Author Archives: Carol Edwards

Google Docs’ “Suggesting” feature — similar to Microsoft Word’s “Track Changes” functionality — is a great way to collaborate remotely with others. The “Suggesting” tool allows users to make suggestions in the form of comments in a document that other users can then respond to, accepting or rejecting the proposed changes.

It’s a very useful feature for editing. We’re taking a look at how it works.

How to “track changes” in Google Docs using the “Suggesting” feature

In Google Docs, you must have editing permission to be able to use the “Suggesting” feature. If the document is one you created, you will obviously already have the permission enabled. If the document was created by someone else, they need to ensure they have given you editing permission. They can do this by changing the permissions when they share the document with you via a link or email.

There are three ways to access the “Suggesting” functionality. The simplest is to highlight the text you want to comment on, then look for the pop-up menu that appears to the right of your text. If you click on the green pencil icon (the bottom of the two icons that appear), Google Docs will go from “Editing” mode to “Suggesting” mode.

Another box with a check mark in it will then appear, offering you the ability to “Add comment.” Click this and you can comment on that area of text. You can simply comment, or you can @ mention other users if you need to by using their email address.

The other method to get into “Suggesting” mode is via the menu options at the top of your Google Docs screen. Look at the top of your screen to find the “Editing” drop-down menu.

Open the menu and select “Suggesting.”

Whatever you type in the document will be automatically turned into a green text with a comment box generated on the right-hand side of your text. This is recommended if you need to make a lot of comments.

The third method of adding a comment to a Google Doc is by right clicking and selecting the “Comment” option.

If you click the “Suggest edits” option in the same menu, you put the document into “Suggesting” mode.

Once you’ve commented, the owner of the file will get an email about your suggestions with an option to open the document.

How to respond to a comment in Google Docs’ “Suggesting” feature

You can respond to comments in Google’s “Suggesting” functionality in several ways. You can accept the changes by clicking on the check mark, or reject the suggestion by clicking the “x” icon.

Alternatively, you can reply to a comment by clicking in the text box and typing.

You can also @ mention other users using their email address.

There is also a quick way to accept or reject all suggested edits someone has made. Go to the Google Docs “Tools” menu and click on “Review suggested edits.”

This brings up a box on your screen with the option to “Accept all” or “Reject all.”

How to manage your Google Docs “Suggesting” comment notifications

Whether you want to make sure you never miss a comment, or you want to turn off notifications for comments, there’s a quick way to adjust your settings.

Click on the “Comments” icon at the top right of your screen. This is shaped like a speech bubble.

Next, click on the bell icon that appears. From here you can choose when you want to receive notifications.

The options are “All,” which means whenever any comments are made; “Only yours,” which is whenever others reply to your comments or comments you are added to; and “None” which means you’ll never receive emails about comments for that file.

Using keyboard shortcuts to navigate and reply to comments

One final thing to note about Google Docs’ “Suggesting” functionality is that you can use keyboard shortcuts with it. You can select a comment and use keyboard shortcuts to do the following:

Reply to current comment – R

Move to next comment – J

Move to previous comment – K

Resolve current comment – E

Exit current comment – U

Now, get to editing.

Need to convert YouTube videos into MP3 audio files? We’re delighted to report that there is an absolutely excellent free online tool to help you do so. Whether you want to download the audio from videos to convert them into podcasts to listen to while you’re exercising, or you want to share audio from your own YouTube videos with others, this nifty website can help you out.

A free online tool to convert YouTube videos into MP3 audio files

The YouTube to MP3 Converter is an easy-to-use, free website. It works on all popular web browsers, including Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Internet Explorer, Opera, and also Android mobile browsers.

Here’s how to use it:

First, grab the URL of the YouTube video you want the audio from. Then head to the site.

Paste the URL link of the YouTube video in the box at the top of the page, and click the “Go” button.

Your video should load on the screen. Now, click on the drop-down menu to select the quality of MP3 you want.

The options are 64kbps MP3, 128kbps MP3, 192kbps MP3, 256kbps MP3, and 320kbps MP3. It’s a general rule that the higher the bitrate (the number) is, the better quality the audio will be. However, MP3s with lower bitrates are generally smaller, so do consider this if space is an issue for you.

Once you’ve selected the quality, simply click the “Convert” button.

Wait until the conversion is completed. Then you’ll see three button options. The first of these is “Download,” which downloads the audio file to your computer’s default downloads folder.

The second option generates a unique QR code that you can scan with your phone to listen to your audio on the go.

The third option allows you to save the file to your Dropbox account.

How easy was that?

When it comes to revelations about how Big Tech really conducts business, Epic Games’ lawsuits against Google and Apple are the gifts that keep on giving.

On Thursday, California judge James Donato ordered Epic’s lawsuits to be unsealed in unredacted form, according to Politico reporter Leah Nylen.

Tweet may have been deleted

The unredacted lawsuits show the lengths Google went to make its Play store the sole marketplace for apps. And you can bet money was involved. MarketWatch editor Jeremy Owens points to some previously redacted text that shows how Google paid and entered into revenue share agreements with multiple parties to prevent the proliferation of alternative app stores.

Epic isn’t the only party going after Google. In July, the attorneys general of 36 states filed an antitrust suit for its Play store conduct. The newly unredacted text of the Epic case shows some more of the ammo these justice departments might have for their case.

Google gave sweetheart revenue agreements to some app makers themselves — and attempted to do so with Epic, in the hopes of securing an exclusive Fortnite launch in the Play store.

It was particularly threatened by alternative app marketplaces that device makers and wireless carriers could threaten if they pre-loaded them onto devices. It signed on companies like Motorola, LG, and others to a “premiere device program.” The program entailed that Google would share a cut of Search revenue made by users on those company’s devices with the device makers themselves if they did not pre-load their phones with other app stores.

Google cut a similar deal with wireless carriers. Of the 30 percent fee taken by the Play store, 20-25 percent would go to “mobile network operators” (MNOs) so they also wouldn’t launch and pre-load their own app stores.

Tweet may have been deleted

All of this surrounds text that shows how worried Google was by the prospect of Epic attempting to work around the Play store and its 30 percent fee. The previous version of the suit showed how Google offered game makers like Activision Blizzard special promotional deals if it went along with the fee. But the unredacted text now shows what Google originally called the scheme: Project Hug. Awww, isn’t anticompetitive conduct cute.

Be careful who you trust, gentle internet user.

If Facebook’s Wednesday report on “Widely Viewed Content” is to be believed, the most-shared links appearing in people’s News Feeds during the second quarter of 2021 covered topics like football, hemp, charitable donations, and recipes. You may want to hold off on placing too much trust in Facebook, though.

The social media company reportedly buried a similar report that it prepared for 2021’s first three months, according to a Friday story from the New York Times. You can probably guess at the reason: Facebook wasn’t thrilled with the results!

The earlier report, which the Times reviewed in full alongside internal executive emails that were shared with the paper, found that the most-viewed link of Q1 was an article whose headline ascribed the death of a Florida doctor to a COVID-19 vaccine. (All of the COVID vaccines currently approved for emergency use in the U.S. are “safe and effective,” the Centers for Disease Control has stated.)

The same report also revealed that the Facebook page for a far-right-aligned website that has peddled in conspiracy theories and misinformation was the 19th most popular page on the platform during the opening months of 2021. It’s enough to make a reasonable person think that maybe, just maybe, President Joe Biden had a point back in July.

The report was headed toward public release until executives stepped in with worries over the possibility of it creating a public relations nightmare. That group included Facebook chief marketing officer Alex Schultz; Facebook told the paper Schultz initially supported the report’s release but he eventually turned around and agreed with holding it back. The report was subsequently not released.

Facebook spokesperson Andy Stone had a whole entire quiet part to say out loud to the Times in response: “We considered making the report public earlier, but since we knew the attention it would garner, exactly as we saw this week, there were fixes to the system we wanted to make.”

There’s no further explanation in the story for Facebook’s thinking here. Mashable reached out with some follow-up questions, seeking clarification on exactly what “fixes” were needed, and what the company’s leaders think the decision to hold back an apparently unfavorable report says about Facebook’s stated efforts to be more transparent. The company hasn’t yet replied.

The Q2 report, meanwhile, has been widely panned for presenting what critics consider to be an inaccurate portrayal of what people are seeing on the platform. A report from The Washington Post characterized the Q2 report as being “part of a broader push by Facebook to block or discredit independent research about harmful content on its platform, offering its own carefully selected data and statistics instead.”

We saw one such situation unfold recently when Facebook moved to pull the plug on NYU’s Ad Observatory project, an effort that was conceived to monitor and analyze how politicians spend ad money on the platform. The NYU project employed a browser extension that the program’s participants, all of whom had to voluntarily opt in, could install to help gather data on ad placement.

Facebook threatened to shut the project down in the weeks ahead of the 2020 election in the U.S., and it eventually acted on those threats roughly halfway into 2021. The problem, as many critics pointed out, is Facebook leaned on flawed and easily undermined arguments to justify its decision.

“It’s like ExxonMobil releasing their own study on climate change,” a former Facebook employee told the Post in its story about the Q2 report. “It’s something to counter the independent research and media coverage that tells a different story.”

Facebook does indeed think very highly of this report, and how it reflects the company’s efforts to provide the world with an honest picture of what people are seeing most on the platform. As Guy Rosen, vice president of integrity, said in a statement provided for that Post story: “This is another step on a long journey we’ve undertaken to be, by far, the most transparent platform on the internet.”

That is a staggering sentence to read in the context of this new Times report, which makes it clear that Facebook moved to hide an earlier, more damning report from public view and then fix its processes, in ways that aren’t currently clear, to ensure that future reports didn’t end up in the same spot.

In one sense, it’s hardly shocking or unexpected for a company, public or private, to place its own interests ahead of anyone else’s. But at the same time, it’s difficult to swallow Facebook’s flowery statements about transparency and serving the public good when, as we’ve now learned, it’s very obviously doing exactly the opposite.

OnlyFans put out a tweet on Saturday that embodies the phrase “too little, too late.”

The tweet directly addresses “sex workers,” and uses the hashtag #SexWorkIsWork, while offering no solutions for a new anti-sexually explicit content policy it has rolled out that makes existing on the platform in a way of the creators’ choosing impossible. But sure, #SexWorkIsWork!

Sex workers have been posting that they are leaving OnlyFans, and they’re criticizing the company’s decision after it happily took 20 percent of sex workers’ revenue for years before suddenly changing the rules in a way that threatens their livelihood.

That turn of events makes the tweet in which OnlyFans acknowledges the role sex workers have played in the platform’s growth seem suspiciously disingenuous, to say the least — especially considering that it hasn’t addressed sex work or sex workers on Twitter ever before, as Twitter users have pointed out, and a search shows.

Tweet may have been deleted

In the replies to the tweet, self-identified sex workers criticized the company for promoting SFW content, and not the adult content creators. A search through the company’s Instagram page indeed shows that the bikini and lingerie-clad women it promotes are described as “models” — not sex workers.

Tweet may have been deleted

With sarcastic quote tweets and incredulous comments piling up, the tweet is on its way to getting ratioed.

Tweet may have been deleted

Tweet may have been deleted

Tweet may have been deleted

Tweet may have been deleted

Has OnlyFans been taking “how to apologize” cues from Andrew Cuomo? Because this “sorry not sorry” just doesn’t cut it.

The FDA is fed up.

The nation’s pharmaceutical regulator is clearly irked by the dangerous promotion of the drug ivermectin — used to address parasitic worms in animals and sometimes humans — to treat or prevent the respiratory disease COVID. On Saturday, the agency tweeted:

“You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it.”

Tweet may have been deleted

In Mississippi, for example, some people are ingesting ivermectin, resulting in a worrying spike in poison control calls. “At least 70% of the recent calls have been related to ingestion of livestock or animal formulations of ivermectin purchased at livestock supply centers,” the Mississippi State Department of Health said on Friday.

Like every disease, real prevention is much better for all parties involved than someone falling ill and having to seek treatment. What’s more, continued disease outbreaks result in floods of sickened people that overwork and exhaust doctors and nurses, sometimes resulting in trauma. Fortunately, highly effective vaccines are available in the U.S, which undergo rigorous, continued scrutiny for safety from the FDA. They protect over 95 percent (and in some regions 99 percent) of people from severe illness that requires hospitalization.

“In vaccinated individuals, the vaccines will be really protective against the Delta variant, in particular for severe illness, hospitalizations, and death.”

“In vaccinated individuals, the vaccines will be really protective against the Delta variant, in particular for severe illness, hospitalizations, and death,” Dr. Thomas Russo, the chief of infectious disease at the University of Buffalo, told Mashable this week.

As the FDA states online: “FDA has not approved ivermectin for use in treating or preventing COVID-19 in humans.” It’s particularly bad to use doses meant for large animals, like horses and cows, in human bodies. “Taking large doses of this drug is dangerous and can cause serious harm,” the agency said.

Disinformation looms large online and elsewhere these days. Beware. It’s best to heed the words of experts who research vaccines and viruses, as opposed to recommendations from feedstores: You want to prevent a serious infection, not try and treat one with an unapproved or unauthorized medicine.

Vaccines have had, and continue to have, excellent safety track records in the U.S. (in addition to eliminating maladies like the crippling disease polio in the nation).

“You should have a plan to be vaccinated as soon as possible,” said Dr. Russo.

OnlyFans definitely cares deeply about its sex worker creators. As long as they follow some arbitrary new rules.

The platform — made popular and successful by sex workers— inspired outrage and disbelief Thursday when it announced that it would ban sexually explicit content. It released details in a revised acceptable use policy on Friday, which will go into effect on Oct. 1.

The guidelines prohibit content, which includes both photos and videos, that contains sexual intercourse, masturbation, and some “extreme” or “offensive” (???) depictions of genitals. Here’s the relevant portions of the new policy.

Do not upload, post, display, or publish Content on OnlyFans that…shows, promotes, advertises or refers to “sexually explicit conduct”, which means:
1. actual or simulated sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, between persons of any sex;
2. actual or simulated masturbation;
3. any exhibition of the anus or genitals of any person which is extreme or offensive;
4. actual or simulated material depicting bodily fluids commonly secreted during sexual conduct.

As OnlyFans acknowledged in a tweet — and as creators on social media had already pointed out — the new rules aim to appease payment platforms. They also seem arbitrary and subjective, and both prudish and sexist at the same time. What counts as “extreme” or “offensive” genitalia exhibition? Why are boobs a-ok?

Essentially, the rules prohibit sex acts in which a creator is a participant who sets their own limits. But fans can still gawk at certain (female) body parts in a way companies like Mastercard, apparently, find acceptable. Like a Mardi Gras “show your tits” circle, embodied in an acceptable use policy.

Tweet may have been deleted

Tweet may have been deleted

Sex workers who have had the rug pulled out from under them are already discussing moving to new platforms on social media. As the internet saw with Tumblr’s banning of sexually explicit content, the phenomenon of building a platform through the popularity of sex workers, and then hanging them out to dry, is one sex workers have seen before.

Tweet may have been deleted

OnlyFans may say it cares about its sex worker creators. But it clearly cares about getting paid more.

The last time astronauts visited the school bus-sized Hubble telescope in space, they installed a new, reliable camera.

Twelve years later, this “workhouse” camera (Hubble’s Wide Field Camera 3), is still capturing bright, vivid galaxies in the cosmos. On Friday, NASA shared a resplendent image of the spiral galaxy NGC 1385.

You can see the galaxy’s arms along the sides and bottom of the galaxy, with the brilliant core showing areas dense with stars. It’s 68 million light-years away.

Tweet may have been deleted

The legendary Hubble Telescope is aging, though it’s still clearly producing rich cosmic images. Yet the intensely anticipated next generation of space telescope, the James Webb Space Telescope, is currently set to launch on Halloween 2021.

Webb is equipped with a giant mirror, at over 21 feet across, whereas Hubble’s is eight feet across. The larger the mirror, the better the resolution of deep-space objects. Stay tuned for the looming fall launch.

While peering up at the hazy Martian sky, NASA’s Perseverance rover recently spotted one of Mars’ irregularly-shaped moons.

The moon, Deimos, is relatively small at 7.5 miles wide, so it appears as a bright spot in Mars evening sky, as seen in the timelapse video below. NASA spotted the lumpy moon while looking for Martian clouds overhead. Deimos is one of two Martian moons, and takes about 30 hours to orbit the desert planet Mars.

Tweet may have been deleted

Primarily, the rover’s mission is to seek potential signs of past primitive life — should any have ever existed — and to collect small rock samples for a future mission to fly back to Earth.

The rover is currently drilling into rocks (a challenge) in the Jezero Crater, an exciting destination because NASA scientists think this region was “once flooded with water and was home to an ancient river delta.” On Earth, at least, we know microbial life thrives in watery places.

Perseverance isn’t just collecting rocks and sights on Mars: It’s also recording unprecedented Martian sounds. The rover’s microphones have captured Perseverance rumbling over the rocky ground, its laser zapping rocks, and the eerie Martian wind.

Sure, everyone loves Ted Lasso, the wholesome Jason Sudeikis-led comedy on Apple TV+. But Ryan Reynolds is also widely beloved. What happens when these two titanic crowd-pleasers butt heads?

The most adorable threat you ever did see, obviously.

Reynolds took to Twitter on Saturday morning with a letter penned “from the desk of RR McReynolds.” The letter pointedly calls out a wisecrack in Lasso‘s fifth episode directed at Reynolds and It’s Always Sunny co-creator Rob McElhenney (who also co-created the Apple TV+ hit, Mythic Quest). A quick history lesson is in order before we go further, though.

“RR McReynolds” is the name of the company under which Reynolds and McElhenney together co-own the Welsh football club, Wrexham AFC. The European football-loving Hollywood stars took ownership of the team earlier in 2021 and committed to investing in its success (aka it wasn’t a joke). Wrexham’s journey under new ownership will soon be the subject of an FX docuseries.

It was a high-profile business move, is what I’m saying. So in the fifth episode of Lasso‘s second season, when AFC Richmond director of communications Leslie Higgins (Jeremy Swift) pondered RR’s commitment to the team, it was a gauntlet, thrown.

“I can’t tell if them buying the club is a joke or not,” Higgins said at one point in reference to the two “Hollywood magnates.” The joke didn’t go any further than that, but it didn’t have to. Questioning the new owners’ commitment is apparently a sore spot for Reynolds.

Tweet may have been deleted

“While we hold the incomparable Jeremy Swift in no ill regard and are honored to be mentioned on the platform that’s brought us high-quality programming ranging from Mythic Quest season one to Mythic Quest season two, we must insist that you cease and desist from the casting of any doubt regarding our commitment to the club, the fans, and the entire Wrexham community,” the letter reads.

Reynolds, always a reasonable guy, does have a solution that he thinks will fix the whole situation. He writes: “To avoid legal action please send 2 LARGE boxes of Ted Lasso’s biscuits to [Wrexham’s home stadium] the Racecourse Ground.”

The biscuits in question have been the subject of much discussion on the internet after they debuted early in the first season. An official recipe does exist, but Reynolds is probably too busy getting serious about managing a football club these days to summon up some magic in the kitchen.

Obviously this legal threat lacks teeth, but how does anyone in their right mind threaten to sue the saintly Ted Lasso? Clearly it’s all just a ploy to charge up Wrexham AFC with some truly divine homemade shortbread biscuits.