How do you feel about having your mom find out that you gave “Kinky Drinking Games: Spring break edition” a four star review? Or about sharing your positive experience of hemorrhoid ointment with that client you’re trying to impress? What if your strongly pro-life supervisor at work sees your face in an ad for “Everything You Need to Know to Prepare for an Abortion?” Not keen? Google recently updated their Terms of Service to include something called Shared Endorsements, which will go live on November 11. If you have a Google Plus account, Shared Endorsements allow Google to use your name, image, and activity on Google sites to advertise to your family and friends. Google Plus users under eighteen years of age are automatically excluded from Shared Endorsements, but adults need to change their account settings if they don’t want their information used in ads. If you would like to opt out, here’s how: 1)      Sign in to your Google Plus account 2)      From the “Home” drop-down menu in the top left corner, choose “Settings.” 3)      Check to see if Shared Endorsements are on or off. If they are on, click “Edit.”   4)      The Shared Endorsements page is long and the actual opt-out is below the fold. Scroll down. You’re looking for this:     5)      Make sure the tick box is un-checked, then hit “Save.” 6)      A warning message will pop up; hit “Continue.”     You’ve opted out.  Go plus-one  “Rabid Zombie Ferret Fanciers” in (relative)...

Technology changes at a frightening pace; the future is now. Tomorrow arrives unexpectedly and frequently with little regard to the conventions and ideals that made yesterday possible.  Mobile devices, the cloud, Bring-Your-Own-Device (BYOD), X-as-a-Service and other Gatneresque buzzwords have reduced traditional PCs and notebooks to a commodity. For Microsoft, this is devastating.  Their entire business model was built on traditional PCs and the servers that drive them. Their licensing model, marketing, management and entire corporate culture are designed and refined to support a declining market segment that likely will never see growth again. Microsoft believes that its software has intrinsic value; a license should be paid for every device that accesses software containing Microsoft’s intellectual property.   Google believes that software is a means to an end, not an end unto itself; it is the data that is valuable, not the software that manipulates it.  Google charges on a per-user basis to access the tools required to manipulate that data.  It gives the operating systems away for free. Per device versus per user; the debate over which was more efficient has raged for ages. Microsoft has offered lip service to the concept for decades; however, its licensing models have always leaned towards per-device.  Software has device limits for install, Microsoft’s remote-access implementations make you count the number of devices you remotely access your desktops from, and so forth. Microsoft have even recently increased the cost of their per-user licencing by 15% because individuals using that model were (in Microsoft’s view of the universe) getting too much value for their dollar.  Back when there wasn’t even a computer for every employee – and families often had a single PC for all members – this view of the world made a sort of sense.  End users didn’t...