Do you guys list a series of illegal activities as public interests on Facebook or something? Google's lack of privacy boundaries are much more disconcerting than this -- "Orwellian" seems to imply one being watched, which Facebook is not doing; you are publishing it yourself, to the Internet. This is just an example of poor UI design.
I list gay marriage and other socially liberal causes. I'm sure that some socially conservative HR managers that look at my pages will not choose me for a contracting gig. Is it foolish? Perhaps, but simultaneously they were signals that I wished to send out for other reasons.
Similarly, people who include the tea party should not be discriminated against in employment. Yet people will do this subconsciously.
This is explained on your Profile settings page: "These settings only control the information people can see on your profile. This information, such as your Pages and list of friends, is still public, so it could appear elsewhere on the site and be accessed by applications you and your friends use."
Maybe it's just the Chicago market, but I can't make a single trip in my car without hearing a Bing radio ad. I'm pretty sure they're laying out a fair amount of marketing cash.
As another statistically irrelevant point, my mom who believes doing anything on the computer is "downloading" has started using Bing.
"Our understanding is that the video didn’t violate any copyrights; instead, there were likely privacy issued involved, as most of the people in the video didn’t know that they were becoming part of a viral video."
To argue is to present an argument. If you argue about something then your stance is unclear. However, if you argue a stance then you are arguing for that stance.
Example:
Tom argued about the war (unclear stance).
Tom argued the war was a bad thing (clear stance, Tom disliked war).
However, there may be a regional usage of 'argue' as 'question' or 'dispute' ("nobody could question/dispute the iphone's success") that I am unaware of.
I'm not sure how productive it is to lump yourself into social categories like this. I tested as an INTP as well, but I would venture to say that I am generally a "finisher" (at least, when it comes to my projects). When I am really drawn into a project, I lose myself: nothing else matters, and I meticulously perfect each and every detail until it is "finished". Then I drop it and move onto something else.
I empathize with the other characteristics you mentioned: "dawdling, distracted, and forgetful of mundane chores, late for obligations, losing homework or library books, and generally disconnected from the external world". But I make a point to finish my projects, or else I feel dissatisfied with myself.
I think part of how I do this is that, although my attention does wander, when I am working on a project it only wanders across little details, rather than large concepts; rather than getting bored with the project itself and moving onto another, I merely get bored of a detail and focus on another (usually completely unrelated, but still within the realms of the vision that is the finished
project). After doing this for a while, eventually the entire project is finished, because that is really all it is — a collection of little details. (Of course, this only works if you are perfectionist as I am.)
To be honest, I think that these arbitrary measurements like IQ tests and personality descriptions are irrelevant (and maybe even procrastinations) to solving your real problem. If you want to be able to finish projects, just work on them — you won't know what motivated you in theory until you discover it in practice.
