geek-9pm has a history of flawed metaphors that amount to nothing more then excessive hyperbole.
1st: This has nothing to do with the "internet" and everything to do with home networks.
2nd: Even a completely wide open router is more likely to get, at most, 4 "leeching" PCs. However- this is almost always purely accidental- I've known people to accidentally connect to their neighbors router when they have their own router and internet at home.
What are the chances of these people accidentally installing and using a WPA crack tool and accidentally gaining access to a nearby WPA encrypted device? 0.
3rd:
With this kind of flaw we all strand to lose a lot.
Why? How? If somebody isn't using WPA they aren't susceptible! And WPA is only used by
home users. I don't see how we are apt to lose a lot, and would like some clarification on exactly what we're losing too, because there is no real implication aside from using it as a sort of badly formed metonymy.
In either case, for reasons I already went over- even those people using WPA are unlikely to be affected.
A metaphor can be drawn from the joke, where the two friends are running from a bear, and the one says, "I don't think we can outrun the bear!" and in reply he is told, "well, I don't have to outrun the bear, I just have to outrun you".
In a similar case, you don't need good encryption techniques to keep people out of your home network, because in almost 100% of all cases there is somebody such as smeezekitty who scoffs at the very concept of wireless security.
Given the choice between a wide open router and any of the encryption methods, is stands to reason that the open one will be used, since it is, "the path of least resistance".
Also I might add that drawing an analogy between Something as docile as wireless networking and a terrorist attack is nothing of not in good taste.
