This. I am continually amazed at how few people use Audible. It is an amazing and rich source for books recorded in very high quality (read by voice talents, no stops during audio). I finish a book every 2-3 weeks just by listening on my way to and from class.
Grooveshark is another service I use my phone almost daily for. Play virtually any song on your phone.
Myfitnesspal is yet another. Record daily caloric intake and exercise easily (since you always have a phone around and since you don't know all the calories in the food you eat, but a search-enabled website does).
I also play backgammon while waiting for the bus.
I never take maps to unknown destinations any more. I still remember the times we printed maps before going to tourist destinations in nyc.
I check my email.
I check my calendar.
I talk on skype (via skype mobile). I do international calls without being charged international rates.
I check the weather (mostly the temperature) to know how heavy to wear.
I occasionally take photos when I need to record something (on a blackboard, for example) but don't want to write it down.
it depends on what you're planning to do with the picture. For example, if you're a designer working with a stock photo, the ability to refocus based on the context where you plan to use the picture could be huge.
The problem with this approach is that I would not want to auto-reply to every message, particularly not group lists or important people who expect their stuff to be read on time. I think smokesignal is a lot more subtle.
As far as I know, barely anyone use Grooveshark in Sweden while practically all my (University) friends use Spotify. Doesn't Grooveshark have some quite dodgy habits when it comes to paying the artists/using legit music files? Or was that some other music streaming service?
If nothing else Spotify has received a lot of good press in Sweden simply because it is Swedish. Patriotism :) And this was a Swedish study after all.
I actually think it's politer and more agreeable to use the asterisk. It's akin to presenting a photo of a bare-chest woman with the nipples striked-out with a black line. Everybody knows what is there, but it makes the picture a lot more agreeable and less obscene.
Personally, I find the nipple thing pretty inane as well. I have no idea how anyone benefits from covering them up, especially when it gets to a point where the nipple is the only part of the breast covered.
I don't really see how its particularly less "obscene", nor how someone who would normally find the picture disagreeable would suddenly find acceptance because of a token gesture censoring a small portion of the photo.
I am a photographer and I know I'd hate this feature. It makes street photography a lot more difficult.
I assume by sexual misconduct you mean someone taking pictures in the bedroom (as opposed to photographing women at the beach, which is public space - unless specifically prohibited). I feel that is too specific a protection to make the lives of legit photographers difficult. Instead, more severe punishments could be implemented to protect men and women whose sex videos are filmed without consent.
In Japan, groping women and taking pictures up their skirts is a very very common practice among men. That's why they have women only passenger cars on trains. The camera sounds are there to deter this behavior.