Woman Loses Disability Insurance Over Facebook Photos

We've discussed how using Facebook and other social networking sites can get you fired, or even keep you from getting a job. In this case, a Canadian woman lost her disability insurance payment because of Facebook photos.

Before anyone asks, it's disability insurance, not the Universal Health Care that Canada has. So, in this case, it's not covered by their Universal Health system.

Nathalie Blanchard, 29, from Quebec, has been disabled from her position at IBM for one and a half years due to deep depression. During that period, she has received monthly disability checks from Manulife. Those, however, recently stopped coming.

When BLanchard checked with Manulife, she was told that based on the Facebook pictures Manulife had seen, including ones showing her having a good time at a Chippendales bar show, at her birthday party and on a vacation at the beach, she is no longer depressed.

A few questions arise at this point. According to Nathalie Blanchard, she had her Facebook privacy settings enabled. So, just how did Manulife access her photos?

Additionally, Blanchard added that "having fun" was her doctor's advice. As a way to forget her problems, she followed his advice, including nights out at her local bar with friends and short vacations.

Her lawyer Tom Lavin said "I don't think for judging a mental state that Facebook is a very good tool. It's not as if somebody had a broken back and there was a picture of them carrying with a load of bricks. My client was diagnosed with a major depression. And there were pictures of her on Facebook, in a party or having a good time. It could be that she was just trying to escape."

Lavin added that he has requested another psychiatric evaluation for Blanchard.

Manulife confirmed to the CBC that they do use Facebook for these sorts of "checks," but added that they would not solely use Facebook to make a judgment.

Regarding the possible depression that Blanchard faces and the so-called "happiness ban" that Manulife seems to have instituted, I consulted with Dr. Dominika Osmolska, PsyD, about the issue.

She said, "Just because you're at the beach doesn't mean you aren't depressed. People to go the ocean to drown themselves, to make it 'beautiful.' A few Facebook photos does not prove you are mentally healthy."

She did add, however, that most people who are clinically depressed to the point of being disabled for 1 1/2 years would be unlikely to want to leave the house. That is, of course, not an absolute.

It is troubling that said she had her profile "locked" and yet Manulife was able to view it. If that is the case, than none of us on Facebook are safe. I have emailed Facebook with a request for a comment on this.

"What Happening" At Twitter? A Sea Change

It seems like a very slight change, two characters less, but the meaning is definitely different. Today Twitter changed its familiar question which you would answer in a Tweet from "What are you doing?" to "What's Happening?"

It's a nod to something that's been obvious for some time: while Twitter was first envisioned as a service that allowed people to say what they "were doing," it's become a service that's being used to broadcast news and more. It's less about what a person is doing, and more an information resource used by whomever wants to use it.

Thus, we see this change. It's a small number of characters, but it certainly shows how Twitter has grown. As founder Biz Stone said in a blog post about the change:

The fundamentally open model of Twitter created a new kind of information network and it has long outgrown the concept of personal status updates. Twitter helps you share and discover what's happening now among all the things, people, and events you care about. "What are you doing?" isn't the right question anymore—starting today, we've shortened it by two characters. Twitter now asks, "What's happening?"

Google Details The Chrome OS

Google held an event on Thursday to unveil details about is Chrome OS, which was first announced in July. Prior to Thursday, only miniscule details about the OS were known, including it running on netbooks, and delivery of the final product in the second half of 2010.

First, as part of its announcement today, Google said that Google would be releasing all of the operating system’s code and design documents to the public. Chrome OS is a Linux-based, open-source operating system based on Google’s Chrome browser. “As of today, the code will be fully open, which means Google developers will be working on the same tree as open developers,” said Sundar Pichai, vice president of product management for Google.

So besides being open-source, Linux-based, and centered on Google's Chrome browser, what else can be said about the Chrome OS? In a nutshell, Chrome OS IS the Chrome browser. Basically, everything runs through the cloud, included applications, and in reality what you have is the Google Chrome browser extended, with the help, probably, of BIOS extensions from the OEMs Google will partner with, to run a complete netbook or other computing device.

That's the view in a nutshell, and you can see this would be a great way for Google to move more end users to its cloud-based services and applications, like Google Docs. However, on Thursday, Google emphasized speed, speed and more speed for its Chrome OS. Being built on Google's Chrome browser, the OS will be lightweight. Google intends, as well, for the OS to boot up near instantaneously. Right now, Google says Chrome boots in 7 seconds.

Chrome OS will be user installable, but only on a "Chrome OS device." The initial focus will be netbooks, from manufacturers that Google is working with. At least, that's the plan for 2010; Google wants to run on laptops, desktops, etc. eventually.

All the applications will run through the Web, like Google Docs. Think of it as a "cloud device," although if an app wants to run offline, it can. You'll remember that some Google web-based apps can already do this, using Google Gears.

For security, remember how everything in Chrome (the browser) is sandboxed, so that web-based malware is encapsulated and unable to affect the rest of the system? The Chrome OS will work similarly. As Google said, right now all apps in a typical OS have the same privileges as you do. In the Chrome OS, all apps will be untrusted by default.

In order to work on a whole device, and to be able to work when a USB device is plugged in, Google will have to create drivers. That's probably the most challenging portion of the project; Microsoft, despite its foibles, should be applauded for making Windows run on most hardware without a glitch. Granted, drivers are written by OEMs, but Microsoft still must certify them.

No pricing was announced, and not hard deadlines. However, Google was pretty clear about a late 2010 release, and if Google Chrome OS is netbook-centric, we may see devices in the $200 - 600 range. We may even see lower prices if Google "gives" the OS away.

Watch a video about Chrome OS.

Irony: Microsoft Banned From Selling Windows In China

Irony of ironies. Microsoft has been banned from selling Windows in China, the ultimate land of piracy. One would think it might be the other way around (if it were possible, that is).

The ban arose after a Beijing court ruled that Microsoft violated its licensing agreement with Zhongyi Electronic. The products in question, Windows XP, Windows Server 2003, Windows 2000 and Windows 98 include Chinese fonts designed by the company. However, Zhongyi said that the agreement it signed with Microsoft only allowed it to use the special fonts in Windows 95.

Microsoft said it plans to appeal the ruling, and in a unintentionally hilarious statement added it "respects intellectual property rights" and uses the intellectual property of third parties "only when we have a legitimate right to do so". The hilarity of course, results from the country of origin of the complaint, China.

In August, four people were jailed in China for selling a bootleg version of Windows XP. State -operated Xinhua news agency called it China's biggest software piracy case to date.

Meanwhile, last month Microsoft was faced with the dire prospect of seeing bootleg copies of Windows 7 flooding the Chinese market, even before the new system went on sale.

Palm Pixi, Pre Prices Slashed At Amazon.com

Hopefully you didn't pay $100 for the Palm Pixi when it launched a few days ago. If you did, you probably feel seriously ticked off, as you can now get the Palm Pixi at Amazon.com for a mere $25, and without having to mail any rebates in.

Meanwhile, Amazon.com has cut the Palm Pre's price to $80, matching a previously announced offer from Wal-Mart (and Let's Talk). However, as I said, the Amazon.com deals are super-easy, and don't involve any rebate forms.

They do, of course, require a two-year service plan.

Amazon.com doesn't note any end date for these prices, however, if you don't sign up by Monday you will lose out on a Sprint free activation offer.

One thing's clear: the $100 and under space is becoming full of smartphones, with the exception of the highest profile ones, such as the iPhone and the Droid. It's going to be an interesting holiday shopping season.

AT&T Loses The First Round In Its Ad War

AT&T has lost round one in its fight against Verizon's anti-ATT-network ads. The company has sued Verizon, saying the maps and statements made in the latest Verizon ads confuse consumers.

At issue in the lawsuit, the maps (above) compare Verizon and AT&T 3G coverage. AT&T says that the maps are interpreted by many as indicating that AT&T has not coverage in those areas not marked blue in their map. Instead they simply indicate a lack of 3G coverage.

It's clear that Verizon has the advantage in terms of 3G coverage in the U.S., though their CDMA technology has plenty of minuses. At least, however, they don't drop 30 percent of their calls.

U.S. District Court Judge Timothy Batten Sr. refused to serve Verizon with an injunction against showing the ads. He said that people might “misunderstand” the commercials, “but that doesn’t mean they’re misleading.” At the same time, he noted that most people, when watching TV, aren't all that attentive anyway. “Most people who are watching TV are semi-catatonic. They’re not fully alive.”

Of course, he didn't list another reason to forego the injunction: as more people buy DVRs, they aren't watching commercials anyway.

Is The Real Google Phone Coming?

When Google first started working on the Android platform, it was believed to be a smartphone, nicknamed the Google Phone or gPhone. Since then, Android the platform has emerged, and thoughts of a Google Phone have vanished. But should they have?

A new report indicates that the Google Phone may be a reality in early 2010. The phone will be produced by a major phone manufacturer, but will have only Google branding. It was originally planned for this holiday season, but has been delayed until early 2010.

Now, there's already been much discussion around this, with some saying that there's no way that Google would do this, as it would alienate handset manufacturers. Additionally, just last month Google vice president of engineering for Android at Google Andy Rubinsaid "We're not making hardware. We're enabling other people to build hardware."

Technically, they still wouldn't be making the hardware, but anyway, those arguments actually make sense, but now there's a new theory: a data-only, VOIP device that integrates with Google Voice and thus technically isn't really a phone.

Technically is the key word, because it will still have the capabilities of a phone, as long as it can connect to a data network and work through Google Voice. According to the new report, AT&T is interested in this already.

AT&T isn't against data only plans either. You can get a data-only plan on Windows Mobile and BlackBerry devices (not on the iPhone) so it's not out of the question for them to take this sort of approach.

Of course, since AT&T's network is already overloaded by the data-centric abilities of the iPhone, do we need still more data-hogging devices on that network?

Black Friday? There's An App For That

You can bet that on Black Friday, which is the day after Thanksgiving, there will be plenty of people buying Apple products, including iPhones. They might even be using this new app to help them.

It's called Mall Maps. According to a press release from the developers, its already reached the top 50 of its category. The app costs $2.99, so some of that seems rather hard to believe, as so many people want free, free, free when it comes to iPhone apps.

There is also another app, called ManGo, that can help you with shopping. That app is free.

One thing about Mall Maps though: it concentrates on malls, and only malls. It also includes something great for mallrats: maps of each mall. The app is described as follows:

FEATURES

• More than 1,000 Shopping centers across all 50 states
• GPS Location-based search – find all the malls around you
• Browse malls by state
• Detailed floor plan of every mall
• Store list with corresponding map numbers
• Favorites: Choose your favorite stores for quick access—automatically categorizes to their respective malls
• Address, phone number and URL of every mall
• Phone number of every store within mall profile
• Google Maps directions to every location
  

BENEFITS

• The mall’s entire floor plan and store list in the palm of your hand
• No more wasted trips
• Visiting friends or family for the holidays? Find the nearest plaza and arrive with the perfect gift!

Personally, for the last few years, I've eschewed the malls for holiday shopping and relied on online stores, such as Amazon.com. In fact, with the exception of getting prescription glasses made, I've not been in a mall for several years. For mallrats, however, this may be a must-have app.

Verizon To AT&T: The Truth Hurts

Addressing AT&T's recent complaints and lawsuits over its latest series of ads picking at AT&T's network coverage, Verizon has only three words for AT&T: "The Truth Hurts."

As you may recall, this all started when Verizon started a series of ads mocking Apple's "There's an app for that" ads with, "There's a map for that" ads that emphasized the coverage area of Verizon's 3G network when compared to AT&T's.

That's the point: the ads compared 3G vs. 3G. While most of Verizon's network is 3G, most of AT&Ts is 2G / Edge. Thus, the AT&T map looked pretty sparse (above). Asserting that the Verizon maps confused end users, making them believe that AT&T had no coverage in the blank areas of their map (as opposed to no 3G), AT&T sued.

Verizon has responded with a court filing of its own (.PDF). The company opens the filing with the following:

AT&T did not file this lawsuit because Verizon’s “There’s A Map For That” advertisements are untrue; AT&T sued because Verizon’s ads are true and the truth
hurts.

Ouch, that first sentence hurts. It doesn't seem like AT&T has much to complain about. Well, realistically, they do. The problem is that legally they don't have a lot to stand on. Verizon has little teeny fine print in their ads that makes it clear that the coverage maps are all about 3G. Whether or not customers understand just what that means isn't really their problem, now is it?

And after all, as Verizon points out in their filing, AT&T continues to use the tagline about its 3G network being "Nation's Fastest 3G Network," so why shouldn't Verizon use whatever ammo it can?

One-Third of Teens Aged 16, 17 Text While Driving: Study

What seems to be a plethora of studies and research prove that text messaging while driving is dangerous. Despite this, a new Pew Research study (.PDF) shows that 1/3 of teens aged 16 and 17 text while driving.

Here are some of the highlights, or rather, lowlights, of the report:

• 75% of all American teens ages 12-17 own a cell phone, and 66% use their phones to send or receive text messages.
• Older teens are more likely than younger teens to have cell phones and use text messaging; 82% of teens ages 16-17 have a cell phone and 76% of that cohort are cell texters.
• One in three (34%) texting teens ages 16-17 say they have texted while driving. That translates into 26% of all American teens ages 16-17.
• Half (52%) of cell-owning teens ages 16-17 say they have talked on a cell phone while driving. That translates into 43% of all American teens ages 16-17.
• 48% of all teens ages 12-17 say they have been in a car when the driver was texting.
• 40% say they have been in a car when the driver used a cell phone in a way that put themselves or others in danger.

Worse, some teens are flippant about texting while driving, and feel unconcerned about the possible dangers. This sort of "belief in their invulnerability" is something quite common among teens, and not restricted to texting while driving.

Said one high-school aged boy: “I think it’s fine ... And I wear sunglasses so the cops don’t see [my eyes looking down].” Likewise, another high school-aged girl wrote that she texts “all the time,” and that “everybody texts while they drive (.,.) like when I’m driving by myself I’ll call people or text them ‘cause I get bored.” One older high school-aged boy explained that he limits his texting while driving only if his parents are around: “I’m fine with it, just not with my mom and dad in the car. Like when I’m with my brother, I do it.”

Teens did make a distinction between reading text messages and sending them. “There’s a difference, I think,” said one older high school boy. “Because just reading a text isn’t that bad, it’s just reading and then moving on. If you’re texting, it’s going to take more time when you’re supposed to be driving, and that’s when most people get in accidents.”

It's actually not much better to read vs. write when texting while driving. In either case, your attention is diverted from the road in front of you and onto your device's screen.

Fortunately, not all are so casual about texting while driving. One high school boy in a focus group, when asked about riding with drivers who text, said: “Not if they know what’s good for them. I’ll snatch the phone out of your hands – don’t be driving in the car with me and doing that ... I want to live until the end of this car ride.”

The study is based on a telephone survey on teens’ and parents’ use of mobile phones and 9 focus groups conducted in 4 U.S. cities between June and October 2009 with teens between the ages of 12 and 18. The quantitative results in this study were based on data from telephone interviews conducted by Princeton Survey Research International between June 26 and September 24, 2009, among a sample of 800 teens ages 12-17 and a parent or guardian.

Microsoft Co-Founder Allen Has Recurrence of Cancer

Paul Allen, co-founder of Microsoft in 1975 with Bill Gates, has been diagnosed with non-Hodgkins lymphoma (NHL). This is a recurrence of the disease; Allen previously fought and beat NHL after being diagnosed in 1983, the year he left Microsoft.

Since leaving Microsoft, Paul Allen has purchased three pro sports teams: the NFL's Seattle Seahawks, the NBA's Portland Trail Blazers, and MLS's Seattle Sounders that began playing in the 2009 season. Additionally, he is the founder and chairman of Vulcan Inc., his private asset management company, and chairman of Charter Communications, which filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy On March 28, 2009.

A memo was sent Monday night to employees of Vulcan, as well as the media, by Vulcan CEO Jody Allen, who is also Paul Allen's sister:

To employees of Vulcan and affiliates:

I want to let you know that Paul was recently diagnosed with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.

He received the diagnosis early this month and has begun chemotherapy. Doctors say he has diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, a relatively common form of lymphoma.

This is tough news for Paul and the family. But for those who know Paul's story, you know he beat Hodgkin's a little more than 25 years ago and he is optimistic he can beat this, too.

Paul is feeling OK and remains upbeat. He continues to work and he has no plans to change his role at Vulcan. His health comes first, though, and we'll be sure that nothing intrudes on that.

We would ask you to respect Paul's privacy and not discuss this outside of the office.

If you have any questions, please ask your EC member.

Thank you in advance for what I know will be all your good thoughts for Paul.

Jody

According to the American Cancer Society, there has been a general decline in Hodgkins lymphoma rates over the past 30 years, this disease now accounts for only 1 percent of all cancers. At the same time, rates of NHL have increased by more than 70 percent during this same period. NHL is currently the fifth most common type of cancer in the U.S. and accounts for about 4 percent of all cancers.