Talk:Bram Cohen

Asperger syndrome

He "diagnosed himself with Asperger's"? Since when is he qualified to diagnose himself? Seems like the sentence should be changed to reflect that he _claims_ to "suffer" from Aspergers. Or more accurately, you could just say he's a bit too pretentious. -- Jgw

I retract my previous statements on this article. -- Jgw

It dosen't take a rocket scientist to Diagnose an ilness. He is pretty smart anyway. Its quite easy to diagnose some ilness's theres a check list you can run down. If you meet the criteria, well hell, you've got the ilness. --Neil Lennon 08:02 am, 13 December 2005 (pacific)

^^ It doesn't take a rocket scientist, no. It takes a qualified professional, something Mr Cohen is not. Having Asperger's seems to be the "cool" thing in geek circles right now (similar to how having "bipolar disorder" on myspace.com is). Unfortunately, this trivializes people who actually suffer from the disease (and suffer they do). It's unfortunate that every article about Bram Cohen mentions his supposed syndrome. I guess everyone needs their special niche for the press. Also, stop deleting stuff on the Talk page, anon 67.171.225.35 15:22, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

I have restored the deleted comments. RossPatterson 16:10, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Its quite easy to diagnose some ilness's theres a check list you can run down. If you meet the criteria, well hell, you've got the ilness. --Neil Lennon 08:02 am, 13 December 2005 (pacific)

err ahem people dont suffer with aspergers. people with suffer from people with NT-ism. Also the things people take as a disability is usually a comorbid not actually aspergersJoeMele 22:14, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

(I think this was ment to be here)

As a person who was diagnosed professionally with Asperger syndrome, I would like to correct some misunderstandings. The majority of adults, diagnosed with Asperger syndrome by "professionals" were originally self-diagnosed and sought help. How else do they get a diagnosis? Self-diagnosis is seen as quite reliable by professionals.

Also, Asperger syndrome is not a disease. A disease threatens the ability for a person to remain alive, is usually progressive and maybe contagious.

Lastly, Asperger syndrome shades into "eccentric normality". If there were on/off difference between "normal" and Asperger syndrome, the existence of AS would be more easily accepted. But it is a spectrum that shades into "normality". It seems that people with Asperger syndrome are hidden, misunderstood and disparaged people who are not quite affected enough to merit a diagnosis.

Diamond Dave 02/09/2006 17:26

Self diagnosis? Reliable sources?

The Bram Cohen Asperger claim cites two three sources: the Wired article (which doesn't go into any detail), the Fortune article, and the interview on Wrong Planet. However, the sources don't say anything about it being a self diagnosis. Are there any reliable sources for this, or is he formally diagnosed, or is this just another spurious claim that yet another random genius, celebrity or luminary has it? In any case if this can't be clarified then the paragraph needs to be struck (or at least reworded) due to BLP concerns. Snthdiueoa (talk) 01:37, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

• Sorry, my bad: I didn't read the Fortune article properly. It talks quite clearly about how it's a self diagnosis there. Snthdiueoa (talk) 11:19, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Totally Innaccurate

The community that BT was built around was the free high quality bootleg community for such bands as Phish. Bram wanted to trade large FLAC files around without a lot of bandwidth. This was the primary purpose and goal of BT. --Gayhippo 19:51, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

That's completely false —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 190.44.203.105 (talk) 05:16, 8 December 2006 (UTC).

Funny!

"Cohen collected free pornography to lure beta testers to use the program." LOL! A smart idea, though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.114.59.41 (talk • contribs) 00:29, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

I was ready to call bullshit on this claim, but a quick check finds a Wired article from January 2005 that says in part:

For the program's first successful public trial, Cohen collected a batch of free porn and used it to lure beta testers. (The gambit worked, as did the code.)

Since the article involved interviews with Cohen, and since I can't find any claims by him that it isn't true, I guess it is. RossPatterson 16:24, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

There is nothing in that article about downloading porn. I removed the reference. -- JC

Nothing besides on page 2, "For the program's first successful public trial, Cohen collected a batch of free porn and used it to lure beta testers. (The gambit worked, as did the code.)". LilDice 21:22, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Pirate

On Bram's own site [1], he claims to be a pirate. Why, then, does anyone think BitTorrent was intended for any legitimate use? -- Mikeblas 02:19, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

It says at the top of that page that the text is a parody on the cypherpunk manifesto. Don't take the content as a serious statement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.130.4.46 (talk) 07:25, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Cohen from Bellevue?

I came across this today. Is he from Bellevue or New York then? Anyone know for sure? -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 08:14, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

I could have sworn he was still in bellevue.. I think I just saw him out walking with his wife. Didn't realize it at the time, though the combination of a noticeable sort of non-normality, google tee-shirt, and recollection of a Seattle Times article about him. I came to this article to check the image, and it looks like the same person, only doesn't have the hair anymore.

cohen and asperger's

Please do not remove the interview with the subject until we come to a consensus here. Perl (talk) 00:12, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

A local consensus will not override the broad consensus that editors should follow our conflict of interest and external links guidance, nor that we should be very conservative in applying verifiability policy where biographies of living people are concerned. Angus McLellan (Talk) 00:20, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

The verifiability policy is perfectly acceptable, as is the COI policy, but the site in question has been shown to be a reputable source by multiple other established news organizations. Perl (talk) 00:23, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

The site in question is already linked in the references section. There is no need to have it a second time in the external links section, especially since there are also COI issues here. (I understand from Talk:Wrong Planet that User:Perl is actually the founder of the website concerned.) —Snthdiueoa (talk|contribs) 00:49, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Removal of TorrentFreak interview

I know the problem with blogs as sources, but if a link is to an interview - and the blog has no additional analysis - is it still verboten? Thanks, WalterGR (talk | contributions) 01:07, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Generally no, per external link guidelines. However, TorrentFreak may be recognized as an authority on these matters - perhaps not. If it can be argued that TorrentFreak has a particular sort of authority or relevance, then the link should be included, but otherwise it probably shouldn't be. --Cheeser1 (talk) 01:24, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

It is probably not exactly WP:AGF of me to say so, but I can't help wondering if there was a hint of WP:POINT in removal of that particular link. OTOH, I can't say I disagree with it. I tend to favour a minimalist approach to external links myself, not least because (a) "external links" sections tend to be spam magnets and it can be difficult to know exactly when to draw the line, and (b) the legitimate ones are usually better off as references for specific statements in the text. Maybe it could be cited as a source for something in the article? —Snthdiueoa (talk|contribs) 02:09, 22 March 2008 (UTC)