Re: A helpful ruling on "anonymity"

On 17 Oct 2000, Matt Curtin wrote: >With all of the people running around claiming that data which are >pseudonymous are actually anonymous, it's no wonder that there's so >much confusion. > >http://www.consumerreports.org/Special/ConsumerInterest/Reports/0005pri1.htm > >Trying to point out the

Re: A helpful ruling on "anonymity"

At 10:24 AM -0700 10/17/00, Ray Dillinger wrote: > >Basically, whether it's math or crypto, there are some ideas that >people just aren't going to "get" because they always lump unfamiliar >things together if those things violate the same assumption. > >In math, they used to look at me blankly whe

Re: A helpful ruling on "anonymity"

See also: http://www.nytimes.com/2000/10/17/technology/17ONLI.html http://www.techserver.com/noframes/story/0,2294,500269480-500419504-502600227-0,00.html -Declan On Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 09:16:15PM -0700, Tim May wrote: > > This is a helpful ruling. No kidding. No spoof. > > --fair use excerpt

A helpful ruling on "anonymity"

This is a helpful ruling. No kidding. No spoof. --fair use excerpt begins-0- Monday October 16 4:29 PM ET Anonymous Net Posting Not Protected By CATHERINE WILSON, AP Business Writer MIAMI (AP) - In a ruling that challenges online anonymity, a Florida appeals court declared Monday that Inter