Multi-tasking with Chrome

Finally, Google’s sense of humour has returned.

I love Chrome, and I’ve used it every single day for a few years now. As far as I’m concerned, no other browser even comes close.

So what could be better than new functionality which allows you to be 50% more productive by enhanced multitasking. Oh yes, the aptly-named Multitask allows you to connect two mice to the one computer and enjoy twice the productivity by having one in each hand. (Mice, that is!).

Don’t be a sceptic – after a short period of time, it feels ‘completely natural’!

As architect, Clancy Johnson, says on the video, although the results of his job can often mean the difference between life and death for clients, Chrome Multitask takes the stress out of his work as he no longer has to think too hard about any one project.

Hell – we could all use some of that, right? 

You can even share your computer simultaneously with your ‘significant other’ – just as devoted couple Jennifer and Carl MacDonald do. Their fights over who got to use the laptop first are a thing of the past; now they can check their email at the same time, each with a Chrome window in their half of the same laptop screen.

(Jenny, a word of warning: you might want to cover the tracks of your extra-marital activities a little more thoroughly next time. Carl seems an observant ((and jealous)) kind of chap).

Chrome Multitask–You’ll never look back!

The possibilities are simply endless.

Update:- If you think you can handle it, there’s more.

Gmail Tap–best suited to those with fat fingers.

“You can say 2 things with your fingers, which you mouth can only say one of”.

Google – your April 1^st posts are back in business! Love it! 

Google Chrome is now 2nd most popular browser

From Paul Thurrott’s WinInfo Short Takes of the week 02/12/11:

Google's Chrome has been on the market for only three years, but it has already surpassed Mozilla Firefox to become the number-two most-often-used web browser after Microsoft's Internet Explorer (IE). That's the word from the market researchers at StatCounter, at least, though it's only a matter of time before others who follow web-browser usage share report similar findings[.]

I jumped on the Chrome bandwagon at the end of 2008 and haven’t looked back. In 3 short years it’s got to the point where there are now hardly any people I know that *don’t* use Chrome. It’s the de facto standard browser at work and I live in Chrome every single day.

Firefox has turned into a bit of an also-ran (although they are at least fighting back a bit now) and IE has lurched from versions 7, 8 to 9, all promising the world and under-delivering each time. 

It’s been a long-standing joke that Internet Explorer is simply a one-time portal for users to download a real web browser.  That’s still true today, sadly, as How to Geek cheekily alludes to:

IE 9 is fine; it just isn’t anywhere near as great as Google Chrome. And that’s the problem.

December’s Wacky Search Terms

There have been rich pickings for weird and wonderful search terms over the last month.  Here are some of my favourites.

“formula on how to benchmark high attrition of lawyers” - I think it's called the credit crunch... don't ask me for the formula though.

“just minxy models” - Just?

“perv chat” - oh you dirty web-surfer, you.

“fu*k you” – Charming.  Just charming.  Why would somebody search for this?  I guess that's the typical Bing.com user for you!  :p

"santa claus sample" - oh boy... a sample of what, exactly?

“what to revise for property equity and trusts exam” – try your syllabus for starters.  But aren't property law and equity and trusts usually split?!  

“shenanigans law” - ....I smell a sitcom brewing!!

“send-a-smile office 2010 turn off” - it certainly turned me off from the beta until I disabled it.

“facebook sex” - I get about half of dozen of this searches on Law Actually most days.  Shocking, isn't it?

“grandpas porn” - oh.... dear!!  You'll find nothing to get 'Gramps' off at Law Actually, I'm afraid.  Or is this Gramps in the starring role - which is even more disturbing? 

“are people who own fountain pens lawyers?” - Well, probably not ALL of them...

“advocate cocktails” - ill-advised.

“getting a job in new york as llm”  Ok… I'm going to explain to you everything that's wrong with that question... this might take a while....

“how to make use of a calligraphic biro” - a calligraphic biro... errrrrm.....  I refer you to my previous response.

"jeans bared her buttocks" - I hope the surfer from New South Wales who searched for this found what they were looking for...

"uk laws against santa" - seriously, what is this?

“in a lecture would you need to sit at the front with a Dictaphone” - Oh, no - most dictaphone users go out of their way to cause maximum annoyance/frustration to others present in room.  They usually insist on sitting at the back but squeeze by and scramble over everybody else to go and place their wretched dictaphone at the front, switch it on and off during breaks and, of course, collect it at the end.

"underwear problems in office" -I should imagine there were lots of 'underwear problems' across offices all over the UK this month - what with it being Christmas party season and all!  ;-)

“death cow attack” - Is this some kind of Star Wars spoof?

"nigella lawson gloopily and glossily" Oh yeah?!?! :p   ;-)

"santa claus laws" - Strange as this might seem, there are no laws that I know of (in England and Wales at least) that specifically pertain to Santa Claus.  That's not to say that no laws at all apply to him - see my previous post.

“lawyer on christmas tree” - I guess it makes a change from an angel, though it would certainly bring tears to his or her eyes.

“hitting dead ends with the dissertation” – An inevitable stage of the process.

“free nasty texting” – Please, show some restraint!

“colorado's vail ski accident l dangling upside legal sues down and pantless a ski lift. vail's blue sky basin” - It started off well, didn't it and then....?  Typing random words into Google isn’t usually the best way to quickly find what you’re looking for.  And just out of interest, what WERE you trying to look for?!

“i am here as the personal lawyer of the deceased to ensure that we have a successfully claim” - I think you can all make your own minds up about this one.

“dissertation work for bed students” – bed students?  Is this a lazy form of distance learning?

“old boys clubs, uk, law” - It's invitation only, I'm afraid.

“paralegaling in hospitals” - Is that essentially junior ambulance chasing?

“sexey x-mis photos” - I'm not sure if that's a poor attempt at a play on words or just dodgy spelling.

“the legal law of the usage of a Dictaphone” - the legal law - I love it.  :D

...and to top it off, here's a classic I found yesterday - a visitor from New Jersey with an apparent problem has turned to Google for help:

"sperm when texting a girl" - what do you even say to that?  :-|

Googling with Bing

 

In fairness to Microsoft, their new search engine, Bing, is actually pretty good and a huge step forwards from Windows Live Search. Having tried it on and off for a few weeks now, I’m continually impressed by it and would say that for certain types of searches in particular, it’s actually superior to Google.

Of course, one of Microsoft’s biggest challenges in successfully competing in the online search space is removing the connection people make in their minds about searching online and the name Google; arguably Google is far more than just the industry standard now – their name is synonymous with online search.

And this video from College Humor recognises that.  Brilliantly.

Google April Fools’ a flop? Ingenuity has left the building

 

I can’t be the only one thinking this.  Recent years have been so good on the Google April Fools’ front but this year’s offering falls disappointingly flat, courtesy of CADIE.  In 2007 we had the brilliant Google Flushdrive (which essentially involved flushing cables down a toilet for connectivity) and in 2008 we were treated to the ingenious Google Custom Time which ‘allowed’ you to back-date emails – primarily for mischief making.  Both ideas were great April Fools’ trickery.

This year, however, Google have unveiled CADIE Cognitive Autoheuristic Distributed-Intelligence Entity for April 1st.  And it just seems like a massive damp squib to me.  It’s something about, um, oh go and read it for yourself.

There’s a quirky blog deliberately designed to look amateurishly bad which features Cadie the panda – go figure.  It’s ‘something’ I guess…. if you like that kind of thing.  As if that were not enough, though, there’s a YouTube channel and some explanatory text.  Hmm.

And that’s it?  Yeah, that’s really ‘it’.

Seriously, Google: you’ve let us down for April Fools’ this year.  

GoogleMaps Streetview Silliness: A Double Bill

From The Independent 21/03/09:

The Internet giant Google has been forced to remove dozens of images from Street View, its controversial mapping service, after complaints from users who felt it breached their privacy.

After launching in Britain on Thursday the service, which gives 360-degree three-dimensional views of 25 of Britain's biggest cities, immediately drew criticism from people objecting to invasions of privacy and offensive imagery.

Among the images pulled within the first 24 hours – even though faces were blurred – are a man vomiting on the pavement in Shoreditch High Street, east London, another man in shorts and T-shirt entering a sex shop in Soho, and a man being arrested behind a security cordon in Camden, north London.

"When we launched the service, we explained how importantly we take the service and explained how easy it is to remove pictures. We have received a few removals in the past 24 hours but less than expected," he said. "The tools are there for users to remove pictures they are not happy with. We are pleased the tools we developed are working well."

Okay.  I don’t ‘get’ the problem here. Google seem to have taken a wholly proportionate and responsible approach, balancing the need for the usefulness of the service to continue while respecting people’s ‘right’ to privacy – such as it is.  On the face of it, there doesn’t seem to be much difference between being snapped by the ‘Google car’ and inadvertently being caught in the frame of someone’s holiday shot on a street somewhere.  Let’s remember, the chances of you being caught on camera by the ‘Google Car’ are relatively miniscule and even then, the likelihood that you’re recognisable is even less.  In the unlikely event that you are – and you have a problem with it – Google offer a means of resolving the problem by obscuring your identity.  So, seriously: what more can they do? 

For my money, I think there’s a certain amount of truth behind the notion that a person will only be bothered about this kind of thing if they were somewhere (or doing something) they shouldn’t have been. 

From Outlaw.com 19/03/09:

A privacy campaigner will launch a legal challenge to Google's Street View service, which was launched today. Simon Davies of Privacy International says that he will pursue "a test case" against Google.

"There still hasn't been a formal complaint put to the Information Commissioner, but we will [file one] now on the basis of prior consent being needed for this service," said Davies. "I think there is something of a test case in this. We are arguing that a line has to be drawn to empower the individual to make a conscious decision whether to allow his or her images on to such a system."

The UK's privacy watchdog the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) endorsed the service last summer.

"We are satisfied that Google is putting in place adequate safeguards to avoid any risk to the privacy or safety of individuals, including the blurring of vehicle registration marks and the faces of anyone included in Street View images," said an ICO statement.

Err, yes, Simon Davies.  Good luck with that.

Keyword Quirks

I’m always keeping a close eye on the ‘stats’ for Law Actually and I’m often reminded of the wacky things that people punch into Google.  Those who ask search engines ‘questions’ usually rank as the funniest search terms of all.  Sometimes, far better than hitting the search button, users would benefit from taking a step back and really THINKING about what it is they’re searching for.  The last couple of days have been particularly fruitful on the wacky keyword front so thought I’d share a few with you, faithful readers:

- “are all cameras actually speed cameras” ….Probably not!  For instance, I’ve got an old Polaroid somewhere that I’m pretty sure isn’t one.

- “blog my struggle to get a training contract” Oh come on!  Chin up and all that.

- “is l.p.c a qualification in its own right” Just stop it! I don’t want this can of worms opened again. 

- “company law topics for dessertation”  Oh boy.  Your ‘dessertation’, eh?  Hmm… good luck with that one.

- “is the iphone good for law students” I don’t know.  Is it?  Either way, surely you’ve got something better to spend you money on.

And my absolute favourite:

- “what did charlotte dymond say as she died” I don’t know…  Ouch?

**—UPDATE—**
After ‘going to press’ I came across another couple of keyword brarmers.  I’m still trying to figure out why there are so many rich pickings at the moment.

- “sex in looe” I’m no huge fan of Looe, granted, but this search just seems to defile an innocent Cornish town.  Shame on you, you ‘smutty Googler’.  Or maybe they meant 'sex in lieu’.  The question then, of course, becomes, ‘in lieu of what?’ 

- “dissitation and breach of confidence and human rights article 8 and 10” OK, at the risk of stating the obvious, the fact you’re struggling with spelling ‘dissertation’ doesn’t bode too well for the prospects of you turning in a killer paper!  Far be it for me to ‘diss’ you though.  Or is that ‘dissit’?

- “the law on cameras in the toilet” Oh honestly!

Google Earth helps lead roof thief plot crimes

From The Independent 16/03/09:

“The highly detailed satellite images provided by Google Earth opened a unique window on the world when it was launched in 2005, one that proved all too enticing for roofer Tom Berge; he used the website to hunt down a fortune in scrap metal on the roofs of historic buildings near his home in London.

Berge, 27, stole lead worth £100,000 from schools, churches, museums and other large buildings during a six-month spree that began in September last year. He used the website to identify the lead roofs by their darker colour. He was sentenced to eight months in prison – suspended for two years – after confessing to more than 30 offences.”

This reminds me of that classic Only Fools and Horses episode – you know, with the miraculous weeping statue which turns out to be rain dripping through (caused by Del Boy pilfering the lead from the roof).   Admittedly Google Earth didn’t form part of the storyline but it was back in the 70s, I guess. 

Seemingly innocuous technology has always been, and always will be, put to mischievous uses.  That’s just plain old human nature for you.  There’s not a great deal that Google could do to regulate this either.  Still, I sure there’s somebody out there in the ‘sphere who will be clamouring for Google to pixelate or otherwise obscure the roofs on web-base map services etc etc.  You’ll be pleased to to hear, though, faithful readers, that that somebody isn’t me.  

Google Developments

Google have really been cranking up the creative lever recently and have released a number of improvements to their already excellent Gmail service.

I’ve been a big fan of Gmail dating back to September 2004 when I first signed up to an account and quickly recognised Google’s email offering for what it was: an online e-mail service that could rival the functionality of locally-based email accessed through a ‘client’.   Up to that point web-based email was undoubtedly the poor relation of email solutions but Google’s offering quickly changed all that. Back then, Gmail didn’t offer IMAP support so there was no choice but to use it via a browser but the huge benefits of keeping email ‘out there’ in cyberspace were nonetheless obvious. And this is years before the phrases ‘Cloud Computing’ and ‘Software as a Service’ (SaaS) were ever coined.

Today, of course, people who aren’t keeping their email in the ‘cloud’ are just blatantly behind the curve and potentially courting disaster should their hard disk fail or some other misfortune strike that makes their locally-based email inaccessible.

Most recently, Gmail has seen offline support via their Google Gears technology be added to the extensive list of bells and whistles that Gmail already boasted. A quick look down the Google Mail labs list in your account quickly reveals a long list of truly innovative – if rather peculiar – experimental features.  While I’ve found the tasks list, superstars, quick links and custom label colours features all extremely useful, I can’t say the same for all of them.  Personally, I don’t think I’ll ever find a need for ‘Mail Goggles’ or ‘Old Snakey’. 

This morning, I noticed that the menu bar in Gmail has been updated which has revealed some interesting ‘muscle memory’ that I’ve developed over the past few years when deleting email.  The bar’s visual refresh - which, dare I say it looks a little ‘Windows 7 esque’ - has seen the delete button move to the left.  Because of this, I’ve been hitting the ‘Labels’ button all morning instead of delete which has made my morning task of wading through emails a touch more tiresome that usual. 

Of course, Google illustrated on Saturday afternoon that even they aren’t above a slip-up when every hit from their search engine was marked as potentially harmful to your computer. Cheeky Google even had the audacity to flag up Law Actually as harmful:

 

Google have since admitted that the problem which reportedly lasted for about 40 minutes was caused by ‘human error’ but nonetheless left millions of web users scratching their heads for a while.

When you know Google is getting too powerful!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Is it just me, or does 'Kevin' look just like the BMW Sauber driver Nick Heidfeld, just with tats?!?

And if I were Kevin, I wouldn't worry about 'Jen'.  His current date is much more preferable!!

Anyhow, it's good stuff!

Full steam ahead for the Google Navy

From Boat Owner 15/09/08:

Google, the Internet search engine company already renowned for radical ideas has really pushed the boat out this time.

According to a patent application seen by The Times newspaper, the multi-billion-dollar company may be embarking on a futuristic server farm aboard what has already been dubbed its 'computer navy'.
Huge banks of computers storing billions of web pages may soon be housed on barges moored offshore, which would use renewable wave energy as a power source.

The company also hopes to avoid paying property taxes on the huge installations it currently runs across the globe.

Electricity consumption by internet servers is predicted to skyrocket in the next 20 years, and as a result, companies such as Google, Microsoft and Sun Systems have been investigating ever more radical solutions to the problem of keeping the electronics cool.

I have to say I quite like the idea of the whole Google houseboat/navy thing, not that it truly matters where their servers are stored I suppose. However you look at this, though, it’s good to see the companies who stand as the world’s computing superpowers do a little forward planning for the problems of tomorrow. Granted, most if not all the reasons for their doing so are self-serving as they look to cut energy costs and achieve tax savings, but if it means they become a little greener, I’m sure that’ll appease the enviro-friendly crowd into the bargain. Plus, as the internet continues to grow in importance and ubiquity, perhaps its long term sustainability is dependent on such a green and plentiful power source.

Facebook... again

I feel I’ve been giving Facebook a bit of an easy time recently; I’ve hardly mentioned it on Law Actually at all. So what the hell, let’s make up for it now. But don’t worry – I’m not just going to berate them for the fun of it – there’s actually genuine news developments going on here.

From Wininfo Short-takes for 12.5.08:

Facebook [finally] Protects the Kids
"Social networking service Facebook has agreed to institute a broad set of policies aimed at protecting young users from online predators and offensive content. The change, which comes at the request of 49 US state attorneys, will require a bit of behavioral technology to weed out those who really are 18 years old from those who are clearly 49."

It’s not entirely clear whether this policy will be rolled out to all countries in time or whether it’s going to remain solely a ‘US thing’. While I sincerely hope it proves to be the former, either way, this development is at least two years too late. I’ve been clamouring for this for so long, I’m kind of shocked it’s finally happened.

Microsoft looks to snap up Facebook

Since the whole Yahoo takeover will-they, won’t-they went belly-up this earlier this week, Microsoft have been busy licking their lips, contemplating which other company to sink their teeth into. Well, now it seems they’ve turned their sights to Facebook.

As it turns out, Microsoft already own a stake in Facebook – 1.6% to be exact. Paying $240 million for that paltry slice back in 2007, it puts a value on the company of $15 billion. Yeah, you read that correctly. I don’t get it either.

As Paul Thurrott points out in his Wininfo article:

“Few believe Facebook is worth anywhere near that, however. The site currently has about 109 million unique visitors a month, making it the fifth most-visited Web property after Google (625 million), Microsoft (563 million), Yahoo! (505 million), and MySpace (117 million).

While Facebook's numbers are up dramatically year over year, the company has faltered in its bid to monetize its popularity. Facebook makes very little via advertising, and half of its revenues from 2007 were derived directly from Microsoft's investment.”

Buying Facebook doesn’t appear to be a very logical back-up plan. Okay, they might be looking to score a home run with the social networking side of things but what else does it give Microsoft? The Yahoo acquisition would have given Redmond a substantial leg-up across a broad range on online technologies to help them better compete with Google. After all, that’s the whole reason they’re doing this in the first place. But what do they get with Facebook? It makes very little money, is already a fairly mature and full-featured social networking tool and, remains at risk of falling out of favour in the social networking world. After all, people get bored easily with online technologies; while they’re flying high at the moment, who’s to say it’ll last?

Google Custom Time

In keeping with previous 'releases' by Google on 1st April each year, the internet monolith have this time rolled out a new feature to Gmail: Custom Time. This handy function allows users to send email so that it appears to have been sent hours, days, months or even years earlier than when the user actually clicked 'send'.

Here's how Google explain how to use it: "Just click "Set custom time" from the Compose view. Any email you send to the past appears in the proper chronological order in your recipient's inbox. You can opt for it to show up read or unread by selecting the appropriate option."

According to Google, there is an upper limit of pre-dating your mail back to 1st April 2004 - the date Gmail was released.

It certainly looks like a neat feature with a multitude of uses, as borne out by the 'testimonials':

"I just got two tickets to Radiohead by being the 'first' to respond to a co-worker's 'first-come, first-serve' email. Someone else had already won them, but I told everyone to check their inboxes again. Everyone sort of knows I used Custom Time on this one, but I'm denying it."
Robby S., Paralegal
 
"I used to be an honest person; but now I don't have to be. It's just so much easier this way. I've gained a lot of productivity by not having to think about doing the 'right' thing."
Todd J., Investment Banker

"This feature allows people to manipulate and mislead people with falsified time data. Time is a sacred truth that should never be tampered with."
Michael L., Epistemology Professor

And perhaps best of all: "The entire concept of 'late' no longer exists for me. That's pretty cool. Thanks Gmail!"
Miriam S., Delivery girl

Pretty neat, eh?

You only get 10 emails per year which can be 'pre dated', though. Google's explanation:

Our researchers have concluded that allowing each person more than ten pre-dated emails per year would cause people to lose faith in the accuracy of time, thus rendering the feature useless.

And the technology behind this wonderful new function in Gmail?

Gmail utilizes an e-flux capacitor to resolve issues of causality.

Love it. Almost as good as their 'TiSP flush drive' last year. If the idea of wired broadband where you flush cables down your toilet to establish a connection wasn't wacky enough, an email-time-machine more or less nails it.

Google Moon

From Scenta 3.3.08:

In what's being described as the most wide-scale advertising attempt ever known, Google is planing to "brand" its logo into the surface of the moon so that it is visible from Earth, although presumably via telescope rather than to the naked eye.

The web giant is said to have paid the US government an estimated $1 billion for the rights to the lunar land.

I came across this story last week and initially suspected it might be another Google April Fools. Apparently not, though. I guess this scheme is somewhat in keeping with Google’s light-hearted and rather maverick corporate image. But the moon, seriously? Isn’t it a touch excessive and unnecessary? Google has become synonymous with the internet; there can hardly be a single person left in the civilised world who isn't aware of Google. However, with such a large market share in internet search and advertising, maybe Google are looking for a new customer base - extra-terrestrial web users. Yeah, that must be it.

Microsoft & Yahoo Merger?

I have to admit that when I first heard about this a few days ago, I was initially sceptical and very dubious of Microsoft’s proposed merger with Yahoo. My thinking here was that Microsoft was a big and ungainly monolith already, without adding additional baggage. Their MSN brand (since subsumed under the Windows Live umbrella) has solidly ticked-over, but never once truly snapped at Google’s heels.

Microsoft seemed to have lost its wow-factor in recent years and, with exception of Office 2007, its overwhelming successes have been few and far between. Of course, the cold-to-lukewarm reception that Vista enjoyed in its first year of availability is a case in point: of 250 million windows PCs sold, only 100 million were running Vista – leading the observer to the conclusion that 150 million or so machines must have shipped with the previous OS, Windows XP. And what a rocky and tumultuous road, that proved – getting Longhorn out of the door as I documented over a year ago: a meandering journey through 5 years of bumbling development, lack of direction and a culling of previously promised features.

The innumerable antitrust actions that the Redmond giant had been slapped with in the past decade must also be factored-in. Few regulators are prepared to give Microsoft the benefit of the doubt now, with Europe taking a particularly tough stance.

That said, Paul Thurrott makes a number of very interesting points and explains why, perhaps, the Microsoft/Yahoo merger is a major step forwards for both the company and the wider internet-surfing public alike. Without it, Microsoft may well continue losing ground against Google in the battle of the titans, with the latter going on to take over the world entirely. Or something like that.

But seriously, Paul’s analysis is usually right on the money. As he points out, “Google is a new kind of competitor and needs to be addressed differently.” Equally, Microsoft, unlike Google and Yahoo still doesn’t ‘get’ the internet, the way the online and computing world is heading and the whole ‘cloud computing’ concept that’s descending on the world right now. As he neatly sum-ups, “Yahoo will bring a healthy attitude about platform-agnostic cloud computing to the insular world of Microsoft and, hopefully, inspire the company to reach for the future instead of just defending the past.”

Intellectual Undernourishment?

From: The Times 14/01/08

Google is “white bread for the mind”, and the internet is producing a generation of students who survive on a diet of unreliable information, a professor of media studies will claim this week.

She believes that easy access to information has dulled students’ sense of curiosity and is stifling debate. She claims that many undergraduates arrive at university unable to discriminate between anecdotal and unsubstantiated material posted on the internet.

“I call this type of education ‘the University of Google’.

“Google offers easy answers to difficult questions. But students do not know how to tell if they come from serious, refereed work or are merely composed of shallow ideas, superficial surfing and fleeting commitments.

I first read this article in the Times last week on an early morning journey to Portsmouth of all places. I’ve done a shocking amount of travelling this month with more still to come, worryingly. But I digress. Since then, I’ve read a whole host of articles concerning the growing problem that schools, colleges and universities are facing in respect of plagiarism and the ‘coursework industry’ (the multitude of websites who charge pupils for downloading completed essays etc.) The university which I attended as an undergraduate adopted a particularly hard-line stance on plagiarism and virtually from day 1, we were drilled in what did and did not constitute plagiarism and how to ensure we avoided it. From what I’ve heard on the grapevine, this is not true of all law faculties.

But as many of the articles point out, ignorance and lack of pupils’ understanding re. citing the work of others is most probably to blame. While there will always be a minority of cheats, scoundrels and lazy-ar*es, the vast majority of pupils/students plagiarise through lack of knowledge – nothing else.

As regards the internet and the easy access to information it affords, I couldn’t disagree more with the argument that it is ‘dulling students’ sense of curiosity’. In fact, from my experience, the opposite holds true. I’m much more inclined to investigate a topic that before I would have shied away from because library based research techniques would have taken too long. The benefits of being able to look up an answer quickly, on the fly as it were, are huge. The fact that extra care need be taken with some sources is neither here nor there, quite frankly.

Granted, too many students may rely too heavily on Google search results, Wikipedia and dubious, unsubstantiated sources. But guidance and education on sifting the wheat from the chaff is the answer – not returning to wholesale library sources exclusively. Frankly, the world has changed and used correctly the internet has revolutionised research, making it faster, easier, richer and more current. The small trade off in reliability when used carelessly is nothing compared to the advantages it offers.

White bread for the mind?! Humph! It’s more like a healthy wholemeal to go.

The Michael discusses Google and the law

Today at work, during one of the many interludes to hardcore grafting, I chatted cordially with my boss about the various legal skirmishes that Google are wont to get into. Last week, we discussed the falling-out between eBay and Google whereby the former had withdrawn all sponsored links from the latter’s listings. Something to do with eBay being pi*sed that Google were rivaling paypal with their own payment gateway, Google checkout. That same day I read up on the background of the story on... Google News, coincidentally enough but haven’t checked since. Quite frankly, I’ve neither the enthusiasm nor interest to check again. Not today at least.

Also, I touched briefly on the topic of one of my (very few) posts on this blog: about the lawsuit over Google adwords due to various trademark infringements committed by Google at the expense of American Blind Co. Well, having checked again, this lawsuit is still rumbling on.

This topic should appeal to me: I studied intellectual property a couple of years ago and certainly enjoyed the trademarks section of the module. Somewhat worryingly, perhaps, I’m past giving a flying hoo-hah as to the outcome – or the nitty-gritty of whether Google have actually committed a trademark violation in respect of American Blind’s registered phrases. Shame.