Gerhard Fiedler <lists <at> connectionbrazil.com> writes:

> > The moral problem with the technical solution is this: Who decides (proves) 
> > that rogue VPN is used for job-related activities?  
> 
> I think you're mixing things up here. Morality doesn't need proof; in fact,
> you can't prove morality. Mike decides what he uses the VPN ("rogue" is
> already implying a value, but that's what we're discussing, isn't it?) for.
> If he uses it only for legitimate purposes, it's all ok, morality-wise, I
> think. If he doesn't, there may be a morality problem, depending on your
> moral axioms. But that's not a moral problem; that's, if it is one, a legal
> problem or a responsibility chain problem or whatever... just not a moral
> problem.

Gerhard, I see your point and agree with it.  I was looking at it from
sys-admin's point of view.  From this POV, any unauthorized VPN or service on
network is "rogue".  
>From Mike's POV, he decides what is and is not a moral use.  

The morality of this is beyond the point.  The point (question) was what to do
about inadequate internet access.  My suggestion is to solve the problem
bureaucratically, rather than technically.  

I think we are close to have exhausted the thread.  I would read you response
with interest, but will probably not respond.  Thank you for great discussion.

Sergey

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist