerned with ethics, anyway.

Flip the scenario around. Would you want to take responsibility for things that complete strangers do on your wifi without your knowledge? If the answer is no, then you should apply the same ethical standards when you're considering other people than when you're considering yourself.
Google

+ - Condemned To Google Hell

Submitted by sas-dot
sas-dot (873348) writes "Google Hell is the worst fear of the untold numbers of companies that depend on search results to keep their business visible online. Getting stuck there means most users will never see the site, or at least many of the site's pages, when they enter certain keywords. And getting out can be next to impossible — because site operators often don't know what they did to get placed there. Google's programmers appear to have created the supplemental index with the best intentions. It's designed to lighten the workload of Google's "spider," the algorithm that constantly combs and categorizes the Web's pages. Google uses the index as a holding pen for pages it deems to be of low quality or designed to appear artificially high in search results."
Censorship

+ - The F-bomb most popular, N-word most offensive

Submitted by
word munger
word munger writes "The F-word is censored from nearly all U.S. broadcast TV (except when someone like Bono slips it into a live telecast), but people use it every day in casual conversation. Meanwhile vicious insults like "nappy-headed ho," while they did result in Don Imus's firing, are repeated ad nauseum on every newscast covering the event. What curse words are truly offensive, and who do they offend the most? On Cognitive Daily, we surveyed over 700 readers to find out. The results? The F-word is only mildly offensive — not even as offensive as "ho." What's more, as people get older, they react more negatively to some words, like "suck" and "ho," but other words bother them less. It all suggests that censoring particular words makes less sense than evaluating words in context. Depending on who is watching and when, the FCC might want to reassess its censorship policy."
Businesses

+ - Is Profiting Off of Massacres Okay?

Submitted by
jbash
jbash writes "I have an ethical issue. It seems people are registering domain names like vashootings.com and vatechshootings.com. (Warning: DO NOT click those ads, since they are pay-per-click ads paid to the domain name owners!) Google and Godaddy for their parts are making money off of those domain names too, not just the nice folks who registered them.

Is it wrong of me to think that this is just not right? That something has to be done about this, such as contacting the advertisers? (It was advertisers who got Imus removed, after all.) Or is it none of anyone's business how someone makes his money? And, on the other hand, if domain parking at something like vashootings.com in order to sell ads is unethical, then is it ethical to make documentaries or write books about tragedies? Is that not also making a profit off of suffering?"

IF I HAD A MINE SHAFT, I don't think I would just abandon it. There's got to be a better way. -- Jack Handley, The New Mexican, 1988.

Working...