You do realize that recording public officials, law enforcement and the like is going to land you in jail, right? Actually, it's already been demonstrated, when a black teen recorded a police officer publicly harassing and beating another black teen. So the one who got 8 months in jail and is facing 7 YEARS in prison? Not the 15 year old behind the police officer's baton, but the one who RECORDED the event with his camera phone.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1e9Htc6FMY

When it becomes legal and admissible evidence for an officer to bring in his dash camera footage, but ILLEGAL for a citizen to record an officer breaking the law, what have we become as a society? Seriously. This stuff is happening NOW.

And it scares the bejezzus out of me, and thousands of my compatriots.

Here's another of a fan running on a field, the cops chase him down, start beating him up ON THE FIELD in front of thousands of fans, when the fans storm onto the field and beat the crap out of the cops.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBfEh4aBt1g

With Google Glass, how soon before cops start smashing your $1,500 device, or shatter your phone, to prevent any evidence of their wrongdoing?

Maybe "The Final Cut", almost 10 years ago wasn't so far off:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0364343/

"A Zoë Chip is chip placed in your brain at birth to record your entire life. When you die, the footage from your life is edited into a “Rememory”-- a film shown at your funeral pieced together by an editor. A toy for the privileged, Zoë Chips are changing the face of human interaction, but there are those who are against this emerging technology, and believe that memories are meant to fade."

As much as I object to an "Opt Out" mentality, we could make this easier, by ensuring that all Google Glass users adhere to the "Obscuring" policy (does not exist yet).

Basically if you're in a coffee shop and wearing your Google Glass, anyone in that shop who is signed into Google would get an alert that they are in proximity to Glass, and could then "opt out" of monitoring video and audio. The Google Glass wearer's device would then just blur our the faces of those who have opted out (easy, Google already does it for Maps), and subtract the audio from those users (harder to do, me thinks).

Anyone using Glass with an active monitoring device in-play (video, audio) SHOULD be notifying the people around them that they're actively recording them. Not only is this illegal in most states, if you're in on private property (i.e. Panera, Starbucks, coffee shop, McDonalds, etc.), you can be ejected and asked to leave.

Additionally, if someone near you objects to you recording them, or their surroundings with your Glass device and asks you to stop recording, you have to comply, or you can be slapped with fines and arrest for "Unauthorized Recording" (i.e. recording laws of the state in question). You can't record someone nor take photos of them without their consent. Do people do it? Sure, but if everyone starts wearing Glass, you'll see more people banned from public spaces (i.e. private property businesses) for doing so.

Also, since you can't use these devices anywhere near government buildings, public transportation systems (trains, planes, airports, bus stations, bridges, highways), it's really going to be a pain to take the device on and off hundreds of times a day.

As one of my colleagues once said: "This is an example of a good idea, poorly implemented."

With all the money you're going to spend filing those patents, why not contribute to the research instead? $20M would help bring the industry a long way :)

http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/ac/qs/ope/fee031913.htm

I think you probably meant to link to this copy of the file instead:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ed/PVeff(rev130307).jpg

Which of course, you should never do, since .htaccess will grind the performance of your site directly into the ground. It also means that anyone with access to the filessytem (such as an already-hacked WP instance) can revert your changes.

http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.2/en/howto/htaccess.html#when

Because a significant portion of Google's backend infrastructure is run on Java.

That's funny, because I just interviewed with Google last week for an SRE role, and they specifically wanted someone with hardcore Python and Java development experience, at the filesystem and kernel level. They're moving -everything- into those two language engines.

Or, you can vote for neither and raise the awareness and quality of the other dozen-or-so political parties that are not on either side of that tired, worn out old coin.

Vote for new change, not the same coins you've always carried with you.

Dropbox offers a few advantages over rsync: It runs in real time and detects changed files, syncing them instantly without polling the filesystem. (using services like inotify). It has iPhone and Android clients. It's easy to install and doesn't carry other requirements like cygwin, and doesn't break in all kinds of odd corner cases like rsync on windows does. It offers central management of which computers sync which files and folders (well, SugarSync does this much better). It offers a web based view of your synced files for when you don't have your own computer. (This can be a plus or minus depending on your viewpoint). It keeps backup copies of your deleted and changed files.

You do know that Dropbox is already using rsync, right? Look at the code... it's available. They wrapped some service logic around it, but it's rsync (librsync) under the hood.

Don't worry, your friends and family will upload pictures of you and tag them for you so Facebook has photos of you to draw from.

One of the biggest flaws in the design of Facebook, was allowing other people to tag you in photos, without your approval.

What should happen, is you get tagged in photos, and for each photo you're tagged in, you have to approve it, before it goes live. Just like someone "friending" you on FB.

I'm shocked they let blind tagging of people happen like that.

Then there is the old standby "resisting arrest".

Uhm...you can't be arrested for resisting arrest. If that's the case, what were you arrested for in the first place, for which you were "resisting"?

I haven't used titlebars on any app in almost a decade (sawfish). I also don't use icons, docks, wharfs or menubars. I prefer my environment to be clean, fast, functional and uncluttered.

As long as the browser's default behavior remains the same, and the 'tabs-on-titlebar' is an optional feature that can be enabled, that's fine.

Changing the default behavior is always bad. Always.

How do you run their CloudOS while on an airplane? In a train tunnel? While disconnected from the Internet itself?

There's a growing, ignorant view that everyone has access to Internet all the time, and that's simply not true, and in fact, is growing in the opposite direction. Many people are taking their devices with them more and more, and finding that they have less connectivity than they thought they did.

Home? Yes. Work? Yes. Friend's house? Yes. But all the touch points in-between? No, not likely... so what then?