Print Remotely: Print from Anywhere in the World
This is a very cool tool. If you are out of your office/home and would like to print a certain document/spreadsheet remotely, you will enjoy using this tool. You will need to be using Google Chrome and should be signed in with your GMail id and password. Your document should be in your Chrome browser—you could have opened it from your email or from Google drive. Your remote computer and printer (at office or home) have to be on. Once you go to ‘file - print, change destination’, you will see your home / office printers also in the list. Select the one you would like to print to, and the document will be printed remotely. A great tool when you are travelling and want some document to be printed in your office / home. For more detailed instructions go to




11 months ago

this is a bit misleading...
one needs to setup the printer to make it available on the cloud
also, besides printer being on, it needs to be connected to a desktop with access to internet (unless it is an internet enabled printer).
more details:

The Dig: Investigating the Safety of the Water You Drink

Today, The Dig dives into water. Pun totally intended. I've received a lot of questions about applying investigative reporting techniques to figuring out whether your water is safe - the stuff in your taps, the stuff in your rivers, the stuff at the beach. Flint, Michigan, has made us all want to be water sleuths.


Fortunately, this is one of those topics that investigative journalists routinely tackle. And tackle is the right word, because unfortunately, it turns out to be a pretty difficult job. (One experienced reporter described wrestling with a water data set as battling the "monster" - giving a nerdy journalistic task a cool, Beowulfish feel.)


The difficulty is partly due to the complexity of the topic. Water is not simple. And there's this: most drinking water in the U.S. is safe. But let's be honest. Local, state and federal governments do not make it easy to access water safety information. Moreover, the data they possess is often outdated and inaccurate. Pipe to pot transparency legislation for water supplies anyone?


Let's start with drinking water. For help, I turned to ProPublica's resident expert, environmental reporter Abrahm Lustgarten. (Heard of fracking? That's his work.) How do you know whether your water supply is safe? His answer:


"Short answer is that water testing is hyperlocalized. The first best thing you can do is get a clean water sample (using containers supplied by testing firm) from your own tap and have it tested. Should cost about $35. This is the only way to know for sure what you are drinking, and whether there is contamination between a government test location and your sink. Next step is to go the website of your local water utility. Every utility is required to test water to meet standards under the Federal Clean Water Act, and to post those test results annually. But there is no central database to go to for all municipalities, thus the need to check with your local water provider. Those are the two most important steps. After that it's up to personal curiosity and ambition to know where your water comes from."


FWIW, that final sentence should be a tattoo for any citizen investigative journalist. It applies to any quest for information from those in power. Government, corporations, your school principal. Ultimately it's up to you - your personal curiosity and ambition - to get what you need for you, your family and your community. The public is the most effective watchdog of public information.


Back to water. On a big scale, USA Today did a great series, Beyond Flint, which examined the safety of public drinking supplies in the United States. Their topline finding: Some 2,000 water systems, serving 6 million people, had recorded at least one test indicating high lead levels during the past four years.


But the reporters on the team also described how difficult it was to actually dig up the information. Alison Young, a super-experienced investigative reporter, had so much trouble trying to determine the safety of the water flowing into her own home that she opted to buy water filters.


Her colleague, Mark Nichols, with some two decades journalistic experience, was the reporter who battled with data found on the Environmental Protection Agency's Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) website. The website is designed to compile inspection reports for local water agencies. Another place to look is the EPA's Consumer Confidence Reports, which rely on the same information, but are searchable in a slightly more user-friendly way.


The problem, however, is that the Government Accountability Office and the EPA Office of Inspector General have criticized the data for being inconsistent and outdated, as Nichols noted. Heck, even the EPA dumps on its own data, gathered from some 150,000 public water suppliers: "EPA is aware of inaccuracies and underreporting of some data in the Safe Drinking Water Information System." Your government at work, folks.


So here's where we are with water safety in America today. Highly experienced investigative reporters have a hard time getting the big picture. And it's not even that easy to figure out answers for your own tap. Though there are caveats, your first, best step is testing your own water.


All this points to an interesting possibility: crowdsourcing. That's the name given to a reporting technique in which reporters and readers work together to gather information. ProPublica has done this on a number of projects, including Free the Files, our examination of political spending at local television stations, and most recently Reliving Agent Orange, looking at intergenerational effects of the defoliant on the children of Navy veterans who served in Vietnam.


Perhaps what is needed are crowdsourced water projects - an army of citizen water sleuths rising across the country to document the safety of water from the tap. I'll rely again on Dr. Seuss to frame a reporting tip, this time from The Lorax: "UNLESS someone like you cares a whole awful lot, nothing is going to get better. It's not."


Keep sending in questions, tips, pressing ethical dilemmas. Democratize journalism! Write [email protected], or @txtianmiller.


ProPublica is a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative newsroom. Sign up for their newsletter.



Istanbul airport blasts: 36 killed; Turkish PM blames IS
Turkish Prime Minister Binali Yildirim on Wednesday blamed the Islamic State (IS) for the bombing attacks that killed 36 people and injured 60 others at Istanbul's Ataturk Airport on Tuesday night, the media reported.
Addressing the press at the airport, the premier said the attacks were carried out by three suicide bombers and all blew themselves up, Xinhua news agency reported.
US officials said the attack bears the hallmarks of IS because of the target and method, CNN reported.
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said the attack should serve as a turning point in the global fight against militant groups, BBC reported. 
"The bombs that exploded in Istanbul could have gone off at any airport in any city around the world," Erdogan said.
Turkish Justice Minister Bekir Bozdag said earlier in Ankara that one terrorist opened fire with a Kalashnikov rifle and then blew himself up.
A Turkish official was quoted as saying on Twitter that the vast majority of casualties are Turkish citizens, with foreigners among the dead and wounded.
The police have closed the entrances and exits of the airport, and some inbound flights to the airport have been diverted in the aftermath of the attacks, press reports said.
Prime Minister Binali Yildirim has ordered the formation of a crisis desk.
Kerem Kinik, the head of Turkish Red Crescent, has appealed for blood donation.
The security situation in Turkey has deteriorated over the past year, with Istanbul, the national capital of Ankara and other cities having already been hit by a number of bombing attacks.
Disclaimer: Information, facts or opinions expressed in this news article are presented as sourced from IANS and do not reflect views of Moneylife and hence Moneylife is not responsible or liable for the same. As a source and news provider, IANS is responsible for accuracy, completeness, suitability and validity of any information in this article.



We are listening!

Solve the equation and enter in the Captcha field.

To continue

Sign Up or Sign In


To continue

Sign Up or Sign In



The Scam
24 Year Of The Scam: The Perennial Bestseller, reads like a Thriller!
Moneylife Magazine
Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance
Stockletters in 3 Flavours
Outstanding research that beats mutual funds year after year
MAS: Complete Online Financial Advisory
(Includes Moneylife Magazine and Lion Stockletter)