Daniel Sichel wrote on 05/12/09 08:17: > > The software is "merely installed" is not a complete statement of the > facts.
Yes, it was. This whole issue was about detecting installed p2p software that is not in use. Usage is a whole different thing. Please do not muddle the issue. > There is a high probability that this leads foreseeably (sp?) to > use of the "merely installed" software. Again, usage is a whole different thing. And, as one of the posters said, network admins are sure within their rights to block p2p traffic. That's traffic, as in usage. > Certainly a case can be made > that it is the responsibility of the student to make sure it's not in > use. Yes. > How about this as a compromise? Leave the software, run Nessus on > the LAN. When (and I mean when, not if) the student's computer begins > generating traffic that indicates he or she is abusing the facility with > P2P software, their connection is terminated until they pay a fine equal > to the value of excess bandwidth used and maybe reasonable compensation > to the other responsible users for the degraded facility. No excuses. If the student violates the rules of using the network, there are presumably appropriate remedies for that. But again, I have not argued about usage. I only argued about having the software installed. Having certain software installed on the student's personal property does not violate any network usage rules. > As for banning books, try citing the Bible in your psych class as a > guide to human behavior and you will swiftly discover, academia already > bans books. Here you again confuse possession with usage. A professor is not going to look in my backpack to see if I carry the Bible with me... Having software installed is akin to possessing particular books, even carrying them with me if I wish to. -Joe
