1 - Is it permissible in the contract with the cable company?
2 - How much bandwith the service provides versus what loads all the different users will be placing on it.
3 - Can you get good coverage for all the apts?
4 - Who's going to administer the network and be the guy that gets called when the guy in 6b says his wireless internet is out, or someone wants to change their email address, etc.
=A0You could have
Why would downloading from a usenet binary be any worse than downloading videos?
1 - Is it permissible in the contract with the cable company?
1A) No, it would have to be a hush-hush deal with your neighbors. "Open' access (unprotected router) are not allowed by many cable providers. And sharing of a PSW protected router is I'm sure a no-no too, but it's not like your sharing a physical cable, so there's little a cable company can do. Apartment people do this all the time, but it's usually not a shared deal, just a few non-techs with Open Access being taken advantage of by techs.
2 - How much bandwith the service provides versus what loads all the different users will be placing on it.
2A) My cable provider has 3 levels, 1.5 Mbps, 8 Mbps, and 20 Mbps. Many people still use dial-up at 56 Kbps! How many times will 56K go into 1.5 M?
Your sharing the bandwith of the cable anyways with all your neighbors even if they all had separate paying accounts, but with one modem your bandwith is limited to your provider level. Even at a 1.5 Mbps account, several surfers would get along fine. In the router set-up you can restrict (limit) the banwith of each user if needed but this is probably not necessary.
Here is a cut and paste "Did you know your cable speed will vary depending on the usage pattern of your neighbors? Cable modem services share bandwidth among subscribers in a locality. The same cable line connects to many households. If many of your neighbors access the Internet simulataneously, it is a distinct possibility that cable speeds for you (and them) will decrease significantly during those times."
3 - Can you get good coverage for all the apts?
3 A) Thats not an issue with todays hardware, proper placing of equipment may be needed. For example it would be best if the router was near the center of the building and not down in a corner basement.
4 - Who's going to administer the network and be the guy that gets called when the guy in 6b says his wireless internet is out, or someone wants to change their email address, etc.
4A) Something to be worked among friends. And just use Yahoo, or Hotmail for email.
You could have
5) Why would downloading from a usenet binary be any worse than downloading videos?
5A) When your downloading through the internet (surfing) with say MS Internet Explorer and you click on that Utube video or download a trial program, you only have one connection requesting data and the total size of that file is very small. When you open your newsgroups with Outlook you will have only one connection to the news servers.
A Binary usenet user would be using a "binary news reader" like NewsbinPro or Newsleecher, these are downloading machines! The user is not limited to
1 connection but may have up to 20 simultaneous connections (see Usenetserver and Giganews) depending on the news server. Typical ISP's allow 4 connections (if they have bin news groups), while paid for servers usually allow 10-20 connections. These users are downloading complete CD's (650MB) , DVD's (4-8 GB), and even HD videos (8-30 GB). They might easily add 20-30 GB's of files to their download que, hit enter and now they have
10-20 simultaneous connections requesting data from HIGH SPEED SERVERS and not just for a minute or two but for hours or even days. This will create slows. :-)
I wouldn't be too sure about that. Various states have specific laws covering cable service and what constitutes theft of service. I would not be surprised to find that in some cases, that in addition to civil exposure, you might actually have the possibility of criminal prosecution.
Is it highly likely? Probably not. But suppose the guy in 6b gets pissed off at you, decides to rat you out, and calls the cable company and tells them what's been going on. You want to be the guy with the contract with the cable company for one legitimate internet service?
Someone getting into your wireless service without your knowledge and permission is an entirely different situation from you getting one legitimate service and then sharing it by becoming the network administrator, collecting the payments from others, etc.
Sure, just as I'm sure there are many people still running Win98 on a
386. But it's not the typical scenario today. What is more typical is to have users downloading r/t video, large video files, or other heavy demands.
Yes, but so what? I have around 1.5mbits up, 4.5 down and the system can handle that with the typical load of all the others on the entire cable system. I periodically benchmark it. Even so, it can take some time to download larger files. I would not want to split my bandwith with 5 other users.
Yes, which is a good reason why you probably don't want to take the bandwith that you already have and split it 6 ways
That is precisely the issue. Who's gonna screw around to find the right solution and the right place to put it? Suppose you buy a bunch of gear and it don't work where you thought you could put it? Of course you can ultimatley deliver a wireless solution. My point was you may not be able to cover 6 apartments with a typical home router, ie the kind many cable companies give you for free, or an easy solution, etc. I've been in plenty of expensive hotels with wireless where coverage was spotty and speed was poor.
Friends? The guys is talking about 6 apartments. Who knows who is in any of them now or the future?
LOL
Even
LOL
However if you had one user downloading data from a
The total size of videos is small? There are companies on the internet now offering full Hollywood movies streamed to your TV. At CES this month, there were lots of products to marry TV with broadband. Sure wouldn't want to do that with the typical single user internet service split 6 ways.
=A0When you open your newsgroups with Outlook you
Welcome to the real world. To have users today that place a heavy load on a network, whether downloading from newsgroups, movies, videos, or similar isn't unusual at all.
I wouldn't be too sure about that. Various states have specific laws covering cable service and what constitutes theft of service. I would not be surprised to find that in some cases, that in addition to civil exposure, you might actually have the possibility of criminal prosecution.
Yeah, I pretty sure these is a difference between tracing a physical shared cable and a wireless connection that you can not see.
Is it highly likely? Probably not. But suppose the guy in 6b gets pissed off at you, decides to rat you out, and calls the cable company and tells them what's been going on. You want to be the guy with the contract with the cable company for one legitimate internet service?
What's been going on? He hacked my router, hacking is a criminal offense!
Someone getting into your wireless service without your knowledge and permission is an entirely different situation from you getting one legitimate service and then sharing it by becoming the network administrator, collecting the payments from others, etc.
Oh, so you recommend he should just set up an OPEN router and let other discoved it, OK.
Sure, just as I'm sure there are many people still running Win98 on a
386. But it's not the typical scenario today. What is more typical is to have users downloading r/t video, large video files, or other heavy demands.
Your not downloading shit unless your using a binary news reader with multiple connections.
Yes, but so what? I have around 1.5mbits up, 4.5 down and the system can handle that with the typical load of all the others on the entire cable system. I periodically benchmark it. Even so, it can take some time to download larger files. I would not want to split my bandwith with 5 other users.
Larger files.... LOL.... give me some sizes? Even if you could find a large file on the internet, you would still only be using one connection, one connection can only use so much bandwith. You been watching too many Cable company commercials where they keep trying to sell you faster and faster speeds when you don't need them.
Yes, which is a good reason why you probably don't want to take the bandwith that you already have and split it 6 ways
That statement makes no sense. First of all you not splitting it 6 ways, your sharing it 6 ways.
That is precisely the issue. Who's gonna screw around to find the right solution and the right place to put it? Suppose you buy a bunch of gear and it don't work where you thought you could put it? Of course you can ultimatley deliver a wireless solution. My point was you may not be able to cover 6 apartments with a typical home router, ie the kind many cable companies give you for free, or an easy solution, etc. I've been in plenty of expensive hotels with wireless where coverage was spotty and speed was poor.
You obviously know little or nothing about todays extended routers and how easy they are to setup. If you buy something and it does not work take it back to Bestbuy and get a refund. You don't get out of the house much huh? Your typical home router is based upon commerial hardware that has been in use for years before people at home starting installing them. Buy Linksys!
So the hotel had poor service, so what, thier pool probably had shit in it too. How old is your PC?
Cable companies don't give away anything for free. If they did it would be junk.
Friends? The guys is talking about 6 apartments. Who knows who is in any of them now or the future?
Who knows? Only the OP knows, and who cares about future tenants, figure that out as it goes. It's not like the future tenant is going to see the wireless signals and call the cable cops. Yeah, I think I heard some Internet sharing going on last night.
He could just share with the guy accross the hall or at the other end of the building. Hey times are tough for some and manys families with kids need Internet. Maybe this guy will share without charging. It's not like a bank job! The prices they charge for high speed internet is rediculous becuase they have a monopoly until fiber optics becomes wide spread.
LOL
Even
LOL
However if you had one user downloading data from a
The total size of videos is small? There are companies on the internet now offering full Hollywood movies streamed to your TV. At CES this month, there were lots of products to marry TV with broadband. Sure wouldn't want to do that with the typical single user internet service split 6 ways.
Those movies are compressed video and your polling them with one connection. They take a 5 GB movie and compress it to about 1.5 GB. I'm sure everyone in the building is going to want to down compressed movies at the same time, but even if they did with a 20Mbps connnection 6 users could do anything any everything they wanted without slows (as long as no one was using a binary news reader with 10-20 conns).
When you open your newsgroups with Outlook you
Welcome to the real world. To have users today that place a heavy load on a network, whether downloading from newsgroups, movies, videos, or similar isn't unusual at all.
Yeah right, keep watching those cable commercials and attending those tradeshows. I think it's time you upgraded your service. You will get extra emails accounts for a limited time only. LOL.
You have no idea what a heavy load is until you use a binary news reader.
You got hotels, book stores, coffee shops, and even gas stations with wireless access. Don't you think they ever have 6 more people accessing the same router at the same time? How many routers do you think they have at the local Starbucks? Or Barnes and Noble? One!
So is lying to investigators, if it came to that. You think that's a good idea too? Here's the guy reselling service, collecting money, and proposing to add it to monthly condo fees. Surely there is both an accounting trail and other condo owners who could easily yield the truth.
No, I never recommended any such thing. I just pointed out that trying to equate setting up a shared internet connection for an apartment complex off a single individual internet connection to someone happening to find an open wireless internet has no validity. What I am suggesting is that contrary to your claim that there is no issue with setting up a shared internet service off a single apt service, there are in fact many issues, both potentially legal, as well as practical. Before he proceeds, among other things, he should consider:
A - Is it allowed under the cable contract?
B - If not, does he want to be the guy in who's name the service is in? What happens if 5 years later the guy in 6b calls the cable company, tells them Ray has been the administrator, collecting fees, etc and the cable company comes and wants payment from Ray for full internet fees for 5 apts for 5 years?
C - If it's not allowed, what does state law say, if anything, about it? I would think in many states, it would be considered theft of services.
D - Does Ray want to be the guy people call at 10PM when they can't get connected, for whatever reason?
E - Who's going to put in the system, make sure coverage is OK for the entire building, maintain it, etc?
F - What happens when the guy in 6b is downloading heavy traffic, impacting others?
And in view of all that, whether it's worth saving $30 a month. I know the answer for me is no.
LOL
Really LOL now. Even if you could find a large file on the internet?
=A0You been watching too many
So, says you. Every speed increase I've ever had in internet connectivity has given me a speed boost that I both noticed and used. I'm at around 4.5mbits down now, and not about to share that with 5 other households.
Choose whatever words you like.
Sure, you can buy stuff. You can screw around, and return it if it doesn't work. I'm sure there are plenty of people on here who will tell you they have had trouble getting full coverage in a single family home, let alone in an apt building. I'm sure all that is just a non-issue to you, but I think to most people, becoming the network installer, administrator, and go-to person, does present issues.
The point is, it's not uncommon to find hotels where coverage is not complete and signal strength may not be good. And hotels have professionally installed systems, not a hack job put together by a clueless amateur.
My Scientific Atlanta cable box and my Motorola Cable modem have worked fine for years.
I'd think he might be a little concerned when the new folks move in. The guy in #6 tells the new guy in #4 about the arrangement and how to get cheap internet. Turns out the guy in #4 works for the cable company, or his wife is in law enforcement. All sorts of interesting possibilities for the "network administrator."
So, if the cable contract says the service is for a single family home/ apt you're obviously OK stealing it and reselling it with the argument that the cable company charges too much. The typical price of $40 seems fair to me. What else is it OK to steal?
Yeah I asked him why am I bothering to buy this? When I could just get it for FREE????:(
He remarked EVERY neighborhood has some open connections.....
My parents had 3 Open routers near them months ago. I'm guessing Cox caming sniffing and sent them a letter. Now all 3 are password protected, but 2 of the 3 used the name of their router for the passkey. LOL.
So is lying to investigators, if it came to that. You think that's a good idea too? Here's the guy reselling service, collecting money, and proposing to add it to monthly condo fees. Surely there is both an accounting trail and other condo owners who could easily yield the truth.
Who said anythig about reselling it? Maybe this guy owns the units and just wants to add free wireless to the package like a washer and dryer room. Businesses do it all the time, why couldn't a owner?
No, I never recommended any such thing. I just pointed out that trying to equate setting up a shared internet connection for an apartment complex off a single individual internet connection to someone happening to find an open wireless internet has no validity. What I am suggesting is that contrary to your claim that there is no issue with setting up a shared internet service off a single apt service, there are in fact many issues, both potentially legal, as well as practical. Before he proceeds, among other things, he should consider:
A - Is it allowed under the cable contract?
It is for many businesses, so maybe he gets a bus account?
B - If not, does he want to be the guy in who's name the service is in? What happens if 5 years later the guy in 6b calls the cable company, tells them Ray has been the administrator, collecting fees, etc and the cable company comes and wants payment from Ray for full internet fees for 5 apts for 5 years?
LOL! What if the sky falls?
C - If it's not allowed, what does state law say, if anything, about it? I would think in many states, it would be considered theft of services.
LOL! Yeah the jails are just full of people that had Open access. LOL!
D - Does Ray want to be the guy people call at 10PM when they can't get connected, for whatever reason?
Sure, there's an extra service charge for calls made after 5 PM! LOL!
E - Who's going to put in the system, make sure coverage is OK for the entire building, maintain it, etc?
My 5 year old nephew is available on weekends.
F - What happens when the guy in 6b is downloading heavy traffic, impacting others?
You can limit the bandwith per user in the router setup if needed.
And in view of all that, whether it's worth saving $30 a month. I know the answer for me is no.
Well, everyone has to make their own decisions.
LOL
Really LOL now. Even if you could find a large file on the internet?
You been watching too many
So, says you. Every speed increase I've ever had in internet connectivity has given me a speed boost that I both noticed and used. I'm at around 4.5mbits down now, and not about to share that with 5 other households.
I have 3 PC's networked, 1 wired, 2 wireless and have seen no problems at all when all are in use.
Choose whatever words you like.
Sure, you can buy stuff. You can screw around, and return it if it doesn't work. I'm sure there are plenty of people on here who will tell you they have had trouble getting full coverage in a single family home, let alone in an apt building. I'm sure all that is just a non-issue to you, but I think to most people, becoming the network installer, administrator, and go-to person, does present issues.
I'm sure they are plenty of people that can't hook up a DVD player or even spell PC. If they are not smart enough to do it does that mean they shouldn't? There's a learning process for everyone. Linksys has very good support and plenty of documentation on their website.
The point is, it's not uncommon to find hotels where coverage is not complete and signal strength may not be good. And hotels have professionally installed systems, not a hack job put together by a clueless amateur.
LOL, Just becuase the hotels you stayed in had bad coverage (per you) that means that this 6-by-unit can not install wireless and get complete coverage? If they had bad coverage it was their fault, cheap equipment, not enough routers, bad install, it wasn't becuase it's not possbile. Many hotels have double steel walls, what maybe every 14' to 16'. And maybe they placed a sinlge router in the middle of the building instead of two on each end. Corps have been using wireless for years, this not new un-tested technology just for home users.
Once again check your laptop, upgrade your wireless device, ask for a room closer to the router or bring a cat5 cable and plug into the wall.
My Scientific Atlanta cable box and my Motorola Cable modem have worked fine for years.
And they were free? LOL.... I will give you a FREE 32' HDTV and you must use it for two years, and pay me $80 a month. If you choose to stop using the HDTV, you can pay me $1920 and the HDTV is your FREE to keep. Deal?
I'd think he might be a little concerned when the new folks move in. The guy in #6 tells the new guy in #4 about the arrangement and how to get cheap internet. Turns out the guy in #4 works for the cable company, or his wife is in law enforcement. All sorts of interesting possibilities for the "network administrator."
LOL, ever drive over 55MPH? Ever make a u-turn when you shouldn't? Ever hear of a crooked cop?
So the buidling comes with free wireless, are you as a tenant going to be concerned about where the router is, and how it's conected and who's paying the bill? It's free it's, it's there, use it if you want, if it's down then wait until it's up.
So, if the cable contract says the service is for a single family home/ apt you're obviously OK stealing it and reselling it with the argument that the cable company charges too much. The typical price of $40 seems fair to me. What else is it OK to steal?
Who said you he had to re-sell it? I'm not sure I would personally classify this as stealing, the connection is being paid for, it's just being used by more partys then allowed by contract (if single family account). What's the differnce between me having 6 PC's in my house using one wireless router or having 5 of them in someone else's house? Does this cost the cable company more? No. So what is being stolen? What is not being paid for?
From the context and the flow of the thread, if you paid attention before giving blanket advice, it's quite obvious that Ray doesn't own the units. And in fact he had this to say:
"The directors could vote to make the cable/satellite service a part of the monthly maintainence fee -- just as we do with heat and water. "
Does that sound like he owns a rental building? As for the comparison to a washer/dryer room, well there is none. Presumably, he would OWN the washer, dryer and building. I seriously doubt an individual cable internet account contract allows one to distribute access to 5 other apts.
Because of the above and if you follow the thread, he doesn't own the building. The building could get it, and distribute it, as any other business, eg hotel would, PROVIDED THEIR CONTRACT WITH THE SERVICE PROVIDER ALLOWS IT.
The likelihood of him getting nailed and screwed is a lot higher than the sky falling. By that standard, gee, why should I have insurance on my house. The chance of a fire is remote.
Again, you are deliberatley comparing two very different things. One is someone who has an unsecured wireless network and SOMEONE NEARBY CASUALLY ACCESSES IT. The other is telling Ray that there is no issue with him purposefully setting up his internet service to be shared by, and then paid for one way or another, by 5 other apartments. Got it now?
As for even the open access part, here's what CNN had to say about it recently. And note that they don't give even your blanket endorsement that it's OK and not an issue:
"The spread of wireless is opening lots of opportunity to log on for free, but experts urge caution.
Will this land you in jail? The legality of stealing your neighbor's connection is murky at best.
"All of this stuff is so new, it's hard to say what the liability issues are," said Robert Hale, a San Francisco-based attorney who recently published an academic paper on the subject.
Hale points out that there is a federal law on the books that ostensibly prohibits using someone's access point with out their permission. But "without permission" is vaguely defined and the law seems more geared towards computer hacking.
"A broad statement concerning the access of unprotected wireless networks as being always legal or illegal simply can't be made," said Jackie Lesch, a spokeswoman for the Department of Justice. "It's just kind of dicey."
On the state level it could be more clear. "It's unlawful access", said John Geraty, an officer with the Internet crimes against children unit of the San Francisco Police Department.
According to Geraty, using your neighbor's wireless is specifically prohibited in the California penal code. "It's not yours and you're taking it," he says. "
Yep, another non-issue according to you. Apparently the realities of computer and network support are a foreign concept to you.
Yep, another non-issue according to you.
Yes, but they should make them in view of the real facts, not because some nit-wit on the internet proclaims that there are no issues to redistributing internet service to 6 apts.
Cool. So, since there are 6 apts, lets multiply the above by 6 and see what happens. And factor in some real usage like many PCs see today, with rich content, r/t video, downloading movies, etc, as opposed to you hunting and pecking on newgroups.
That is the default router name used by linksys. If you have a linksys also open your internet browser and enter 192.168.1.1 in the url, this will enter the routers config settings and you can change your router name. You can also turn off broadcasting with most routers so your not showing up on everyone else's list.
And THAT is the reason I consider it the worst choice.
You can change the routers name, but that is distinct from the wireless network name (SSID).
I forget who made it, but there was a post on another group about someone who unknowingly configured and used someone else's router because of this. This sort of thing is one reason your initial setup of a router should be done with a (faster, more secure, more reliable, etc...) WIRED connection.
If you are not using wireless, it should be DISABLED instead.
Yes, although this should always be IN ADDITION TO setting up WPA-AES security with a good password.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.