I'd like Eric Schmidt to publicly release his search history, both his work-related and private searches.

Straight back at Eric Schmidt: "If you have to look at people's personal data to do something, maybe you shouldn't be doing it"

What if his statement was not intended as a moral imperative, but as practical advice?

Perhaps he is saying, "The fact of the matter is that we're required to retain and release lots of information. If you don't want that information being passed around, you probably shouldn't give it to us. Sorry, we do the best we can under the circumstances."

"If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be [googling] it in the first place."

cool, so my friends that work at Google don't need to keep the details of their projects secret anymore?

So much for "don't be evil".

My vision for the future involves ending world hunger, a Mars base, and an alternative energy source to power everything in the world. To accomplish these things I will set a budget of $5 dollars. Because I see it's the right amount of money to charge for all that.

I'm going to call my plan "The Future." Since I just wrote about it online, in a comment, any time any one reference The Future, or even mention the future, and it includes some aspect of my plan I demand you credit me and attribute me as being involved. Because I wrote about the idea first.

Also, the blogosphere agrees with me about ending world hunger, having a Mars base, and the need for an alternative fuel source so I'm right. Because we all know if it's popular then it's more important than the truth and popular people are always the best judges of plausibilities in an intellectual property legal dispute where there are no legal documents.

This is why Michael Arrington won.

I don't think he'd like that at all.

The article links to a story about Google blocking CNET reporters for a year after they used Google search to find details about Schmidt: http://money.cnn.com/2005/08/05/technology/google_cnet/

Really, all this "privacy" nonsense is for the little people, not important folk like Eric Schmidt, anyway.

This couldn't come at a better / worse time for me. I finished college 3 years ago, and spent the last 3 years building a startup. It's an extremely stressful time at the moment, and we're in talks with our first "big fish" (> 1 million / year) clients. Basically, it either needs to work out in the next 6 months or the plug will be pulled.

Lately, I've been feeling socially isolated big time. I've been neglecting a lot of friendships over the past few years, always feeling guilty when I'm not working, not being able to enjoy the more important things in life, always using the excuse that I have more important things to deal with my life right now. "When my company gets going, I'll start spending things on the finer things in life", I would say. I guess for me, part of it was a bit of a dream, a fantasy image I would hold on to: this dream will either become reality or fail in the next few months, and with this chance of failure coming closer and closer, I guess something snapped with me -- too much stress, and putting way too much pressure on myself.

Failure is not an option, because otherwise I completely blew it with a huge part of my social life, and will have nothing left.

I'm not sure why I'm sharing this, and it's not really a cohesive story, but I I guess I needed to vent with people who kind of can relate. I guess this is one of those phases in life I need to get through to realize what's more important in life.

I have a problem.

Cuil answered that question very definitively :D

or they shouldn't be working on that project...

False statements you have made about art:

"The paintings made between 1430 and 1500 are still unsurpassed." (easy refutation - go to sistine chapel, look up).

"What made oil paint so exciting, when it first became popular in the fifteenth century, was that you could actually make the finished work from the prototype."

This is not how people painted with oil until the 19th century. It was a very expensive medium requiring careful preparatory work, sketches, and so on.

"Most painters start with a blurry sketch and gradually refine it." - completely unsupported.

"Line drawings are in fact the most difficult visual medium" - yes, carving marble is much easier.

"When oil paint replaced tempera in the fifteenth century, it helped painters to deal with difficult subjects like the human figure because, unlike tempera, oil can be blended and overpainted." - again, this is how oil paint was used much later. At the time it was painted in thin, transparent layers that did not allow the kind of reworking you learned four hundred years later in art class.

And now we have 'Cézanne can't draw" to add to the list.

Many of your other statements about art fall more in the 'not even wrong' category - fatuous generalizations based on your own tastes, but presented as deep insights about the world.

So it is a little disingenuous of you to keep asking for people to point to specific places where you are wrong. The wrong is diffusely and uniformly distributed.