I've been audited once. I was a student with very low income from multiple sources, very low dividends from multiple accounts, and education credits of some form. It was a crazy filing, but the audit actually only found an error on their side. I'm not sure that income has much to do with it.
Android's connection to Google is well known to geeky types, but seems to be less well understood by the general population. Aside from the Nexus devices, there's almost no Google branding on Android phones. Even the inclusion of various Google apps is somewhat countered by the stock inclusion of Facebook and other companies' apps.
I completely agree that Google would do well by moving away from advertising. The data slurping and overall creepy and opaque nature of Google's business is largely due to being supported by advertising. It's going to be a very hard road, though. Getting people to pay for services that used to be "free" is hard to do without convincing them that "free" wasn't really free (and that "free" was undesirable... tarnishing their image in the process). If they don't fix their image and trajectory though, they're bound to turn into another Microsoft: flush with cash, but reviled and only coasting along on inertia.
A great deal of the creepy factor associated with Glass is the connection to Google. You may not perceive it this way because you work for Google, but a great deal of the population is at least a little uneasy with Google and their tendency to slurp up any information available.
In any conversation I've been in, the mention of Google carries with it a response ranging from mild uneasiness to outright creeped out. By the general population, Google isn't perceived as hip and cool anymore. A Glass clone without a creepy connection to Google would likely be better received.
It's not being recorded that bothers people as much as it's being recorded for creepy or nefarious purposes. Google's involvement makes the recording more creepy.
Just like they did with water, sewage, and the other utilities...
If only we had corporate monopolies for those too! I'm looking forward to my monthly sewage cap.
Why buy a full tablet device with a pen if you will always use it with a mouse and keyboard.
I have no idea, which is why I have no interest in owning one. For reading and notetaking, what does the SP3 give you that a cheap ARM tablet wouldn't give you with better battery life and less mass?
If tablet tasks are what people use it for, then now I'm stumped as to why anyone would pay that much for one...
Proof that your touch UI and OS is crap when your users of your flagship device use a mouse and keyboard with it most of the time.
Huh. Looking back, every Surface Pro I've seen was always being used with a mouse and keyboard. I never really thought about it at the time.
To be fair though, the Surface Pro is really a laptop without an integrated keyboard and mouse. Its niche seems to be that of a laptop that you can use like a tablet (like those weird old Thinkpads with the rotatable screen, but not as thick and heavy). Metro crappiness aside, it's easier to do real work on a laptop than a tablet/phone and real work almost always requires a keyboard and mouse.
Obama veto a bill... yeah right.
The current president has used the veto less than any president in over 100 years. He's used it twice in eight years and has happily signed into law bills that directly countered the platform he ran for office on. If this managed to make it to his desk, he'd probably sign it just the same.
Whoosh? Mac OS X is BSD.
If the trendy new flat grey-on-grey visuals annoy you, try the "Increase contrast" option in the Accessibility System Preference. It doesn't restore the visual scheme to what it was (which had its own problems), but it's different enough that it may appeal to you. My eyes are fine, but I'm not a big fan of the war on contrast.
An air rifle would be fine for city use. A BB has next to no kinetic energy by the time it returns to the ground. Air resistance is a real energy sapper for things that small.
A thrown rock or a slung projectile will be larger and more massive and so retain more of its kinetic energy on return. The attacked drone falling from the sky will do more potential damage than any of the projectiles you'd use to bring it down.
Then we should really eliminate democracy. The people are too dumb to give power to. Unfortunately I do not know what the solution is if we eliminate democratic process.
A lottery for representatives would be the ideal. Even a hereditary monarchy (with a constitution and veto, perhaps in the form of a guillotine) would beat what we have now.
The problem isn't so much that people are too dumb as that our system selects for corrupt, greedy, and power hungry sociopaths. The only way to become a "representative" is to want to be one. But anyone who wants that job should be denied it on that basis alone. The people may vote sub-optimally, but every single choice available to them is a bad choice. Our system is designed to distill out anyone who is remotely suitable for public office.
Replacing the system that self-selects the most horrible people with one that operates on complete chance would be an improvement.
I've found that many of the telemarketers either use a random number with the same area code as the number they're calling or an 800/866 number for the caller id. I've had the same phone number since college and don't know anybody at all with that area code. So any call coming from my area code is a drunk misdial or a telemarketer. Very handy for filtering two classes of annoying calls.
Once we've lost the ability to fix the problem, people will begin to care again. Apathy is caused by life being easy; fixing the problem of people not caring is going to be very painful.
It's hard to understand how disconnected they are from us and our daily concerns. They're representing their interests and the interests of everyone they know and meet. Senators, and the people who hang out with senators, don't have to worry about being outsourced. "Outsourcing" is something that makes people's business more successful and their bank accounts bigger. Why would you oppose it?
Or, if you're feeling cynical:
They're connected now, if they weren't already before. When the US turns into a third world shithole because of their actions, they'll be the feudal lords or safely relocate to a less distasteful locale. (Or at least they hope that's the case. Or they know they'll be dead before any sort of collapse and don't care what their lifestyle costs the chattel.) If they aren't so pampered and surrounded by sycophants to see the outcomes of their actions, they're just-world believers and think the displaced workers probably deserved being laid off.