Speaker 1: Welcome to tech Stuff, a production from I Heart Radio.
Speaker 1: Be there and welcome to tech Stuff. I'm your host,
Speaker 1: Jonathan Strickland. I'm an executive producer with I Heart Radio,
Speaker 1: and I love all things tech. And this is the
Speaker 1: tech news for Tuesday, July twenty twenty one, and let's
Speaker 1: just get right into it. Misinformation is in the news,
Speaker 1: both you know, as a topic and literally as part
Speaker 1: of the news, because that's the world we live in.
Speaker 1: The New York Times is Max Fisher wrote a piece
Speaker 1: earlier this week titled Disinformation for Higher A shadow industry
Speaker 1: is quietly booming. And the contents of that piece will
Speaker 1: likely come as no surprise to anyone who has kept
Speaker 1: up with the ongoing mess that is misinformation and disinformation
Speaker 1: campaigns and the platforms that facilitate the spread of those campaigns.
Speaker 1: And it probably isn't a surprise that there are a
Speaker 1: collection of companies that are kind of acting as guns
Speaker 1: for hire to run and promote disinformation campaigns on behalf
Speaker 1: of their clients. And it gives those clients kind of
Speaker 1: a bit of distance from the cd and unethical campaigns themselves. Right,
Speaker 1: If you want to have a smear campaign against say
Speaker 1: a political rival. You'd rather not have that come back
Speaker 1: to you if you're saying a lot of things that
Speaker 1: are just legit not true. Anyway, we saw all of
Speaker 1: this years ago with Cambridge Analytica. That was kind of
Speaker 1: a an example of this, although they did other stuff too,
Speaker 1: and that company was actually fairly clumsy when it all
Speaker 1: comes down to it. I mean that that house of
Speaker 1: cards came crashing in on itself. But on the flip side,
Speaker 1: there's also money to be made in fighting disinformation. So
Speaker 1: we're also seeing startups come up to fight disinformation while
Speaker 1: others are actively promoting it. So startups like Active Fence
Speaker 1: are fighting disinformation. So we've got two sides of an
Speaker 1: information war, both of which have turned this fight into
Speaker 1: a profitable business. There's probably something really smart I could
Speaker 1: say here about the whole situation and maybe about capitalism,
Speaker 1: but I'm just going to leave that to someone who's
Speaker 1: better equipped than I to make that observation. But just
Speaker 1: like typical right anyway, Active Fence recently announced that it
Speaker 1: has raised one million dollars in investments and is developing
Speaker 1: a suite of tools to help detect misinformation campaigns. UH.
Speaker 1: The company is using artificial intelligence as a way to
Speaker 1: kind of crawl across various social platforms and not just
Speaker 1: examine posts, but to look for connections between different accounts
Speaker 1: and different groups, and those connections can point to concerted
Speaker 1: efforts to spread, you know, a specific message or undermine
Speaker 1: some other message. As we continue to deal with misinformation
Speaker 1: campaigns around the world that deal with everything from politics
Speaker 1: to workers rights, to vaccinations and beyond, it becomes more
Speaker 1: important to be able to weed out the bad stuff
Speaker 1: and to give people more opportunities to understand when they're
Speaker 1: actually being manipulated and by whom and for what purpose.
Speaker 1: That's incredibly valuable information to have, assuming that you actually
Speaker 1: take the effort to look into it and not just
Speaker 1: allow information to confirm maybe preconceived biases or prejudices you
Speaker 1: might have, or to comfort you into thinking that something
Speaker 1: that is your fault is totally not your fault. Like
Speaker 1: all those kind of earmarks for how misinformation can really
Speaker 1: get its hooks in, Uh, it's hard to overcome. My
Speaker 1: guess is we're gonna see a continued escalation between the
Speaker 1: companies that are offering to handle disinformation campaigns and the
Speaker 1: ones providing the tools to fight those campaigns and it'll
Speaker 1: just keep getting messy. That's my, you know, incredibly obvious prediction. Alright,
Speaker 1: switching gears, let's talk about cybersecurity and software vulnerabilities. So
Speaker 1: for many years, Apple products were seen as sort of
Speaker 1: being bulletproof, and there were a couple of really big
Speaker 1: major reasons for this. There are lots of reasons, but
Speaker 1: two really big ones, and one was that Apple notoriously
Speaker 1: follows a walled garden strategy in which the company makes
Speaker 1: not only the operating systems, but the actual hardware that
Speaker 1: those OS is run upon. Now, if you do this correctly,
Speaker 1: you can actually cut down on potential vulnerabilities. You know,
Speaker 1: you don't have different companies making different pieces and thus
Speaker 1: creating the potential for gaps insecurity as much. It can
Speaker 1: still happen, but it gives you a leg up. The
Speaker 1: second big factor was that Apple, for many years had
Speaker 1: much lower percentage of the market share when it came
Speaker 1: to operating systems. So if you were a batty and
Speaker 1: you wanted to make malicious software and your goal was
Speaker 1: to affect the largest number of people you could, you
Speaker 1: would focus on Windows based devices, Windows based computers. Like
Speaker 1: this is before the smartphone era, and that's because Windows
Speaker 1: was on way more computer systems than mac OS was,
Speaker 1: so it just made more sense you were going to
Speaker 1: hit more targets if you aimed for Windows users. But
Speaker 1: these factors do not make Apple immune to the problem
Speaker 1: of malware. They're not, you know, completely uh bulletproof, as
Speaker 1: I was saying. The Register actually reports that Apple recently
Speaker 1: patched a zero day vulnerability in its various OS products,
Speaker 1: including mac os and iOS, just yesterday on Monday, a
Speaker 1: week earlier. The company issued updates to the various operating
Speaker 1: systems to fix some other issues, and the patched vulnerability
Speaker 1: was in a screen frame buffer. Uh. That's a feature that,
Speaker 1: if it had been exploited by a hacker, could be
Speaker 1: used to uh to to run malware, to execute malware.
Speaker 1: The Register also reports that someone, though at the time
Speaker 1: that I'm recording this, I don't know who, had been
Speaker 1: exploiting that bug in some way. Uh. That could potentially
Speaker 1: be the n s O group, that's the that's the
Speaker 1: company that's behind the Pegasus spyware that I talked about
Speaker 1: last week, the one out of Israel. At least one
Speaker 1: security researcher has said that they knew about this particular
Speaker 1: bug for several months, but did not report it that
Speaker 1: they were working on their own kind of bigger report
Speaker 1: that was going to incorporate this as part of it,
Speaker 1: which is you know, a yikes. Anyway, this is one
Speaker 1: of those things that really stinks for the end consumers
Speaker 1: because bad actors can easily exploit vulnerabilities like these and
Speaker 1: use some fairly simple attacks to get people to fall
Speaker 1: prey to them. I mean, the the NSO groups. Pegasus
Speaker 1: uses a zero click attack through messengers like I Message,
Speaker 1: and that that's very hard to avoid. Gizmoto has an
Speaker 1: article listing the various Windows ten features that are going
Speaker 1: to go away when Windows eleven launches, or rather Windows
Speaker 1: eleven isn't going to include them. If you keep running
Speaker 1: Windows ten, you'll still have access to these features. You know,
Speaker 1: each time Microsoft updates its flagship operating system, we get
Speaker 1: some new features and we say goodbye to some of
Speaker 1: the older ones, and it doesn't always end up feeling
Speaker 1: like it was a fair trade. So what is heading
Speaker 1: out this time? Well, Internet Explorer will finally be really
Speaker 1: most sincerely dead, at least on Windows eleven. Microsoft hasn't
Speaker 1: really supported i E in a while. They moved to
Speaker 1: the Edge web Browser instead, but they kept it around
Speaker 1: for folks who refused to use Edge. UH and Windows
Speaker 1: ten still had Internet Explorer as an option, but that
Speaker 1: will not be the case with Windows eleven. Another feature
Speaker 1: going away is the synchronization feature called Timeline. So the
Speaker 1: idea behind Timeline is that you could essentially link different
Speaker 1: Windows based machines that you work on and have them
Speaker 1: synchronize your activities across the machines. So let's say you've
Speaker 1: got two Windows based computers in your house, and you're
Speaker 1: on one of those computers and you open up a
Speaker 1: word document in your one drive, and you work on
Speaker 1: it for a while, and you say that you close out.
Speaker 1: Then you move to your other computer. Later on in
Speaker 1: the day, you open up Word and that document would
Speaker 1: be in your recent documents list in Word, even though
Speaker 1: it was a totally different computer, because Timeline was synchronizing
Speaker 1: these activities across the two devices. That is going away
Speaker 1: with Windows eleven. I'm sure there'll be some comparable feature,
Speaker 1: but it's not Timeline. Another thing that's going away are
Speaker 1: live tiles, which I forgot we're even a thing for
Speaker 1: Windows tin. I've never used them. These are little tiles
Speaker 1: that you could put on the Windows tin desktop. They
Speaker 1: can display live information, so you could have a tile
Speaker 1: that has like a news ticker, that kind of thing.
Speaker 1: It looks like when Microsoft is going to go back
Speaker 1: to widgets for Windows eleven, which really aren't that different
Speaker 1: from live tiles, I suppose, and I guess maybe this
Speaker 1: will be the Windows where widgets really pay off. I
Speaker 1: don't spend a whole lot of time looking at my desktop,
Speaker 1: so maybe I'm just not the right person for these
Speaker 1: kinds of features because I typically have programs on full
Speaker 1: screen all the time. I've got multiple monitors and each
Speaker 1: one has got a full screen program on it, because
Speaker 1: I find lots of open windows in the same view
Speaker 1: to be too cluttery. But when Whendows eleven, I'm gonna
Speaker 1: put the widgets back. I don't think I'll be using them,
Speaker 1: but they'll be there. Windows eleven will also remove your
Speaker 1: ability to place your taskbar on whichever edge of the
Speaker 1: screen you want, and now the task bar will live
Speaker 1: at the bottom of the screen and you'll like it.
Speaker 1: And I actually do happen to like having the test
Speaker 1: bar at the bottom of the screen. I get really
Speaker 1: irritated whenever I accidentally relocate the taskbar to some other
Speaker 1: part of the screen, which can sometimes happen if I'm
Speaker 1: being sloppy with my key strokes, and then something I
Speaker 1: can't find my start button because it's at a different
Speaker 1: spot of the screen. So I'm totally okay with Windows
Speaker 1: eleven anchoring it at the bottom. Windows eleven is also
Speaker 1: apparently going to de emphasize Cortana. That's the virtual assistant
Speaker 1: feature that's named after a character in the Halo video
Speaker 1: game franchise. Cortana will still be incorporated into Windows eleven,
Speaker 1: but won't occupy the same sort of screen real estate,
Speaker 1: nor will there be a Cortana segment in the setup process.
Speaker 1: And also Skype is going to get de emphasized as well.
Speaker 1: Microsoft's really pushing Microsoft Teams to be the main communication
Speaker 1: tool on Windows based machines. There are a few other changes,
Speaker 1: but I recommend going over to gizmoto and reading up
Speaker 1: on the rest if you're thinking about upgrading to Windows
Speaker 1: eleven when it comes out later this year. We've got
Speaker 1: a few more news stories to cover, but first let's
Speaker 1: take a quick break. I got a hypothetical for you.
Speaker 1: What happens if you run a company that's focused on
Speaker 1: online privacy tools, you know, like virtual private networks or VPNs,
Speaker 1: and you get caught out running unencrypted services, well you
Speaker 1: go into damage control, and that's kind of what's happening
Speaker 1: with the company wind describe. Wind Scribe offers virtual private
Speaker 1: networks or VPN services, and the way VPNs work, just
Speaker 1: from a really high level, is pretty simple. So you
Speaker 1: use a VPN client to log into a remote server
Speaker 1: that is kind of standing as proxy for you. Then
Speaker 1: all of your Internet activity actually filters through this VPN
Speaker 1: server before it comes to you. Anyone who's snooping on
Speaker 1: your connection will only see that you are communicating with
Speaker 1: this VPN server. They won't be able to see what
Speaker 1: you're doing beyond that server. So let's say you're using
Speaker 1: a VPN to get past some regional controls, or you're
Speaker 1: trying to avoid having your Internet service provider know which
Speaker 1: sites you're visiting. Maybe you're shopping for different I s
Speaker 1: p s and you would just prefer if the I
Speaker 1: s P you have doesn't know about that. These are
Speaker 1: all basic things that you could do, and this can
Speaker 1: be really important for protecting your security and your privacy. Now,
Speaker 1: it can also be used to hide your activity if
Speaker 1: you're up to no good. So there is a double
Speaker 1: edged sword here. But all of this really hinges on
Speaker 1: having the VPN servers protected with encryption as well as
Speaker 1: a good policy with regard to record keeping. So in general,
Speaker 1: it's it's considered best practice if the VPN is not
Speaker 1: keeping activity log of its users, because if it is
Speaker 1: keeping activity logs a compromise server, it could potentially reveal
Speaker 1: all the stuff that the users were up to when
Speaker 1: connecting to that specific server. Well, in the Ukraine, authorities
Speaker 1: seized a couple of VPN servers belonging to wind Scribe,
Speaker 1: and those servers proved to be poorly encrypted using an
Speaker 1: outdated methodology that has long since proven to be insecure.
Speaker 1: It's been deprecated. In other words, we don't use it
Speaker 1: anymore because it's not reliable. The company has essentially copped
Speaker 1: to that, saying yeah, that is what happened, and they
Speaker 1: said that generally they encrypt servers that are considered to
Speaker 1: be in like high risk security areas, but they failed
Speaker 1: to do so appropriately in this case in the Ukraine,
Speaker 1: which I would think of as being a high security
Speaker 1: area considering the political issues that go on between the
Speaker 1: Ukraine and say Russia, and this opened up the potential
Speaker 1: for someone to compromise the system. And Ours Technica has
Speaker 1: a really great piece about this. It's titled VPN servers
Speaker 1: seized by Ukrainian authorities weren't Encrypted. That article goes into
Speaker 1: a lot more detail about both the issue at hand
Speaker 1: and wind scribes response. Also. Ours Technica wisely points out
Speaker 1: that VPN services have really taken off over the last
Speaker 1: few years, and there are a lot of different companies
Speaker 1: that are offering them, So it really pays to do
Speaker 1: your research to make sure that whichever service you're looking
Speaker 1: into is following the best practices of the industry in
Speaker 1: order to keep your activity the way Gandolf would want
Speaker 1: you to. You know, is it secret? Is it safe?
Speaker 1: If it's not, don't use it. The Verge has a
Speaker 1: piece titled Vigilante app Citizen is paying users to live
Speaker 1: stream crime scenes and emergencies, which to me just sounds
Speaker 1: a lot like the plot to the film Nightcrawler starring
Speaker 1: Jake Jillenhall. If you haven't seen that movie, it's intense.
Speaker 1: It's not for everybody, but the movie follows Jake Jillenhall's character.
Speaker 1: He's a man who finds out that he can make
Speaker 1: some pretty decent money if he's the first on the
Speaker 1: scene of like an awful accident or a grizzly crime,
Speaker 1: and he shoots footage of it, and then of course
Speaker 1: he gets more and more involved as it goes on.
Speaker 1: I won't spoil any more of it in case you
Speaker 1: want to watch it, but it is a pretty intense film. Well,
Speaker 1: now there's an app for that. The company behind Citizen
Speaker 1: is offering between two hundred to two hundred fifty dollars
Speaker 1: a day for people to live stream quote unquote newsworthy
Speaker 1: events in their local area, so creating kind of a
Speaker 1: gig economy on on the ground instant reporting. The company
Speaker 1: expects applicants to not just point a camera at like
Speaker 1: a developing situation, but also to conduct interviews, like to
Speaker 1: talk to witnesses and onlookers and the police. Now they're
Speaker 1: not supposed to interfere with police procedures or to put
Speaker 1: themselves in harm's way, but they are supposed to interview folks. Uh,
Speaker 1: this is I feel like it's active asking a heck
Speaker 1: of a lot from users. The skill set for being
Speaker 1: a good interviewer is a really nuanced and deep skill set.
Speaker 1: And I say this as someone who occasionally interviews folks
Speaker 1: and I have for a few years, but I still
Speaker 1: feel like I've got a good way to go but
Speaker 1: to become a really great interviewer. And it just seems
Speaker 1: disastrous to open this up to me. Apparently, the company
Speaker 1: has folks in Los Angeles working ten hour shifts for
Speaker 1: two fifty bucks a day, which you know is better
Speaker 1: than minimum wage, but I imagine the work can get
Speaker 1: pretty risky for numerous reasons. Also, I don't know how
Speaker 1: the company works as far as paying people, Like if
Speaker 1: you're wandering around your area and it just happens to
Speaker 1: be a quiet day, do you still get paid. Also,
Speaker 1: the Verge reports that there's some other disturbing things with this.
Speaker 1: For instance, Citizen, the company is apparently testing a private
Speaker 1: security force, complete with patrol cars. Now Here in the
Speaker 1: United States, we're already in a situation in which a
Speaker 1: large segment of the population is calling for police reform
Speaker 1: or outright defunding the police, and it seems like creating
Speaker 1: private security forces, particularly when you take into consideration that
Speaker 1: Citizen used to go by the name Vigilante, can raise
Speaker 1: all sorts of red flags. Uh, certainly something that I'll
Speaker 1: be following closely because this concerns me. It feels like
Speaker 1: it could very easily tip into mob justice territory, which
Speaker 1: which which can be truly disastrous Here in the US.
Speaker 1: During the previous presidential administration, the FCC launched the Rural
Speaker 1: Digital Opportunity Fund, and the idea was that the FCC
Speaker 1: would grant subsidies to companies that would extend broadband connectivity
Speaker 1: to communities and agents in the US that lack broadband access.
Speaker 1: In other words, like, we need to get these people connected,
Speaker 1: and here's an incentive for companies to to do that.
Speaker 1: They'll get these great subsidies in return, which is a
Speaker 1: pretty good idea, except the r d o F was
Speaker 1: riddled with flaws that made it relatively easy for companies
Speaker 1: to land those subsidies and then you know, not actually
Speaker 1: provide services to rural or underserved areas. Some companies instead
Speaker 1: focused on building out services in places that actually already
Speaker 1: had broadband access, and that has led the f c C,
Speaker 1: which of course is now under new leadership because of
Speaker 1: a change in presidential administrations, to reach out to the
Speaker 1: companies that were granted subsidies and say, hey, buddy, either
Speaker 1: do what you were supposed to do or we want
Speaker 1: our money back. And I think that's pretty darn keene
Speaker 1: as there are lots of folks out there who really
Speaker 1: lack any real access to broadband connectivity, and yet internet
Speaker 1: access is increasingly a critical component to being a citizen
Speaker 1: in the United States and just getting stuff done, particularly
Speaker 1: in a world that is still in the midst of
Speaker 1: a pandemic. When you have news stories about school kids
Speaker 1: who have to go and sit in a parking lot
Speaker 1: because that's the only way they're able to get internet
Speaker 1: access in order to participate in school, that is a
Speaker 1: serious failing of society and it's one that needs to
Speaker 1: be addressed. The digital divide is not a new thing.
Speaker 1: It has been a thing for decades. It's just not
Speaker 1: getting better, and we need to do better. Well, we
Speaker 1: have a couple more stories to cover, but before I
Speaker 1: get to that, let's take another quick break. The New
Speaker 1: York Times reports that a Toyota executive has been meeting
Speaker 1: with congressional leaders in d C in a move to
Speaker 1: push back against the planned path to adopting an all
Speaker 1: all electric vehicle approach. And we're seeing various places around
Speaker 1: the world go after fairly aggressive strategies to phase out
Speaker 1: internal combustion engine vehicles entirely, at least for new vehicles
Speaker 1: that is, and just move to all electric vehicles for
Speaker 1: new cars. So to be clear, this doesn't mean that
Speaker 1: you know, existing internal combustion engine vehicles are going to
Speaker 1: all have to go to the scrap heap. No one's
Speaker 1: coming to take your Dodge charger or anything like that.
Speaker 1: It just means that in the future, like not that
Speaker 1: far out into the future, shopping for a new car
Speaker 1: will be all about electric vehicles because internal combustion engines
Speaker 1: will no longer be in production. Now, apparently Toyota would
Speaker 1: really rather we hold off on doing that, as the
Speaker 1: company executive is trying to argue for hybrids and hydrogen
Speaker 1: fuel cell vehicles to also be part of this conversation
Speaker 1: and they should also qualify as replacements for internal combustion
Speaker 1: engine vehicles, and that an all electric vehicle approach is
Speaker 1: just the wrong way to go. This could be because
Speaker 1: Toyota might be lagging behind some other manufacturers when it
Speaker 1: comes to, you know, the plans to switch to e
Speaker 1: vs UH. I would say that including hybrids and fuel
Speaker 1: cell vehicles in the conversation, is not necessarily a bad idea.
Speaker 1: They can definitely help reduce greenhouse gas emissions if they
Speaker 1: are engineered properly, and they could have a legit seat
Speaker 1: at the table when it comes to transitioning away from
Speaker 1: internal combustion engines. However, Toyota's approach is one that's not
Speaker 1: likely to win any supporters from those who want to
Speaker 1: see big changes in an effort to reduce the impact
Speaker 1: of climate change. So, in other words, it might just
Speaker 1: come across as the wrong move. Toyota has had some
Speaker 1: pretty notable, highly public pr issues in recent past that
Speaker 1: have to deal with politics, so we'll see if this
Speaker 1: also adds to the fire. Intel, which was once the
Speaker 1: king of the hill when it comes to computer processors,
Speaker 1: has slipped a little bit in recent years, but according
Speaker 1: to the company's Intel Accelerated Virtual Event, the company has
Speaker 1: a plan to regain the top spot by and part
Speaker 1: of that strategy is a drum roll, please, a new
Speaker 1: way of naming processors. Now, a lot of chips reference
Speaker 1: the you know, size of components on a processor in
Speaker 1: the nanoscale, which is a number that just keeps getting
Speaker 1: smaller in defiance of physics itself. But as I recently learned,
Speaker 1: those numbers don't necessarily actually reflect the actual components sizes
Speaker 1: on the chip. That's a matter for another podcast. I
Speaker 1: think I'm gonna have to do a full podcast about
Speaker 1: how misleading those numbers are because it surprised me, and
Speaker 1: I've been covering this stuff for years, so I need
Speaker 1: to do an episode about it. The new naming scheme will,
Speaker 1: according to Intel, create quote, a more accurate view of
Speaker 1: process nodes across the end of street end quote. So
Speaker 1: what does that mean, I'm gonna pull a Teva from
Speaker 1: Fiddler on the Roof. I don't know, but this might
Speaker 1: help Intel move away from a nomenclature that is at
Speaker 1: best confusing and at worst misleading, and it might give
Speaker 1: the company the chance to show off what it's hardware
Speaker 1: can do without someone saying, yeah, but that number of
Speaker 1: a day is better than your number, and it comes
Speaker 1: down to performance rather than naming conventions. In other words,
Speaker 1: and on that front, Intel's chips have been holding up
Speaker 1: pretty well. Actually, honestly, I'm just curious to see if
Speaker 1: this strategy is going to pay off for Intel the
Speaker 1: processor industry as a whole, has had a lot of
Speaker 1: shake ups recently, in large part because the pandemic has
Speaker 1: really disrupted business and caused massive delays for long term plans.
Speaker 1: So we'll just have to see how this all develops.
Speaker 1: And finally, speaking of electricity, Dell and its subsidiary alien Ware,
Speaker 1: have a shocking problem, and that's the fact that several
Speaker 1: of the new alien Ware products those are like high
Speaker 1: performance gaming rigs that they exceed the power consumption regulations
Speaker 1: for states like California, Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington,
Speaker 1: which means people in those states cannot actually order those
Speaker 1: particular models and have them shipped to them. The company's
Speaker 1: website makes this clear for those specific models that if
Speaker 1: you order one and you happen to have a shipping
Speaker 1: address that's in one of those states, that order will
Speaker 1: not go through. So while the computers might go fast
Speaker 1: while they're sitting still, they ain't gonna be making their
Speaker 1: way to those states, at least not directly, because the
Speaker 1: power consumption levels are just too high. On the one hand,
Speaker 1: this feels like it's just incredible access to me, right,
Speaker 1: Like you have a computer that is so juiced up
Speaker 1: for gaming that it's pulling way too much electricity, like
Speaker 1: more than some of your other appliances in your home.
Speaker 1: But on the other hand, I think this could be
Speaker 1: a gold mine for advertising. I imagine it alien ware
Speaker 1: the computer so fast it's illegal in six states. I mean, sure,
Speaker 1: that's not entirely accurate, but I think it could move units.
Speaker 1: And that's it for the Tech News for July one.
Speaker 1: We will not have a tech News episode this Thursday.
Speaker 1: We have a new episode of Smart Talks coming out,
Speaker 1: but we'll have more news next week, and we'll have
Speaker 1: other episodes of tech Stuff obviously throughout the week. So
Speaker 1: if you have any suggestions for future topics I should
Speaker 1: cover on tech Stuff, reach out to me on Twitter.
Speaker 1: The handle for the show is text Stuff H s
Speaker 1: W and I'll talk to you again really soon. Tech
Speaker 1: Stuff is an I Heart Radio production. For more podcasts
Speaker 1: from my Heart Radio, visit the i Heart Radio app
Speaker 1: Apple Podcasts wherever you listen to your favorite shows.