The key point you're missing is not simply allowing access, it's allowing modifications. In your property example, that's like telling someone that hey, you can go ahead and paint my house for me and then complaining when they file a lien on the property because you didn't pay them.
Or, perhaps a little closer to the linked in example, many states have laws that will allow people to claim ownership over property (land, in this example) they have maintained for a certain period of time with the knowledge and (tacit?) approval of the property owner. I forget what the legal term is, but it does exist.
Common-law marriages, if still on the books in any states, are perhaps another example.
I believe there have also been court cases where a person sues a former housemate who allowed them to live in the house without a rental agreement due to a "relationship" getting a certain percentage of ownership awarded to them because they were able to show spending time and money maintaining/improving the property.
I guess my point is be careful of anything that may be interpreted as sharing or giving up ownership rights.
Our fearless leaders, both public and private, have made the boneheaded mistake of relying on computers and electronic communications networks for just about everything, and even worse, they connected them to public networks.
What private company is going to rebuild its insecure network without government incentive or regulation? How is an attack on the power grid possible unless the control systems are connected to the public network, and how many utilities are going to build interconnected but isolated control networks without government incentives or regulation?
Companies have also proven time and time again that backup systems fail and disaster recovery doesn't always work.
I don't advocate more government regulation on the internet, but the problem is that by and large the free world has built and come to rely on a very fragile network with an infinite number of attack vectors and limited self healing capabilities. DDoS attacks taking out major online companies; backhoes taking out major backbones; undersea cables snapping; comm satellites knocked out by solar flares; There is no last mile redundancy for personal users.
(Except for the phone system; last weekend a lightning strike took out my power and cable, but the phone, which runs mere feet away, still worked. Took a long time for the lines to be fixed - major downside to underground utilities.)
What's the solution? I don't have one. It needs to be in the best interests of every organization that runs a computer connected to the internet, whether it's a home laptop, a router at an ISP, or a DNS root server to take security more seriously.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by TonyP.
Re: Re:
The key point you're missing is not simply allowing access, it's allowing modifications. In your property example, that's like telling someone that hey, you can go ahead and paint my house for me and then complaining when they file a lien on the property because you didn't pay them.
Or, perhaps a little closer to the linked in example, many states have laws that will allow people to claim ownership over property (land, in this example) they have maintained for a certain period of time with the knowledge and (tacit?) approval of the property owner. I forget what the legal term is, but it does exist.
Common-law marriages, if still on the books in any states, are perhaps another example.
I believe there have also been court cases where a person sues a former housemate who allowed them to live in the house without a rental agreement due to a "relationship" getting a certain percentage of ownership awarded to them because they were able to show spending time and money maintaining/improving the property.
I guess my point is be careful of anything that may be interpreted as sharing or giving up ownership rights.
Problem is...
Our fearless leaders, both public and private, have made the boneheaded mistake of relying on computers and electronic communications networks for just about everything, and even worse, they connected them to public networks.
What private company is going to rebuild its insecure network without government incentive or regulation? How is an attack on the power grid possible unless the control systems are connected to the public network, and how many utilities are going to build interconnected but isolated control networks without government incentives or regulation?
Companies have also proven time and time again that backup systems fail and disaster recovery doesn't always work.
I don't advocate more government regulation on the internet, but the problem is that by and large the free world has built and come to rely on a very fragile network with an infinite number of attack vectors and limited self healing capabilities. DDoS attacks taking out major online companies; backhoes taking out major backbones; undersea cables snapping; comm satellites knocked out by solar flares; There is no last mile redundancy for personal users.
(Except for the phone system; last weekend a lightning strike took out my power and cable, but the phone, which runs mere feet away, still worked. Took a long time for the lines to be fixed - major downside to underground utilities.)
What's the solution? I don't have one. It needs to be in the best interests of every organization that runs a computer connected to the internet, whether it's a home laptop, a router at an ISP, or a DNS root server to take security more seriously.