Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
"qpd"

I just picked three random letters about 3 years ago. Haven't bothered to change it since.
 
This begs the question: If you didn't want anyone on your network, why didn't you lock it down in the first place? In essence, you were broadcasting a signal to the guys home that said "open network right here, please connect!". I always look at open networks as.... well, open for anyone to use. If the owner of the AP doesn't want outsiders to connect to his network, he would lock it down. Right?

Hope you don't do that in the UK, wouldn't matter if the connection was open or not you'd be breaking the law.

Mine is kinda boring... just called "Scott's network" would change it but really can't be arsed.
 
Mine:
 

Attachments

  • Picture 1.png
    Picture 1.png
    12.1 KB · Views: 781
My first network was an 802.11b router, and it was called jaynet. Then I moved it to the network closet and bought an Airport Express, so that became jaynet2. Then I moved out of my parents' house, and put in my own D-Link "n" router, and so I called it... jaynet3.

Creativity is key.
 
"look ma! no wires!"

I'm house sitting my parents' home and their wireless didn't have a password on it nor did they have a unique SSID. I supplied both. :D Seems to fit well with this area of Kentucky.
 
Currently hawknet
Im gonna chance it to "25cents per minute. Will send bill to your company."!:D
 
Hope you don't do that in the UK, wouldn't matter if the connection was open or not you'd be breaking the law.

It's the same in Finland as well, but that doesn't stop me from thinking that it's downright stupid. IMO the owner of the AP is responsible for the proper operation of his AP. If he sends an unencrypted signal all over the neighbourhood that basically asks all available devices to connect to it (which is what WALN basically does), I really don't think that the owner of the AP has much grounds to complaining. If he doesn't want others on his network, he can lock down the network in few minutes.

If we make it illegal to connect to open WLANs, then we are basically encouraging people to do a half-assed job configuring their equipment. If connecting to those networks was legal, then the owners of AP's would actually have an incentive to secure their networks. Current legislation basically lets anyone buy a radio-transmitter (that is what AP is, basiclaly), blast a signal everywhere and not be responsible for that signal in any shape or form.
 
Both of my networks are open (at both houses), and as long as the neighbors (both kindly retired couples) don't do anything stupid (what? Nursing home porn?) we let them use our network cause they can't figure out how to set one up themselves.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.