People get very upset when online services want their real names. The thing is there are literally hundreds of other firms you frequently hand over your personal information to. Banks, insurance companies, utility companies, etc... The only difference is that you assume that because they make money elsewhere, your data is safe. Actually, I trust Google with my information much more than any credit card company with all my shopping habits (I have not surrendered my full name to Google directly but they could probably infer it from my emails or just my email address). Because it's comparatively easy to switch search engines as opposed to a bank or government, Google knows that one false step with user data could land them in a lot of hot water. Google's not perfect, but I'd like to see some concrete evidence of malice before I start accusing them of evil.

...you could copy from Google Chrome, why copy their exponential versioning system?

I'm wondering when the day will come when we realise that "information" (films, music, software/games, books) are all now effectively public goods (are indiscriminately available to everyone - like street lighting and parks). Then we can have a (perhaps progressive?) "artistic tax", the revenue from which can be distributed to artists according to how widely distributed their "information" is.

Frankly, I just find this a-mooo-sing.

...theft? ...of bandwidth?

Just buy audio CDs. You may have to wait a couple of days for delivery, but in the end you get a non-DRM, full lossless quality backed up on physical media with a free booklet with often beautiful artwork, not to mention a better selection that doesn't just include what you hear on Capital FM, plus resale and sentimental value. Why do we have digital downloads again?

That's a pretty black-and-white view. I've known plenty of people who are, in terms of intelligence and academic stature, in the top 0.5% of the country, but they are not necessarily any less sociable or have any fewer friends. Many /.ers seem to take the view that it's "us an them". But in the end, intelligence doesn't necessarily have much impact on how many friends you make, how good you are at sports or what sort of people you meet. There may be some correlation, but the most intelligent of my friends have always been able to, once in a while, turn off their brains and talk about last night's X-Factor results. People who can do that will become the politicians.

What native Blackberry apps? I think the move is a rational one. There are now 5 competing smartphone platforms (Android, Blackberry, iOS, WebOS and WP7), each dramatically different from one another (only two - Blackberry and Android - even have a preferred programming language in common and the iPhone blocks anything not written exclusively for the platform). There are only so many developers, each of whom only has time to master so many platforms. So when competition for developer time and skill is so fierce, isn't it really quite a good idea to try and share devs with the Android platform? RIM still has a sufficiently differentiated platform so that the risk of people saying:

is low, since so many business users swear by its carefully researched and targeted features.