This leaves an opening for abuse. One that will no doubt be ruthlessly exploited: The 'victim' merely has to 'claim' that her reputation was threatened or in some way affected by some remark made by an anonymous detractor. Court order -> detractor outed -> retribution time. I admit, once Cohen got her name. She chose not to go further with the pettiness. Kudos to her. However, this whole affair smacks of pettiness, and self indulgence on the parts of everyone involved. Including the judge, who played the role of enabler to some random internet cat fight on the public dime. (just my opinion... but I'm sticking to it)

I've been there too, but in my case sniveling and whining did not constitute proper evidence. The judge was not nice about it either. I quietly and humbly learned a valuable lesson: Be able to show actual, compelling evidence or STFU. Cohen's snivelling was delivered by better attorneys and thus actionable. She bent the court AND Google to her will (practically on a whim, hooray for money). Worse things are said about better people everyday, but somehow this instance was special? I call bullshit. I have to. It's the only way I can stay sane. =-P

How not so? If you mean f2f? Post IMO deserved to be outed, but not with taxpayer money, and 'just because I (Cohen) can'! That is my main opinion (which is probably wrong, but I refuse to give up my sanity for the sake of "legal correctness").

And if you ever question my skankiness, there will be hell to pay! >;-D

Thanks for the correction.

Google should not have complied. It should have fought back instead of folding like cheap lawn furniture. However, Google is like any other American corporation when it comes to deciding whether or not to set a very bad precedent: take the cheapest route and smoke pole like a Tijuana crack whore.

What Liskula Cohen did was game the system for ego gratification. Pure and simple. Google could have spotted this (I'm sure they have *some* intellegent people working there). Hell in fact the Judge in this case could have spotted this and told Ms. Cohen to grow up and stop acting like a narcissistic, spoiled little eleven year old. I'm almost positive that Cohen's attorney told her that the case was terribly weak. But no. Instead, they both 'presented' like a whipped omega baboon. Pathetic.

In the US, it is quite legal for us to call each other names and say awful things about one another. Follow any election cycle! Plenty of people snipe at political candidates from what effectively constitutes 'anonymity'. Virtually nobody tries to stop them either. Its a hot kitchen, the internet. Man/woman up or GTFO. Sounds simple and fair to me.

Also... There's this thing called Barratry. Most of the US legal system has forgotten that it exists.

I don't mean to sound pedantic, or borish, but C is actually "yeah baby yeah" typed, to enable pointer arithmetic, stack space exhaustion, buffer overflows, and system level development. It's not incorrect to say that it is weakly typed, per se. It's just awkward having to try to explain the direct parallels between the C type system and a 70s style love-in (where anything goes) -- to your manager.

And then there is the question of keyboard size. I cannot deal with the keyboards on 10" and 8" netbooks. My hands are just too big! At least with the 12" neties, I can type at about 15-20 WPM!!! Anything smaller and it's game over. =p

Sure it can. Who ever said that a sane, sensible, rational, kind, conscientious person HAS to fight fair after being sucker punched?

I don't mean to sound rude or impetuous Mr. Card, but we also must know our own mind, or we cannot avoid catastrophe.

That simian-masturbatory maniacal focus on security is exactly why I use OpenBSD. If I was a monkey, and jacking off was a primary mission goal, then clear, consistent priorities would have to made and adhered to. All other considerations would have to be shelved. These are necessary and vital preconditions for anyone who lives in a zoo.

I don't know about the CS prof theory, but I'm not really willing to simply dismiss it offhand.

There is a definite schiziodal declaration and different psychological knowledge embedded in their intent statement. The tracts of their manifesto (what I could find) struck me as doctrinaire, and para-moralistic: precisely the type of High Ideal/Low Internal Projection thinking that sucks in well intentioned but young, frantic, and inexperienced activists. They feel their cause is bigger than the damage they inflict on innocent by-standers, when in fact it is because their cause lies just slightly outside the normal person's worldview IMHO. They are becoming frustrated. They have to attack in order to be heard. They've already subverted their own cause in this regard. They've doomed themselves.

Security by obscurity is proven myth. I would hate to have to be on the wrong side of that debate. Doesn't sound like much fun, and anything you say or do is only going to serve to strengthen your opponent's position.

Ah, to be young again... and have absolutely no idea what I am doing...

Bang!

The timing. Companies are getting desperate to generate new revenue streams, and preserve old ones. Certainly doesn't mean you are wrong, it just means that crummy economies help reinforce paranoia.

On slashdot, paranoia takes on a tawdry escapist quality.

I'm not having that issue with FF v3.0.10.

I love it when these guys just come out and say what is on their minds. Makes it easier to determine whether or not their skills and talents are commensurate to the position they hold. :D

That would make a good Chick publications cartoon tract!

Q: Who spends +mod points on AC trolls?

A: Sock puppet retards.

Problem is.... parent is correct (bad form not withstanding). OP is pure over-generalized rhetorical spewage.

I call bullshit on that one. When in the last 8 years have taxpayers ever really had a say in how federal tax funds are used?