The Goggle Machine Surprizes Again

I like Gmail. It's got my kind of capacity and my kinds of features. I like the ease of using Google Calender, Google docs, et al. In short, I'm a happy user. Hence, when told about Gmail's latest feature, I simply had to post it here.

I wouldn't have thought about this but someone at Google did and it apparently sounds like a great feature to many a user judging from the responses and comments they have received. Can't say I'll have a need to use it but I reckon it's usually a good idea to be open-minded vis-a-vis the 'Google machine.'

A bit says:

"When you enable Mail Goggles, it will check that you're really sure you want to send that late night Friday email. And what better way to check than by making you solve a few simple math problems after you click send to verify you're in the right state of mind?

By default, Mail Goggles is only active late night on the weekend as that is the time you're most likely to need it. Once enabled, you can adjust when it's active in the General settings.

Hopefully Mail Goggles will prevent many of you out there from sending messages you wish you hadn't. Like that late night memo -- I mean mission statement -- to the entire firm."
Read more here.

Some of you who also do work/write at night might find this annoying and unnecessary but plenty of AM folk might find it really useful. I suppose that's Google's strongest suit: catering to all on some level and in some capacity.

Would you use this feature? Do you find it micromanaging and/or too editing?
graph per google

Paris and Sheen: Loves It?

Paris Hilton is channeling current political and pop discourse for her current 'Paris for Fake President' campaign. She uses phrases like 'Fo Po', which by the way stands for 'foreign policy', as well as a slew of few other pop culture references.
And a fake past president joins her.
Loves it?

See more Paris Hilton videos at Funny or Die

Of Awkward Syntax

The following paragraph would have to take the cake as the most syntactically confusing paragraph I read today.

“I’m not saying he’s dishonest, but in terms of judgment, in terms of being able to answer a question forthrightly, it has two different parts to this. The judgment and the truthfulness and just being able to answer very candidly a simple question about when did you know him, how did you know him, is there still — has there been an association continued since ’02 or ’05, I know I’ve read a couple different stories. I think it’s relevant.”

Qtd by Maureen Dowd.