This Week in Google 233 (Transcript)

Leo Laporte: It’s time for TWiG, This Week in Google, Jeff Jarvis, Gina Trapani and Danny Sullivan of Search Engine Land will discuss Mac cont signals to SEO’s, Google Glass best practices, a little bit of a fight coming up on that. Is Yahoo really the number one page on the Web? We’ll find out why, next on Twig.

Netcasts you love, from people you trust. This is TWiT. Bandwidth for This Week in Google is provided by Cachefly at cachefly.com.

This is TWiG, This Week in Google Episode 233, recorded January 22, 2014

Glass Goes to the Movies

This Week in Google is brought to you by shutterstock.com, with over 28 million high quality stock photos, illustrations, vectors, and video clips. Shutterstock helps you take your creative projects to the next level. For 25% off your new account, go to shutterstock.com and use the offer code: TWIG114. And by, LegalZoom. Visit legalzoom.com to save on your legal needs and gain access to a network of legal plan attorneys for guidance. Legalzoom is not a lawfirm, but provides self-help services at your specific direction. Visit legalzoom.com and use the offer code: TWIG to receive $10 off at checkout. And by 99Designs, the world's largest graphic design marketplace. 99Designs connects businesses to get quality affordable designs. With a community of more than 270,000 graphic designers. Visit 99designs.com/twig to receive a free power pack upgrade, valued at $99

Leo: It's time for TWiG, This Week in Google, the show that talks about the latest in the Googleverse, in the cloud and Facebook and Twitter and all that jazz. Gina Trapani is here from her offices at ThinkUp, the launch under her belt, ready to face the brave new world of business.

Gina Trapani: Of actual users and customers who are demanding to know what we're giving them for their money, yes, hello!

Leo: Yeah, they got the credit card charge this week so now they want to know.

Gina: Yes, that was the real test. Good to be here, as always.

Leo: Great to have you. Also with us from Davos, Switzerland, and with a little bit of a wonky connection but we just love him so much we're going to put up with it, Jeff Jarvis. Hi Jeff.

Jeff Jarvis: Yeah, I'm in a world seven seconds behind. Sorry.

Leo: Hey, where are you? Are you in some special Davos world economic forum mission control?

Jeff: I'm in the media center.

Leo: Oh, it looks like it.

Jeff: Filled with desks of- Empty now because they're all at parties.

Leo: Is Bono there?

Jeff: He's here this year. I'm supposed to see him for a dinner tomorrow night. Not an on-team dinner, but a large dinner.

Leo: How fun, that's exciting.

Gina: Wow...

Leo: Hey, that other voice Danny Sullivan is here from search engine land and marketing engine land, and always one of the most astute observers of the Google versus. Always great to have you on Danny, thanks for joining us.

Danny Sullivan: Thank you.

Leo: Yeah, I'm just looking at my ThinkUp, Gina, Tacow Meeky followed me. Do geekery, geek business and tech sound like good descriptions? Oh yes.

Gina: Yes they do.

Leo: Oh my. This week’s key stats, this is nice. As time’s gone by this has gotten deeper and deeper and more and more interesting.

Gina: Yes. That’s the point. Actually I saw that 3 years ago you signed the lease on the brick house.

Leo: I signed the lease for the brick house.

Gina: That was really cool to watch.

Leo: Hard to believe. Yeah we did that on the air. Yeah.

Gina: Crazy. Yeah.

Leo: With my special pen.

Gina: That was cool.

Leo: That’s kind of neat. This also is by the way, the 30th anniversary of the 1984 Apple Superbowl commercial that was aired on this day, thirty years ago, for the first time and the last time in most areas. I think they aired it in some other places just so they could win a Cleo award. This is the ad that announced the Macintosh to the world. All you have to do is Google 1984 ad and you’ll find plenty of copies of it. Should I play it, Chad you think? Here we are, and oh there's an ad. I have to skip the ad, there’s an ad on the ad. That seems a little much. Everybody has seen this so many times, we were talking about Star Wars before the show began, it’s like that kind of cultural phenomenon. You know its funny, the soundtrack sounds exactly like the new ipad ad soundtrack with Robin Williams reading Walt Whitman poetry.

Danny: What’s amazing is that they managed to capture 30 years ago what it looks like inside an Apple store today.

Leo: There’s going to be a big event Saturday at the Flint Center where the Macintosh was unveiled on January 24th, 1984. This event will be January 25th, 2014 and a lot of the original Apple team will be there. It’s going to be a big event at the Flint Center in Cupertino. They are selling tickets online at Mac30th.com So there you go, a little bit of history. Tell us about Davos, what are you doing there? What is the world economic forum, Jeff?

Jeff: The world economic forum 1500 Mac-ers from all fields. Business, government, NGO’s, journalism come together every year and stuff happens here, it really does. Today I got to go to a session listening to Japanese Prime Minister Abe. I wish it were fascinating and exciting and if I cared more about Japan verses China I may have been fascinated, but it was a hot room and I was sleepy. Tomorrow we get to see the president of Iran and Mexico and the next day the president of Brazil in our little media group, so that's fun. I see all kinds of people I don’t see year round and talk to people. I have a session this morning on Big Brother with Senator Leahy, hopefully he won’t get away from me. It’s kind of ridiculous, it’s kind of a hoot, but if they ask you to come you don’t say no.

Leo: Who does this and why?  Who is the World Economic Forum? Is this is a government that throws this event?

Jeff: No. It’s a guy named Professor Klauschwab, who’s German and now Swiss. He put together this organization 30 some years ago. It is really quite phenomenal because he brings together all these world leaders. Companies pay upwards of $500,000 a year for the privilege to come, plus plenty of other fees. They make a fortune on this stuff but it’s a not for profit, and it does bring in the world leaders and major things have happened here. So it’s a pretty amazing thing.

Leo: Neat. Yeah.

Jeff: Yeah, it is. It is. It’s also one percentish but, so is most of the world. There was a study out this week that said that there are 83 people whose wealth equals half the world. I think a few of them may be here.

Leo: That is depressing isn’t it, the inequality statistics. So Mac Cuts, a couple of days ago blogged, at maccuts.com, “OK, I’m calling it. If you’re using guest blogging as a way to gain links in 2014, you should probably stop, because over time it’s more and more of a spammy practice. If you’re doing a lot of guest blogging you’re hanging out with really bad company.” Danny, he kind of backed down a little bit. Saying, that doesn't mean don't do it.

Danny: His original post said, you know, is like the decline and fall of guest blogging, and that was the headline. When you read the article he said “Look if you’re doing guest blogging to try and build links and all this sort of stuff you should stop, it's just really spammy and it’s not really a helpful thing. That’s sort of his warning shot that if Google were to take a close look at somebody’s website and they think that you’re just running a lot of blog posts that have no real purpose other than to try to help somebody else rank better, then you might be deemed as spamming. But, what happened was you had a lot people who have guest contributors, guest blog posts that are written, not because they are trying to help someone rank better in Google, or that the person is trying to rank better in Google, but they just, you know, they’re contributors.

Leo: It’s an established practice. Om Malik does it on Gigaohm. Forbes does it. It’s an established practice, not everybody who posts on a blog works for that blog.

Danny: And so the issue really was in this case, Matt was probably too close to it, when he thinks of guest posts and guest blogging in his mind. I think of people in the SEO space you tend to think that crumby guest blogging stuff, where you get these requests from people like “Hi, I’ve been visiting your site that I love, I would like to give you content. Here is my content and all I ask is for three do-follow links back”. So he had to walk it back and say look, I’m not saying don’t do guest blog posts. I’m saying don’t do guest blog posts for SEO purposes where you think that because you can just get this post running in a bunch of different places and you managed to get a nice link in there that says “best used cars” somewhere hidden in the text of whatever that’s going to rank you well, and that’s one of the things they’re going to be going after. But it did, it caused- The most notable example I found was Charles Stross who is an award winning science fiction author who is out on Hacker News going “but I have Hollywood directors about to do guest blog posts and now I’m kind of worried, how is Google going to automatically figure this stuff out”. So it caused some panic. And importantly, there is no automatic method on how this works anyway. It’s really kind of like how Google deals with the advertorials. It can’t  look at a web page and think that’s an advertorial or someone has paid to have an article placed, and they have a link in it, therefore that violates our guidelines, we’re going to knock it down. What happens is, they go into a website because something suspicious has been raised. It’s almost like going through customs, you come over here were going to look through your bag now and see what you’ve got. Then they go through and they say I’m seeing all sorts of things, that’s not kosher with us and now you’re getting a penalty. So, really, if you’ve been doing blog posts because you have guests and they have really good content, there’s nothing for you to panic about. But, if you’ve been running blog posts because people out of the blue have been coming to you saying, “Hey, I got some great content, why don’t you run it for me. It would be a great thing for both of us and we’ll rank better on search engines”. Yeah, don’t do that.

Leo: Yeah, we get that email all the time, I’m sure you do too.

Danny: I get that lots.

Gina: Yeah, I get that all the time too. I’m not even really actively blogging any more, it's weird.

Leo: It strikes me that it’s a little bit like porn. You know, the famous comment by Justice- I can’t remember his name, "I don’t know what porn is but I know it when I see it." Of course, we all know the spammy blog posts but I don’t know, it might be difficult to algorithmically find them.

Jeff: Well, but Leo that’s what Matt is saying, is that at some point he’s going to have to trust quality bloggers that are really put in there for good reason. And, it’s more of a human thing, he’s saying to the bloggers you'd better decide because if you do it all of the time, you have nothing but guest blogs. This goes back to this idea that I mention a lot of times and it came up today, and it came up today, here in Davos actually, is that I still think that Google has to have appeal practices. I also think that a jury of peers- If there were a jury of bloggers who helped Google and said, yeah that's spam. That’s okay, listen to us Google, it takes the heat off of Google for having the power of God.

Leo: Well, but isn't this exactly what Google doesn't want to do? If they could, they'd do everything algorithmically because the last thing they want- My first reaction to this is, wow Google wheels a lot of power. And that power could be wielded unfairly and perhaps, is wielded from time to time.

Danny: Just ask Expedia, which has I think a 6% drop in its stock because it was penalized by Google yesterday-

Leo: 25% of their search visibility has disappeared, according to Perry Schwartz, writing in your Search Engine Land.

Danny: Yeah, Google does have a lot of power.

Jeff: Google is vulnerable for anti-trust here. And they've got to be careful, come up with better procedures, and they've got to come up with more transparency about this. It was brought up here today at Davos. The head of Bain brought up the Rap Genius case and made it very clear that Rap Genius messed up, knew they messed up and came back. But it's this idea that Google has the power of God in these instances.

Leo: Did Expedia break any rules, I mean this is a severe penalty.

Danny: Well, we don't know for certain. We just don't know, we know that in December Expedia had been spotted and outted by a post that was saying they look like they have all of these unnatural links and their weird placement of things like the footers of word press blogs and stuff like that. And then nothing happened, and then they took this hit. Expedia is saying nothing on their record, Google is saying nothing on their record, but it has all of the look and feel like Google saw something that Expedia was doing and decided to hit them with it. I mean, when Google rarely actually goes through and confirms that they've penalized somebody- So when you want to know if someone is in Google jail you search for them and if you can't find them in ways that you'd expect to, then you kind of have a pretty good idea that they were penalized. But in terms of the anti-trust thing you know, it's hard. First of all, Google has 1st Amendment protections in the United States to pretty much do whatever the heck it wants with the search results. That's already been tested, I mean it's been tested years ago. So if The New York Times decides that it doesn't want to run an article about some company that it thinks has been doing bad PR to drum up stuff, nobody says well, you're so powerful New York Times, we're going to control you or whatever. And New York Times is powerful! And also Rap Genius doesn't compete with Google, right? So it sucks if you're Rap Genius that you can't go there, but it's hard to make a case at Google, on an anti-trust purpose decided and we kept Rap Genius down. But, the whole reason Google is in anti-trust issues right now in Europe actually came out of the exact same thing, where there was a shopping search engine that Google felt like was doing some spammy stuff, penalized them because it felt like it was protecting its search quality, and then the shopping search engine, this was FoundEm, decided that no... This was Google trying to prevent competition.

Leo: Right, just because they're in the same business. Just as they are with ITA, and the same business as Expedia.

Danny: Sure, and I think Expedia is part of the same group that kind of globbed on to this whole big anti-trust thing and Google's got to be stopped, or whatever. Now, the interesting thing though is, Google is already cleared of all that stuff in the US. The FTC has said, now you're fine. We're still staying to see what happens in the EU, but it is a weird case where it's sort of like fight back against spam to seize the anti-trust aspect. There's relatively few companies that can use that, to say Google went after me because they're trying to be a Monopoly. Most companies that are hit, are either hit because there's a good reason for it, or they get hit and are just upset because they don't think Google is being fair but they don't  tend to think Google's not being fair from an anti-trust perspective.

Leo: But this is how Google muddies the waters with their acquisitions. It's tough if you want to be a search engine and you're in the same business as somebody that you're posting links to. Anti-trust may not be a conflict of interest, for sure.

Danny: Yes, the more that Google is doing stuff- I did this thing about a year ago and talked about how Google had changed from a search engine to destination. The more Google has its own destination content, or its own stake in where it can send you to, the more that it gets susceptible to these accusations like oh they're trying to be abusive or whatever. So you know, and it's tough because there are some cases where you're looking at these types of things and you're like well this is cruddy. But, my perspective is, the bigger issue isn't Google wielding all of this power or whatever, the bigger issue is that most of these things happen because Google was desperately, desperately trying to protect the sanctity of the link, as a way they count votes to figure out what page you should rank better. I always go back trying to like it as if Google is stuck on this fossil fuel resource- You know, the links are like this fossil fuel that are really heavily polluted at this point, that people buy, sell, barter, and trade them. They don't give them when they should, they do give them for reasons that they shouldn't do or whatever, and Google keeps coming up with all of these reasons why you should be able to use a link in this case, but not that. Like, well press release links we won't count anymore and guest blog posts we won't count. Well, we will count them but only if it's like a real guest post thing or no you don't want to have your links be in infographic because now those infographics- It's like a laundry list of things to the degree that it's like, I don't really know what's left that they're supposed to count.

Jeff: Danny, I think you're right in everything that you just said. There's just one 'yes, but'.. And that is, that Google is trying to be transparent and let people know, and without giving the algorithm off, let people know what works and what doesn't. And I think we've got to give them some points for that. I know I get to be Mr. Pro Google here, but I think that's a factor where Matt Cutts, as an open part of Google was trying to explain to people, the rationale behind what he does to make that algorithm. It may be confusing. His job is, the world is. But is that really an awful thing?

Leo: Gina..?

Gina: I love Danny's rant, by the way and actually Danny what I want to hear from you, is what you think. If links from webpages aren't a good indicator of quality anymore, what's the new page rank? Is social the new page rank, are we basically going back full circle back to Yahoo when Yahoo used to have editors, you know, compile search results to good websites? Like if Leo Google+'s a link and he's legit, does that mean that link should get high page rank? What else can Google do?

Danny: I think social should be a much bigger part of the equation than it is now and again, about two years ago now I think. I did an article and it was like, 'when everyone gets the vote, social share isn't the new signal,' or something like that and what I was trying to explain was when Google started, they used the idea of links as votes and that's the democracy of the web. Another metaphor I used was, if links were votes and that's the democracy of the web, then that's democracy in the United States when you had to be like 35 and white, a landowner, and a man, in order to vote. That's not democracy, only a small number of people voted and if you think, how many times you have 'liked' a page, or content, or business, or whatever. You've been really happy about something and had a great experience, so much so, that you turned around and said you know, I'm going to write a blog post about this company that I had a great experience with, and I'm going to make sure I link to them so that Google will understand that they're valuable, I'm going to make sure that the anchor text to that link is very descriptive, so that hopefully they'll rank well for you know, Customs Surfboards, because that's really good. And I'm going to make sure that I do it on a platform that doesn't automatically, somehow put a no follow in there. People don't do that. But when people are happy with a business and want to recommend something, they actually 'like' it on Facebook, or tweet it on Twitter, or they go to Google+. So to me, social signals are far more democratic than the link signal. And when I kept bringing this up-

Jeff: That's true.

Danny: But when I bring this up with Google and with Bing as well, their response comes back as, we don't find them that useful and don't feel like they're that valuable, they could be gamed... And there's like a litany of excuses they have, as to why they can't use social and I come back to thinking well, I'm sorry that you're finding that social doesn't seem to work because you've spent all of, maybe, two years kind of poking at it. That's like saying solar doesn't work very well because we put all of this energy into building a gasoline engine, and we don't want to leave that aside as well. Yeah, social is not going to be perfect, at all. There's going to be issues with it, but I just find it hard to believe that links are somehow so much better and today, I'll leave off with this, Matt Cutts just did a post today where he's being asked about it's a video, you know, does Google use Twitter and Facebook to rank things, and he's going through and he's at pain saying, no we don't use Twitter data, social data or Facebook data. Those are just oridnariry pages and we don't count up all of the followers and all of this sort of stuff. And if you really understand some of the back history, one of the thing you're hearing in there that Google especially has a problem with is, he won't make mention about how they were blocked, he doesn't name it, but he's talking about Twitter, from getting Twitter data. And one of the issues I think Google has, is that back when they had a deal with Twitter, they built a lot of their infrastructure around Twitter's data, to an unprecedented degree. The deal fell apart and then Google had to stop having things like RealTimeSearch. And I think they looked at that and said never again. Never again will we be so dependent on a third-party for data that we use in our search results. Which is why they don't want to use it, and that's why by the way, you have Google+.

Gina: Right.

Jeff: Okay, but there's another thing going on here, and that is that things like Upworthy, which may have good motive behind them, are cynical acts to get you to click on things- Buzzfeed. Chart Feed said recently they found out that people share before they read. Those of you who share something, your link to it is not necessarily a signal at all-

Leo: I just like the picture and the headline, and I'm going to share that on my Facebook.

Jeff: And I'm going to be before everybody else. Upworthy comes in and cynically says she turned the page and it changed her life. And you won't believe how it will change yours. I hate this stuff and how it tells me what I'm going to think, no matter how good the motive is. What they're doing there is, they're manipulating. Instead of the algorithm, they're manipulating us to manipulate the algorithm. And so once again, I've got to be a little bit sympathetic for Cuttsville for saying how do you cut through that?

Danny: I agree with you, that's true. That's why you don't just rely on one signal so heavily. But it's like saying I could do that qualification with links and more, and then there's this whole extreme number of things they do to still try to get value out of link signal. It's like they're digging up the tar sands of links now and they're extracting whatever is left that they can get out of it after they filter it through all of this stuff. So, no... The social signal isn't pure, but you can also take that and align it with other things.

Gina: Yeah.

Danny: So, you can take a social signal and you can also then go through and look at other things like, we have other data that tells us how much time people spend on a website. Okay, oh and this video is actually on Youtube... Maybe we can tell how long that's played, or maybe we can tell what kind of clicks are happening. There may be data that they have in aggregate that they associate with it and that's what the algorithm is all about. You take all of these signals together and try to help them kind of check and balance each other. to fiugre out what works or doesn't work. It's just that the link signal has become much more degrading over time, that's why you get-

Jeff: I agree, I agree.

Gina: That's definitely true. When you think about Google Analytics is on sites across the web, so Google has all that data. Google has the knowledge graph, right? So we know that Mark Hamill is 62 years old, and Google knows that. So, they could look at a webpage that says that Mark is 40 and know that is incorrect. Google can know a lot about the quality of a website, based on lots of different signals beyond just links, and yet SEO is this game that's still being played. Not a game, but it's- I mean, content publishers kind of work the SEO angle like it's their job because so many publishers and content creators depend upon Google traffic to make their money, to drive eyeballs to their ads, right? To what you said earlier Jeff, I do give Google credit for having Matt Cutts in front of a video camera, explaining how they view certain things. Of course Matt is very close to the guest blogging situation, people shouldn't stop guest blogging, you know, if there's a blog that has an audience that you want to reach? Of course you would do it, forget the SEO, right? That's why he had to dial it back and say I mean for SEO purposes. But that's just a natural, that you'd want to do that. So, I do give them credit for sharing how they view these kinds of practices, but I think Danny is absolutely right. Page rank is- The link value should be small and mixed in with a bunch of other signals. Social, other data, knowledge graph data, etcetera.

Jeff: Do you think Larry Page has an emotional tie to page rank?

Leo: Because it's his name, you mean?

Danny: I don't get the impression that Larry Page is paying much attention to search these days. He seemed to be off of the- And page rank, by the way, it in itself is one aspect of it. In particular, we will count links and give each link a score, you know, and they're far more sophisticated with that sort of stuff. So I don't think he'd be like I need to have page rank 4.0 out there, I'm not going to let it go or whatever. But I do get depressed more and more each day because as Google is buying, and companies that put through missed debts here, and I'm going to get smart contact lenses and all this stuff I keep joking, and all of that is paid by mesothellioma and Payday Loan ads, right? Because the underpinnings to all of these great things at Google is doing, you know, the bulk of their income still comes from search. It still comes from those search ads out there, a lot of which are not from very savory type of things. And sometimes I feel like Google just kind of wanted to pretend like well all of that stuff, it just has nothing to do with us, you know, we're Google Glass! We're great and we're wonderful! And for someone who would have to deal with the search base day-to-day, it is a tough job... I would not want to run a search engine and yet, you see terrible results and you see things that don't make sense. Last week I wrote a story about the thousands of hotel listings that were hijacked in Google Local. Google's response to that was, "We're aware of it."

Gina: What do you mean they got hijacked?

Jeff: This is a good story.

Danny: They've got people that, like Hilton and Sheraton, they have Google Local+ listings, verified listings. Which means, with those listings you would have had to use a pin number that was sent to your address, and the location or a phone number.

Leo: Yeah, it's like a postcard.

Danny: So a lot of these were verified listings, and what happened was the official URL's for those things, that would've led you to the Hilton or the Sheraton or the Holiday Inn or whatever, got changed to some third-party web booking site. How is this a listing, right?

Leo: How did that happen?

Danny: That would be a good thing to know, wouldn't it? And I think that Google would like to explain, and say that we would not have it happen again. But Googles' response initially was nothing, at all. Then they kind of came back after the article ran and said, "We're aware of it, and are correcting it." We don't know how it happened, but what I do know is, if you have thousands of Google+ accounts that got hijacked and got treated that way, it would have been a user privacy nightmare and Google wouldn't have been able to crawl back into their, "No comment," type of reaction. We don't need to have to deal with it or whatever. And the security for those businesses is just as important, but when it gets into these unsavory things, more and more, Google is just like well, we don't- We won't say anything and pretend this goes away. And that's the kind of transparency that to me, counts. That when something goes wrong, you actually step up and explain it clearly so that it doesn't happen again. Proof, proof.

Leo: It's only going to get worse because the waters are more and more muddy, you probably saw the article on Arstechnica This Week, we talked about it on Windows Weekly, about Machinima paying $3 per thousand impressions, to which Youtube video producers to include positive content about Xbox One. Money that was apparently given to the Machinima from Microsoft, although the question about it is whether Microsoft knew anything about it, and they say they did not. Machinima specifically told these Youtube makers that it had to be positive content about Xbox One, they couldn't say anything negative about Machinima, and they couldn't say it was a sponsored mention. Which of course, is a violation of FCC guidelines.

Danny: Which I would get really upset about if it weren't for the fact that every time I watch Modern Family apparently, everybody just uses Windows phone or-

Leo: It's everywhere, you cannot get away from it anymore!

Danny: It is everywhere. And at this point, I have had it with let's get worried about it when it happens online, where the FCC have to give you guidelines. Oh, that was a sponsored Tweet, you'd better mention that's a sponsored Tweet. Yet, I can watch a half hour show with so much product placement in it, and the idea disclosure was at the end of the credits, which have been shoved up into little things so they can be promos and everything else-

Leo: Promotional Announcement-

Danny: There's a little thing telling me promotional. You know Modern Family is going to Australia this week, I love Modern Family by the way. But they're going to Australia on some big thing or whatever. They're not going to Australia because hey, we just thought it was a good idea for everybody to go off in Australia!

Leo: Yeah. The Australian Tourism Board is bringing them down there, yeah.

Jeff: Danny, you are on a rant spectacular night.

Gina: I know!

Jeff: You are wound up like a marching doll!

Danny: Can we talk about Gina's ThinkUp, which is awesome!

Leo: Okay, let's do that in one second. We're going to take a break and talk about something nice. We'll be talking about the ThinkUp and also the change log, as well as a lot more. You're watching This Week in Google with Gina Trapani, Danny Sullivan from SearchEngineLand. You know, you've always been the guy who is keeping Google honest, and I'm just thrilled that you're here, as always. And of course, from Davos, Switzerland, in the World Economic News Forum, maker Jeff Jarvis.Our show today brought to you by shuttterstock.com. If you do publications, PowerPoint presentations, advertising, or doing any project that you need royalty-free images for, you've got to check out shutterstock.com. It is our royalty-free clip art, I don't really want to use the word clip art because it's so much more than clip art. It's our royalty-free photo site of choice, we have the 25 image/day subscription, find it very useful. Partly because of the amount of stuff on Shutterstock is so incredibly huge, almost 33 million royalty-free stock images illustrations, vectors, and videos. But that would be nothing if you didn't have  a good search tool and they have probably one of the best. You can not only search for objects, or nouns like bulldozer, but you can modify it with adjectives. I wonder if there's a lonely bulldozer pictured anywhere in here.. Yes! There's a lonely bulldozer. Aaaaawwww. Here's a lonely bulldozer looking out at the vista. That is a great search engine! So when I say 32  million images, people go well how are you going to find what you want? You absolutely can! Not only that, they add 20,000+ images everyday! So every time you visit, you're going to find something new. The images are, for the most part, from professional photographers and artists. Of course they are all curated individually for content and quality and they're just fabulous. I want you to visit shutterstock.com, try the search engine, sign up for a free account. That's a good idea because then you could create a like box where you can save images to your like box, access them anytime, share them with other team members. It's a great way to get inspiration, they have a wonderful iPad app. It's a Webbie Award winning iPad app, which lets you search on the go and find inspiration on the go, as well. Shutterstock.com, truly international, as is TWiT. If you go to shutterstock.com and buy something, they have multi-lingueal customer support in more than a dozen countries. Full-time customer support throughout the week, they speak your language. No credit card needed to set up an account, but if you do decide you want to buy, I invite you to use our offer code: TWIG114 and you'll get 25% off of any package. Shutterstock.com, try it for free. But TWIG114 if you want to save 25% off. When you go there, you're normally on the photos page, but then there's the footage page, which has a whole bunch of sutff. Clips and stuff, things you can save for free... See, that would be useful. Right there for a PowerPoint. Battery filling up, in my dreams that fast. Shutterstock.com! Now play the drums, blow the horns, it's time for the Change Log!

The Google Change Log!

Leo: What do you think this is, a morning show? Here she is Gina Trapani with the latest from Google.

Gina: I've been waiting for this, we have talked about this coming up and now it's finally happening! We're seeing Google Now integrated into Chrome on the desktop! Before you get too excited, these are the Chrome canary. These are the really really early builds, and it's for Windows and Mac, it's a canary build. 34.0.1788, you know Google and their crazy version numbers. So you have to install a Chrome Canary Build, and then you've got to go to Chrome, Flags, and enable Google Now, change it to enable, restart, sign in, stand on your head! And then when it's all done, you'll see a little card that says Google Now in your desktop, stay connected to what you need to know, across all devices. This is basically the Google Now that you get on your Android phone, but you see Weather, scores, traffic, and reminder cards in Google Now.

Leo: Where does it show up though, I mean how does it show up?

Gina: It shows up and looks like a Browser notification window, basically.

Leo: Oh, okay. So it's in the window bar, on a Mac anyway. That's interesting, okay.

Gina: Exactly, exactly.. So I want this upgraded to a stable build ASAP because I love Google Now.

Leo: You don't use canary?

Gina: I just installed it today, because I wanted to try this out. I don't use Canary, I'm usually on beta. So I don't know, I'm just not cutting edge enough.

Leo: I did Canary for a while, and didn't see any more problems with it or anything. I'm using beta right now. But I have to think it's almost here if it's in Canary stages.

Gina: Yeah, it's a good sign. I use PushBullet, which is this extension that pushes notifications from your Android phone to your desktop, so I often do see Google Now cards, but that's kind of a hacky, round-about way of doing it. I love that this is built in. And the warnings that are on Canary are like it can break anytime and even when you enable Google Now, it's in the experiment section and there's this giant disclaimer across the top that says like, hey any of these could break at any time, your privacy could be compromised, you know, we take no kind of responsibility.

Leo: Jeez.

Gina: Yeah, they really kind of disclaim the whole thing, so yeah. I think I'm going to stick to beta, but this did get me to install Canary because I wanted to check it out. Google Alerts, google.com/alerts, which I haven't looked at in a long time, but I went back to it today to put in an alert for a ThinkUp, got a redesign. So it looks like Google is paying a little more attention to one of these lesser known, but super useful features. The Google Alerts email is basically, you put in a keyword and say send me email with new news stories, with this keyword in them, and it got a redesign. It brings it closer to Google's latest look and feel, there's the Card, the Style, Layout, the LC Google Search Results, or Google Now, their mobile apps and the new alerts will tell you what kind of alert you're getting hourly, daily, weekly. They have larger headlines and social sharing buttons, including Twitter and Facebook. So, if you haven't checked out Google Alerts in a while, if there's a story or keyword that you want to keep on top of, even if it's your own name or your company’s name. I'll admit that I have total ego searches set up there, check it out, and finally.... Google's research division put together a really neat visualization of music that has been uploaded to Google Play Music. So if you go to research.google.com/bigpicture/music, you'll see the Google Play Music timeline and it shows kind of, I'm actually not sure what it shows, but it's sure pretty and-

Leo: Popularity of genres over time, I guess, I love that.

Gina: Yes, so if you hover over the different genres, you can see the most popular albums. So this is based on Play Music data, or rather, songs that Play Music users have uploaded to play music, based on the album release date and genre. And it's just a beautiful visualization and a really neat, sort of discovery mechanism for music lovers, over time from 1950-2010.

Leo: That is neat, just so cool. I love graphs.

Gina: Yeah, I do too. Even if I'm like, I don't know what this means, I still want to click on it.

Leo: I don't know what this means but I like it.

Gina: Yeah, exactly. Yep, that's all I got.

Leo: There's your Change Log, thank you Gina.

Gina: Sure.

Leo: You know, what I mostly got out of this is PushBullet.

Gina: PushBullet's great.

Leo: So, that's cool.

Gina: Have I not talked about PushBullet? Man, I love it-

Leo: You probably talk about it on All About Android, right?

Gina: Yeah, All About Android, yeah.

Leo: So you put an app on your phone, then you have to have a Chrome extension on Chrome...

Gina: Yep, and then any notifications that go to your phone, show up on your desktop. So if you get a text, a Google Now card... For a while, it drove me crazy because I use Hangouts, and so when someone chatted me on Hangouts, I would get the notification on Hangouts on my desktop and then I would get the PushBullet notification. But you can disable via apps, you can say don't mirror my notifications here. It's really nice though, when the phone is ringing and you can see who's calling, right on the desktop or any app that fires a notification, you can see if without having to pick up your phone.

Leo: PushBullet, push to... Neat, and I can push stuff to the phone too?

Gina: You can push stuff to the phone, you can push stuff to your friends, it's a really cool independent app.

Leo: Love it, and it's free!

Gina: Yep.

Leo: Well, thank you Gina. Very nice.

Gina: Sure.

Leo: Oops, I just uninstalled it. You've got to listen carefully to every inch of this Change Log. There's all sorts of stuff in there, you never know. By the way, I was just looking at Google Now because somebody said I only get Sports. I get lots of good stuff. I get birthdays on my Google Now, I get my calendar updates, my stocks, and oh look, it's 72 degrees right now. That's just mean of me.

Gina: That's just wrong.

Leo: Did you get 14" in- 18 degrees in New York!

Gina: Yeah.

Leo: Did you get 14" last night? That's what I heard.

Gina: Yep. It took me 4 hours to get from JFK to Manhattan yesterday. Yeah, it was one of those days.

Leo: Were you walking?!

Gina: No, slower... I was on a bus.

Leo: Wow!

Gina: Even Uber couldn't save me yesterday.

Leo: What's it like in Davos? I'm sure it's cold and snowy, but you expect that.

Jeff: Actually no, no. Today was, last I knew it was 50 degrees.

Leo: Okay, we're all screwed up. And Danny, you're in San Diego, where are you?

Danny: I am in Orange County. Newport Beach.

Leo: Where it's beautiful and warm.

Danny: I don't know what my temperature is, probably- Actually I think you're a bit warmer in Petaluma than here because we had some coastal fog but-

Leo: I can't believe it's 72 degrees, that's crazy!

Danny: I've been feeling a little bad, not super bad.

Leo: This weather report brought to you by Google Now.

Gina: I dread looking at Now in the morning, actually; when I have to decide whether or not I put thermal underwear on.

Leo: You chose it young lady, you wanted- Although, it's a general consensus that Brooklyn is a hotbed of innovation right now, it is the place to be.

Gina: Yeah, I think it is. That's why I'm here.

Jeff: How often do you come into Manhattan, Gina?

Gina: Oh, I'm in the office every day now.

Jeff: Oh you are? Okay.

Danny: So you're based out in Manhattan now?

Gina: Well my ThinkUp office is in Manhattan, but I'm living in Brooklyn. I'm actually still waiting to close on my new place so I've been kind of crashing at my mom’s house.

Leo: Oh, no! Still?

Gina: Long story, I will not regale you with the details.

Leo: It's harder to get a loan than ever, thanks to thanks to those bankers down there on Wall Street.

Gina: Yeah, I blame the bank.

Leo: You have to practically give them blood type stuff.

Gina: Tell me about it. Tell me about it. I blame the bankers and the lawyers.

Leo: It's crazy now.

Gina: We're close, though. We're close.

Leo: Speaking of crazy, a man and his wife in Columbus, OH subjected to hour long interrogation by the FBI because employees at the AMC movie theater saw him wearing Google Glass.

Jeff: I didn't believe this story at first, it's been confirmed since... But this is just ridiculous.

Gina: This poor guy... He has been to this theater before, this is Columbus, Ohio. He's been to this theater before, he's an hour into watching the movie with his wife or partner, he's got Glass on, these guys come in and grab him, and grab Glass off of his face, and take him into an interrogation room. I'm laughing, it's not funny. I just can't imagine getting my Glass torn off-

Leo: He blogs on the Gadgeteer. It was quite embarrassing, outside the theater there were 5-10 cops and mall cops. It was like major bust. First of all, of course because it's Glass, he could have been recording the movie, right?

Gina: Yes, he could've been.

Danny: Or he could have been recording it on his phone, or-

Leo: Right. Well, but people do that and it is a crime.

Danny: But why, who's going to buy that world's worst video? That's what's so absurd about this.

Leo: Oh, but they do. I mean, there are camcorders, people are getting up and down and that's terrible but people do it and people sell it. But is this really a commensurate response to somebody taping a movie, even if he was taping the movie, it takes 5-10 police officers to take this man down? Searched?

Gina: Yeah, I guess this theater had trouble with bootleg and people recording movies, in the past. So I guess when they were interrogating him, they were like hey man just give up your boss, like who are you working for? Just give up the guy up the chain and we'll let you go. And he was saying just plug up my Glass to a computer and you'll see like, there's pictures of my wife and my dog on there, I didn't record the movie. Quite a bit of time passed before they actually looked at Glass and tried to ascertain whether or not he was actually recording.

Leo: He says, he wrote, "I insisted that they connect to the Glass to see that there was nothing on it, I also insisted that they look at my phone and clear things out. But they wanted to talk first, they wanted to know who I am, where I live, where I work, how much I'm making, how many computers I have at home, why I'm recording the movie, who I'm going to give the recording to, why don't I just give the guy up the chain up because they're not interested in me," over and over. You know, there is something really wrong when Federal law enforcement officials are doing the bidding of the Motion Picture Association of America like this. When there's real crime going on, but this is ridiculous.

Jeff: You know what? If you're going to question him- There's so much I found disturbing about it. Like, you're going to get ripped out of your seat, okay, but that you're going to be questioned without having your rights read to you, but you’re actually under arrest and are clearly being detained... Technically he should've been able to walk out any time he wanted to.

Leo: They said that, they said you're not under arrest, but if you choose not to cooperate, bad things may happen.

Danny: Right, and really at that point he could say well bring on the bad things, because I'm leaving unless you want to arrest me or whatever. So there are all of these things, but what was disturbing to me was that there's no technical expertise. If you're going to go after somebody, and these people, some of them seem to have knowledge of the bootlegging like, how it's going on or whatever. And you see that someone has this Google Glass, you think you'd at least Google a little bit of information about them. And in short order, you'd understand things like, well you're going to get maybe 45 minutes of the movie recorded, you know? Or if he is telling you that you can take a look at them from there, then do it.

Leo: Right. They said they released him five minutes after they checked. "They went through my phone and five minutes later they concluded that I had done nothing wrong," and offered him four passes to another movie at the theater. There is a lesson to be learned here though, don't wear your Glass into a movie theater.

Jeff: No, there's a lesson to be learned, not for that guy, but for stupid movie theater owners and stupid cops.

Leo: No, I disagree. Because I think that if you did the same thing, like held up your phone in front of your face, or if you had a camcorder they'd go in and arrest you and they would be within their rights, that's against the law.

Danny: He had prescription lenses attached to his Glass, those are his glasses.

Leo: Ah. I didn't know that.

Gina: Yeah, he wears his glasses, yeah... You know, it's funny Leo I felt-

Danny: And actually I don't get them saying it's a recording device, because while it's a recording device, it is also your phone. If I'm wearing my smart watch to the thing, I don't get arrested because it has a recording device-

Leo: No but you might if you pointed it at it, and the problem with Glass is it-

Danny: Not necessarily, if my watch were to beep at me and I go to look at it-

Jeff: In Florida, you get shot if you do that.

Danny: If my Ping's up or whatever, I could be having Glass on because I want to sit in a movie theater and for whatever reason, I want to get a notification on email, or a text message showing up so that I know if I'm having a problem with my baby sitter or whatever. Just because it has a recording device doesn't mean that it's recording.

Leo: But I think this is the fundamental problem with Glass, is that it does have a recording device that is pointed at you and you don't always know if it's recording. It's the same societal problem with going into a bathroom with Glass, and people, if you want to have Glass take off, you'd better be very sensitive to this, right?

Gina: Leo, I felt the same way you did before last night's episode of All About Android, which I'm going to plug right now because we had a guest on, Cecilia Body, who was stopped and given a speeding ticket in the San Diego area, but she had Glass on while she was driving, and the cop also tried to fine her for wearing Glass.

Leo: She had to fight in court, and won, by the way.

Gina: She had to fight in court, right, and she won because they couldn't prove that she was watching a video on Glass, right? Which is what the law prohibits, you're looking up the second screen and you know, my attitude was like why would you wear Glass while driving? Or why would you wear Glass to the movie theater? That's just dumb, and you know, especially driving. Because you open the package and one of the first things it says is like hey, this is not lawful to wear while you drive. I mean, Google basically says don't wear it while you're driving but Cecilia explained that like, first of all, she's a CTO of a company that develops Glass wear. She wake up in the morning, puts them on, and is a very dedicated explorer. They're just her glasses, she doesn't think about it anymore.

Leo: Right.

Gina: She puts them on and wears them and it sounds like this is the situation with the guy at the movie theater. It didn't occur to her to take them off while she was driving. She wasn't watching Netflix on her Glass or whatever, she was just driving. And particularly with driving it's like navigation is a totally legitimate use case for wearing Glass while driving, so I think that the explorer program, and I said this on the show last night, the explorer program is very much this sort of like canary in the coal mine thing. And I think that Google is figuring out like where does Glass create these issues or problems? I think that movie theater officials and cops on the highway what Glass is, what it means when it's on like whether it's recording or not. I think it's just a misunderstanding of the technology, but unfortunately we have people like Cecilia and this guy in Ohio who have to be the ones to deal with these sort of legal tussles and figure it out.

Leo: I think there is some onus though, on Glass owners, to be aware of the sensitive nature of this. And while I don't care if he's in a movie theater, I don't think that Glass owners do need to put the Glass up on their head when they’re in a men's room. I feel like it's kind of a little tone-deaf on the part of Glass owners to say, hey man these are my prescription glasses what's your problem? You're wearing a recording device on your head! So, be aware of that, some people are going to take umbrage, some of them will be federal law officials. It might be behoove of you just to avoid the problem, like if that's his only pair of glasses?

Danny: Well he explained quite a bit actually, there's some other things I was reading on how he has another spare pair but he's actually been using them as his ordinary pair of glasses.

Leo: Well he needs to kind of wise up.

Danny: Yeah, but he had also said that he has been to the theater before and-

Leo: So he got away with it before, that doesn't mean it's not...

Jeff: Leo, hold up hold up. You and I know-

Danny: It's not getting the blame of anything.

Leo: Yes it is, wearing a recording device on your head carries a heavier responsibility than not wearing a recording device on your head. Will you not agree to that?

Jeff: A recording device, I want to repeat this, that has like five minutes of battery power!

Leo: I don't care, you're wearing a recording device on your head!

Danny: Leo, I would agree with you in general. For example, if I go into a restroom and I am actually wearing Glass, I will put them on the top of my head.

Jeff: No... Come on!

Danny: No, but all you do is slide it up, it's no big deal.

Leo: We're just living in the world Jeff! You got people!

Danny: It's not that big a deal, it's like a polite consideration to do for anybody who possibly might be freaked out.

Jeff: No, no, no... Let me run it back. If you really think that every man on earth wants to shoot other men's junk, the only thing stopping them is that they don't have a camera on their head, then you've got a really-

Leo: No, that's not what wear saying. You have to be aware that this is highly sensitive. If you go around with a tape recorder, holding it out ahead of you, people are going to take umbrage and rightly so.

Jeff: You're not, you're wearing glasses that have technology on it. Jesus, is this This Week in Love iTism, what happened?

Danny: I'm just saying that yes, I can see Leo's point that you might want to think about a bit more when you're using technology that people are not that familiar with-

Leo: Just be sensitive.

Danny: And might be a bit freaked about.

Jeff: No, I'm asking you to give credit to people, that they're not going to suddenly be bad because they have technology attached to their head.

Leo: I understand, and I'm not saying that they are, I'm not saying this guy did anything wrong.

Jeff: You're saying he should act as if people should assume that he does.

Leo: He should be sensitive to the fact that people-

Jeff: No, I say he should act as if he is virtuous until he does something wrong, you are making him guilty he's proven guilty.

Danny: Yeah, but I'm saying, for example, if I'm wearing Glass on occasions and I'm sitting at a table with someone, or talking with somebody, or interacting, I may move it to the top of my head just so they don't think I'm going to be, subtly, being distracted. It's the same way that if I'm talking to somebody and I look at my phone, while I'm talking to them, that can be interpreted as rude.

Leo: Let me ask you this Jeff, are there any places you can envision where it would be inappropriate to wear Glass?

Jeff: That's the issue of wearing it, I don't think it's a matter of inappropriateness, no. I don't think-

Leo: So there's nowhere you could imagine somebody wearing Glass, where it would be appropriate to put them away or to take it off?

Jeff: I think it's appropriate-

Leo: In every circumstance?

Jeff: I think it's appropriate to say to someone are you recording, it's appropriate to say I'm not recording, that's fine.

Leo: So if I'm going into a locker room where there are children changing and I'm wearing Glass, I should say hey, I have a right to wear this.

Jeff: I'm not saying it's not right, I'm saying that you are presuming that just because someone is using the technology, the use of it is bad-

Leo: No, I'm not.

Jeff: Yeah, you are. And that's an issue because the knee jerk of the technical panic crowd is that if technology can be used in a wrong or bad way, it will be used that way by everyone and none of us should use it. And I'm objecting to that logic.

Leo: Jeff if I carry an ax around, I have no intent to chop anybody, this is for wood. If I carry a gun around, I have no intention of shooting anybody, I use this to shoot deer, are there not things that are maybe legal, but societally, it might be nice if people showed some consideration for other people?

Jeff: Leo, it isn't far from you that people drive around with gun racks in the back of their pickups, and if you went up to them and said I object to you doing that, you shouldn't do that, I want a dash cam on that scene.

Leo: No, but I can assure you that if they came in here carrying weapons- In fact, you go to Texas and every bar has a sign that says please don't bring your gun in here. Is that wrong? Are they in some way-

Jeff: Glass is not a gun!

Leo: I'm just saying there are things you can have, whether you intend to do anything wrong or not, that would just be polite to take them off.

Jeff: It's the same discussion, no- When I get the Glass, and I get my prescription lenses put in them, I'm not carrying around an extra pair of glasses to change them all of the time, that's my glasses and we have the same issue..

Leo: This is going to be an issue going forward, and it could be very-

Jeff: It was the same issue, the same argument when cameras went on to cellphones. And it was oh my God, we can't allow them anywhere near our gyms. How many stories have you seen of sickos taking pictures in gyms? We didn't see it, because we're not sicko, as a society.

Leo: Yeah, but I have to say, if I go into a locker room, I don't go into a locker room with the camera on my phone facing wherever I'm looking and be like hey everybody... But if you're wearing it on your head, it's okay?

Jeff: Okay Leo, they got their phone out and are texting like so, and the camera could be pointed at your junk, but they're repetitively pushing on their screen.

Leo: Well, I think that's rude. I don't think you should do that. I think it's extraordinarily rude.

Danny: When I was at CES, I was in a restroom, and like I said, if I had Glass when I walked in I probably would've moved it to the top of my head just not because I'm worried that some guy who's standing next to me thinks I'm taking a picture of them, just because the entire bathroom area tends to have some degree of privacy expected into it. So, I'm like you know, for whatever reason I'll move them to the top of my head. But, as I was in this certain hotel's restroom, the urinals in there, sorry to get too graphic, had pictures of women making funny faces and pointing down at you, above every urinal. You know, so I didn't think it was that funny, but I decided to share it and take a picture of it with my regular phone, but before I did that, I was really, really careful that no one was around.

Leo: If someone's standing at the urinal, you do not take that picture.

Jeff: I'm not saying you would take a picture then and I'm not saying that just because I have a camera-

Leo: But Jeff, we can't tell with Glass. Let me just say, as somebody who's-

Jeff: Yes, you can.

Leo: I can tell you're taking a picture?

Jeff: Okay, Glass command.

Leo: But you don't have to say okay, Glass. You can wink. You can.

Jeff: I think you're playing in a techno panic. And so there was no justification for the treatment of this guy in this theater for wearing his Glasses that happen to have a camera attached that he wasn't using.

Leo: No, the right thing for the theater to do would be to say I'm sorry, you can't wear your Glass into the theater.

Jeff: No, the right thing for them to do is to say remember sir, please don't use that camera.

Leo: Oh, yeah. That'll work.

Jeff: Once again, what faith you have in mankind!

Gina: I mean the reality is, if he had actually been recording the movie with Glass, it would've been the worse recording, if he even had a giant camcorder on his shoulder because-

Leo: That doesn't stop people from doing it, and selling it.

Danny: Yeah, but he also would've had 45 minutes of the movie.

Leo: Okay.

Danny: It's just not- You can't do two hours of video.

Leo: You know, I have this camera phone and I'm holding it as if I'm recording, but you don't have to worry, because it can only record 720p. I don't think that's really germane.

Danny: But I think part of the issue, again this is a precursor of what's going to come, I think they are going to have glasses that will have recording devices in them because they make a lot of sense. So, the issue is not going to go away, and it's going to become even more complicated because, yeah... If you are having glasses where everything can fit into an ordinary frame, those would be your main glasses. The reason I don't wear Glass when I go to the movie theater, by the way, is aside from the fact that I don't need them, I like to wear my regular glasses to let me see at distance, right? What am I going to do, I'm not going to double stack them or whatever, I don't need them for most things, but if I had a pair of glasses or especially around here, sunglasses- I'm desperate for a pair of sunglasses, I use glass here, in Newport as my sunglasses. Like if I'm going out on the paddle board or something like that the sunglasses are great, I can take pictures of stuff, and don't really give it a second thought because you know, there's a great use case. So, when they become this ordinary device that you're wearing, it's going to be everywhere. So, I don't know what you're going to do at that point, do you stop everybody who walks into a theater because-

Jeff: I'm telling you, this is a rerun. It's a rerun of 1890 and the Kodak camera.

Leo: No it's not, you're not allowed to carry a camcorder into a theater either, I mean, I don't think that's such an unreasonable restriction. Admittedly, they over reacted and what they did was wrong.

Danny: To go both ways, I think that what Jeff is saying, when you eventually get to where everybody has these recording devices, you get to the point where people start to relax about them and not freak out.

Jeff: Yes!

Danny: And it'll probably become pretty clear that a movie recorded from somebody's head is not going to be that great, even as things improve.

Leo: Do you think that we have a legal right to wear Glass?

Jeff: Yes.

Danny: Yeah?

Gina: We have a legal right to wear Glass

Jeff: I have a legal right to carry around a pencil and paper when Glen Green Wolls, a husband, was prevented from writing down the name of the Asians interrogating him, at the border of the UK, I was offended by that. That you couldn't record something by a mean-

Leo: What if I go into a theater with a Goproach strapped to my chest?

Gina: Well, no I mean a restaurant that says shirts and shoes please? That's a different thing, I mean, the thing at the bar said if-

Danny: That's where the private business has the- So, do you have a legal right to go into a private business wearing Glass?

Leo: No.

Danny: Probably not.

Leo: The theater has every right to say you cannot wear Glass in this theater.

Danny: Unless you can prove that there is a situation like being handicapped in some way-

Leo: Yeah, like the ADA says I can wear this.

Danny: But you know, most cases, no. A private business probably could prevent you from doing it.

Leo: I know they can.

Danny: Do you have the right to be detained by law enforcement because you're wearing something, without being arrested?

Leo: Well, no that's recent law that says you cannot record a movie and that is law. I mean, I think they over reacted, but they had the right to do that. They did not act illegally, otherwise there would be a lawsuit going on right now. They did not act illegally.

Jeff: I'm about to have my Dvorak moment and ask, did nothing happen this week?

Leo: We're moving on, LegalZoom.com, it's not a law firm, ladies and gentlemen, it is a sponsor and I love them. Personalized, affordable legal protection. If you're starting a business, do not do so without making it a corporation, whether it's an LLC, a Chapter S, a Chapter C, and you know what? You might say you can't afford to do that. Yes you can, $99 plus the state filing fee, for an LLC. And I can tell you, these things work, we did it in 2005. Same exact operating agreement, papers and everything ever since, nine years later. LegalZoom will also do trademarks. Hey, you've got to have a trademark. If you've got a blog, or if you're omgchat and have something that is yours that you don't want copied by anybody, just trademark it, it's easy. LegalZoom is a step-by-step questionnaire, you woe through it, pay the reasonable fee, and boom you're done. Now, if you feel I need to talk to a lawyer but

I- I'll give you an example. I was trying to decide what state I should incorporate in, Delaware, California, that's when you might want to talk to somebody who has some expertise in the matter, but you don't have to pay the inflated hourly rates of an attorney. You can go to legalzoom.com, where they have pre negotiated rates with attorneys practicing in your state. You can read the attorney's profile and unedited reviews before you hire the attorney and the prices are absolutely right. From $23.99/month for the business legal plan. A month! I can't talk to my attorney for five minutes for $23.99. $11.99/month for personal legal plans. They also have personal services like Last Will and Testament. Here's one you absolutely should do, if you don't have a healthcare power of attorney, make one right now at legalzoom.com, or a living will. If you can't make decisions on your own, due to illness or something of the sort, this is very important. So go to legalzoom.com, 90% of customers recommend LegalZoom to friends or family, that means there are some happy happy LegalZoom users out there. Over a million entrepreneurs who started their business on legalzoom.com. No surprise fees, no hassles, no headaches. LegalZoom's step-by-step process was created, of course, by experts in the fields of law and technology. It works. LegalZoom, not a lawfirm, but they can connect you with a third-party attorney, and provide you with self-help services from wills to business formation, trademarks, power of attorney, go to Legalzoom.com and we invite you to use our discount code, TWIG, to get $10 off at checkout. That way, they know you heard it here, and you save a little money. Legalzoom.com. Just think of it like we'll buy you a cup of coffee if you mention us. Legalzoom.com. Jeff Jarvis at Davos in Switzerland, Gina Trapani, in New York at ThinkUp headquarters, Danny Sullivan SearchEngineLand in Newport Beach. There is actually, I thought this was kind of interesting, it's a Google moon shot. They want to make a contact lens for diabetes patients that would diagnose glucose in your tears.

Gina: So cool.

Leo: Isn't that neat?

Jeff: Here too, I immediately heard oil privacy. Google will know about your diabetes.

Leo: Well, that's true-

Jeff: I've heard diabetics say if they can invent this and make me healthier, God Bless them if they do.

Leo: I don't think any diabetic minds and you know, if you go to a drugstore and buy a pin prick kit, then you're on CVS's list.

Jeff: I heard a great story today here at Davos. Mark Benioff was on stage at an event and he uses FitBit religiously, in fact, here at Davos, they're giving us all Ups, in a health challenge, but Benioff has a FitBit and he's tied into a community of people and he said he got an email one day not long ago, from Micheal Dell, saying Mark are you okay? Benioff said well, what do you mean? Dell came back and said you haven't been exercising for three days, and just kind of a great story but Benioff said it made him realize-

Leo: That's a little creepy.

Jeff: Well, it's in his close group of friends that he trusts, you know. He wouldn't let LeoL in, it's not smart. Micheal Dell, he knows him. He also said I'm the CEO of a public company, and maybe somebody's going to know something about my health, he said suddenly I realized I've got to be careful.

Gina: Interesting.

Jeff: Yeah, it really was.

Gina: Yeah, so like his business, or his company's health was tied to his own health, in a way.

Jeff: Exactly.

Gina: Because of the publishing to a small number, or number of people.

Jeff: I saw Dell later on the floor and I said you and Benioff should compete to become the most connected executive and he said I'll let Mark have that. Mark also talked about his connected WiFi toothbrush, and how he loved that.

Leo: What does it do?

Gina: What does the toothbrush do?

Jeff: Oral B's idea, I think this might be a prototype, I don't know what he said. I couldn't tell the difference, but he really wants it because he wants it to track him and go directly to his dentist, and his dentist can give him tips, and he wants there to be a button on it that says help, and it'll connect through his phone to the manufacturer and he can get help.

Danny: Does it do all of that now?

Jeff: I don't think so, yet.

Danny: What does it do?

Leo: It doesn't do anything, I think it's made up. I don't think there is a WiFi toothbrush, but it's just a matter of time.

Danny: It'd be nice to have a toothbrush to keep track of how long you were brushing though.

Gina: Yeah, that's what you really want to do.

Jeff: There was one that was going to be connected but it's not here yet. Here's a story about it ZDNet, sales force is bidding off, says your toothbrush will be a marketing tool.

Leo: Oh, that's bad. See Mark, shut up. Because that's exactly what's causing people to worry about this stuff. You need toothpaste, you need mouthwash.

Danny: Your breath smells bad, you're disgusting.

Jeff: Apparently, this is Shmeil he's been doing this November.

Leo: Yeah, see I think what you really want to be careful about is promoting these as a way to get you better advertising. I think we've established people don't care about better advertising.

Gina: What about a toothbrush that could detect your glucose levels through you saliva, as well as tell you whether or not you've brushed long enough?

Leo: Yeah there you go. And I have to say, if they can find blood glucose levels in tears, they probably could do blood/alcohol level and other kinds of things. Here it is, by the way, the WiFi toothbrush, BeamBrush.com, thank you chatroom.

Gina: Get prizes for brushing your teeth

Leo: Get prizes for brushing your teeth.

Gina: This is the thing about quantified self that just like-

Jeff: Gina, you're going to have a daughter that you'll be trying to convince to brush her teeth pretty soon.

Gina: Well this is the thing, you have these apps treating you like your mom, giving you rewards for like doing your chores.

Leo: Wait a minute, look at this brush, okay? Doesn't that look like an electric toothbrush? It's not, it's a manual toothbrush. All of the size and the charging is dedicated just so it can talk to your phone. That's so stupid. "Install the free Beam app and connect your brush with a user profile."

Jeff: So, I don't want to start another hour long discussion because I'm tired, but the CEO of Palantir, the big data secretive big data company, is kind of coming out and he was a DLD where I was last week and he was in Davos talking today, and he uses an example, a fascinating data thing, that payments to Doctors and Pharmacies are incredibly indicative of addiction and overdose. He said it's not at all implausible in the state of New Hampshire, where there is a huge problem with Heroin right now, that, and the governor did an entire state of the state’s speech about this. It's Tom Cruise, you could predict that someone is going to overdose with a good probability of being right, do you intervene?

Leo: Well how do you know?

Jeff: Because the orders on your basis to your doctor and the pharmacy are highly indicative in ways that I don't know, but everybody nodded in the room and said yes this is true, the data is there.

Leo: Wow...

Gina: Does who intervene?

Jeff: The police or health officials. I would actually say probably not police, but health officials.

Leo: There's no question if you knew that you know, in fact this happens all of the time, you had some indication that a child was being abused at home, that you would intervene.

Jeff: Yes.

Gina: Yep.

Leo: But that's defending an innocent person, I mean, hm. I don't know.

Jeff: Let's say there's no police, and that you had an end percent, 85%. Pick it up, pick a number, the high percentage odds that someone was going to overdose. They had these sign signals that said they were going to overdose, and you don't intervene, what's your moral responsibility?

Leo: I don't think you can, I don't think you can intervene.

Jeff: You don't think that someone's doctor is beholden? I mean, given those indications, what's the difference between-

Leo: Yeah the doctor should say something. Depends on what the intervention is I guess.

Jeff: The doctor may not have all of the indications across to various doctors.

Leo: Then the doctor should say something; they shouldn't go to the person's house.

Jeff: There's HIPA stuff, I was talking to a doctor at a session I attended tonight. These are the wonders of Davos. She said that years ago, if she were in a hospital and saw someone, she could pick up the chart and read it. Now, it's all electronic and no, no, no. Two people in her hospital were fired because they looked at data for Boston bombing victims.

Leo: Well that's right, that's appropriate. Because that prurient, not for health purposes.

Jeff: That was in that case, but the same principle applies, what if a doctor says this person looks a little yellow to me. I don't know, maybe I should take a look at them. You don't have the right authority, you can't even just look, because it's presumed to be evil and intent.

Leo: What a world.

Jeff: But I didn't want to get into an hour long discussion.

Leo: Watch out for your Chrome extensions. It turns out that there is a quick market in Chrome extensions. Spammers come along, buy a small Chrome extension that maybe has a few hundred thousand users, give them a few bucks, take it over, and then there's no mechanism in Chrome to vet updates to that extension. Google's removed two adddefeadley and tweetthispage after one was sold, one was paid to show ad ware by a simple update. And this seems to be a real flaw in the way Chrome extensions are handled. Google vets the Chrome extension to get it on the market place, but after that, anything goes.

Gina: Yeah, it should check updates.

Leo: It should, and you know how Google found out about this? The Wall Street Journal.

Gina: Oh no. Is that true? Oh, no....No, no, no.

Leo: Well, presumably what happened is the people who had installed this extension went, what the hell, I'm seeing ads, and complained in some way. The Journal ran an article about it and Google noted the article and said, oh well we had better to something.

Gina: Well, the other problem with extensions and I'm going to talk about this generally because I haven't done a whole lot of extension development, I've dabbled. Is that the permissions for extensions are very broad. Almost every Chrome extension that you install asks you for permission to see all of your browsing activity. On every tab, I don't know if you've noticed this but it freaks me out every time. But most extensions can't work without those permissions because they do certain things on certain pages and so you have to trust them to only do what they're supposed to do on the pages that they apply to. But those overly broad permissions allow for this kind of thing to happen, for someone to buy the extension, or take it over with malware or whatever. So, I think there are two issues. There's like the permissions model, which I think Google could do better with. A la Android's permission model. Which also could use a little bit of improvement, but is deniftely better than what they have for Chrome. But also the update vetting process, all they have to do is parse that source code on every update and check for URL's and run in against their ad or malware database and flag it.

Leo: So, the way it happened, Meat Agrijual who created adddefeadly described in his website how he sold the extension to an unknown buyer for a small sum and said that the new owner added code that injected invasive advertising on users. Meanwhile, Arstechnica reported the other extension Google removed. Tweetthispage also had been purchased and altered to insert ads. This is the Wall Street Journal, "Google removed the two extensions after being contacted by the Wall Street Journal." Maybe I'm assuming causation. Maybe Google was already planning to do that, I don't know.

Gina: It's a big business, I had a very popular Firefox extension back in the day, years ago, but I got tons of inquiries about partnerships and about ad revenue partnerships. I always turned them down but it was really interesting and now I don't hear about it if it's Firefox. It was a while ago, but-

Leo: Now you know why they were contacting you.

Gina: Yeah, I mean because it-

Leo: See because basically, you've got a Trojan horse in the user's computer that's been giving all of these permissions...

Gina: Hey you could rewrite links on any website, wherever you want them to go, yeah.

Leo: Terrible. This is really bad because extensions to the browser- Because the browser really is the vector for bad guys getting into your computer, and extensions have all of these permissions and they're sitting right there. I think Google really needs to look at how extensions are vetted. Yahoo, you probably knew this as the publisher of SearchEngineLand.com, Yahoo tops the most trafficked website list for desktops in the U.S. beating Google, Microsoft, and Facebook, according to ComScore.

Jeff: Only old farts still have desktops.

Leo: Yeah.

Danny: They've been on top for months now, so you know, that was several months ago when they finally flipped up over to the top. So, I think the reason you're hearing so much about desktop is because they're having to really qualify that this is desktop. When they were first up, nobody really paid much attention to that, so that seemed to kind of be the twist that we're stressing even more, that's happening.

Leo: In December, Yahoo had more than 195 million uniques. That's a good number...

Danny: The hard thing is, we don't know why. We don't, when they first shot up, I did a whole thing on this. I did charts and everything and I showed how after Marissa came in, they did this spike. I think it was like Yahoo's traffic is up, but no one knows why, or something like that.

Leo: Yeah, I remember that.

Danny: You know, they got this little spike, then a big spike, then another big spike and spikes like that are unusual/suspicious. They don't just happen overnight. Sometimes they happen because like a publisher suddenly decides that they're going to do slideshows on every page and so the same page is now counting twice. So, I went back to Yahoo when all of this first started coming out and said well, what'd you do? What's the secret sauce? And they were just like oh we just did a good job today all over Yahoo and it's just really great. So you know, and then what's also interesting is, one of our assumptions was maybe this was because they bought Tumblr, but no. They would be even higher than they are now if Tumblr were wrapped up into it. The last time I looked at the stats, they're still not wrapping up Tumblr into Yahoo's overall properties, which is odd.

Leo: I think you were on when we talked about this actually, we talked about this on the show,  yeah.

Danny: But, yeah. They're there. So, Yahoo.... Woo hoo!

Leo: Woo hoo! Do you think it's legit?

Danny: I don't know, I really don't. I don't like spikes like that without explanations. I think Yahoo knows why they were spiking and they should explain it.

Leo: They have the details.

Danny: Yeah, and when they don't explain it, there was another thing. A whole series of articles recently that were going out about, I can't remember who had it, but it was like, Yahoo's in trouble, Tumblr isn't growing.and then there was like a chart and what was going on with Tumblr, and then Yahoo's like we only trust numbers you get for ComScore, but then they were like siting the ComScore numbers and Yahoo's all like quiet, and so you know.

Leo: Well also, it's hard to measure Mobile, I don't know if they were measuring mobile for those numbers and on and on and on. There was something I wanted to talk about and I forgot what it was. It was.....

Gina: There wasn't a whole lot of news this week, relative to most shows, I will say.

Jeff: That's why we went on forever about that Glass story.

Gina: Well I saw that there were a lot of passionate feelings about that, but...

Jeff: Yes there were.

Leo: There were a few feelings, apparently. Little did I know.

Jeff: One of my thrills of Davos was getting to set across from Tony Fadell of Nest last night.

Leo: Oh, was he there? Go on yeah, what did he say?

Jeff: He's just a really charming, charming nice guy. I asked him about whether he was in the Google Hotel and he said no it's not closed yet, we can't do any of that stuff. But really fascinating to hear him talk about Nest, and the protect thing and how there spread bit by bit. And why it made sense to be blocked by Google.

Gina: Could you share that?

Jeff: Yeah, I don't think any of it was secretive but I think that you go for more money, and then you've got to meet this really high barrier and he talked in Munich about how he talked to a lot of companies over a time, it took a long time, but when he sat down with Larry Page, it was just obviously kismet. He said I go into meetings and think I'm going to teach somebody something to get somewhere in this meeting.

Leo: You know how you spell kismet? $3.2 billion.

Jeff: Amen. He worked the hell out of it. He lured a lot out of Larry-

Leo: Yeah, yeah, yeah. $3.2 billion....

Jeff: Yeah, but what he told the employees is, it's a line you hear all the time in these purchases. What they really did was invested Nest. But it's true, the have the resources and are going to be able to do amazing things. He talked about one of the stories the Rundown, he has said we are not going to change our privacy policy if we do, when we do, we'll let you know. I said, listen I want Wave to tell Nest oh, he's in traffic. Wait an hour before you put the heat up. I want those kinds of connections.And he said, most people do, but-

Danny: First, we're not going to ever change our privacy policies, which is a stupid thing to say and puts them right in line with-

Jeff: They didn't say that.

Danny: Well no, they said they aren't going to change, they aren't going to share data, I mean I recall it as being pretty clear at the first day was we aern't changing anything, we aren't sharing our data. Which is a stupid thing to say because you are not the CEO, founder, whatever of your company forever. Google has made similar promises of how they will never do anything and they do a 180 degree turns. Then the next day, it's if we make some changes, we'll give you lots of notice. So, yeah. They're going to make changes that will upset some people, there will be some benefits to doing it, it just always makes me laugh when you have a founder act like they've sold their company but the company is never going to change.

Jeff: Yeah.

Danny: Because it changes.

Leo: You don't have any choice, it's called I gave you $3.2 billion, now shut up and go away. That's okay, I would take the money and run.

Danny: I installed the Nest app, by the way because I didn't have them so I ordered the thermostat.

Leo: What do you think?

Danny: Well for me, I don't get it, right? Because I'm in Southern California-

Leo: You never leave the house.

Danny: Well I don't leave the house, and we're right on the coast so it's not hot and it's not cold. It's like ten times a year I turn on to maybe get a bit more heat, and then it was like kind of cool. I thought it would be constantly trying to adjust stuff, and no, I could see why people would want it. It was pretty smart and it was cool to flip the fan on, when I was so anxious to figure the kits out. The smoke detector though, I'm like wow, that's an expensive smoke detector. Then when you get the instructions, it's like and we really recommend smoke detectors be placed inside and outside, every room in the house is like- I spent $2000 it seems like to wire up my house with smart smoke detectors.

Leo: That may be why I didn't really get that much out of the Nest because I live in California, maybe it makes more sense if you live in the frigid tundra.

Jeff: Oh, rub it in again will you. Rub it in again.

Gina: Yeah....yeah.

Leo: It was turning on the heat at random times and was too smart for its own good. And frankly Jeff, if I'm on my way home and I get home and the house is cold so I have to turn on the heat, it's not the end of the world.

Jeff: See, here's what I want, I want-

Gina: But you're in California.

Leo: That's true.

Jeff: Yes.

Gina: It's 18 degrees here.

Leo: But on the other hand, if you're in New York, you don't let the house get down to 52 degrees, you always-

Jeff: Leo, I'll give you another example. We have the heated floor in the bathroom because it's cold where we live. I want my alarm to be tied to the floor, so that the floor goes on just a few minutes before the alarm goes off.

Leo: This is such a first world problem.

Jeff: Oh, that's.... Yes.

Leo: You could wear slippers, Jeff. And I say that as a guy who has a toilet seat that heats up I understand, I'm not-

Danny: Those heated toilet seats are awesome, when I've had them in a hotel.

Leo: No, I'm not immune to the pleasures.

Jeff: I've been given Davos backlash tonight, I'm gone for one second, and you're treating me different.

Leo: I'm with you, I'm saying I have a toilet seat that washes my butt, however, it's hard to justify a $250 smoke alarm-

Jeff: Oh, oh, oh. I'm not talking about that, I'm saying a solid floor connection that shouldn't cost anything.

Leo: Yeah, eventually all of this stuff. And maybe it'll just be kind of the way it is with everything talking to everything else and it's just kind of- I just see all sorts of difficulty, you know, this is a long- We're a little ways off. It's $129 for the smoke detector, so it's only 4 times more expensive than a First Alert.

Jeff: A First Alert runs-

Leo: $12, they're cheap.

Jeff: I just bought one. No.... Not the wired ones, it was $45.

Leo: Well the wired ones are more expensive, you're right.

Jeff: And the CO2 one, I think is $75-$80.

Leo: Right, alright. So, it's not so far off. Yeah. I can't remember what it was that I wanted to talk about.

Jeff: Here's what he said last night, Love, they auditioned huge numbers of people to be the voice of the Nest alarm because the Nest alarm will say-

Leo: I'll do it, right? Get out of the house.

Jeff: And he also said they  picked a woman's voice because the children are more likely to listen to a mother's voice.

Leo: Yeah, they do that with pilots. The voice that comes on in a plane while you're blacking out is always a female. But that's been known for years. Pull up pull up pull up, yeah that's always a female voice.

Jeff: I hate it when the tests do that.

Leo: Yeah you can hear it sometimes while you're on the plane, it;s very depressing.

Jeff: Yeah.

Danny: I still need a Nest light switch that when the kids leave the room, goes hey! Turn off the light!

Leo: Hey! I'm not made of money!

Danny: I would call it dadswitch.

Leo: Yeah.

Gina: Doesn't grow on trees.

Danny: However, we had to have one room redone and they put in these automatic switches that are currently not very expensive and I was like, but, you've just made me redundant.

Leo: By the way, the chat room is giving me a hard time, not just men listen to female voices, women listen to female voices too, it works for both genders. Humans listen to female voices.

Danny: Oh yes, I can add something to this, I remember reading an article about BMW or somebody in Germany discovering that they couldn't use the woman's voice for the auto navigation in the car because men did not like a woman telling them what to do.

Jeff: I remember that.

Danny: In that case, they had to go with a male's voice, and in particular, with a man using a pilot's style intonation because they reacted better, it was more like the co-pilot with them.

Gina: Interesting.

Leo: It's okay, the co-pilot is telling us to turn. But if my wife is telling me to turn, I'm not going to turn.

Gina: I've heard that babies respond to a higher- That's why they love Elmo, right? Because it's voice is just so high, but I didn't know that-

Leo: So you can get wood now in your MotoX, they've got four kinds, and it's cheap it's $25 to add a wooden back. They started with a bamboo, but as of yesterday, ebony, I know Mike Elgan just ordered his ebony. Teak, and walnut. God, that's gorgeous.

Jeff: So, are you doing it Leo?

Leo: I already have a Moto X but I was thinking about buying a new Moto X just so I can have walnut.

Gina: Oh, so you can't do just the back.

Leo: No, you have to buy a whole new Moto X, but look at the price by the way. When I bought the Moto X, it wasn't $75, they've really dropped the pricing. That's of course with subsidy, but still, they've really dropped the price on this.

Jeff: That's interesting, I'll bet even with the wood it's cheaper than the retail you paid.

Leo: Absolutely it is.

Jeff: Right, interesting.

Leo: Sigh. No off contract, it's now $399. Trade in your old phone and get a credit. I wonder if they'll take the Moto X  as the old phone. I really want walnut it's so beautiful. The only reason I don't do that is I have a strong suspicion there must be a next generation coming any minute now.

Gina: Yeah, with the price drops.

Leo: Yep. Let us take a break, tips tools numbers, Danny if you'd want to throw in a Pick of the Week, we'd love it.

Danny: Oh, okay.

Leo: You're watching This Week in Google with Danny Sullivan of SearchEngineLand-

Danny: Although, I'm probably about to have to jump off .

Leo: Oh yeah, oh God, we kept you long. You want to leave, you can. Danny Sullivan, thank you.

Danny: Pick of the Week, real quick is ThinkUp, it's awesome.

Leo: It is awesome.

Gina: Oh, thank you!

Danny: I look forward to Twitter buying it because that's what they should just do.

Leo: Danny, thank you for letting us keep you so long, I appreciate it.

Danny: I had said we'll probably be done by 3, I'm just like no, I've really got to go now.

Leo: Oh I had no idea, I wasn't paying attention. Thank you, Danny Sullivan! Marketingwatch and Searchengineland.com.

Danny: You guys take care.

Leo: Take care.

Gina: Thanks, Danny.

Leo: Great guy, don't we love Danny Sullivan? He's a good ranter, but he's been kind of the conscience of the search industry, particularly Google, for ages. That's what we need. Our show today brought to you by 99designs.com. This is a great place to go, in fact, I was just looking at our hoodie designs, we're going to do a hoodie. So, what we did was we went and created a contest at 99designs, there are currently 2,0280 open contests, and we said we want a design for our hoodies. And we got, I can't remember, I looked at three pages of designs, picked my top five, and then we'll have a little vote off and so forth. It's so much fun, thank you everybody, who submitted designs. You know, I think this is a really great way to bring people who need design help together with some of the best designers in the world. There are now, over 270,000 designers at 99designs.com and they're waiting to hear from you. Everything from logo design to web design, landing page, mobile app, they'll even do a business card or a car wrap. Prices start as low as $199, you tell 99designs what you need, dozens of designers from the community will submit designs created just for you. You can see the ideas rolling, give them your feedback, help find the designs, then select and pay for your favorite. You need new marketing collateral, you know, 99designs, email template, inner ad, infographic and we're going to give you a little extra something here. If you go to 99designs.com/twig, you'll get a $99 power pack of services absolutely free. Power pack gives you more designer time and attention, they'll bold, highlight, and feature  your design project in the 99designs marketplace, as a result, more than twice as many designs. 99designs.com/twig and we'll show you our hoodie design soon.

Gina: That's exciting.

Leo: What was that?!

Gina: Sorry, that was me. There were sirens going by and I was trying to mute but it wasn't working.

Leo: I forgot Manhattan.

Gina: Yeah, constant sirens

Leo: Kind of seems like it would feel like your life is vital. You're living somewhere where people are living and dying,even as we speak.

Gina: It feels like you get run over the minute you step out of the office.

Leo: Alright, let's start you off with the tip of the week, Gina.

Gina: GoogleDrive added a cool new feature, which I really like. It's an activity stream to the upper right hand side of your Drive. I really like this and I spend a lot of time in GoogleDrive, my businesspartner and I do a lot of our business documents in Drive. And so, they've added a little "i" icon, I don't know what it stands for, info? I'm not sure. At the top right corner, and this is just rolling out now over the past week, so I saw it in my Google Apps account, but not in my GMail account, so you might have to wait for it to see this, but you click on it and it's an activity stream of updates to your GoogleDrive documents. So, what document and who updated it last. A really handy feature, particularly if you share documents with other people a lot, to kind of see what's happening. New GoogleDrive activity stream.

Leo: I figure the "i" is info...

Gina: Yeah, it's got to be info.

Leo: That's the universal logo with the circle around the i. Jeff's got quite the Number of the Week this week.

Jeff: Yeah, well my first number is actually 12. It's midnight here so I went to find the last number I could. I want to say firstly, it's utter BS, I don't believe it, but what the heck? It's just like BuzzFeed. I'm going to give it to you anyway. Some Princeton researchers say Facebook will lose 80% of its users by 2017. How do they say that? Well, they compare Facebook, in terms of Google Searches, to a virus.

Leo: Oh wow...

Jeff: Now, how you can justify this, I do not know. But they say that it's growing  at the rate of a virus, thus, it will die at the rate of a virus. It's BS, but it's a number and it's midnight so I wanted a number.

Leo: I think it's a good number and I don't think it's BS. I think they're exactly right and I think that it's going to happen sooner than that.

Gina: Like Bubonic Plague, Facebook will eventually die out.

Leo: I think you could call it, I think Facebook is dead, as of right now.

Jeff: I'm feeling a case of Zuckitus.

Leo: I find myself really not using it as much as I did, there's a lot of upworthy crap.

Gina: Yeah, they definitely changed the news algorithm.

Leo: I feel, and I don't think I'm alone- Even the people who use it do so because, like Lisa, that's how you stay in touch with family and friends, but they don't like it.

Gina: Right, they do it because that's where the people are.

Leo: How long can something survive that people use but don't like?? All it takes is somebody to come along and do a better job, and it’s over. Although, there is the network effect.

Gina: There is the network effect, someone could make a social network that's way better than Facebook but the people arent there.

Leo: Well, we've seen how fast the people can move. And I don't think people under 25 use Facebook at all, do they Chad?

Chad: I think people under 25 do all have accounts-

Leo: Okay yeah, my daughter does. She graduated from highschool a couple of years ago and so everybody she knows went some random place and so it's a really good way to stay in touch with-

Chad: Everyone nowadays sees it as a tool. It's a utility to make parties happen, and share your photos. It's not what it used to be, which was a place to go and kill 30 hours, while looking at everyones pages and streams.

Leo: So sick of it. So speaking of viri, we did this last year, we do it every year, the Google Flu Trends chart's up. Google.ord/flutrends. This is a bad one this year, H1N1, look at the heat map. You see that red? The more red you see, the more flu activity, and there's only a few places. Like if you want to avoid the flu, go to North Dakota, Utah, not Arizona or New Mexico, Indiana, or Maine. The rest of us are toast. Google does this with the help of th CDC. It's actually really interesting if you know what to look for. The activity spikes each year, but you can see that this is a bad one. See how that peak is higher than anything in the last ten years.

Gina: Oh yeah, that's not good

Leo: So, bad one this year.

Gina: Yeah. I've become a Purell maniac since I work around people in an actual office.

Leo: Yeah, that's something you don't want to do, don't go around other people at all, ever. I got my shot last Thursday, so they say it takes two weeks to get to full strength, so I have a little countdown on my desk. I don't need to talk to anybody. Anyways, that's fun it's google.org/flutrends, if you want to follow the flu. I don't take credit for this it came from Alex Lindsay. Google maps, if you use data there is a free and paid version in the app store for Android. You can use Google Apps to do a survey and then it automatically imported the data into the map it can really do some neat stuff with this.

Gina: I've seen a couple like this but never have seen this specifically.

Leo: Gina Trapani, you've got the data, you've got it all at Thinkup,com. Now when are you going to let people sign up?

Gina: Next week, we're just kind of looking at our data and all that.

Leo: Have the servers survived?

Gina: They're looking good, we're just trying to make last minute fixes.

Leo: So can I control whatever you've got.

Gina: It's whatever we have right now but we'd like to add some more controls. Just like or dislike things.

Leo: By the way, one of the good ones, Leo Laporte mentioned ThinkUp once last week. I like that. I'll talk about ThinkUp more, I am really loving it.

Gina: Thank you, we're really excited to get it out to the public.

Leo: Chad gets the 'bout enough about me stat with all of his 'my's, me's I's, and so on' By the way my number one Tweet according to your graph here is on here. She is also a blogger at smarterware.org and is a new resident of Brooklyn and every Tuesday catch her 5pm Pacific and 8pm Eastern. Jeff Jarvis stillhatesverizon@buzzmachine.com he's up late thank you for staying up for us Jeff and enjoy your time.

Jeff: My pleasure.

Leo: Will you blog about anything that happens there?

Jeff: I will, just haven't yet.

Leo: And you'll be there a while, thank you all for joining us for This Week in Google catch up with us 1pm Pacific 4pm Eastern 2100 UTC on twit.tv on Wednesday and you can always see on demand episodes after the fact. Check us out at Youtube at youtube.com/twig and of course, you could subscribe via your favorite netcast program. See you next time on TWiG!