Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbatt!ihnp4!chinet!wmf
From: wmf@chinet.UUCP (William M. Fischer)
Newsgroups: net.unix
Subject: Re: Looking through other users' (unprotected) files
Message-ID: <682@chinet.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 25-Oct-86 00:22:01 EST
Article-I.D.: chinet.682
Posted: Sat Oct 25 00:22:01 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 26-Oct-86 01:11:24 EST
References: <1246@kitty.UUCP> <141@rayssd.UUCP> <2433@phri.UUCP>
Reply-To: wmf@chinet.UUCP (William M. Fischer)
Organization: chi-net, Public Access UN*X, Chicago IL
Lines: 27

In article <1501@jade.BERKELEY.EDU> mwm@eris.UUCP (Mike (Don't have strength to leave) Meyer) writes:
>In article <2849@rsch.WISC.EDU> mcvoy@rsch.WISC.EDU (Lawrence W. McVoy) writes:
>>In article <3561@mit-eddie.MIT.EDU> jbs@mit-eddie.UUCP (Jeff Siegal) writes:
>>>Does someone's home being unlocked give you the right to violate it
>>> [...]  I think not.  

>>Well, Jeff, you are 100% wrong here.  The analogy between a home and a
>>computer is not in any way shape or form a valid one.  

>No, it's perfectly valid. 

>Let's look at YOUR version of the analogy, [...]

>[...] and that's because the defaults for the real world

>[Of course, you should still tell people that there may be users with
>defective ethical systems, and that NOTHING is save from being read by

Sheesh.... everybody chmod the files they want private and let's move this
discussion to net.philosophy. :-)


-- 
             ====================================================  
             |    Fortiter in re,       ||     Bill Fischer     |
             |       suaviter in modo.  ||  ...ihnp4!chinet!wmf |
             ====================================================