Democracy is a mirror. If you don't like what you see, start by changing yourself. If privacy is important to you, then don't read the personal pager messages (illegally obtained?) just because they are posted on the internet and everyone else is doing it.
(The same way we typically don't feel guilty about reading Anne Frank's private diaries following the Nazi atrocities and her death in a concentration camp.)
May I am slightly mixing my definition of personal with private, but where is the respect for other people?
"It's not personal if you broadcast it unencrypted" is the same line of thought as "she was asking to get raped". Just my opinion.
Not even remotely near the same thing. Can we agree to stop making crappy physical analogies, please?
> If my neighbor leaves their Wi-Fi open, I won't hack it.
It's not "hacking" (or even a little bit unethical) to associate to an open AP - it amounts to an advertisement of a free service available. Really you're not crossing any creeper lines there unless you start rifling through the other computers connected to that AP.
No, that is exactly the same thing. Private correspondence has the expectation of being private. Just because you have the technical ability to do something, doesn't mean you should.
No it doesn't. Especially if it's unintentional.
Yes it does. See how easily something can be refuted when it isn't backed up?
You might have an argument if it's unintentional, though.