What it comes down to is that people on this site believe themselves to possess a God-given right to enjoy other people's work without paying, and they'll demand that "right" be defended by any means necessary.

Thank you for letting me know what kind of person YOU ARE.I will now judge you by your own words. And for those who may want to condemn me for my righteous indignation, I cannot tell you how many times I had to respond to my ISP because I believe running Tor is a good idea.

This seems to be the point of his article. He obviously was caught with his hand in the proverbial cookie jar. Now he wants to tell everyone how dull the truth is. He has set himself up as a poster child for the saying, "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."

Time will tell how successful he is explaining his stupidity. Maybe be can win that campaign. He did not want to see the truth before and that reminds me of another saying, There are none so blind as those ...

I think that when people accuse academics of using confusing terms and concepts, the issue is actually more with the listener than the lecturer.

Much like when a speaker is giving a lecture on Comdex you wouldn't expect him to explain email, internet, or describe what exactly java, .net and terms like that mean, you can't expect Umberto Ecco when talking at an event geared mostly towards literature historians to cross the interdisciplinary divide and clean up his speech for the techies.

Think of this "The more clearly you can state a complex idea, the better the author." next time you are trying to explain issues in mozilla cross-platform development to a person with little or no training in that field. Sometimes it's just not possible, most often it's not really worth the effort. In order to get something out of some academic discussions, one needs a foundation to participate.