Double blind reviews are kabuki

I just got a paper to review from a journal that does "double-blind" reviews. They blank out the names of the authors and send it to me. My review is anonymous. All this is meant to guarantee impartiality.

Who are they fooling? Two paragraphs into the paper, the paper explains that the authors are expanding on their previous work. Since I know what work that is, I know who these folks are. Even otherwise, they have cited my papers several times -- and from the context, it's easy to figure out the authorship. So, not only do I know who wrote the paper, I can confirm it another way too.

Meanwhile, my review will have to correct one of their citations and a couple of their descriptions and that'll give the game away. They'll know who I am.