Comments on: Too Stupid to be a Judge

By: etbe

etbe — Sun, 03 May 2009 11:40:45 +0000

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Bork
James: Thanks for that hint. Robert Bork was the judge in question and the successful effort to reject his nomination led to the invention of the term “borked”. Not that his video rental history had anything interesting or relevant to the issue.

By: James

James — Sun, 03 May 2009 06:16:17 +0000

The Video Privacy Protection Act was passed after someone published a judge nominated for the supreme court, so this idea works in practice.

By: etbe

etbe — Sat, 02 May 2009 22:39:04 +0000

Ben: No, that would be a crime and it’s not something that I would advocate. I do on occasion advocate civil disobedience, but I don’t think that compromising the PC of a government figure is appropriate.

Don: Your comment is not clear to me. By “least responsible people” do you mean Professor Reidenberg, the 4chan crowd who are likely to take up a challenge from a judge, or the executives of major corporations (who seem to do the most wholesale damage to privacy)? Based on my prior knowledge of your attitudes I’m guessing that you do not believe that Professor Reidenberg is irresponsible, although Antonin would surely think so.

By: Indelible Bonobo

Indelible Bonobo — Sat, 02 May 2009 19:48:55 +0000

The Quack-quack judge cannot possibly surprise me anymore.

By: Don Marti

Don Marti — Sat, 02 May 2009 14:59:49 +0000

So it sounds like what Justice Scalia is saying is that we’re only supposed to have as much privacy as the least responsible people think we need.

By: Ben C

Ben C — Sat, 02 May 2009 13:58:32 +0000

It would also be “interesting” to penetrate the personal Windows machines of “all senior figures in the US government”…