[Tfug] Hello

[Stephen Hooper]

On 3/14/07, christopher floess <skeptikos at gmail.com> wrote:

> Well the way I understand it, they will apply to Linux eventually. I kind of
> thought policing the software I run was like Cox policing the software I
> run. What's the difference (I'm really asking here, not being rhetorical)? I
> also thought that the UAPublic SSID would be phased out once WiFi is fully
> implemented.


Hypothetically the main difference would seem to me to be that if you
don't like your ISP you are paying for it, and so can vote with your
dollars by moving to a different ISP.

You are not paying the University for Wifi access, you are paying them
for education.  I know, I know... the funding for it is all student
dollars, but the main reason students are paying the University is for
an education.

Therefore (again hypothetically), the University is putting in the
network to enhance the educational experience.  As such, they are
probably more "right", and can police it because they are not really
in the business of providing the service as their service, and you can
therefore just choose not to use it (at the detriment of your
education), the same way as if you didn't like a professor you could
choose not to attend his class.

An alternate hypothesis that would be equally applicable is that the
people who decide these things don't really care very much about it,
past the point of being able to compare themselves to other
Universities ("Look! The UofA finally has wireless access!"), and
being able to say that they have fulfilled their job function ('We
have put in wireless access!", "We are secure!", etc.).