WEBVTT - Tech News: TikTok Protests Being Called a Gatekeeper

0:00:04.440 --> 0:00:12.479
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to Tech Stuff, a production from iHeartRadio. Hey thereon

0:00:12.640 --> 0:00:16.120
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to Tech Stuff. I'm your host Jonathan Strickland. I'm

0:00:16.120 --> 0:00:19.360
<v Speaker 1>an executive producer with iHeart Podcasts and how the tech

0:00:19.400 --> 0:00:22.239
<v Speaker 1>are you. It's time for the tech news for Thursday,

0:00:22.360 --> 0:00:28.040
<v Speaker 1>November sixteenth, twenty twenty three. First up, over in the EU,

0:00:28.640 --> 0:00:34.199
<v Speaker 1>TikTok is protesting its designation as a gatekeeper. So this

0:00:34.360 --> 0:00:39.760
<v Speaker 1>relates to the EU's Digital Markets Act. That act establishes

0:00:39.880 --> 0:00:44.200
<v Speaker 1>this designation of gatekeeper for companies that meet several criteria

0:00:44.840 --> 0:00:47.640
<v Speaker 1>and if they do meet those criteria and the EU

0:00:47.720 --> 0:00:52.120
<v Speaker 1>determines their gatekeepers, it means these companies have obligations to

0:00:52.200 --> 0:00:56.320
<v Speaker 1>comply with a specific set of rules and restrictions that

0:00:56.400 --> 0:00:59.520
<v Speaker 1>the EU created for these very powerful companies. So first up,

0:01:00.120 --> 0:01:04.360
<v Speaker 1>what is a gatekeeper? Well, it's any company that serves

0:01:04.520 --> 0:01:10.080
<v Speaker 1>as a gateway between consumers and businesses through core platform services.

0:01:10.440 --> 0:01:13.280
<v Speaker 1>TikTok in this case, would be a core platform service.

0:01:13.720 --> 0:01:17.160
<v Speaker 1>But okay, beyond that, the companies that merit the designation

0:01:17.280 --> 0:01:21.040
<v Speaker 1>gatekeeper have to be really important players that hold significant

0:01:21.080 --> 0:01:26.000
<v Speaker 1>power in their respective markets. So think about companies that

0:01:26.080 --> 0:01:30.200
<v Speaker 1>have effectively a stranglehold on some specific element of the

0:01:30.240 --> 0:01:34.880
<v Speaker 1>digital world. Google web search would be a clear contender, right,

0:01:35.319 --> 0:01:39.920
<v Speaker 1>Facebook or Meta really would have a lot in social networks.

0:01:40.560 --> 0:01:43.600
<v Speaker 1>So to continue to be considered to be a gatekeeper,

0:01:43.959 --> 0:01:46.600
<v Speaker 1>there are some actual financial results that are important too.

0:01:46.920 --> 0:01:49.000
<v Speaker 1>A company has to have a turnover of at least

0:01:49.040 --> 0:01:53.120
<v Speaker 1>eight billion dollars for the last three financial years or

0:01:53.720 --> 0:01:56.840
<v Speaker 1>have an average market capitalization of at least seventy nine

0:01:56.880 --> 0:02:00.840
<v Speaker 1>point five billion dollars in the last financial year. The

0:02:00.880 --> 0:02:04.560
<v Speaker 1>reason for these numbers like seventy nine point five is

0:02:04.600 --> 0:02:07.240
<v Speaker 1>because obviously in the EU, this is all in euro

0:02:07.480 --> 0:02:11.840
<v Speaker 1>not in dollars. The company us to also provide services

0:02:11.880 --> 0:02:15.400
<v Speaker 1>to at least three member states within the EU, so

0:02:15.440 --> 0:02:18.360
<v Speaker 1>if it's only operating in one, it cannot be considered

0:02:18.400 --> 0:02:22.040
<v Speaker 1>a gatekeeper. If it is not making those kind of

0:02:22.080 --> 0:02:25.639
<v Speaker 1>financial returns, then it can't be a gatekeeper. It also

0:02:25.720 --> 0:02:29.680
<v Speaker 1>must be in an entrenched and durable position. Now that

0:02:29.800 --> 0:02:33.600
<v Speaker 1>means that these companies are really well established. They're not

0:02:33.720 --> 0:02:36.600
<v Speaker 1>likely to get displaced by a competitor anytime in the

0:02:36.600 --> 0:02:40.760
<v Speaker 1>foreseeable future. Now, to be clear, the EU is not

0:02:40.800 --> 0:02:45.480
<v Speaker 1>actually saying that TikTok is the gatekeeper here. That's one

0:02:45.520 --> 0:02:50.400
<v Speaker 1>of those core services, not the gatekeeper itself. Instead its

0:02:50.480 --> 0:02:54.680
<v Speaker 1>parent company bye Dance is what the EU has identified

0:02:54.800 --> 0:02:59.640
<v Speaker 1>as a gatekeeper. So TikTok is saying, oh, contrier, Monefrayer,

0:03:00.280 --> 0:03:03.639
<v Speaker 1>we're largely independent of Byteedance. We don't have that much

0:03:03.680 --> 0:03:08.080
<v Speaker 1>to do with them. We operate very much independently of Byteedance,

0:03:08.560 --> 0:03:11.120
<v Speaker 1>and when you take that into consideration, we don't qualify

0:03:11.120 --> 0:03:14.600
<v Speaker 1>as a gatekeeper. So that means we shouldn't have to

0:03:15.040 --> 0:03:19.280
<v Speaker 1>comply with the rules that gatekeepers have to follow. See

0:03:19.280 --> 0:03:22.320
<v Speaker 1>these rules include lots of stuff. One example is that

0:03:22.880 --> 0:03:26.120
<v Speaker 1>a gatekeeper has to be able to give users access

0:03:26.600 --> 0:03:30.440
<v Speaker 1>to the data that they are generating through using the platform.

0:03:31.160 --> 0:03:33.240
<v Speaker 1>So if a user says, hey, I want to have

0:03:33.280 --> 0:03:35.600
<v Speaker 1>access to all the data you have on me based

0:03:35.640 --> 0:03:40.000
<v Speaker 1>upon how I'm using your product, they have to do that.

0:03:40.000 --> 0:03:43.480
<v Speaker 1>That's just one example. So clearly, any company that has

0:03:43.600 --> 0:03:45.520
<v Speaker 1>gatekeeper status is going to have to put in a

0:03:45.520 --> 0:03:48.880
<v Speaker 1>lot of work to comply with these rules, and furthermore,

0:03:49.840 --> 0:03:52.200
<v Speaker 1>complying with those rules will also likely have a big

0:03:52.200 --> 0:03:54.800
<v Speaker 1>impact on how these companies can do business in the

0:03:54.880 --> 0:03:58.240
<v Speaker 1>EU in the first place. Right, those rules might end

0:03:58.360 --> 0:04:01.280
<v Speaker 1>up saying that things that are normal business practices for

0:04:01.320 --> 0:04:05.160
<v Speaker 1>these companies are no longer viable, and suddenly you have

0:04:05.240 --> 0:04:09.200
<v Speaker 1>this very lucrative form of revenue generation cut off from you.

0:04:09.320 --> 0:04:12.640
<v Speaker 1>So it's understandable that TikTok would want to find a

0:04:12.960 --> 0:04:19.400
<v Speaker 1>get out of Digital Markets Act free card. Interestingly, Meta

0:04:19.440 --> 0:04:24.040
<v Speaker 1>has also challenged its status as a gatekeeper. Considering how

0:04:24.120 --> 0:04:29.520
<v Speaker 1>frequently Zuckerberg has bragged about, you know, having billions of users,

0:04:30.279 --> 0:04:34.919
<v Speaker 1>it seems weird and difficult to argue that Meta somehow

0:04:35.120 --> 0:04:41.200
<v Speaker 1>doesn't qualify for gatekeeper status, but they're trying anyway. I'm

0:04:41.200 --> 0:04:43.960
<v Speaker 1>not sure they're going to find much success with that route.

0:04:44.360 --> 0:04:50.520
<v Speaker 1>But the other companies that have been designated gatekeepers include Amazon, Google, Microsoft,

0:04:50.640 --> 0:04:53.800
<v Speaker 1>and Apple. So the deadline for these companies to submit

0:04:53.839 --> 0:04:56.640
<v Speaker 1>a challenge to the classification is let me see, let

0:04:56.640 --> 0:05:01.240
<v Speaker 1>me look here today. Actually today's the last, so we'll

0:05:01.279 --> 0:05:05.080
<v Speaker 1>see if the EU reconsiders. I suspect that's not going

0:05:05.160 --> 0:05:07.599
<v Speaker 1>to be the case, but we'll see. Meanwhile, here in

0:05:07.600 --> 0:05:12.000
<v Speaker 1>the United States, Judge von Gonzalez Rogers ruled that Section

0:05:12.120 --> 0:05:15.839
<v Speaker 1>two thirty protections cannot be used as a blanket force

0:05:15.920 --> 0:05:20.200
<v Speaker 1>field defense. So as a reminder, Section two thirty states

0:05:20.200 --> 0:05:23.440
<v Speaker 1>that an Internet platform cannot be treated as a publisher

0:05:23.760 --> 0:05:27.279
<v Speaker 1>and then held responsible for the content that users are

0:05:27.320 --> 0:05:32.240
<v Speaker 1>posting to that platform. So, for example, if someone posts

0:05:32.320 --> 0:05:36.400
<v Speaker 1>a video on YouTube that is slandering an innocent person,

0:05:36.880 --> 0:05:41.400
<v Speaker 1>YouTube is not responsible for that video. They're not responsible

0:05:41.400 --> 0:05:44.520
<v Speaker 1>for the crime of slander. Section two thirty would protect

0:05:44.520 --> 0:05:48.240
<v Speaker 1>them from that. There are some limitations to section two thirty,

0:05:48.279 --> 0:05:51.440
<v Speaker 1>so things can get a little bit fuzzy. Like you know,

0:05:51.520 --> 0:05:55.080
<v Speaker 1>if a platform shows that it has not tried to

0:05:55.240 --> 0:06:01.120
<v Speaker 1>reasonably respond to issues from the recreated by users, then

0:06:01.160 --> 0:06:03.400
<v Speaker 1>it can lose some of the elements of section two

0:06:03.440 --> 0:06:07.440
<v Speaker 1>thirty protection. But this particular ruling takes a totally different

0:06:07.480 --> 0:06:11.400
<v Speaker 1>perspective on the problem. So at the heart of the

0:06:11.440 --> 0:06:17.240
<v Speaker 1>decision isn't the content that's posted to a platform. Instead,

0:06:17.680 --> 0:06:22.760
<v Speaker 1>it's actually directed at the platform's design and operation. So

0:06:23.480 --> 0:06:28.279
<v Speaker 1>the argument is if the platform's design is faulty and

0:06:28.480 --> 0:06:34.960
<v Speaker 1>allows for the posting and the proliferation of illegal content

0:06:35.040 --> 0:06:39.120
<v Speaker 1>on the platform that is not covered by section two thirty,

0:06:40.080 --> 0:06:43.680
<v Speaker 1>So it's not that the platform is responsible for publishing

0:06:44.160 --> 0:06:50.599
<v Speaker 1>the material, but that its measures to prevent abuse are

0:06:50.880 --> 0:06:54.839
<v Speaker 1>not sufficient, and therefore that's a design flaw and that

0:06:54.960 --> 0:06:57.560
<v Speaker 1>is not covered or protected by Section two thirty. So

0:06:57.640 --> 0:07:00.320
<v Speaker 1>let me give an example. Let's say a platform creates

0:07:00.360 --> 0:07:04.400
<v Speaker 1>an AI powered tool that is meant to detect instances

0:07:04.880 --> 0:07:08.880
<v Speaker 1>of illegal material posted to the platform, but this tool

0:07:08.920 --> 0:07:13.560
<v Speaker 1>fails to work reliably and some stuff gets past the tool. Well,

0:07:13.640 --> 0:07:17.119
<v Speaker 1>Judge Rogers's ruling says that the platform cannot hide behind

0:07:17.120 --> 0:07:20.280
<v Speaker 1>Section two thirty to protect themselves because the root of

0:07:20.320 --> 0:07:24.920
<v Speaker 1>the complaint is that the tool meant to protect against

0:07:25.240 --> 0:07:30.720
<v Speaker 1>the illegal material doesn't work. It's not about the publication

0:07:30.760 --> 0:07:33.560
<v Speaker 1>of the material. It's about this tool that's meant to

0:07:33.880 --> 0:07:37.840
<v Speaker 1>prevent that stuff, So it's all about contextualization. The ruling

0:07:37.880 --> 0:07:40.960
<v Speaker 1>means that this huge lawsuit that thirty states in the

0:07:41.040 --> 0:07:45.040
<v Speaker 1>US have brought against social networking companies can actually continue

0:07:45.240 --> 0:07:48.720
<v Speaker 1>to the discovery phase. So it doesn't mean that this

0:07:48.760 --> 0:07:52.160
<v Speaker 1>particular lawsuit is going to turn out one way versus another.

0:07:52.560 --> 0:07:55.160
<v Speaker 1>That's still to be determined in the courts. It just

0:07:55.240 --> 0:07:59.800
<v Speaker 1>means that the lawsuit can proceed to the next stage

0:08:00.080 --> 0:08:03.720
<v Speaker 1>in the court system. And it also means the extent

0:08:03.760 --> 0:08:08.480
<v Speaker 1>of protections offered by Section two thirty have boundaries. They're

0:08:08.480 --> 0:08:11.480
<v Speaker 1>not endless. It is an important precedent, and it's one

0:08:11.480 --> 0:08:14.040
<v Speaker 1>that's short to concern a lot of big tech companies

0:08:14.520 --> 0:08:18.480
<v Speaker 1>out in the space. Meanwhile, our march toward being engulfed

0:08:18.520 --> 0:08:22.520
<v Speaker 1>in AI generated content continues. Google is experimenting with several

0:08:22.520 --> 0:08:25.920
<v Speaker 1>AI powered features over on YouTube. One of them will

0:08:25.920 --> 0:08:28.560
<v Speaker 1>take a tune that you hum into a microphone and

0:08:28.600 --> 0:08:31.360
<v Speaker 1>then use that to generate a full music track for you.

0:08:32.000 --> 0:08:35.319
<v Speaker 1>Another tool has been rolled out to a small test

0:08:35.360 --> 0:08:39.280
<v Speaker 1>group of creators that is called dream Track, and this

0:08:39.360 --> 0:08:42.840
<v Speaker 1>tool lets the creator create a prompt to generate a

0:08:42.880 --> 0:08:45.520
<v Speaker 1>thirty second piece of music in the style of one

0:08:45.679 --> 0:08:50.440
<v Speaker 1>of nine musical artists. So why only nine? Well, Google

0:08:50.840 --> 0:08:53.960
<v Speaker 1>is trying to do this in a respectable and responsible

0:08:54.000 --> 0:08:57.760
<v Speaker 1>way and is working with artists on this tool. So

0:08:58.120 --> 0:09:01.240
<v Speaker 1>each one represented in the tool worked with Google and

0:09:01.280 --> 0:09:06.480
<v Speaker 1>gave their permission for this to actually work. So you

0:09:06.520 --> 0:09:08.959
<v Speaker 1>can't just use this tool to copy any artist out there.

0:09:09.000 --> 0:09:11.080
<v Speaker 1>It has to be someone who has given their express

0:09:11.120 --> 0:09:14.000
<v Speaker 1>permission for the tool to be able to do this.

0:09:14.360 --> 0:09:15.480
<v Speaker 1>And what it can do is it can take a

0:09:15.520 --> 0:09:19.400
<v Speaker 1>pretty generic prompt you might say, like make me a

0:09:19.440 --> 0:09:26.480
<v Speaker 1>song about driving fast along a coastal highway, and it

0:09:26.520 --> 0:09:28.640
<v Speaker 1>will take that prompt and then it will do everything

0:09:28.800 --> 0:09:33.319
<v Speaker 1>from generating the music to actually writing lyrics, to creating

0:09:33.880 --> 0:09:37.520
<v Speaker 1>vocals that sound like the artist you selected, and produce

0:09:37.559 --> 0:09:40.079
<v Speaker 1>the whole thing for you now. According to The Verge,

0:09:40.320 --> 0:09:42.840
<v Speaker 1>YouTube plans to roll out this feature specifically as a

0:09:42.840 --> 0:09:47.120
<v Speaker 1>way to augment YouTube shorts. That's YouTube's take on stuff

0:09:47.120 --> 0:09:49.600
<v Speaker 1>like TikTok videos and reels and that kind of thing.

0:09:50.000 --> 0:09:53.199
<v Speaker 1>Google's Deep Mind project provides the horsepower in the background

0:09:53.200 --> 0:09:57.440
<v Speaker 1>through an AI generation model that's called Leria, And unlike

0:09:57.480 --> 0:09:59.920
<v Speaker 1>with a lot of other generative AI applications, I don't

0:10:00.120 --> 0:10:02.920
<v Speaker 1>feel that icky about this one. I like that Google

0:10:02.960 --> 0:10:06.760
<v Speaker 1>reached out to actual artists first to get their buy

0:10:06.840 --> 0:10:10.439
<v Speaker 1>in on this. I like that it's limited in its application,

0:10:10.520 --> 0:10:14.440
<v Speaker 1>it's not like designed to just write music. And I

0:10:14.480 --> 0:10:18.360
<v Speaker 1>also like that, you know, it's it's going to give

0:10:18.520 --> 0:10:21.840
<v Speaker 1>creators a chance to do things like make a backing

0:10:21.920 --> 0:10:25.600
<v Speaker 1>track for their video without having to you know, take

0:10:25.679 --> 0:10:28.880
<v Speaker 1>up music or potentially, you know, try and lift someone

0:10:28.880 --> 0:10:31.720
<v Speaker 1>else's work and hope they don't get a copyright strike.

0:10:31.960 --> 0:10:34.000
<v Speaker 1>I like that as well, so I think this is

0:10:34.880 --> 0:10:38.040
<v Speaker 1>a reasonable use of generative AI, at least so far.

0:10:38.720 --> 0:10:41.880
<v Speaker 1>On a related note, Google has also introduced an audio

0:10:42.000 --> 0:10:46.079
<v Speaker 1>watermark for AI generated audio tracks. It's called synth id,

0:10:46.760 --> 0:10:50.200
<v Speaker 1>and while it's an audio watermark, it isn't audible, or rather,

0:10:50.240 --> 0:10:54.560
<v Speaker 1>it shouldn't be detectable, in Google's words, by human ears.

0:10:54.800 --> 0:10:57.360
<v Speaker 1>So theoretically, we puny humans won't be able to tell

0:10:57.400 --> 0:10:59.200
<v Speaker 1>that it's there. But if you were to PLoP the

0:10:59.240 --> 0:11:02.440
<v Speaker 1>track into some audio editing software, you should be able

0:11:02.440 --> 0:11:07.679
<v Speaker 1>to find the audio watermark somewhere in the track. It's

0:11:07.679 --> 0:11:11.000
<v Speaker 1>supposed to be true even if someone runs the AI

0:11:11.120 --> 0:11:15.080
<v Speaker 1>generated audio through compression, or they change the speed of

0:11:15.120 --> 0:11:17.400
<v Speaker 1>the track, or even if they put in other audio,

0:11:17.640 --> 0:11:20.280
<v Speaker 1>like if they mix it with something else. It is

0:11:20.280 --> 0:11:22.840
<v Speaker 1>not bulletproof. Google reps say that if someone had enough

0:11:22.840 --> 0:11:26.480
<v Speaker 1>determination and they pushed image manipulation far enough, they could

0:11:26.480 --> 0:11:30.040
<v Speaker 1>off uskate the watermark. But as we feel our way

0:11:30.080 --> 0:11:32.280
<v Speaker 1>toward how we can best make use of generative AI

0:11:32.400 --> 0:11:35.760
<v Speaker 1>so that we can enjoy its benefits without also having

0:11:35.800 --> 0:11:40.400
<v Speaker 1>to endure massively negative consequences, stuff like this technology can

0:11:40.440 --> 0:11:44.560
<v Speaker 1>help us get to that destination. All right, we're gonna

0:11:44.600 --> 0:11:46.360
<v Speaker 1>take a quick break. When we come back, I've got

0:11:46.400 --> 0:11:58.000
<v Speaker 1>some more news items to talk about we're back. So

0:11:58.200 --> 0:12:01.000
<v Speaker 1>imagine that you're in a ransomware game and you and

0:12:01.040 --> 0:12:03.640
<v Speaker 1>your fellow hackers have targeted a business and you get

0:12:03.640 --> 0:12:07.240
<v Speaker 1>into that business of systems, and you steal a whole

0:12:07.240 --> 0:12:09.680
<v Speaker 1>bunch of data, and then you tell the target, Hey,

0:12:09.760 --> 0:12:12.319
<v Speaker 1>I've got your data. If you do not pay out

0:12:12.320 --> 0:12:14.640
<v Speaker 1>a ransom, we're going to share this information with the

0:12:14.640 --> 0:12:16.719
<v Speaker 1>rest of the world. And then let's say that you

0:12:16.760 --> 0:12:20.440
<v Speaker 1>are not satisfied at how quickly or your target's moving.

0:12:20.480 --> 0:12:23.719
<v Speaker 1>Your target hasn't responded fast enough, so you could go

0:12:23.800 --> 0:12:26.040
<v Speaker 1>ahead and release all the information, but then you're not

0:12:26.080 --> 0:12:28.440
<v Speaker 1>going to get anything from your victim, right, It's just

0:12:28.480 --> 0:12:30.120
<v Speaker 1>going to be like, well, we did it and we

0:12:30.200 --> 0:12:33.240
<v Speaker 1>released information, but we didn't get any money for our efforts.

0:12:33.960 --> 0:12:36.240
<v Speaker 1>How do you get your target to pay up? Well,

0:12:36.760 --> 0:12:39.720
<v Speaker 1>how about you tell the authorities that they failed to

0:12:39.720 --> 0:12:43.160
<v Speaker 1>disclose a data breach, because that's what the Alpha ransomware

0:12:43.160 --> 0:12:46.080
<v Speaker 1>group did to a company called Meridian Link. So the

0:12:46.160 --> 0:12:49.440
<v Speaker 1>hacker group alerted the US Securities in Exchange Commission, or

0:12:49.559 --> 0:12:53.720
<v Speaker 1>SEC that they had hit Meridian Link with a ransomware attack,

0:12:54.400 --> 0:12:58.480
<v Speaker 1>but Meridian Link failed to disclose this attack, and not

0:12:58.559 --> 0:13:01.240
<v Speaker 1>too long ago, the SEC pasted a rule that says

0:13:01.640 --> 0:13:05.680
<v Speaker 1>companies have four days to report ransomware attacks that represent

0:13:05.760 --> 0:13:10.160
<v Speaker 1>a significant breach. So this was literally the hackers taddling

0:13:10.679 --> 0:13:13.680
<v Speaker 1>on their victim in an effort to pressure Meridian Link

0:13:13.720 --> 0:13:16.760
<v Speaker 1>to cough up the ransom. Never Mind that the hackers

0:13:16.840 --> 0:13:18.600
<v Speaker 1>might have been a bit premature to do this because

0:13:18.640 --> 0:13:21.680
<v Speaker 1>those rules, while they have been drafted, don't actually go

0:13:21.720 --> 0:13:25.800
<v Speaker 1>into effect until December fifteenth, so there is no legal

0:13:25.840 --> 0:13:29.880
<v Speaker 1>obligation yet for Meridian Link to have revealed this. Plus,

0:13:30.360 --> 0:13:33.480
<v Speaker 1>Meridian Link could argue that the breach doesn't actually amount

0:13:33.520 --> 0:13:35.839
<v Speaker 1>to being significant in the first place, so that it

0:13:35.880 --> 0:13:39.679
<v Speaker 1>wouldn't have you know, triggered the rules even if they

0:13:39.720 --> 0:13:42.040
<v Speaker 1>had been in effect at the time. But I just

0:13:42.040 --> 0:13:44.240
<v Speaker 1>thought it was interesting that the thieves are snitching on

0:13:44.280 --> 0:13:48.600
<v Speaker 1>the victims to the authorities. It's pretty crazy. Tesla and

0:13:48.640 --> 0:13:51.800
<v Speaker 1>worker unions in Sweden are in a pretty big fight

0:13:51.880 --> 0:13:55.400
<v Speaker 1>right now. So in Sweden, the labor market is really

0:13:55.440 --> 0:13:57.559
<v Speaker 1>different from other parts of the world. You know, a

0:13:57.640 --> 0:14:01.040
<v Speaker 1>lot of countries have things like minimum wage requirements and

0:14:01.200 --> 0:14:05.480
<v Speaker 1>working hours requirements, but in Sweden these decisions come down

0:14:05.600 --> 0:14:10.240
<v Speaker 1>to worker groups. So essentially unions and the various employers

0:14:10.240 --> 0:14:13.160
<v Speaker 1>in Sweden. So the two parties come together and they

0:14:13.240 --> 0:14:16.520
<v Speaker 1>negotiate the terms until both sides are satisfied, and then

0:14:16.840 --> 0:14:20.880
<v Speaker 1>that's those are the rules. But Tesla hasn't been doing that.

0:14:20.920 --> 0:14:23.240
<v Speaker 1>The company has refused to come to the table to

0:14:23.280 --> 0:14:28.440
<v Speaker 1>negotiate with Swedish workers, and so several different groups representing

0:14:28.680 --> 0:14:32.120
<v Speaker 1>different types of jobs have all decided they aren't going

0:14:32.160 --> 0:14:35.040
<v Speaker 1>to work with Tesla anymore. So that includes like dock

0:14:35.120 --> 0:14:39.720
<v Speaker 1>workers who will stop unloading Tesla cargo in Swedish ports,

0:14:39.840 --> 0:14:42.800
<v Speaker 1>So Tesla might ship stuff to Sweden, but no one's

0:14:42.800 --> 0:14:46.320
<v Speaker 1>going to be unloading those ships. Electricians will not work

0:14:46.320 --> 0:14:51.040
<v Speaker 1>on Tesla charging stations in Sweden. Cleaning staff will stop

0:14:51.040 --> 0:14:55.480
<v Speaker 1>showing up to clean showrooms. Several unions have expressed solidarity,

0:14:55.680 --> 0:14:58.680
<v Speaker 1>extending the protests beyond the first circle of employees affected

0:14:58.680 --> 0:15:02.560
<v Speaker 1>by Tesla's refusal to negoiate. The company is facing increasing

0:15:02.600 --> 0:15:05.240
<v Speaker 1>resistance in Sweden. Things are just going to get worse

0:15:05.360 --> 0:15:10.360
<v Speaker 1>unless Tesla makes motions to actually negotiate with unions. Even

0:15:10.360 --> 0:15:13.040
<v Speaker 1>the Swedish post office is going to stop delivering mail

0:15:13.080 --> 0:15:17.480
<v Speaker 1>to Tesla addresses starting next week. So elon Musk in

0:15:17.520 --> 0:15:20.080
<v Speaker 1>the past has shown great disdain for unions and for

0:15:20.160 --> 0:15:23.960
<v Speaker 1>worker organization in general. So I can't say that Tesla's

0:15:23.960 --> 0:15:27.080
<v Speaker 1>failure to engage in this process has surprised me. But

0:15:27.160 --> 0:15:30.520
<v Speaker 1>it will still surprise me if that remains the case,

0:15:30.840 --> 0:15:33.120
<v Speaker 1>because I don't get the impression that Tesla's really in

0:15:33.120 --> 0:15:35.920
<v Speaker 1>a position where they can just write off an entire country.

0:15:36.720 --> 0:15:39.960
<v Speaker 1>In space news, SpaceX has received approval from the Federal

0:15:40.000 --> 0:15:43.760
<v Speaker 1>Aviation Administration here in America to perform a second test

0:15:43.760 --> 0:15:47.520
<v Speaker 1>flight of the Starship Super heavy lifting vehicle, which, as

0:15:47.560 --> 0:15:51.880
<v Speaker 1>I record this is currently scheduled for tomorrow, November seventeenth.

0:15:52.320 --> 0:15:55.400
<v Speaker 1>Earlier this year, back in April, SpaceX attempted a test

0:15:55.440 --> 0:15:58.480
<v Speaker 1>launch of this vehicle and it did not go well.

0:15:59.160 --> 0:16:02.200
<v Speaker 1>About four minutes into the test launched, the Starship burst

0:16:02.240 --> 0:16:05.400
<v Speaker 1>into flame, and then it's self destructed. The failure caused

0:16:05.400 --> 0:16:08.000
<v Speaker 1>a great deal of damage to the surrounding area, including

0:16:08.040 --> 0:16:10.720
<v Speaker 1>one case where debris from the explosion apparently hit a

0:16:10.840 --> 0:16:14.120
<v Speaker 1>vehicle here on the ground. An investigation followed and the

0:16:14.160 --> 0:16:17.720
<v Speaker 1>FAA created a pretty long list of issues that SpaceX

0:16:17.720 --> 0:16:21.280
<v Speaker 1>would have to address before the FAA would grant permission

0:16:21.320 --> 0:16:24.000
<v Speaker 1>to conduct another test. But apparently all of that is

0:16:24.040 --> 0:16:27.480
<v Speaker 1>now reconciled, and if tomorrow's test goes as planned, the

0:16:27.640 --> 0:16:31.360
<v Speaker 1>starship should lift off, it should fly for around ninety minutes,

0:16:31.400 --> 0:16:35.240
<v Speaker 1>and then eventually it should descend vertically into the Pacific Ocean.

0:16:35.520 --> 0:16:37.000
<v Speaker 1>So we'll have to keep our eyes out to see

0:16:37.040 --> 0:16:40.200
<v Speaker 1>if that in fact happens. In New York City, the

0:16:40.240 --> 0:16:44.400
<v Speaker 1>company Joby Aviation held a demonstration of its electrical Vertical

0:16:44.440 --> 0:16:49.360
<v Speaker 1>takeoff and Landing Aircraft or EV tall as six propellers,

0:16:49.480 --> 0:16:52.320
<v Speaker 1>it kind of looks like an oversized remote control drone,

0:16:52.560 --> 0:16:54.560
<v Speaker 1>like just big enough for you to ride in, and

0:16:54.600 --> 0:16:57.880
<v Speaker 1>the fact that it has six propellers, whereas most consumer drones

0:16:57.920 --> 0:17:01.560
<v Speaker 1>have four. But this is an example of an electric

0:17:01.680 --> 0:17:05.040
<v Speaker 1>flying taxi concept that's been around in New York for

0:17:05.080 --> 0:17:09.200
<v Speaker 1>a while, and primarily the focus has been on transporting

0:17:09.240 --> 0:17:13.919
<v Speaker 1>people from locations like say downtown Manhattan to an airport

0:17:14.480 --> 0:17:18.119
<v Speaker 1>and or vice versa, from an airport to say downtown Manhattan.

0:17:18.680 --> 0:17:20.320
<v Speaker 1>And this is a trip that if you were taking

0:17:20.760 --> 0:17:23.560
<v Speaker 1>by ground transportation, it might take you an hour or

0:17:23.600 --> 0:17:26.880
<v Speaker 1>sometimes longer to get there, but by air it could

0:17:26.880 --> 0:17:30.080
<v Speaker 1>take you less than ten minutes. New York's Mayor Eric

0:17:30.119 --> 0:17:33.240
<v Speaker 1>Adams was present for this demonstration, which saw a job

0:17:33.640 --> 0:17:36.320
<v Speaker 1>ev tall vehicle lift off the ground and fly around

0:17:36.359 --> 0:17:39.240
<v Speaker 1>the area. The plan is to have Jobey Aviation cleared

0:17:39.240 --> 0:17:42.679
<v Speaker 1>for commercial operation by twenty twenty five, but the company

0:17:42.680 --> 0:17:45.160
<v Speaker 1>still has to meet a few more FAA requirements before

0:17:45.160 --> 0:17:47.600
<v Speaker 1>it can earn a license to operate in New York City.

0:17:48.080 --> 0:17:51.080
<v Speaker 1>Joby Aviation is just one company that's actually competing for

0:17:51.119 --> 0:17:53.960
<v Speaker 1>this potential future. There are others that are also looking

0:17:54.000 --> 0:17:57.359
<v Speaker 1>to take that spot in New York. Now, I'm not

0:17:57.400 --> 0:18:00.160
<v Speaker 1>gonna lie. I do think it's neat, but I'm I'm

0:18:00.160 --> 0:18:04.160
<v Speaker 1>not entirely convinced it actually meets a real need. I mean, sure,

0:18:04.200 --> 0:18:07.159
<v Speaker 1>getting to the airport more easily and quickly is great,

0:18:07.920 --> 0:18:10.520
<v Speaker 1>but the capacity of these aircraft is pretty limited, so

0:18:10.640 --> 0:18:14.119
<v Speaker 1>I don't actually see it making a significant impact on

0:18:14.240 --> 0:18:17.479
<v Speaker 1>larger issues like traffic, even traffic to the airports. I mean,

0:18:17.520 --> 0:18:19.480
<v Speaker 1>it's a very small percentage of people who are going

0:18:19.520 --> 0:18:22.080
<v Speaker 1>to be able to take advantage of this, at least

0:18:22.400 --> 0:18:25.440
<v Speaker 1>unless you've got like maybe a huge fleet of these things.

0:18:25.440 --> 0:18:27.040
<v Speaker 1>And then you have the issue of well where are

0:18:27.080 --> 0:18:30.760
<v Speaker 1>they taking off and landing? Where are you storing these things?

0:18:30.800 --> 0:18:32.879
<v Speaker 1>Like you know, there are other issues that come up.

0:18:32.920 --> 0:18:34.560
<v Speaker 1>If you're like, well we've got a big enough fleet

0:18:34.600 --> 0:18:37.320
<v Speaker 1>to make an impact on traffic, well, then you have

0:18:37.359 --> 0:18:40.080
<v Speaker 1>other problems you have to solve. I still think it's cool.

0:18:40.280 --> 0:18:43.879
<v Speaker 1>I just I'm not convinced that it really solves a problem.

0:18:44.400 --> 0:18:46.880
<v Speaker 1>I've got a couple of article recommendations for yall before

0:18:46.920 --> 0:18:50.280
<v Speaker 1>I sign off today. First up is Will Saddleberg's article

0:18:50.400 --> 0:18:54.840
<v Speaker 1>for Android Police. It is titled Android Isn't Cool with teenagers.

0:18:55.200 --> 0:18:59.000
<v Speaker 1>That's a big problem. So Saddleberg points out how, particularly

0:18:59.040 --> 0:19:02.440
<v Speaker 1>here in the United States, younger folks prefer iOS devices

0:19:02.480 --> 0:19:05.560
<v Speaker 1>to Android, and that's really bad news for Google because

0:19:05.600 --> 0:19:07.840
<v Speaker 1>you know, young folks who love Apple tend to grow

0:19:07.920 --> 0:19:11.680
<v Speaker 1>up to be adults who love Apple, and then Google

0:19:11.920 --> 0:19:16.880
<v Speaker 1>is left seeing an entire generation moving or not even

0:19:16.920 --> 0:19:21.200
<v Speaker 1>adopting Android devices. Plus, Settleberg touches on the whole crazy

0:19:21.200 --> 0:19:24.679
<v Speaker 1>status symbol thing here in the US in iPhones, particularly

0:19:24.720 --> 0:19:28.560
<v Speaker 1>with I message, where if there's like a group message

0:19:29.480 --> 0:19:34.479
<v Speaker 1>going on and one person has a green bubble of

0:19:34.560 --> 0:19:38.840
<v Speaker 1>text instead of blue, that person is then ostracized or

0:19:38.920 --> 0:19:41.720
<v Speaker 1>ridiculed because they aren't cool enough to have an iPhone,

0:19:42.359 --> 0:19:45.720
<v Speaker 1>which is super lame. I think personally like I would

0:19:45.720 --> 0:19:48.119
<v Speaker 1>just I would roll my eyes at that kind of stuff.

0:19:48.320 --> 0:19:50.760
<v Speaker 1>But then I also understand, like that's kind of how

0:19:50.840 --> 0:19:53.480
<v Speaker 1>kids operate. I was always oblivious to that sort of thing.

0:19:53.640 --> 0:19:56.600
<v Speaker 1>I was never aware enough to pick up on the

0:19:56.600 --> 0:19:59.159
<v Speaker 1>fact that I was being ostracized. I'm sure I was.

0:19:59.560 --> 0:20:02.760
<v Speaker 1>I just did notice. But like when I was growing up,

0:20:02.800 --> 0:20:05.199
<v Speaker 1>it was all things like designer clothes or whatever, or

0:20:05.240 --> 0:20:08.040
<v Speaker 1>certain labels. Certain brand labels were big and others were

0:20:08.320 --> 0:20:13.520
<v Speaker 1>considered garbage. And I never figured that out and I

0:20:13.600 --> 0:20:17.520
<v Speaker 1>turned out. I mean, I'm okay anyway. The other article

0:20:17.560 --> 0:20:20.880
<v Speaker 1>I have to recommend is John Broadkin's piece for Ours Technica.

0:20:21.040 --> 0:20:24.960
<v Speaker 1>It is titled Cable Lobby and Ted Cruz are Disappointed

0:20:25.000 --> 0:20:29.080
<v Speaker 1>as FCC band's digital discrimination. Broadkin does a really good

0:20:29.160 --> 0:20:32.240
<v Speaker 1>job breaking down the actual issue and the various perspectives.

0:20:32.760 --> 0:20:35.440
<v Speaker 1>It's not clear cut, Like I wouldn't say it's super

0:20:35.840 --> 0:20:38.359
<v Speaker 1>clear cut from any perspective. I would also say a

0:20:38.400 --> 0:20:43.160
<v Speaker 1>lot of perspectives are selectively ignoring certain things in order

0:20:43.200 --> 0:20:47.240
<v Speaker 1>to make a point, which is disingenuous, I would argue.

0:20:47.400 --> 0:20:49.199
<v Speaker 1>But anyway, the article does a really good job at

0:20:49.240 --> 0:20:52.320
<v Speaker 1>breaking all that down. Okay, that's it. I hope you

0:20:52.359 --> 0:20:55.880
<v Speaker 1>are all well, and I'll talk to you again really soon.

0:21:02.040 --> 0:21:06.680
<v Speaker 1>Tech Stuff is an iHeartRadio production. For more podcasts from iHeartRadio,

0:21:07.000 --> 0:21:10.720
<v Speaker 1>visit the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen

0:21:10.760 --> 0:21:11.840
<v Speaker 1>to your favorite shows.