I have personally seen the whole write a job description to promote someone thing happen on several occasions. More often in Government work but I have seen similar things happen in private business as well. I'm not sure that is why so many job descriptions are so specific though as I'm not sure that is happening at nearly the rate that I see job descriptions with 20+ paragraph long requirements.

So why were you driving a 100 miles an hour down the interstate when you weren't responding to a call? I see it pretty often around here...no siren, just one cop driving down the shoulder of the road passing traffic.....

I am a fairly heavy daily user of my phone for various purposes and still have 19.2 gigs free on my 32 gb phone. I used to be highly concerned about having an SD card but in general now I don't have any actual need for one for the vast majority of my usage. All this to say, to each their own, I would rather have a top of the line phone selling for $350 off contract than a phone running someone's crapped up version of Android so I can use an SD card.

I don't think "Jonny's just lost his first tooth" qualifies and investigative journalism.

Server to sysadmin ratio, if they really only have 90 sysadmins left then I'd say it was pretty much astronomical compared to most companies. This is an organization with a multi-exabyte facility coming online soon. They capture all phone and internet traffic in the US and beyond. Sure they probably contract some of this work but I'm guessing they 90 are either going to be massively over worked or they are really just shifting the load somewhere else.

The reality is that what they are probably doing is just expecting the other employees there to do the admin's work. The thought being "hey we have lots of smart techie people". I have seen many gov divisions with very little IT support available....they usually still limp along painfully but very inefficiently. In the end this probably going to cost tax payers more than it saves.

I've seen this on several sites, is this news to anyone?? Did you miss it many years ago when this was added? You know what, when someone is physically on my machine while its logged in, they can also send emails from my account!! Its just right there ready to go! We need to do something about this!

Interesting, I have heard many people complain how much better the iOS version of Google apps work compared to their Android counterparts. I doubt Google is intentionally gimping either product.

As a windows media center user I have to say that this is the one place I think they got it right. If they had made a more TV friendly layer for the desktop it would be perfect for me. Its way better than any other set top box system I've seen, I can watch blu-ray movies, watch any video on the internet, record TV, etc. Otherwise yes I have no idea why they are insisting on alienating their users. Seems like they're banking on the average consumer being too little informed or too stupid to care.....not really a bad bet to make, but sad.

Well for android with hdmi out and a keyboard and mouse it can become a device that is in many ways both a desktop and tablet.

Did you read his terms of service? Were they posted? Maybe I missed them.

77 trillion tons.

Its interesting to me how many people here pretty much just want to push anything to the absolute maximum. I bought this bandwidth I MUST be able to use to 24/7 at max level or its broken and I'm being ripped off! Not mentioning a limit on the marketing brochure != unlimited, you need to read the agreement for that. Plus I don't think there was a limit set based on the description of the call, the rep said that what he was doing was violating his TOS, he didn't say it was the usage level, it was all the other things that he was doing.

1) Do a search on "how facial recognition failed to find Boston bombers". That's when they are using a reduced set of faces. Maybe better shots of them would have helped but in general that still means that the wearer will have to basically be talking to you for it to get a good picture.

2) And now they recognized you....what do they do with that? Assuming they can Geo-code the hit that still means they just know who you are and where you are, it doesn't likely give them that much to use against you. Maybe you are in like at McDonalds and they'll find out about your secret love of crappy food but then what?

I'm all for having a critical eye to technology and its uses but it seems to be the glasses fears border closer to paranoia than real issue. Again if your concern is the creepy guy taking pictures of you bending over to tie your shoes then that makes a lot of sense though in the end if someone wants to look at my butt, I don't really care that much. If you are worried that the government will get some back door in the glasses that will allow them use their cameras as a massive surveillance network, then that makes a little sense..though I imagine people might start noticing if their batteries were dying in 10 minutes and their data usage were through the use due to constant on HD video feeds. But the omg the advertisers will use it to try and indoctrinate me into consumer culture....not sure I buy it.

It would be useful for somethings, recording meetings easily, taking notes, that sort of thing. Generally though I don't see that as that useful, I'd rather have some sort of wrist screen (bigger than a watch though). If something like that (basically a smart phone that is more rugged and I don't need to keep track of) would be more likely to become ubiquitous. The face screen idea is certainly interesting as its existed for a long time in Sci-fi but at this point people are likely to be too self-conscious to wear them much and their usefulness is a little too limited I think.

Sending anything you do to advertisers? That's a bit egotistical...."Hey everyone stop, check out this guy! He just sneezed in front of this Google Glasses users, quick drop what you're doing we need to find this guy and send him a tissues ad!!". Somehow I doubt....at least until computers get much better at interpreting the real world, advertisers will be trying to spy on people through video cameras. Beyond being pointless and potentially causing a huge backlash, it would just be to costly in employee pay versus ad revenue return. Now if you're worried about somebody taking video of you for their own personal "purposes" then that's a more valid concern.