Nocera reveals that, at Wojcicki's behest, Google decided to upgrade its childcare to a hyperluxurious standard, including adopting the Reggio Emilia approach to pedagogy. The result: At tuition rates of roughly $14,000 to $19,000 a year, the subsidy paid by Google ballooned to $37,000 a year. From that followed a tuition hike to as much as $29,000 a year, at which price Google still loses money.

At no point, it seems, did Wojcicki or any of the others she involved in planning Google daycare do a market-rate analysis. They simply built the childcare facilities as they saw fit, and then priced it based on cost, not the going rates — even for the kind of quality care they professed to seek.

The Scandinavian School in San Francisco, for example, offers full-time Reggio Emilia daycare for $16,000 a year for infants, and less for toddlers and preschoolers. If the Scandinavian School charged Google's outsized rates, it would run a nearly 50 percent profit margin. Google, by contrast, is losing money by the fistful on its childcare.

So Google has on its hands a disaster: A disaster for parents, a disaster for children, and a disaster for Google shareholders. How does Google respond?

Not by fixing the problem, but instead by lying to a New York Times columnist. Nocera, a famed reporter, quotes Brin twice. Google PR repeatedly denied that Brin made these comments — an unbelievably brazen act, considering the remarks were made before large groups of Google employees. A sampler:

At a T.G.I.F. in June, the Google co-founder Sergey Brin said he had no sympathy for the parents, and that he was tired of “Googlers” who felt entitled to perks like “bottled water and M&Ms,” according to several people in the meeting. (A Google spokesman denies that Mr. Brin made that comment.)

But parents who talked to me said that several times during the six-week-long day care brouhaha, Mr. Brin made comments indicating that he viewed the whole thing as a giant economics experiment. “This is a supply-and-demand issue,” he told one group of parents — adding that Google needed to charge what the market would bear. (Through a Google spokesman, Mr. Brin denies making such a statement.) Given that Google has lots of pre-I.P.O. millionaires, it can clearly charge a lot.

Of course, Google PR would deny that Brin made these statements. They are damning; they suggest the founder is out of touch with rank-and-file employees, and callous in his treatment of them. He surely is, but it is unseemly to admit as much.

Wojcicki, with Brin's permission — what an indulgent brother-in-law! — is conducting an experiment on her fellow Googlers, and their children. But Googlers did not sign up for this experiment. Any parent knows how difficult it is to find good, affordable childcare, and how wrenching for children it can be to change providers. The real test going on here isn't some kind of supply-and-demand economics experiment. It's how arrogant Brin and his clique can get before his employees revolt.

We've spoken to Google in the past about this and received a snide response telling us to look more closely at their blogs.

God save the queen from getting shot walking her corgis around Westminster! To show just how committed the revolutionaries are to privacy, VP of search products Marissa Mayer replaced a mention of "Google" on the homepage with "Privacy" and a link to the company's policy declaration. The noted populist also underscored her sacrifice by pointing out the ascetic homepage's lack of corrupting excess. Put that in your tea and sip it, limeys!

If Yahoo just gave up on search, it would be at Google's mercy, like so many other Web publishers. What Google gives, it can take away. And Yang surely knows this, since it's exactly the game he used to play with other websites.

When MarketWatch, the finance-news site, was preparing to go public — this was long before its sale to Dow Jones, of course — Yahoo Finance was linking to its stories for free. As founder Larry Kramer told the tale to me, he thought this was great — free traffic, right? His investment bankers disagreed, seeing this as a big risk, since Yahoo could stop linking at any time. Eventually, MarketWatch struck a commercial deal to pay Yahoo in exchange for a guarantee of continuing traffic.

One of the few Yahoo sites that gets more traffic from Yahoo Search than from Google is Yahoo Maps. When users typed an address into Google, in the early days, Google would link directly to a Yahoo Maps page for the location. And then Google created its own maps site. Links to Yahoo Maps grew less prominent, than disappeared altogether.

The same could happen to any of Yahoo's Google-dependent properties. Yahoo Search is, at the least, a hedge against such a move. Or it would be, if its share of the search market weren't ever dwindling.

The reality: If Microsoft bought Yahoo's search, nothing would really change for Yahoo's valuable, profitable media properties. Traffic from Yahoo Search would continue to decrease — perhaps more sharply, with Microsoft's incompetent Web executives in charge — while traffic from Google would continue to increase. That's where Jerry Yang and Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer find common ground, in a shared delusion — that either of their search engines, alone or together, amount to anything.

We all got a letter saying that a break-in occured on May 26 and Google was notified on June 9. Here's the fun part: "We've been informed by Colt that specific personal information for employees and dependents included names, Social Security numbers, birthdates, addresses, hire dates, and relationships." Employees are getting a free year of identity-theft protection.

How kindly of Mother Google! No such protection was provided to the North Carolina students whose personal data was made available by the search engine in 2006.

Google's general counsel Kent Walker (pictured) feels it's a competitive deal, with the company arguing that Google's better contextual ad placement algorithms make both users and advertisers happy and that other competitors share and license technology amongst themselves. Not cited, but mentioned in passing? Microsoft, party to one of the largest anti-trust investigations in recent memory and currently desperate to get a sizable share of the search advertising business.

"Did Google use its network of online services to silence critics of Barack Obama?" asks New York Times reporter Miguel Helft today, in what reads like the Gray Lady's attempt to do Valleywag-style gossipmongering. There's something very wrong with the post: Read it and see if you think Helft believed for a minute that any Google employees deliberately and maliciously turned off a few Google-hosted blogs supporting Hillary Clinton and John McCain.

No, it reads like a classic IT malfunction. Second-tier bloggers were accidentally identified as splogs — spam blogs — and disabled. At worst, Google's computers were fooled by Obamatards who maliciously flagged other candidates' sites en masse as "objectionable," triggering an automated shutoff. That's a good enough story that it doesn't need to be wrapped in a far more serious pretend charge. Google silencing Obama critics? If Times editors thought for a moment it had really happened, the story wouldn't be on the Bits blog. It would be on Page 1.

Google will put AdSense against almost any content. Watching Google make its billions, rival ad networks decided they should too, flooding the market with inventory sold at ever-dropping rates. The problem with Google search, in which ads only show up when customers literally ask to see them, is that now all ad-supported Web companies and ad networks think they can create technology that will target advertising equally as well — even though Google search-ad targeting is just a crude keyword match, constantly improved by click-through data.

• The environment, burning enough fuel to power a car for a year in just one hour.
• Public safety: Even though private planes incur the same air-traffic control costs as commercial airliners, commercial planes pay for 95 percent of FAA air-traffic control costs in $2,015 in taxes per flight, while just accounting for 73 percent of air control capacity. Private planes only pay $236 per flight in taxes.
• Tax revenues: Private plane buyers can take a larger deduction their first year owning a new jet.
• The war on terror: The Department of Homeland Security IDs private planes as a particular risk.

The plan is for companies that buy into Allied Security to buy up unused patents, issue themselves nonexclusive licenses for a song and then sell the patents. While it's not clear if Allied Security is a nonprofit, former IBM veep Brian Hinman who heads up the organization asserts it's not a profit-making venture. IBM, of course, has done much to refashion itself as a promoter and producer of open-source software — something anathema to Microsoft's culture.

The same can't be said of Intellectual Ventures, which was founded by former Microsofties Nathan Myhrvold and Edward Jung, Intel's Peter Detkin, and Gregory Gorder of Seattle law firm Perkins Coie, which counts Microsoft as a top client. Myhrvold has been buying up patents left and right, and while his company has yet to sue anyone, he hasn't ruled it out. Microsoft executives have traditionally aped Bill Gates hard-line rhetoric when it comes to intellectual property, and there's little reason to believe Myhrvold and company are any different. While Google is also an investor in the fund (along with Apple and eBay), the Mountain View company must be worried enough about the fund's plans and ties to have helped create a potential competitor.

In other words, if Intellectual Ventures continued to aggregate patents in a competitive vacuum, it could become just as if not more dangerous a monopoly than Microsoft in the company's heyday by commanding premium royalties or denying access to patents entirely in order to hobble products and competitors. It's yet to be seen if Intellectual Ventures will carry water for the Redmond software giant in court, and for now, Allied Security is collection of legal documents and yet an actual owner of patents, but this could shape up to be one of the most boringly important battles in the coming years.

While they're happy to encourage clients to spend as much as possible — even, perhaps, when they don't need to — agencies' own marketers know that Google search is plenty good enough to put a brand's website at the top of its search results in most every case. Why buy the AdWords cow when you can milk Google for traffic for free?

• Former Fox Interactive boss Ross Levinsohn and AOL CEO Jon Miller, now partners at Velocity Interactive, seem to come as a pair. Levinsohn is best known for acquiring MySpace for Fox Interactive and quitting the company after it wouldn't buy Digg. But Levinsohn is also known for bullying entrepreneurs — once, so badly that renowned angel investor Ron Conway reportedly "flew off the handle" at him. In some quarters and in Jason Calacanis's heart, Miller gets credit turning around AOL. But like any exec, Miller has his detractors at AOL and they came out of the woodwork when he was fired last year. One described him as
  

  An executive over 4 years that put more incompetent people in high-places (e.g., McKinley) while firing (Govern) and letting reams of talented folks (e.g., Kotay, list-o-long) leave that were passionate and—at least—somewhat competent, and were actually trying to foster some core innovation and synergy.

• OpenTable’s CEO Jeff Jordan is on Yahoo shareholders and board members' wishlist, just like he was on Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg's list to become COO of that company before it settled on Sheryl Sandberg. An eBay veteran, Jordan was thought to be in line for Meg Whitman's job until he took over as OpenTable's CEO in 2007. His reputation as a "product Nazi" led Valleywag to endorse him for Yahoo's top job way back in November 2006.
• Tim Armstrong heads up Google's ad sales force and the unit is perhaps respectably profitable enough for Yahoo shareholders and board members to include him on their list. We wonder, however, if the board knows about Armstrong's involvement with sketchy search engine spam company Associated Content.
• Why wouldn't Yahoo's board and shareholders want Microsoft’s Kevin Johnson for the company's top job? Ever since Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer announced a bid to acquire the company on February 1, no one's given more thought to running Yahoo. Johnson's even written several memos on the topic — showing great ability to include exclamation marks after the company's name while still respecting the need for capital letters.

Almost a year later, the MacFarlane-Google deal — if it actually happens this time — is more an explanation as to why so many bright entrepreneurs are fleeing the company. At today's supersized, ultracorporate Google, good ideas can take so long to see the light of day, sometimes they need to be announced twice.

Corporate Concierge - Mountain View

This position is located in Mountain View, CA
The Area: Human Resources - Benefits

Google employees have a wide variety of interests both inside and outside Google. We strive to design a unique benefits package that helps Googlers balance their busy lives and allows them to focus on the things they love to do. To that end, the Benefits group has developed a wide variety of comprehensive programs to meet the various needs of our diverse population. The programs we offer at our US headquarters include a world-class children's center, a wellness center with on-site physicians, four full-service fitness centers and massage services. We provide free gourmet food and self-service laundry plus access to many vendors who offer onsite services such as haircuts and car wash. All of these are offered are in addition to our top-tier health plans and a generous 401(k) matching program.
The Role: Corporate Concierge

As Corporate Concierge, you'll be responsible for fulfilling U.S. employees' personal requests and creating perks that make employees' lives easier in a fast-paced environment.
Responsibilities:

* Work closely with all levels of employees throughout the company and help coordinate personal services, including making restaurant reservations, ordering flowers, recommending places to dine
* Source and administer regional perk programs, including discount ticket programs and corporate partnerships
* Establish and maintain an online resource center for personal services such as event planning, housekeeping services, restaurant recommendations and spas
* Develop, design and negotiate creative personal support and entertainment offers
* Support other perk programs and events

Requirements:

* BA or BS degree
* Excellent customer-service experience
* Strong knowledge of the community, area and region
* Demonstrated professionalism, confidence, strong organizational skills, efficiency, initiative, resourcefulness and adaptability to change
* Highly trustworthy at all times and able to deal with confidential information
* Strong verbal and written communication skills
* Strong computer skills (knowledge of HTML and web design preferred)

Asked to characterize the development as worrisome or welcome, an agency COO said "welcome." He said clients make their buying decisions on more than just the kind of raw data AdPlanner provides and that agencies are better at choosing good content brands will want to be seen as supporting than ad targeting technology is a making that content not matter. Another agency exec also said "welcome," because he's tired of metrics firms Nielsen and ComScore running the show.

[AdPlanner] Democratizes data and research to those smaller than us that couldn’t afford the $100K/year subscriptions, but doesn’t offer anything that hasn’t been done yet….

(Photo by Padraic)

June 6, 2008

Patrick Pichette

Re: Offer of Employment with Google Inc.

Dear Patrick:

On behalf of Google Inc., I am pleased to offer you the exempt position of Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, reporting to the Chief Executive Officer, subject to the terms and contingencies set forth below. The position is located in Mountain View, California. Your start date shall be August 1, 2008 and you will assume the position of CFO effective August 12, 2008.

You will receive an annual salary of $450,000, which will be paid biweekly and subject to a periodic review. You are eligible to participate in the Company Bonus Program; your annual bonus target will be 150% of base salary. Bonuses under the Company Bonus Plan are discretionary. The actual bonus amount could be larger or smaller than this amount, based on your performance and the performance of the Company. Whether a bonus will be awarded in a particular bonus period, and in what amount, is within Google’s sole discretion. Both your base salary and the components of your bonus are subject to periodic review.

Additionally, upon your start date, Google will pay you a one-time Sign-On Bonus of $500,000. This will be taxed as supplemental income. At the completion of six months of full-time employment with us, Google will pay you an additional $500,000 Cash Bonus. This will also be taxed as supplemental income. In the event your employment is terminated within the first six months of your employment, the Cash Bonus payout will be accelerated and paid on the termination date or as soon thereafter as Company business practices allow, but in any case within thirty (30) days of your termination. If you terminate your employment at Google before the one year anniversary of your start date, other than as a result of a breach by Google of this Agreement, you will be required to repay the Sign-On Bonus and Cash Bonus. Any required repayment will be prorated based on the number of remaining calendar days until the one year anniversary of your start date.

Google will pay relocation costs and provide reimbursement for specified moving expenses as outlined in Google’s North American Officer Relocation Policy. In order to receive these benefits, you will be required to work with a third party vendor provider designated by Google to assist in employee moves.

As a regular full-time employee you will be eligible for various benefits offered to similarly-situated Google employees in accordance with the terms of Google’s policies and benefit plans. Among other things, these benefits currently include medical and dental insurance, life insurance, and a 401(k) retirement plan. You will automatically be enrolled in the 401(k) plan at 4% into the Wellesley Fund, which is a balanced fund of stocks and bonds. You will be able to change your deferral amount and fund allocation upon your hire. The eligibility requirements and other information regarding these benefits are set forth in more detailed documents that are available from Google. With the exception of the “employment at will” policy discussed herein, Google may, from time to time in its sole discretion, modify or eliminate its policies and the benefits offered to employees.

Upon approval by our Board of Directors, you will be granted four new hire equity grants. Per the Governance Guidelines of the Leadership Development and Compensation Committee of our Board of Directors, the Grant Date of these four equity grants will be on the Wednesday of the week following your start date.

The first award will be a stock option grant to purchase 11,112 shares of Google Class A common stock. Your options will be nonqualified stock options with an exercise price equal to the closing fair market value of the underlying stock on the Grant Date. Your options will vest at the rate of 1/4th on the date one year after you commence employment, and will vest an additional 1/48th each month thereafter, for a total vesting period of 48 months.

The second award will be a grant of 5,556 Google Stock Units (GSUs). Your GSUs will vest at a rate of 1/4th each year over the next four years, beginning on the date one year after you commence employment, for a total vesting period of 48 months. At that time, the vested number of GSUs will convert to a number of Google Class A common shares.

Vesting in both of these stock option and GSU awards is contingent on continued employment on the applicable vesting dates.

The third award will be a grant of 910 GSUs. Your GSUs will vest at a rate of 100 percent at six months. At that time, the vested number of GSUs will convert to a number of Google Class A common shares. In the event your employment terminates prior to the six-month vesting date (other than as a result of your resignation), you will immediately vest in this grant.

The fourth award will be a grant of 910 GSUs. Your GSUs will vest at a rate of 100 percent at twelve months. At that time, the vested number of GSUs will convert to a number of Google Class A common shares. In the event your employment is terminated after six months but prior to the twelve-month vesting date (other than as a result of your resignation), you will immediately vest in this grant.

Please be aware that this program and subsequent programs could be changed at any time, at the discretion of the Board of Directors. Also note that Google makes no representation about the future value of the stock options or GSUs granted herein and you should expect that the value of these grants will fluctuate in the future. Finally, the receipt of such grants shall be conditioned upon the subsequent execution by the grantee of Google’s appropriate form of GSU and Stock Option grant agreement.

For annual equity grants awarded in 2009 and thereafter, your grants will be reviewed pursuant to the same general process employed for all Executives of comparable status.

We encourage you to consult a tax professional for information regarding all current tax reporting requirements related to the compensation and benefits discussed above.

You are being offered employment at Google based on your personal skills and experience, and not due to your knowledge of any confidential, proprietary or trade secret information of a prior or current employer. Should you accept this offer, we do not want you to make use of or disclose any such information or to retain or disclose any materials from a prior or current employer. Likewise, as an employee of Google, it is likely that you will become knowledgeable about confidential, trade secret and/or proprietary information related to the operations, products and services of Google and its clients. To protect the interests of both Google and its clients, all employees are required to read and sign the At Will Employment, Confidential Information, Invention Assignment and Arbitration Agreement as a condition of employment with Google. This Agreement, which provides for arbitration of all disputes arising out of your employment, will be provided for your review; you will be required to sign it on your first day of employment.

Google has a strict policy against conflicts of interest. Google’s code of conduct is located at http://investor.google.com/conduct.html. Before deciding whether to accept or reject this offer letter, please read the code of conduct carefully as it contains certain prohibitions against, among other things, holding outside employment, board memberships or advisory board positions in companies that may cause a conflict of interest. In order to avoid actual or perceived conflicts of interest, we ask that you work with Andy Hinton, General Counsel and Global Compliance and Ethics Officer, to pre-approve board positions before joining Google.

Google has a strict policy against insider trading, which prohibits, among other things, employees, contractors and temporary workers from trading Google stock during certain time periods and engaging in any derivative transactions in Google stock. It will be your responsibility to educate yourself regarding Google’s insider trading policies and to ensure you are in full compliance. If you have any questions about Google’s policy against insider trading, please contact Human Resources.

Further, if an export control license is required in connection with your employment, this offer is further contingent upon Google’s receipt of the export control license and any similar approvals. Your employment with Google will commence following receipt of such export control license and governmental approvals; and is conditioned upon your (a) maintaining your employment with Google, and (b) continued compliance with all conditions and limitations contained in such a license. If for any reason such export control license and governmental approvals cannot be obtained within six (6) months from your date of signature, this offer will automatically terminate and have no force and effect.

Please understand that this letter does not constitute a contract of employment for any specific period of time, but will create an “employment at will” relationship. This means that the employment relationship may be terminated with or without cause and with or without notice at any time by you or Google. No individual other than the Chief Executive Officer of Google has the authority to enter into any agreement for employment for a specified period of time or to make any agreement or representation contrary to Google’s policy of employment at will. Any such agreement or representation must be in writing and must be signed by you and the Chief Executive Officer. Your signature at the end of this letter confirms that no promises or agreements that are contrary to our at will relationship have been committed to you during any of your pre-employment discussions with Google, and that this letter, along with the At Will Employment, Confidential Information, Invention Assignment and Arbitration Agreement, contain our complete agreement regarding the terms and conditions of your employment.

We look forward to an early acceptance of this offer. This offer will remain open for 7 (seven) business days following your receipt of this letter and is contingent upon your start date of August 1, 2008. This offer is contingent upon satisfactory results from your background check, which we expect will be completed by Tuesday, June 10th. Additionally, this offer and your employment are contingent upon satisfactory results from your background check. To indicate your acceptance of Google’s offer, please sign and date the enclosed original and return it to us in the envelope provided. A duplicate original is enclosed for your record. Please arrive at 9:00 AM on your first day of employment for a tour of the office and for your new hire orientation. Orientation will be held at our Mountain View offices. In order for Google to comply with the Immigration Reform and Control Act, your employment with Google is contingent on your eligibility to work in the United States. Accordingly, please bring appropriate verification of eligibility to work in the United States on your first day.

Patrick, we look forward to working with you.

Sincerely,
Laszlo Bock
Vice President, People Operations
Google Inc.

• $500,000 signing bonus
• $500,000 for sticking around six months
• $450,000 annual salary
• Up to $675,000 in annual bonus
• 11,112 options with the strike price set on August 2nd
• 5,556 shares of stock
• 910 shares of stock after six months
• 910 shares of stock after a year
• Health and dental insurance
• All the free food he can eat

The new availability of huge amounts of data, along with the statistical tools to crunch these numbers, offers a whole new way of understanding the world. Correlation supersedes causation, and science can advance even without coherent models, unified theories, or really any mechanistic explanation at all. There's no reason to cling to our old ways. It's time to ask: What can science learn from Google?

The problem here is that if we stop asking the question "why?" then we are basically making for the foundations of faith. You can always make statistics say nearly anything you want, it simply depends on the assumptions you make when you analyze and present them. While Google's search algorithms are the best currently available, they are not infallible — if they were, then Google wouldn't have the advertising business that Anderson speaks so highly of, as people would find what they were looking for in the natural results.

It's a typical technocratic argument that privileges the rough trade in applied science over the pansy practice of theory. Applied science can be commercialized, and therefore profitable — pure, theoretical science much less so. The thinking goes that markets, those ruthlessly efficient arbiters of quantifiable value, don't need a priori hypotheses to make their judgments, so let's leave the thinking to machinations of mathematics and simply guess at the intent of the black box.

But by implying that you can simple toss aside causation is specious sophistry. Because when you stop asking "why" and only ask "what" and "how much" you're bound to lose a grip on strict rationality. As Schroedinger clearly demonstrated, the very act of measuring can affect the outcome of the measurement. Anderson should be careful what he wishes for — by putting faith in the invisible hand without modeling possible outcomes, we will get what the algorithm calculates we deserve, whether we like it or not. (Photo by Dave O)

MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif. (June 25, 2008) – Google Inc. (NASDAQ: GOOG) today announced that Patrick Pichette will be named Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. Most recently, Mr. Pichette served as President of Operations at Bell Canada, a leading global communications company.

Mr. Pichette brings nearly 20 years of experience in financial operations and management in the telecommunications sector, including 7 years at Bell Canada, which he joined in 2001 as Executive Vice President of Planning and Performance Management. During his time at Bell Canada, he held various executive positions, including CFO from 2002 until the end of 2003, and was instrumental in the management of the most extensive communications network in Canada and its ongoing migration to a new national IP-based infrastructure. Prior to joining Bell Canada, Mr. Pichette was a partner at McKinsey & Company, where he was a lead member of McKinsey's North American Telecom Practice. He also served as Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Call-Net Enterprises, a Canadian telecommunications company, from 1994 to 1996. Mr. Pichette earned a BA in Business Administration from Université du Québec à Montréal and an MA in Philosophy Politics and Economics from Oxford University, where he attended as a Rhodes Scholar. He is also chairman of the board of Engineers Without Borders (Canada).

Reporting to Google Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Eric Schmidt, Mr. Pichette will start on August 1, and he will assume responsibility for the company's financial operations and become CFO on August 12.

"Patrick brings the expertise and track record of a successful CFO, along with the hands-on business experience of a seasoned operations executive," said Dr. Schmidt. "This strong combination of skills and experience will be an important addition to Google's executive management team and will support our ongoing efforts to increase value for our users, advertisers and partners." Schmidt added, "On behalf of all my colleagues at Google, we welcome Patrick and, once again, thank George Reyes for all that he's done for Google."

"Google is a great company with a phenomenal brand and an outstanding management team," said Pichette. "As an avid user of Google products, I've admired the company for many years and am excited about working with my new colleagues in Mountain View and around the world."

I work for a fairly large ad network that competes with Google Adsense. A couple of days ago, a new employee was sportin' a Google shirt and I was a little upset. What's the protocol on this? People have brought in embroidered bags from the likes of eBay and Yahoo, which is understandable because the logos are smaller and bags have more utility than a t-shirt. We also have our own company shirts available. So what are the rules? Can you represent your previous companies and what if your previous company is a competitor?

The first rule is, wear something nicer than a t-shirt. A pressed, button-front shirt or blouse, for instance. Haven't had time to do laundry? Light sweaters over a wrinkled shirt have saved many a morning. In fact, keeping a light sweater at the office (along with a full change of clothes tucked in a drawer) can save many, many embarrassments, from inappropriate logos to coffee stains are a romp in the janitor's closet.

If you have to wear a t-shirt, be a team player. If you're going to wear a shirt from a previous employer, make sure it's not a direct competitor or a company with better pay and benefits — with turnover what it is in the Valley means managers are constantly on the lookout for disloyalty. Though if you actually have a job offer from the competition, feel free to play it up for a raise.

Other acceptable options would be companies that have tanked, startups you know are hot but your boss hasn't heard of (as long as they aren't challenging your business), something from Threadless, an independent local artist or designer or a concert souvenir from either a new and hot or ironically old band. That is, if it were acceptable to wear a t-shirt to work.

Google is complying with the defense's subpoena to further tease out the specifics of what sexual topics the average Floridian is searching for, as the publicly viewable Google Trends data isn't limited to the jurisdiction in question, Pensacola. If the defense prevails, it won't just be a victory for the folks behind cumonherface.com, but a shift in how "community standards" may be applied to a community as vast and diverse as the Web, with those in the search business recognized as the unintended experts on the racing pulse of American desire.

(Infoporn via Reason)

It's a way for the buy side to match what's happening on the sell side. The sell side is consolidating in these big platforms and Publicis thinks it needs to organize its buying to hook into these platforms so Google doesn't have all the data. Clients have lots of data. Their agencies need to be able to organize that data to better run campaigns.

Very informative, no? We asked Morrissey if anybody's ever told him he should write about the ad industry for a living. "If Twitter doesn't work out, totally looking into it."

What would have happened had Rachel Marsden was left with more than just a few articles of clothing after those steamy days with Wikipedia founder Jimmy "Jimbo" Wales? Nothing good.

I have to admit, out of all the babies, Marissa Mayer and Zach Bogue's faux-offspring is the least horrifically ugly.

"IT Girl" Julia Allison is ostensibly dating I'm In Like With You founder Charles Forman. But with that lack of resemblance, could Allison be covering for another lover?

Because Forman and Tumblr founder David Karp are very, very close. Looks like Allison is just the beard and Karp is the Forman baby's daddy.

Google is a very strong competitor, and so people will enjoy watching whether they can be challenged. The world will be better off if they are challenged effectively, and I think there's only one company left in terms of the depth and breadth and staying power that you need (to) really give them a big challenge.

Google-baiting aside, did Gates bringing up WordPerfect make anyone else feel really, really old?(Photo by AP/Stephen Brashear)

With 11.4 million users in May, Google News ranked No. 8 among news sites, far behind Yahoo News, which was No. 1 with 35.8 million visitors, according to Nielsen Online. Its growth rate of 10 percent over the last two years is far slower than those of most other large news Web sites. In the last two years, second-ranked MSNBC.com grew by 42 percent, adding 10.4 million users. Traffic at CNN.com and nytimes.com grew even faster.

The Times even ropes in a few professorial types to rip on the few changes to Google News. “I’ve actually been surprised at how little it has evolved, at least on the surface,” said one. “I’m guessing that Google isn’t so sure what to do with it.”