Pinterest Stumbleupon Whatsapp
Ads by Google

Google teaches Americans how to vote, how technology is affecting your sex life, Microsoft rolls out the Windows 10 Mobile Anniversary Update, Microsoft trolls Apple, and crafting a phone case out of flubber.

Google Helps You Vote For President

Google really wants you to vote in the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election 6 Resources to Help You Track the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election 6 Resources to Help You Track the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election The people’s right to vote determines the outcome of an election. Be an informed voter and take this important task seriously with the help of these tools. Read More . So, in order to increase the percentage of the population turning out on the big day, the company is giving potential voters all of the information they need to actually make their vote count.

Having already made it dead simple to register to vote, Google is now getting into the details. This means that anyone searching for “How to Vote” or something similar will be shown a state-specific guide to voting. This includes all of the various requirements and deadlines.

Before you panic, Google isn’t telling anyone who to vote for, just informing them how to vote where they live. The ultimate aim being to make it “easier than ever for everyone to participate in the political process”. Which is probably more crucial in this election than any other.

The choice of Republican and Democratic candidates (Donald Trump Clicking Consequences: Why Donald Trump Is Your Fault Clicking Consequences: Why Donald Trump Is Your Fault Every time you click an article about Donald Trump, the media thinks that is what you want to read, and so it spends more time talking about Trump. Stop clicking! Read More and Hillary Clinton Hillary Clinton's Email Scandal: What You Need to Know Hillary Clinton's Email Scandal: What You Need to Know The Hillary Clinton email scandal is confusing, isn't it? What you need is an in-depth look at what facts are known about the case, to help you understand its significance. Read More , respectively) and the contentious way the two main campaigns have been fought thus far, HAS had an effect on the country though. Google is reporting a spike in the number of people searching for information on voting at the next election.

Ads by Google

All I can say is, roll on November 8th!

Technology Is Bad For Your Sex Life

Millenials are having less sex with less people and waiting longer before losing their virginity. And these trends are being blamed on technology Is Smarter Technology Dumbing Down the Human Race? Is Smarter Technology Dumbing Down the Human Race? As a child, you memorized your friend's phone numbers; now you just add them to your phone. You used to memorize directions; now you just use your GPS. Are humans becoming stupid? Read More . This is all according to recent research in the Archives of Sexual Behavior which saw researchers analyzing data on adult sexual habits from the General Social Survey.

The research suggests that Millenials (people born in the 1980s or 1990s) are having their first sexual encounter at an older age, and then having fewer sexual partners than the previous two generations (Baby Boomers and Generation X). Which would seem to go against the notion that youngsters are constantly engaging in horizontal dancing.

Most sexperts are blaming technology in one way or another. Some are claiming online dating is putting too much emphasis on looks, while others are claiming online pornography is replacing the need for physical relationships. Whatever the truth, Millenials are, as a group, having less sex than other generations did at their age. Which could lead to a fall in birthrates.

Microsoft Remembers Windows 10 Mobile

Microsoft has remembered that Windows 10 Mobile is a thing, and begun rolling out the Windows 10 Anniversary Update to Windows 10 Mobile devices. The Windows 10 Anniversary Update started rolling out to PC users two weeks ago Windows 10 Gets Anniversary Update, Instagram Launches Stories... [Tech News Digest] Windows 10 Gets Anniversary Update, Instagram Launches Stories... [Tech News Digest] Microsoft rolls out Windows 10 Anniversary Update, Instagram tells Stories, Time Warner buys into Hulu, Microsoft offers the HoloLens to everyone with money, and Grand Theft Auto IV cheat codes get mistaken for secret military... Read More , so it’s about time Microsoft shows Mobile users some love.

You can either wait for the Anniversary Update to hit your phone, or you can manually check for the update yourself. This is achieved by clicking Start > All Apps > Settings > Update & Security > Phone Update > Check for Updates.

Unfortunately, there is no guarantee it will be available on your phone at this early stage, as Microsoft makes it clear that availability varies “by manufacturer, model, country or region, mobile operator or service provider, hardware limitations and other factors”.

Microsoft Trolls Apple Over iPad Pro

A couple of weeks ago, Apple made the audacious claim that the iPad Pro is a computer Read Xbox One S Reviews, Apple Thinks the iPad Pro Is a Computer... [Tech News Digest] Read Xbox One S Reviews, Apple Thinks the iPad Pro Is a Computer... [Tech News Digest] The first Xbox One S reviews hit the web, Apple sells the iPad Pro as a computer, Google sells 30 million Chromecasts, YouTube encrypts 97% of its traffic, and IKEA mocks people who photograph their... Read More , or at least a computer-like device capable of replacing your PC (or Mac). There may be some truth to this, with our own analysis suggesting the iPad Pro is a solid option Can the iPad Pro Replace Your Laptop? Can the iPad Pro Replace Your Laptop? The iPad Pro can do a lot, but can it do enough to completely replace the humble laptop? That depends. Read More . However, Microsoft disagrees, as this video shows.

This is Microsoft’s response to Apple’s claims, and it doesn’t hold back from mocking Apple for the shortcomings of the iPad Pro Powerful Things, Small Packages: iPad Pro 9.7" Review Powerful Things, Small Packages: iPad Pro 9.7" Review For some people, a 12.9" screen is the main draw of Apple's first iPad Pro. For others, size was the main barrier to entry. Read More . The ultimate message being that the addition of a keyboard isn’t enough to turn a tablet into a computer capable of powering your whole life. Troll on, Microsoft, troll on.

How Flubber Can Protect Your iPhone

And finally, surely everybody has dropped their smartphone on the floor at least once by now. Or twice. Or down the toilet. With that in mind, most of you will understand the need to surround your smartphone with a solid, dependable case. But have you ever considered using flubber as the material of choice?

We hadn’t. In fact, I didn’t even know flubber was a real thing. It turns out flubber is a mix of water, glue, and borax. When combined, these ingredients create a strange rubbery substance which, it turns out, is capable of protecting your smartphone 5 Smartphone Insurance Plans That Provide the Best Value 5 Smartphone Insurance Plans That Provide the Best Value When a device is as important and as expensive as your smartphone, it probably makes sense to insure it against catastrophes. Read More from shattering into a million pieces when dropped from a height. Today I Learned!

Your Views on Today’s Tech News

Do you need Google to teach you how to vote? Have you noticed technology affecting your sex life? What are your thoughts on the Windows 10 Mobile Anniversary Update? Should Microsoft be mocking Apple in such a flagrant manner? Did you know flubber was a real thing?

Let us know your thoughts on the Tech News of the day by posting to the comments section below. Because a healthy discussion is always welcome.

Tech News Digest is a daily column paring the technology news of the day down into bite-sized chunks that are easy to read and perfect for sharing.

Image Credit: David Mulder via Flickr

  1. C?t?lin Petrescu
    August 17, 2016 at 5:53 pm

    ,,Should Microsoft be mocking Apple in such a flagrant manner?"

    Are you kidding me?

    • Dave Parrack
      August 17, 2016 at 9:45 pm

      No. Should a corporation demean itself by mocking the competition? It's a serious question.

      • Perry F. Bruns
        August 18, 2016 at 4:27 pm

        I have always felt that the problem with most ads that mock the competition is that they mention the competition.

  2. Howard A Pearce @HAPLibertarian
    August 17, 2016 at 5:43 pm

    "The choice of candidates (Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton) and the contentious way the two campaigns have been fought thus far has had an effect on the country though. "

    So even though the least intelligent person knows that there are more than 2 candidates, MakeUseOF seems to want imply to its readers that th only "REAL and TRUE" choices are those from majority parties and not from minority parties.

    MUO probably wants people to think their vote is only valid when cast for someone considered winnable.

    Like almost all media, MUO treats minority parties as interesting side-notes but NEVER to be seriously considered !

    • Dave Parrack
      August 17, 2016 at 9:48 pm

      There's no conspiracy theory here, Howard.

      I'm a Brit, so talking about the U.S. Election isn't exactly my forte. Nothing more, nothing less. BUT, having said that, it is a fact that only the two candidates I named can actually be President. You can vote for one of the others, but it won't impact the result.

      Just for you though, I have edited the article to make it clear these are Republican and Democratic candidates, and not the only names on the ballot.

      Happy now?!

      • Howard A Pearce @HAPLibertarian
        August 18, 2016 at 12:34 am

        Lol, you are the one who decided to post just the two major party candidates WHEN you didn't have to post any to make your point .

        Why did you do that ?

      • Howard A Pearce @HAPLibertarian
        August 18, 2016 at 12:37 am

        The fact that there are the only two who can win is no reason support Hitler or Stalin in a race where Abraham Lincoln cannot win as a 3rd party canidate

        • Perry F. Bruns
          August 18, 2016 at 4:28 pm

          With reasoning like this, it's hard to understand why more people don't take the Libertarian party less seriously.

        • Howard A Pearce @HAPLibertarian
          August 18, 2016 at 9:27 pm

          And you would vote for either Hitler or Stalin then, because they are the ones who can win ?

          How interesting, now that I call "real" logic.

          And your party doesn't even support freedom of association - preferring state-mandated ones instead :)

        • Perry F. Bruns
          August 18, 2016 at 9:57 pm

          Your logic has more glitches than Windows Vista.

          Your first fallacy, which you have continued, is to associate the two major parties with two of the deadliest dictators of all time.

          Let's examine the facts.

          Hitler and his regime killed close to 30 million people during World War II.

          During his 30-year reign, Stalin killed anywhere from 20 to 60 million people separately from the casualties of World War II, according to http://www.ibtimes.com/how-many-people-did-joseph-stalin-kill-1111789

          Trump and Clinton have not been proven to have killed anyone.

          And that's just capital crime.

          Never mind the fact that you've invoked Godwin's Law, which basically ruins any political discussion by bringing up Hitler.

          There's also the fact that neither major U.S. party's policies bear any similarity whatsoever to those of either the Nazi party or Stalinist Communism. In fact, those parties were both single-party: you were either a member or you were most likely in deep trouble.

          Your second fallacy was to assume I am a member of either the Democratic or Republican parties. You failed to even cite evidence for such a claim. You say, "Your party doesn't even support freedom of association (fallacy three, by the way, since you don't know what party I'm in), but both the Democratic and Republican parties strongly support the First Amendment, which specifically guarantees the right to peaceably assemble--or, in other words, freedom of association.

          Fallacy four is this ridiculous claim you make that "state-mandated" associations are supported by either party. Again, you've made no citation.

          As it happens, I am an independent, and strongly support eliminating closed primaries in all 50 states, plus any territories with the right to vote in the present or the future. This would immediately strengthen the smaller parties. I also support debates among candidates of all parties.

          While I support its right to field candidates, I don't support the Libertarian Party platform, but I wish your party the best of luck. Unfortunately, one of the major problems with all the smaller parties is that none of them seem willing to push for party representation in the House or Senate, or in the state and commonwealth legislatures.

          To quote Captain Malcolm Reynolds, my days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle.

        • Perry F. Bruns
          August 18, 2016 at 9:58 pm

          Your logic has more glitches than Windows Vista.

          Your first fallacy, which you have continued, is to associate the two major parties with two of the deadliest dictators of all time.

          Let's examine the facts.

          Hitler and his regime killed close to 30 million people during World War II.

          During his 30-year reign, Stalin killed anywhere from 20 to 60 million people separately from the casualties of World War II, according to the International Business times (/how-many-people-did-joseph-stalin-kill-1111789) and other sources.

          Trump and Clinton have not been proven to have killed anyone.

          And that's just capital crime.

          Never mind the fact that you've invoked Godwin's Law, which basically ruins any political discussion by bringing up Hitler.

          There's also the fact that neither major U.S. party's policies bear any similarity whatsoever to those of either the Nazi party or Stalinist Communism. In fact, those parties were both single-party: you were either a member or you were most likely in deep trouble.

          Your second fallacy was to assume I am a member of either the Democratic or Republican parties. You failed to even cite evidence for such a claim. You say, "Your party doesn't even support freedom of association (fallacy three, by the way, since you don't know what party I'm in), but both the Democratic and Republican parties strongly support the First Amendment, which specifically guarantees the right to peaceably assemble--or, in other words, freedom of association.

          Fallacy four is this ridiculous claim you make that "state-mandated" associations are supported by either party. Again, you've made no citation.

          As it happens, I am an independent, and strongly support eliminating closed primaries in all 50 states, plus any territories with the right to vote in the present or the future. This would immediately strengthen the smaller parties. I also support debates among candidates of all parties.

          While I support its right to field candidates, I don't support the Libertarian Party platform, but I wish your party the best of luck. Unfortunately, one of the major problems with all the smaller parties is that none of them seem willing to push for party representation in the House or Senate, or in the state and commonwealth legislatures.

          To quote Captain Malcolm Reynolds, my days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle.

        • Howard A Pearce @HAPLibertarian
          August 18, 2016 at 10:05 pm

          This was never an argument about Hillary or Trump .. bu the view that one must vote for a candidate what can win . And about favoring major parties over minor by the media.

          Do you support state-mandate wages for employment associations ? Like some conservatives support state-mandated opposite-sex for marriage associations?

          As I told you, I support freedom of ALL associations. I'll bet my life that you don't :)

        • Perry F. Bruns
          August 18, 2016 at 10:46 pm

          Fortunately for you, I don't intend to collect, but you lose. Of course I support freedom of association, and equal rights, hence my earlier comment about opening all primaries and strengthening smaller parties. Perhaps if you actually paid attention to my replies, you'd stop claiming incorrect information about where I stand.

          And I don't even understand your question. What's an employment association? A labor union? An employment agency?

          What do you hope to accomplish with your screed?

        • Howard A Pearce @HAPLibertarian
          August 18, 2016 at 11:03 pm

          You never did say whether you supported state-mandated wages for employment associations?

          Do you support your right to associate with entities that call themselves states ?

        • Howard A Pearce @HAPLibertarian
          August 18, 2016 at 11:11 pm

          An employment association would be primarily one between employer and employee

        • Perry F. Bruns
          August 18, 2016 at 11:28 pm

          Where I'm from, we call that a job.

          And what do "state-mandated wages" have to do with anything we were previously trying to discuss?

          And what does "Do you support your right to associate with entities that call themselves states ?" even mean?

          Please restate the questions in a clear, concise fashion. I'll answer them if I feel like it.

        • Howard A Pearce @HAPLibertarian
          August 18, 2016 at 11:49 pm

          You are the one who claimed to believe in freedom of association, I was following that up with whether you believed in the state-mandated minimum wage for employment associations or whether you supported freedom of (employments) association.

          Same witht the 2nd question.

          Now be honest and try to answer the questions and not change the subject

        • Perry F. Bruns
          August 18, 2016 at 11:53 pm

          Not change the subject? That's what you were doing. And you're just making terms up now. If you had simply asked if I supported a minimum wage, I would simply have said yes, but the issue of minimum wage has nothing at all to do with freedom of association without the idiotic verbal gymnastic stumbling you're doing to equate them.

          I'm done debating the political issues with you, because your personal issues seem to be getting in the way.

          I'm never going to take you seriously. And if you're what the Libertarian Party is about, then I feel the same way about them.

          You're an excellent example of why MakeUseOf's comments section should have a block function, though.

        • Howard A Pearce @HAPLibertarian
          August 19, 2016 at 12:00 am

          I could have asked that, but then that would be to ingore the fact that the association between you and your employer IS an association COVERED by Freedom of Association

          Now we know you support state-mandated wages for (employment) associations.

          I doubt anyone would consider that freedom of association.

        • Perry F. Bruns
          August 19, 2016 at 12:16 am

          My, but you're hilarious. Are you an actual human being in need of medical attention or a small shell script?

          What is your basis for the ridiculous idea that "...the association between you and your employer IS an association COVERED by Freedom of Association"?

          Just to clear up any further wacky questions, I support the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as adopted by the United Nations in 1948. It's not perfect, but it's compatible with the U.S. Constitution, and it fills in a lot of the blanks of that latter august document, complete with clearer, simpler language.

          I draw your attention (or your coder's) to Article 23, which states in its entirety:

          Article 23.

          (1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.
          (2) Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.
          (3) Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.
          (4) Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

        • Howard A Pearce @HAPLibertarian
          August 19, 2016 at 12:20 am

          Yep go for the insults like a typical uniformed person on the rules logic :)

          I'm sorry you can't admit your obvious contradiction. Weak!

        • Perry F. Bruns
          August 19, 2016 at 1:20 am

          Well, since you never made a single point, I got tired of the one-sidedness of the argument, and had to keep myself entertained somehow.

          I have to admit a grudging admiration for you, though: I've never met a single person whose every sentence seemed like a complete coincidence.

          And I was once "uniformed." You left out an "n." And a thesis.

        • Howard A Pearce @HAPLibertarian
          August 19, 2016 at 12:51 pm

          One sidedness ? first you dare to claim you support freedom of association then come right back stating your support state-mandated wage rates for employment associations - restricting the associations a person may enter into. I'm reminded of the problems gays had forming marriage associations fighting people like you

          People who support state-mandated association over free and voluntary ones guaranteed by the LIBERAL concept of freedom of association are supporting fascist acts - regardless of from the right or the left..

        • Perry F. Bruns
          August 19, 2016 at 12:54 pm

          Well, now you're just spouting talking points. You are a sad, strange little man.

        • Howard A Pearce @HAPLibertarian
          August 19, 2016 at 1:28 pm

          Hmm, well your points are debatable as worth talking about.

      • Colin
        August 18, 2016 at 2:02 am

        Do you mean they cannot become President, or their chances are the same as a snowball in hell?

        • Howard A Pearce @HAPLibertarian
          August 18, 2016 at 11:13 pm

          people equate the two

          But the later if you want more more precison

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *