1
00:00:04,400 --> 00:00:07,800
Speaker 1: Welcome to tech Stuff, a production from I Heart Radio.

2
00:00:11,800 --> 00:00:14,360
Speaker 1: Hey there, and welcome to tech Stuff. I'm your host

3
00:00:14,440 --> 00:00:17,799
Speaker 1: Jonathan Strickland, Diamond Executive producer with I Heart Radio, and

4
00:00:17,840 --> 00:00:20,239
Speaker 1: how the tech are you. It's time for the tech

5
00:00:20,280 --> 00:00:24,919
Speaker 1: news for Tuesday, October eleventh, two thousand twenty two. Let's

6
00:00:24,920 --> 00:00:29,600
Speaker 1: get to it. Today, Meta will hold its Connect conference,

7
00:00:30,080 --> 00:00:32,800
Speaker 1: and folks are expecting that Mark Zuckerberg will give an

8
00:00:32,880 --> 00:00:36,560
Speaker 1: update as to the whole journey to the Metaverse thing,

9
00:00:37,159 --> 00:00:40,479
Speaker 1: and part of that will be unveiling of the high

10
00:00:40,760 --> 00:00:45,000
Speaker 1: end VR a gear that has been called Project Cambria

11
00:00:45,280 --> 00:00:48,800
Speaker 1: internally anyway, we expect it will probably be called something

12
00:00:48,800 --> 00:00:51,879
Speaker 1: else when it's released. The going bet now as it's

13
00:00:51,920 --> 00:00:53,720
Speaker 1: going to be the Quest pro By the time you

14
00:00:53,720 --> 00:00:57,200
Speaker 1: hear this, you might very well know that already, because

15
00:00:57,200 --> 00:00:59,720
Speaker 1: I'm recording this before the conference happens. I'm not sure

16
00:00:59,760 --> 00:01:03,800
Speaker 1: what features this new VR device is going to have,

17
00:01:03,960 --> 00:01:06,200
Speaker 1: but the guess is that it's going to have higher

18
00:01:06,240 --> 00:01:10,840
Speaker 1: resolution experiences. It's gonna incorporate eye tracking that can go

19
00:01:10,959 --> 00:01:15,480
Speaker 1: from interesting to creepy real quick, and it might have

20
00:01:15,520 --> 00:01:19,840
Speaker 1: some other mixed reality features built into it, as in, like, hey,

21
00:01:19,880 --> 00:01:22,840
Speaker 1: you've got augmented reality and my virtual reality. Hey you

22
00:01:22,920 --> 00:01:27,440
Speaker 1: got virtual reality and my augmented reality? Say that kind

23
00:01:27,440 --> 00:01:31,440
Speaker 1: of thing. Anyway, we don't know the details, we don't

24
00:01:31,440 --> 00:01:34,120
Speaker 1: know how expensive this thing is going to be. But

25
00:01:34,240 --> 00:01:37,600
Speaker 1: since Meta not too long ago hiked the price of

26
00:01:37,640 --> 00:01:41,240
Speaker 1: the two quest two models, there's a base model in

27
00:01:41,240 --> 00:01:45,120
Speaker 1: a slightly better model, those prices went up by a

28
00:01:45,200 --> 00:01:50,360
Speaker 1: hundred dollars each. They currently cost three and four nine, respectively.

29
00:01:51,040 --> 00:01:55,320
Speaker 1: And my guess is that Project Cambria will be fairly expensive.

30
00:01:55,680 --> 00:01:58,920
Speaker 1: Considering that Meta has had a really bad year this year,

31
00:01:59,280 --> 00:02:01,320
Speaker 1: I can't imagine and that they're going to try and

32
00:02:01,360 --> 00:02:04,160
Speaker 1: sell this at a massive loss. The company has been

33
00:02:04,200 --> 00:02:08,560
Speaker 1: dealing with scandals, it's seen a decline in its user base.

34
00:02:09,280 --> 00:02:12,639
Speaker 1: It's been trying in largely failing, to fight off TikTok's

35
00:02:12,680 --> 00:02:17,160
Speaker 1: appeal to younger users. It's been reeling from Apple's move

36
00:02:17,240 --> 00:02:21,520
Speaker 1: to give iOS users the ability to cut off app tracking,

37
00:02:21,560 --> 00:02:25,200
Speaker 1: which is really hurt their advertising model. Uh. It's seen

38
00:02:25,240 --> 00:02:28,040
Speaker 1: at stock price go down over the year by more

39
00:02:28,080 --> 00:02:31,040
Speaker 1: than sixty percent, like more than a hundred dollars per share.

40
00:02:31,680 --> 00:02:33,280
Speaker 1: And I'm sure there are a lot of folks over

41
00:02:33,320 --> 00:02:36,919
Speaker 1: at Meta who feel the company really needs a win,

42
00:02:37,440 --> 00:02:40,840
Speaker 1: so maybe that's what we'll get later today. The conference

43
00:02:40,880 --> 00:02:43,960
Speaker 1: begins at one pm Eastern. As I'm recording this, it's

44
00:02:43,960 --> 00:02:46,040
Speaker 1: about an hour away, so I'm sure I'll have a

45
00:02:46,080 --> 00:02:49,240
Speaker 1: lot more to talk about on Thursday's episode. The New

46
00:02:49,280 --> 00:02:55,120
Speaker 1: York Times published an article titled quote, Skepticism, Confusion, Frustration

47
00:02:55,560 --> 00:02:59,720
Speaker 1: inside Mark Zuckerberg's Metaverse struggles end quote, and this piece

48
00:03:00,000 --> 00:03:03,919
Speaker 1: had some light on how folks inside the company are

49
00:03:04,080 --> 00:03:08,240
Speaker 1: frustrated and confused by Zuckerberg's push toward all things metaverse.

50
00:03:08,919 --> 00:03:12,120
Speaker 1: The Times quotes several folks, many of them unnamed because

51
00:03:12,120 --> 00:03:13,839
Speaker 1: they didn't want to put their jobs at risk, which

52
00:03:13,880 --> 00:03:18,440
Speaker 1: is totally understandable. One investor that the Times quoted was

53
00:03:18,480 --> 00:03:22,120
Speaker 1: a guy named Matthew Ball, who I think rightfully pointed

54
00:03:22,160 --> 00:03:25,480
Speaker 1: out that while Zuckerberg is focusing on the metaverse, the

55
00:03:25,520 --> 00:03:29,399
Speaker 1: problems that Meta is facing right now are not necessarily

56
00:03:29,480 --> 00:03:32,840
Speaker 1: directly metaverse related. Apart from the fact that the company

57
00:03:32,880 --> 00:03:36,400
Speaker 1: is investing billions into something that's still many years away.

58
00:03:36,920 --> 00:03:40,720
Speaker 1: I think the Ball's point is that Zuckerberg is failing

59
00:03:40,760 --> 00:03:44,480
Speaker 1: to address the real world problems that Meta has encountered

60
00:03:44,480 --> 00:03:47,480
Speaker 1: this year. Which means not only is Zuckerberg looking at

61
00:03:47,560 --> 00:03:52,440
Speaker 1: something that doesn't fix the issues that the company currently faces,

62
00:03:53,200 --> 00:03:56,960
Speaker 1: those issues are also getting worse because the attention is

63
00:03:56,960 --> 00:04:00,360
Speaker 1: on this metaverse stuff. The piece also rewards the several

64
00:04:00,360 --> 00:04:03,400
Speaker 1: employees and Meta are frustrated with Zuckerberg changing his mind

65
00:04:03,440 --> 00:04:08,280
Speaker 1: about projects and rapidly demanding changes. They say that the

66
00:04:08,320 --> 00:04:12,760
Speaker 1: most important project is m MH, which is make Mark happy. Obviously,

67
00:04:12,800 --> 00:04:18,080
Speaker 1: this whole approach disrupts processes and makes them really failed

68
00:04:18,080 --> 00:04:20,640
Speaker 1: to make a lot of progress. The piece also mentions

69
00:04:20,640 --> 00:04:23,360
Speaker 1: that Zuckerberg has been urging Meta teams to hold virtual

70
00:04:23,440 --> 00:04:27,000
Speaker 1: meetings within the company's Horizon Workrooms app and that was

71
00:04:27,040 --> 00:04:30,240
Speaker 1: a huge inconvenience for a lot of employees because they

72
00:04:30,279 --> 00:04:33,720
Speaker 1: had not purchased a VR headset or had one set up,

73
00:04:34,240 --> 00:04:36,920
Speaker 1: so it sent lots of folks scrambling in order to

74
00:04:36,960 --> 00:04:40,359
Speaker 1: catch up. Also, by the way, just on a side note, yuck.

75
00:04:40,640 --> 00:04:43,120
Speaker 1: I mean, if if my boss told me that I

76
00:04:43,160 --> 00:04:45,800
Speaker 1: needed to buy a four hundred or five dollar piece

77
00:04:45,800 --> 00:04:49,240
Speaker 1: of equipment just so that I could attend work meetings,

78
00:04:50,040 --> 00:04:53,240
Speaker 1: I'd be pretty angry about that. Hopefully those employees will

79
00:04:53,279 --> 00:04:55,919
Speaker 1: get reimbursed for having to purchase VR equipment just to

80
00:04:55,960 --> 00:04:58,920
Speaker 1: attend meetings or something. The Times piece also says that

81
00:04:59,640 --> 00:05:03,920
Speaker 1: and Helnal poll of Meta of one thousand employees revealed

82
00:05:03,920 --> 00:05:07,040
Speaker 1: that less than sixty of them felt they really understood

83
00:05:07,040 --> 00:05:10,479
Speaker 1: the company's metaverse strategy. So still more than half say

84
00:05:10,480 --> 00:05:15,200
Speaker 1: they understand it, but like more than say I don't

85
00:05:15,360 --> 00:05:19,520
Speaker 1: really get it now the very least I would think

86
00:05:19,520 --> 00:05:22,520
Speaker 1: that reveals a problem with internal communications. It's very hard

87
00:05:22,560 --> 00:05:25,360
Speaker 1: to be a trailblazer if the folks on your team

88
00:05:25,400 --> 00:05:29,080
Speaker 1: don't understand where they're trying to go to. Again, maybe

89
00:05:29,160 --> 00:05:31,880
Speaker 1: the conference later today will indicate that the company has

90
00:05:31,880 --> 00:05:34,359
Speaker 1: addressed some of these issues. Will have to wait and see,

91
00:05:35,080 --> 00:05:37,120
Speaker 1: or you won't. You probably have already heard about it.

92
00:05:38,320 --> 00:05:42,200
Speaker 1: Let's pop on over to YouTube next. The platform is

93
00:05:42,240 --> 00:05:44,920
Speaker 1: making yet another change when it comes to users and

94
00:05:45,080 --> 00:05:49,000
Speaker 1: their accounts. YouTube sent out emails to YouTube account holders

95
00:05:49,040 --> 00:05:52,320
Speaker 1: and released an announcement that says the platform will soon

96
00:05:52,360 --> 00:05:57,040
Speaker 1: switch to at name style handles, much like other social

97
00:05:57,040 --> 00:06:01,520
Speaker 1: platforms like Twitter. So users who will have a channel,

98
00:06:01,560 --> 00:06:04,920
Speaker 1: they'll be able to secure a unique handle that applies

99
00:06:04,960 --> 00:06:08,200
Speaker 1: across the platform. So this handle feature will allow users

100
00:06:08,240 --> 00:06:11,560
Speaker 1: to mention others and stuff like video titles and comments.

101
00:06:12,120 --> 00:06:15,120
Speaker 1: So let's say you decided to do a YouTube video

102
00:06:15,160 --> 00:06:18,919
Speaker 1: about how awesome I am. You could tag me in

103
00:06:18,960 --> 00:06:22,360
Speaker 1: the title of your video, and I would be aware

104
00:06:22,400 --> 00:06:25,200
Speaker 1: that it existed, and because you're appealing to my ego,

105
00:06:25,839 --> 00:06:29,000
Speaker 1: I would likely promote that video because I want people

106
00:06:29,000 --> 00:06:31,440
Speaker 1: to know how awesome I am. Now, I'm not saying

107
00:06:31,440 --> 00:06:33,600
Speaker 1: you should do this, by the way, Specifically, don't do

108
00:06:33,640 --> 00:06:36,960
Speaker 1: this with me because my social reach is pathetically small

109
00:06:37,360 --> 00:06:39,839
Speaker 1: because I'm almost never on social these days, so it

110
00:06:39,880 --> 00:06:42,200
Speaker 1: won't do you any good. But if you try it

111
00:06:42,240 --> 00:06:45,160
Speaker 1: with folks who have a large, active following, I don't know.

112
00:06:45,440 --> 00:06:47,640
Speaker 1: Maybe it could work. Maybe you just irritate them. You

113
00:06:47,720 --> 00:06:51,640
Speaker 1: just don't know. Anyway, the apt feature can be useful

114
00:06:51,680 --> 00:06:55,040
Speaker 1: for community engagement, though it can also be irritating as

115
00:06:55,080 --> 00:06:57,839
Speaker 1: heck if it's misused, but that is the way of things.

116
00:06:58,440 --> 00:07:01,599
Speaker 1: I find this change interesting but because back when Google

117
00:07:01,640 --> 00:07:05,359
Speaker 1: Plus was still a thing, Google was really pushing to

118
00:07:05,440 --> 00:07:10,840
Speaker 1: require everyone to use their real legal name across Google platforms,

119
00:07:11,240 --> 00:07:15,600
Speaker 1: and that included Google Plus and YouTube. So this motivation

120
00:07:15,760 --> 00:07:19,400
Speaker 1: for this push came from a relatively good place, like

121
00:07:19,480 --> 00:07:21,120
Speaker 1: it wasn't just that they wanted to force you to

122
00:07:21,240 --> 00:07:24,080
Speaker 1: use your real name. The idea was that if you

123
00:07:24,120 --> 00:07:28,600
Speaker 1: hold people accountable by making them use their real names,

124
00:07:29,160 --> 00:07:31,600
Speaker 1: then they're going to be more careful about the stuff

125
00:07:31,640 --> 00:07:35,080
Speaker 1: they say online and you would see a big decrease

126
00:07:35,080 --> 00:07:39,000
Speaker 1: in stuff like abuse and trolling. But it was very

127
00:07:39,000 --> 00:07:41,760
Speaker 1: clear that the company had not considered a lot of

128
00:07:41,840 --> 00:07:44,520
Speaker 1: other issues that come along with forcing people to use

129
00:07:44,520 --> 00:07:49,720
Speaker 1: their real names. Here's a relatively benign example. There are

130
00:07:49,800 --> 00:07:53,960
Speaker 1: a lot of popular YouTube personalities who are known by

131
00:07:54,080 --> 00:07:57,280
Speaker 1: a sort of stage name or a handle, and if

132
00:07:57,320 --> 00:08:00,560
Speaker 1: you forced them to change to their real name, that

133
00:08:00,640 --> 00:08:03,400
Speaker 1: kind of messes with branding. It also poses as a

134
00:08:03,440 --> 00:08:07,880
Speaker 1: potential privacy and security risk. Anyway, YouTube, throughout their history

135
00:08:07,960 --> 00:08:10,600
Speaker 1: has really followed a rocky course when it comes to

136
00:08:11,160 --> 00:08:15,119
Speaker 1: how we identify users and channels on the site. They've

137
00:08:15,120 --> 00:08:18,120
Speaker 1: gone back and forth between being able to use handles

138
00:08:18,120 --> 00:08:21,600
Speaker 1: being able to use real names. Um, and these new

139
00:08:21,680 --> 00:08:25,040
Speaker 1: handles aren't actually going to rename anything. Instead, in theory,

140
00:08:25,080 --> 00:08:27,440
Speaker 1: it will make it easier to interact with other users

141
00:08:27,440 --> 00:08:31,880
Speaker 1: on the platform because you can tag them. Securing handles

142
00:08:31,880 --> 00:08:34,120
Speaker 1: looks like it's going to be a first come, first

143
00:08:34,160 --> 00:08:37,800
Speaker 1: served approach. Once it opens up. But YouTube is also

144
00:08:37,840 --> 00:08:41,080
Speaker 1: going to reach out to some channels in advance to

145
00:08:41,160 --> 00:08:44,680
Speaker 1: give them the opportunity to secure their handle before the

146
00:08:44,679 --> 00:08:46,720
Speaker 1: general public can rush in and grab them up. Which

147
00:08:46,760 --> 00:08:50,400
Speaker 1: makes sense. You don't want, uh, someone rushing in to

148
00:08:50,480 --> 00:08:54,080
Speaker 1: grab Jack septic I before Sean gets a chance to

149
00:08:54,120 --> 00:08:56,920
Speaker 1: do it. I call him Sean even though I've never

150
00:08:56,920 --> 00:08:59,079
Speaker 1: talked to him and he doesn't know who I am.

151
00:08:59,120 --> 00:09:02,440
Speaker 1: But anyway, that's an example, right, You wouldn't want someone

152
00:09:02,480 --> 00:09:07,320
Speaker 1: to to do the equivalent of website squatting or U

153
00:09:07,400 --> 00:09:11,400
Speaker 1: r L squatting on these handles. So those channels are

154
00:09:11,400 --> 00:09:13,520
Speaker 1: going to get the first chance to do it. UH

155
00:09:13,800 --> 00:09:15,719
Speaker 1: don't know what the criteria is going to be for that.

156
00:09:15,920 --> 00:09:18,120
Speaker 1: I assume it's going to be like the check marked

157
00:09:18,120 --> 00:09:21,920
Speaker 1: folks first and then maybe opened up to others after that.

158
00:09:23,000 --> 00:09:26,920
Speaker 1: We'll have to see. This past weekend was twitch Con,

159
00:09:27,000 --> 00:09:30,319
Speaker 1: which was an in person convention relating to Twitch streamers

160
00:09:30,360 --> 00:09:32,760
Speaker 1: and their fan bases. I got a couple of different

161
00:09:32,760 --> 00:09:35,240
Speaker 1: things to say about this. One is that Twitch has

162
00:09:35,280 --> 00:09:38,840
Speaker 1: been in the hot seat of criticism from creators recently,

163
00:09:39,360 --> 00:09:42,320
Speaker 1: primarily because of the company's revenue strategy. There have been

164
00:09:42,360 --> 00:09:45,360
Speaker 1: a lot of times where streamers have criticized Twitch for

165
00:09:45,480 --> 00:09:51,560
Speaker 1: lots of different things. For example, for uh somewhat vague

166
00:09:51,679 --> 00:09:56,800
Speaker 1: and uneven application of content standards, where some people say

167
00:09:57,280 --> 00:10:02,360
Speaker 1: it appears that certain folks get a past for publishing

168
00:10:02,440 --> 00:10:07,200
Speaker 1: content that other folks get reprimanded for. That's one example.

169
00:10:07,200 --> 00:10:10,120
Speaker 1: But the one that has been and in the focus

170
00:10:10,120 --> 00:10:15,000
Speaker 1: more recently has to do with revenue split. So until

171
00:10:15,320 --> 00:10:18,000
Speaker 1: very recently, Twitch had a revenue split for almost all

172
00:10:18,040 --> 00:10:23,400
Speaker 1: Twitch streamers. That was that means that streamers would get

173
00:10:23,400 --> 00:10:27,560
Speaker 1: fifty of revenue coming from subscriptions and Twitch would get

174
00:10:27,600 --> 00:10:30,240
Speaker 1: the rest. There are other ways that Twitch makes revenue

175
00:10:30,440 --> 00:10:33,079
Speaker 1: from these things, and that streamers make revenue from these

176
00:10:33,080 --> 00:10:36,440
Speaker 1: things as well, but that's really kind of the focus. Now.

177
00:10:36,520 --> 00:10:39,800
Speaker 1: Certain streamers who were kind of viewed as top performers

178
00:10:39,840 --> 00:10:44,000
Speaker 1: and thus likely to attract more people to joining Twitch,

179
00:10:44,520 --> 00:10:47,760
Speaker 1: they got a special treatment. They got a seventy thirty split,

180
00:10:48,120 --> 00:10:50,560
Speaker 1: so Twitch would only take thirty percent of their revenue

181
00:10:50,600 --> 00:10:53,160
Speaker 1: and the streamer would get to keep seventy. But that

182
00:10:53,320 --> 00:10:58,760
Speaker 1: was like this small elite group, and that's actually much

183
00:10:58,760 --> 00:11:01,160
Speaker 1: closer to the kind of revenue new split strategies we

184
00:11:01,200 --> 00:11:05,880
Speaker 1: see in other online platforms. But late last month, Twitch

185
00:11:05,960 --> 00:11:09,720
Speaker 1: said that any remaining seventy streamers out there will also

186
00:11:09,760 --> 00:11:13,320
Speaker 1: get switched to a fifty fifty arrangement once they earn

187
00:11:13,600 --> 00:11:18,120
Speaker 1: one thousand dollars as a threshold. And for those elite streamers,

188
00:11:18,160 --> 00:11:20,800
Speaker 1: that's going to be a big setback. Going from a

189
00:11:21,600 --> 00:11:25,800
Speaker 1: take to take is tough, and while we have yet

190
00:11:25,840 --> 00:11:27,640
Speaker 1: to see how this is all going to play out,

191
00:11:28,200 --> 00:11:31,400
Speaker 1: it's safe to say there are some Twitch streamers upset

192
00:11:31,480 --> 00:11:34,400
Speaker 1: with this change. Now, maybe they'll try and offset it

193
00:11:34,640 --> 00:11:38,599
Speaker 1: by incorporating more advertising in their streams, because if you

194
00:11:38,640 --> 00:11:40,960
Speaker 1: have more ads, then you generate more revenues, so you

195
00:11:40,960 --> 00:11:42,880
Speaker 1: can make up for the fact that you are getting

196
00:11:43,160 --> 00:11:46,520
Speaker 1: a smaller cut of the revenue you generate by putting

197
00:11:46,520 --> 00:11:48,360
Speaker 1: in more ads. But if you put in more ads,

198
00:11:49,000 --> 00:11:53,120
Speaker 1: then you might push away Twitch viewers. They might get

199
00:11:53,480 --> 00:11:56,080
Speaker 1: fed up with how many ads there are compared to

200
00:11:56,520 --> 00:12:00,000
Speaker 1: the amount of content they're getting. But anyway, let's talk

201
00:12:00,000 --> 00:12:03,080
Speaker 1: about twitch Con, particularly because the big story coming out

202
00:12:03,120 --> 00:12:06,920
Speaker 1: of twitch Con isn't about twitches policies had to do

203
00:12:07,000 --> 00:12:10,800
Speaker 1: with some really unfortunate injuries that were incurred by let's

204
00:12:10,800 --> 00:12:15,720
Speaker 1: call them enthusiastic streamers who leapt into a a foam pit,

205
00:12:16,160 --> 00:12:18,880
Speaker 1: that is, a pit that had foam blocks, like the

206
00:12:18,960 --> 00:12:21,760
Speaker 1: kind of blocks he would use for packing material, right,

207
00:12:21,840 --> 00:12:25,880
Speaker 1: those dark like charcoal gray foam blocks, that kind of

208
00:12:25,880 --> 00:12:30,640
Speaker 1: thing um And that pit proved to be far too shallow,

209
00:12:30,800 --> 00:12:32,680
Speaker 1: and since this was all done in a venue with

210
00:12:32,880 --> 00:12:36,400
Speaker 1: concrete floor, and then that some folks got hurt, a

211
00:12:36,440 --> 00:12:40,640
Speaker 1: few of them seriously injured. One of those was streamer

212
00:12:40,679 --> 00:12:44,440
Speaker 1: Adriana Chichick, who, after landing in the pit, said she

213
00:12:44,520 --> 00:12:47,480
Speaker 1: was unable to get up and she ultimately got some

214
00:12:47,559 --> 00:12:50,559
Speaker 1: medical attention, and she has since said that she broke

215
00:12:50,640 --> 00:12:53,320
Speaker 1: her back in two places and is going to undergo

216
00:12:53,360 --> 00:12:55,959
Speaker 1: surgery to insert a metal rod into her spine to

217
00:12:56,000 --> 00:12:58,640
Speaker 1: correct for the damage. The foam pit was part of

218
00:12:58,640 --> 00:13:02,600
Speaker 1: an American Gladiator's type attraction. It was sponsored by Lenovo

219
00:13:02,720 --> 00:13:07,280
Speaker 1: and Intel, and it was subsequently shut down after numerous injuries.

220
00:13:07,880 --> 00:13:09,640
Speaker 1: And on a personal note, I just want to say,

221
00:13:09,679 --> 00:13:12,719
Speaker 1: I hope the various folks who got injured in that

222
00:13:12,800 --> 00:13:16,480
Speaker 1: pit have a swift recovery. And to all those websites

223
00:13:16,520 --> 00:13:20,079
Speaker 1: out there that used animated gifts to show the moments

224
00:13:20,120 --> 00:13:23,440
Speaker 1: where folks got injured. Gross next time, just make it

225
00:13:23,440 --> 00:13:26,240
Speaker 1: a playable video. I did not want to actually see

226
00:13:26,280 --> 00:13:30,000
Speaker 1: people get hurt. Um that kind of stinks, And I

227
00:13:30,120 --> 00:13:32,719
Speaker 1: really hope that the hurt people get well soon. That's

228
00:13:32,720 --> 00:13:37,400
Speaker 1: obviously the most important part. All right, speaking of advertising,

229
00:13:37,440 --> 00:13:39,319
Speaker 1: we're gonna take a quick break. When we come back,

230
00:13:39,360 --> 00:13:51,319
Speaker 1: we've got some more news items. You know. I've talked

231
00:13:51,360 --> 00:13:54,439
Speaker 1: a lot on this show about how remote work has

232
00:13:54,440 --> 00:13:58,600
Speaker 1: really changed things for employees, how they are reluctant to

233
00:13:58,640 --> 00:14:01,880
Speaker 1: go back to working in the office, which is totally understandable. Like,

234
00:14:01,920 --> 00:14:04,280
Speaker 1: if you are able to do your job effectively at home,

235
00:14:05,000 --> 00:14:06,360
Speaker 1: there are a lot of good reasons to do it

236
00:14:06,400 --> 00:14:09,320
Speaker 1: that way. Right, you're not driving all the time or

237
00:14:09,360 --> 00:14:13,239
Speaker 1: otherwise commuting, you know, you you can really be efficient,

238
00:14:13,480 --> 00:14:15,240
Speaker 1: and you can stay in the comfort of your home.

239
00:14:15,320 --> 00:14:17,280
Speaker 1: You can help look after your family. There are a

240
00:14:17,320 --> 00:14:19,560
Speaker 1: lot of good reasons. But I've also talked about how

241
00:14:19,560 --> 00:14:22,720
Speaker 1: some companies and managers are not crazy about remote work,

242
00:14:22,800 --> 00:14:26,960
Speaker 1: partly because it makes it harder to monitor employees. It's

243
00:14:26,960 --> 00:14:29,720
Speaker 1: weird because, like every study you see about this kind

244
00:14:29,720 --> 00:14:34,400
Speaker 1: of stuff shows how that approach demoralizes employees, which ultimately

245
00:14:34,440 --> 00:14:37,760
Speaker 1: means you hurt the bottom line. Employees don't do as

246
00:14:37,760 --> 00:14:40,320
Speaker 1: good a job if they're not happy. And yet we

247
00:14:40,440 --> 00:14:43,320
Speaker 1: still see this happening like like it's it's like a

248
00:14:43,360 --> 00:14:45,520
Speaker 1: teacher having to watch over a classroom to make sure

249
00:14:45,520 --> 00:14:48,080
Speaker 1: no one's cheating during a pop quiz. You don't feel

250
00:14:48,080 --> 00:14:51,520
Speaker 1: great if you feel like your boss is treating you

251
00:14:51,640 --> 00:14:56,280
Speaker 1: like a misbehaving child. Anyway, there's one recent story that

252
00:14:56,400 --> 00:14:58,760
Speaker 1: really caught my eye that kind of turned things around

253
00:14:58,760 --> 00:15:00,520
Speaker 1: on a company that was doing the sort of thing.

254
00:15:00,920 --> 00:15:05,640
Speaker 1: A Florida based company called chett To hired a remote telemarketer.

255
00:15:06,000 --> 00:15:10,240
Speaker 1: This telemarketer was based in the Netherlands. Now, according to

256
00:15:10,360 --> 00:15:14,480
Speaker 1: a subsequent lawsuit that the telemarketer brought against chet Do,

257
00:15:15,280 --> 00:15:19,960
Speaker 1: the company managers ordered him to activate his webcam and

258
00:15:20,000 --> 00:15:23,560
Speaker 1: to keep it on throughout the entirety of his work day.

259
00:15:23,600 --> 00:15:27,000
Speaker 1: They also demanded that he screen share his screen the

260
00:15:27,200 --> 00:15:31,360
Speaker 1: entire time, and the telemarketer politely declined to acquiesce to

261
00:15:31,400 --> 00:15:36,000
Speaker 1: the company's request, and chatt To then fired this telemarketer.

262
00:15:36,200 --> 00:15:39,840
Speaker 1: So then he sued the company, And like I said,

263
00:15:39,880 --> 00:15:43,680
Speaker 1: this guy is based in the Netherlands. So a Dutch

264
00:15:43,720 --> 00:15:47,880
Speaker 1: court took up the case, and y'all, we don't treat

265
00:15:48,040 --> 00:15:50,720
Speaker 1: things like privacy that seriously here in the United States,

266
00:15:50,840 --> 00:15:53,400
Speaker 1: but they sure as heck do in Europe and the

267
00:15:53,440 --> 00:15:56,960
Speaker 1: Netherlands in particular. So the court found that the company

268
00:15:57,120 --> 00:16:00,720
Speaker 1: was being unreasonable and that the company demands on the

269
00:16:00,760 --> 00:16:04,680
Speaker 1: employee were quote in conflict with the respect for the

270
00:16:04,720 --> 00:16:08,280
Speaker 1: privacy of the workers end quote which it would be

271
00:16:08,360 --> 00:16:11,880
Speaker 1: very hard to agree to argue against. Rather, and that

272
00:16:11,880 --> 00:16:16,320
Speaker 1: that the company far overstepped the boundaries that an employer

273
00:16:16,400 --> 00:16:19,280
Speaker 1: has when it comes to its employees. So this Dutch

274
00:16:19,280 --> 00:16:22,160
Speaker 1: court found in favor of the telemarketer. They said this

275
00:16:22,320 --> 00:16:25,520
Speaker 1: was a case of unfair dismissal, and as a result,

276
00:16:25,600 --> 00:16:28,479
Speaker 1: the court has ordered Chett to to pay the telemarketers

277
00:16:28,520 --> 00:16:31,920
Speaker 1: court costs, to pay his back wages, to pay a

278
00:16:32,000 --> 00:16:35,160
Speaker 1: fine of fifty thou dollars, and it has to drop

279
00:16:35,240 --> 00:16:39,400
Speaker 1: the non compete clause from the telemarketers employment agreement. And

280
00:16:39,480 --> 00:16:41,520
Speaker 1: whether any of this happens or not, I don't know.

281
00:16:41,720 --> 00:16:44,920
Speaker 1: Chetto did not show up for the court case. Again,

282
00:16:44,960 --> 00:16:48,760
Speaker 1: I'm not shocked, but I imagine this will at least

283
00:16:48,800 --> 00:16:53,000
Speaker 1: make companies a little less eager to hire telemarketers in

284
00:16:53,040 --> 00:16:56,320
Speaker 1: the Netherlands right or teleworkers in general. As well as

285
00:16:56,440 --> 00:16:59,240
Speaker 1: other places that are like in the EU, for example,

286
00:16:59,240 --> 00:17:01,720
Speaker 1: where you have governed moments and regulatory agencies that take

287
00:17:01,760 --> 00:17:07,560
Speaker 1: stuff like privacy seriously. And uh, honestly, I think that

288
00:17:07,600 --> 00:17:10,800
Speaker 1: the requirement of having the webcam turned on was unreasonable

289
00:17:10,880 --> 00:17:13,000
Speaker 1: from the get go. I think it's unreasonable for any

290
00:17:13,000 --> 00:17:16,480
Speaker 1: company to demand that, at least as a general rule.

291
00:17:16,560 --> 00:17:20,960
Speaker 1: I think it's unreasonable. So hopefully we see stories like

292
00:17:21,040 --> 00:17:28,440
Speaker 1: this that convinced companies not to follow those kinds of tactics. Uh,

293
00:17:28,760 --> 00:17:30,840
Speaker 1: it might take a while for that to really filter

294
00:17:31,000 --> 00:17:33,760
Speaker 1: through to all the different companies in the United States,

295
00:17:33,760 --> 00:17:37,160
Speaker 1: because again, we're in a country that does not traditionally

296
00:17:37,800 --> 00:17:43,520
Speaker 1: value or protect privacy to any great extent. Yesterday, CNN

297
00:17:43,560 --> 00:17:48,600
Speaker 1: decided to sunset its Vault project. So this was an

298
00:17:48,720 --> 00:17:53,200
Speaker 1: n f T initiative that CNN launched last year, and

299
00:17:53,200 --> 00:17:56,879
Speaker 1: and the news company was minting n f T s

300
00:17:57,240 --> 00:18:00,960
Speaker 1: that were tied to real world events and headline So

301
00:18:01,320 --> 00:18:05,440
Speaker 1: the pitch that CNN gave to investors was that you

302
00:18:05,880 --> 00:18:08,720
Speaker 1: could purchase an n f T and own a piece

303
00:18:08,720 --> 00:18:13,040
Speaker 1: of history. You could own a headline, a moment of

304
00:18:13,160 --> 00:18:19,359
Speaker 1: newsworthy activity, which I find absolutely laughable. I find it

305
00:18:19,640 --> 00:18:23,000
Speaker 1: ludicrous because really, what you end up owning is a

306
00:18:23,040 --> 00:18:27,760
Speaker 1: digital token that at least in theory, represents this thing.

307
00:18:27,840 --> 00:18:30,119
Speaker 1: But it's just a digital token. It's a token that

308
00:18:30,119 --> 00:18:34,720
Speaker 1: can be traded or sold on a digital marketplace. But

309
00:18:34,800 --> 00:18:38,320
Speaker 1: it's not like you actually own a moment, like like,

310
00:18:38,520 --> 00:18:41,479
Speaker 1: let's say there's a moment where celebrity, a totally disked

311
00:18:41,480 --> 00:18:44,919
Speaker 1: celebrity be at a public event or whatever, and you're like, done,

312
00:18:45,320 --> 00:18:47,800
Speaker 1: I need to own that. I need to own the

313
00:18:47,800 --> 00:18:51,240
Speaker 1: moment where Harry Styles spit on Crisp Pine or whatever

314
00:18:51,280 --> 00:18:53,159
Speaker 1: it was, And so you buy an n f T

315
00:18:53,320 --> 00:18:57,360
Speaker 1: that represents that headline. You don't actually own anything other

316
00:18:57,440 --> 00:19:01,160
Speaker 1: than a token. Anyway, None of that stopped people from

317
00:19:01,160 --> 00:19:03,880
Speaker 1: buying n f t s because, as we have established

318
00:19:03,920 --> 00:19:08,240
Speaker 1: another episodes, n f t s, especially early on, we're

319
00:19:08,280 --> 00:19:11,080
Speaker 1: really seen as a potential cash grab, both for the

320
00:19:11,160 --> 00:19:13,639
Speaker 1: markets that were minting n f t s and for

321
00:19:13,720 --> 00:19:15,919
Speaker 1: the people who were buying them. It was like a

322
00:19:16,000 --> 00:19:19,600
Speaker 1: speculative market, and you can think of it as like

323
00:19:19,600 --> 00:19:21,840
Speaker 1: a long shot bet. You might think, all right, well,

324
00:19:21,880 --> 00:19:25,160
Speaker 1: each individual n f T is not that expensive, maybe

325
00:19:25,160 --> 00:19:27,840
Speaker 1: it's twenty bucks or something for the cheap ones that's

326
00:19:27,880 --> 00:19:30,640
Speaker 1: not terrible. And if it turns out that this one

327
00:19:30,720 --> 00:19:34,639
Speaker 1: is gonna end up being a seven digit item on

328
00:19:34,680 --> 00:19:38,640
Speaker 1: a marketplace, then I'm gonna make a huge profit from

329
00:19:38,680 --> 00:19:41,159
Speaker 1: a small investment. Of course, I'm gonna be tempted to

330
00:19:41,200 --> 00:19:45,919
Speaker 1: do that. But since those days, obviously the crypto market

331
00:19:45,960 --> 00:19:51,080
Speaker 1: has taken a real dive across multiple blockchains. We have

332
00:19:51,160 --> 00:19:56,880
Speaker 1: seen cryptocurrencies and an n f T values plummet and uh.

333
00:19:57,000 --> 00:20:00,240
Speaker 1: More and more people have expressed skeptic skepticism or just

334
00:20:00,320 --> 00:20:04,040
Speaker 1: outright dismissal of n f T s, and some folks

335
00:20:04,040 --> 00:20:07,560
Speaker 1: who were invested in the vault are now talking about

336
00:20:08,000 --> 00:20:12,600
Speaker 1: talking with lawyers potentially bringing lawsuits against CNN and accusing

337
00:20:12,600 --> 00:20:16,159
Speaker 1: the company of pulling the rug out from investors a

338
00:20:16,480 --> 00:20:20,800
Speaker 1: so called rug poll. So rug pull is when someone

339
00:20:20,880 --> 00:20:24,679
Speaker 1: sets up a project and gets investors involved in the

340
00:20:24,680 --> 00:20:28,440
Speaker 1: project and then subsequently cancels the project and then runs

341
00:20:28,480 --> 00:20:30,680
Speaker 1: off with the cash. That's a rug pole right where

342
00:20:30,680 --> 00:20:33,680
Speaker 1: you've set up the scheme where you can convince a

343
00:20:33,760 --> 00:20:36,040
Speaker 1: lot of people to pour money in early on, and

344
00:20:36,040 --> 00:20:39,000
Speaker 1: then you take the money and run. Well. CNN has

345
00:20:39,080 --> 00:20:42,119
Speaker 1: said that's not the case, and it's planning to compensate

346
00:20:42,200 --> 00:20:44,840
Speaker 1: investors by paying out the purchase price of n f

347
00:20:44,880 --> 00:20:49,000
Speaker 1: T s that investors were holding as captured on October six.

348
00:20:49,280 --> 00:20:51,199
Speaker 1: So if you bought an n f T like a

349
00:20:51,280 --> 00:20:54,399
Speaker 1: year ago, you don't get the value of the n

350
00:20:54,440 --> 00:20:57,080
Speaker 1: f T that you paid for at the point of purchase.

351
00:20:57,080 --> 00:20:59,720
Speaker 1: You you get whatever it was worth on October six

352
00:20:59,840 --> 00:21:03,240
Speaker 1: of this year. So CNN estimates that means folks are

353
00:21:03,280 --> 00:21:06,639
Speaker 1: going to recapture around twenty of what they invested in because,

354
00:21:06,680 --> 00:21:09,840
Speaker 1: as I mentioned earlier, crypto had a really bad time

355
00:21:09,840 --> 00:21:11,639
Speaker 1: of it this year, and the value of stuff like

356
00:21:11,760 --> 00:21:14,520
Speaker 1: n f T s has taken a nose dive. It

357
00:21:14,560 --> 00:21:20,040
Speaker 1: also gets worse. Marketplaces have processing fees, so if you

358
00:21:20,080 --> 00:21:24,320
Speaker 1: want to extract your money from an investment on these marketplaces,

359
00:21:24,600 --> 00:21:27,480
Speaker 1: you have to pay a processing fee in in as

360
00:21:27,480 --> 00:21:30,679
Speaker 1: part of that. Well, the marketplace that CNN used was

361
00:21:30,760 --> 00:21:34,119
Speaker 1: connected to the Flow blockchain, and the Flow blockchain has

362
00:21:34,160 --> 00:21:37,680
Speaker 1: a four dollar processing fee for transactions. So let's say

363
00:21:38,040 --> 00:21:41,000
Speaker 1: you bought one n f T from CNN. Let's say

364
00:21:41,000 --> 00:21:43,480
Speaker 1: it was a twenty n f T. We You're only

365
00:21:43,480 --> 00:21:49,159
Speaker 1: gonna get of that value back, right, That's all you're

366
00:21:49,160 --> 00:21:53,639
Speaker 1: gonna get. So one fifth of what you paid and

367
00:21:53,680 --> 00:21:56,000
Speaker 1: you paid twenty bucks, well, one fifth means you would

368
00:21:56,080 --> 00:21:58,840
Speaker 1: get four dollars back, but you also have to pay

369
00:21:58,840 --> 00:22:01,200
Speaker 1: a processing fee if you want to withdraw your money

370
00:22:01,240 --> 00:22:04,760
Speaker 1: from the marketplace. That processing fee is also four dollars,

371
00:22:04,800 --> 00:22:08,760
Speaker 1: which means you get nothing. You get no money back

372
00:22:09,440 --> 00:22:13,239
Speaker 1: because of the reduction in the purchase price and that

373
00:22:13,320 --> 00:22:15,919
Speaker 1: processing fee on top of it. This is another reason

374
00:22:16,000 --> 00:22:19,639
Speaker 1: why lots of critics of n f T s pointed

375
00:22:19,680 --> 00:22:22,760
Speaker 1: in f T s as being dangerous and not a

376
00:22:22,760 --> 00:22:25,760
Speaker 1: good investment, because on top of everything else, you've got

377
00:22:25,840 --> 00:22:29,400
Speaker 1: these processing fees that eat into any profit you might make,

378
00:22:30,000 --> 00:22:32,800
Speaker 1: and you are not guaranteed by any stretch of the imagination,

379
00:22:32,800 --> 00:22:35,000
Speaker 1: to make a profit in the first place. So it

380
00:22:35,080 --> 00:22:38,520
Speaker 1: may mean that you get even less back out if

381
00:22:38,520 --> 00:22:41,199
Speaker 1: you decide that you don't want to be invested in

382
00:22:41,200 --> 00:22:47,040
Speaker 1: the market anymore. Last week, six robotics companies, including Boston Dynamics,

383
00:22:47,200 --> 00:22:50,600
Speaker 1: signed a pledge stating that these companies are not going

384
00:22:50,640 --> 00:22:54,159
Speaker 1: to develop robots that can harm humans, and the company

385
00:22:54,160 --> 00:22:58,120
Speaker 1: has also urged other robotics companies to follow suit. And

386
00:22:58,240 --> 00:23:01,760
Speaker 1: there's been a lot of talk about robotics and how

387
00:23:01,760 --> 00:23:04,760
Speaker 1: they could be put to military use. A lot of

388
00:23:04,880 --> 00:23:08,159
Speaker 1: early ones, including at Boston Dynamics, were talked about as

389
00:23:08,240 --> 00:23:12,200
Speaker 1: sort of a load bearing device that could help carry

390
00:23:12,240 --> 00:23:15,719
Speaker 1: heavier equipment in the field for military, so kind of

391
00:23:15,720 --> 00:23:18,600
Speaker 1: like a mule that it would be carrying this stuff.

392
00:23:18,720 --> 00:23:21,959
Speaker 1: Not necessarily weaponized itself, but it might carry weapons that

393
00:23:22,280 --> 00:23:25,360
Speaker 1: you know, other soldiers can can take off of it

394
00:23:26,200 --> 00:23:31,080
Speaker 1: and use. But there's also been conversations about weaponized platforms,

395
00:23:31,640 --> 00:23:35,919
Speaker 1: whether paired with a human operator who works remotely to

396
00:23:36,160 --> 00:23:42,520
Speaker 1: actually fire the weapons, or even and autonomous system that

397
00:23:42,560 --> 00:23:46,360
Speaker 1: would have stuff like image recognition capabilities that would be

398
00:23:46,400 --> 00:23:50,080
Speaker 1: capable of engaging in combat. So you could have a

399
00:23:50,200 --> 00:23:54,879
Speaker 1: combat ready weaponized robotics platform. And that thought is really scary,

400
00:23:55,000 --> 00:23:59,440
Speaker 1: particularly because we know that computer vision isn't even close

401
00:23:59,480 --> 00:24:02,399
Speaker 1: to perfect. You know, we've seen so many stories of

402
00:24:02,440 --> 00:24:07,960
Speaker 1: computer systems misidentifying people or having a bias against specific

403
00:24:08,040 --> 00:24:12,320
Speaker 1: populations because the computer models themselves are faulty. We've seen

404
00:24:12,359 --> 00:24:15,919
Speaker 1: that over and over again. Now imagine such an imperfect

405
00:24:16,119 --> 00:24:20,560
Speaker 1: system armed with a gun, so that not only is

406
00:24:20,600 --> 00:24:25,400
Speaker 1: this a deadly weapon, it's one that could misidentify targets. Uh,

407
00:24:25,440 --> 00:24:27,719
Speaker 1: it could identify something as a target that's not a

408
00:24:27,720 --> 00:24:32,520
Speaker 1: target at all, and that leads to tragedy. Also, there's

409
00:24:32,560 --> 00:24:36,000
Speaker 1: a fear that if you have robot soldiers that is

410
00:24:36,040 --> 00:24:38,919
Speaker 1: what it really amounts to, that you would be less

411
00:24:40,440 --> 00:24:44,080
Speaker 1: reluctant to engage in combat because obviously you're not putting

412
00:24:44,160 --> 00:24:48,960
Speaker 1: people your people in harm's way, you're using equipment. So

413
00:24:49,119 --> 00:24:52,359
Speaker 1: there's a fear that this could lead to increased aggression

414
00:24:52,520 --> 00:24:57,520
Speaker 1: around the world. It's a very sobering idea. So these

415
00:24:57,560 --> 00:25:01,720
Speaker 1: companies stressed that their robotic platforms it have significant positive

416
00:25:01,840 --> 00:25:05,879
Speaker 1: use cases, like they could really help contribute to lots

417
00:25:05,880 --> 00:25:11,320
Speaker 1: of human endeavors. But if robotics companies agree to weaponize

418
00:25:11,640 --> 00:25:15,560
Speaker 1: their platforms, that will in turn undermine any efforts to

419
00:25:15,920 --> 00:25:19,960
Speaker 1: make robots for peaceful applications because it erodes trust and

420
00:25:20,000 --> 00:25:23,919
Speaker 1: it encourages fear. So people will be less likely to

421
00:25:24,000 --> 00:25:27,040
Speaker 1: invest in robotics companies that could be making stuff that

422
00:25:27,119 --> 00:25:32,560
Speaker 1: could really make positive changes in peaceful ways because there

423
00:25:32,560 --> 00:25:35,800
Speaker 1: are these other companies that are making kill bots. Essentially,

424
00:25:36,560 --> 00:25:39,480
Speaker 1: I'm really on the same page as these companies. I

425
00:25:39,520 --> 00:25:41,679
Speaker 1: think that this is the responsible thing to do. I

426
00:25:41,680 --> 00:25:44,199
Speaker 1: think it's the right thing to do. But whether we

427
00:25:44,280 --> 00:25:46,919
Speaker 1: see this spread throughout the entire robotics industry or not,

428
00:25:47,200 --> 00:25:51,600
Speaker 1: I just don't know. Russian speaking hackers have managed to

429
00:25:51,680 --> 00:25:55,119
Speaker 1: take down more than a dozen airport websites yesterday morning,

430
00:25:55,680 --> 00:25:59,560
Speaker 1: including the site for my home airport, Atlanta's Hertsfield Jackson

431
00:25:59,640 --> 00:26:03,560
Speaker 1: Internet National Airport. Now, the hackers appear to be aligned

432
00:26:03,880 --> 00:26:08,800
Speaker 1: with the Russian government, meaning their motivations appear to be

433
00:26:08,920 --> 00:26:13,480
Speaker 1: based off what the Russian government is doing, but it's

434
00:26:13,600 --> 00:26:16,040
Speaker 1: unknown whether or not they have any sort of state

435
00:26:16,200 --> 00:26:20,719
Speaker 1: sponsor relationship with the government, and maybe that they're acting

436
00:26:20,760 --> 00:26:25,040
Speaker 1: completely independently. In that case, they would be acting more

437
00:26:25,160 --> 00:26:28,480
Speaker 1: like anonymous does. It could be a loose group of

438
00:26:28,560 --> 00:26:31,600
Speaker 1: hackers that choose their own targets and they don't have

439
00:26:31,640 --> 00:26:35,600
Speaker 1: any actual connection with any authority, figure, or agency or

440
00:26:35,600 --> 00:26:38,600
Speaker 1: anything like that. So no one's going so far as

441
00:26:38,640 --> 00:26:43,320
Speaker 1: to say that Putin, for example, ordered hackers to take

442
00:26:43,320 --> 00:26:47,479
Speaker 1: down airport web pages, and I'm guessing that that's not

443
00:26:47,520 --> 00:26:49,600
Speaker 1: the case. I don't think Putin would have done that

444
00:26:49,800 --> 00:26:54,240
Speaker 1: simply because it's not an effective way to really disrupt things.

445
00:26:54,280 --> 00:26:58,720
Speaker 1: In fact, the airport websites that were affected had no

446
00:26:58,800 --> 00:27:03,160
Speaker 1: impact on actual travel whatsoever. Which isn't a surprise. I mean,

447
00:27:03,200 --> 00:27:06,400
Speaker 1: I don't think I have ever pulled up the Atlanta

448
00:27:06,440 --> 00:27:11,520
Speaker 1: Airports website. Instead, I rely upon whichever air carrier i'm using.

449
00:27:12,080 --> 00:27:14,920
Speaker 1: I use their web page or their app. I don't

450
00:27:14,960 --> 00:27:18,399
Speaker 1: go to the airport's web page itself. So this sounds

451
00:27:18,440 --> 00:27:21,919
Speaker 1: like it was, you know, barely an inconvenience in some ways.

452
00:27:22,800 --> 00:27:25,520
Speaker 1: Many of the sites were back up by late mornings.

453
00:27:25,600 --> 00:27:27,959
Speaker 1: That really shows that it wasn't a very effective attack.

454
00:27:28,600 --> 00:27:31,679
Speaker 1: It's just a temporary disruption. The hackers reportedly used a

455
00:27:31,800 --> 00:27:35,760
Speaker 1: di DOS, or distributed denial of service attack on these sites.

456
00:27:36,560 --> 00:27:39,840
Speaker 1: Those tend to be fairly superficial sorts of attacks that

457
00:27:39,920 --> 00:27:44,639
Speaker 1: can be effective, um, particularly if you have your website

458
00:27:44,640 --> 00:27:47,480
Speaker 1: hosted on a service that doesn't have good di DOS

459
00:27:47,520 --> 00:27:51,640
Speaker 1: protection on it. But it's it's a temporary effect. It's

460
00:27:51,680 --> 00:27:57,040
Speaker 1: not like something more insidious like breaching a system. It's

461
00:27:57,119 --> 00:28:00,560
Speaker 1: nothing like that. It's just really shutting down on traffic

462
00:28:00,560 --> 00:28:03,840
Speaker 1: to that website temporarily. So I'll be chatting more about

463
00:28:03,920 --> 00:28:06,880
Speaker 1: de DOS attacks a little bit later this week. That's

464
00:28:07,240 --> 00:28:10,040
Speaker 1: a preview. I've talked about them before, but I have

465
00:28:10,040 --> 00:28:13,199
Speaker 1: an idea for a themed set of episodes, so that

466
00:28:13,240 --> 00:28:16,000
Speaker 1: will be coming a little bit later. Also coming later

467
00:28:16,320 --> 00:28:19,080
Speaker 1: will be another couple of news stories, but before we

468
00:28:19,119 --> 00:28:31,600
Speaker 1: get to that, let's take another quick break. Delta Airlines

469
00:28:31,640 --> 00:28:36,119
Speaker 1: has pledged to invest sixty million dollars in startup job

470
00:28:36,080 --> 00:28:40,360
Speaker 1: By Aviation, which is in the electric air taxi business.

471
00:28:40,680 --> 00:28:43,280
Speaker 1: That's going a pretty far away. It's not really a

472
00:28:43,320 --> 00:28:47,160
Speaker 1: business yet, but that's what they're developing. Is is electric

473
00:28:47,680 --> 00:28:52,400
Speaker 1: air taxis. Delta also said that should the project hit

474
00:28:52,480 --> 00:28:56,120
Speaker 1: certain milestones uh in in a certain amount of time,

475
00:28:56,640 --> 00:28:59,680
Speaker 1: the company might up that investment as high as two

476
00:28:59,760 --> 00:29:04,720
Speaker 1: hund million dollars. Job has created an electric vehicle takeoff

477
00:29:04,840 --> 00:29:08,720
Speaker 1: and landing vehicles that this v tall vehicles v t

478
00:29:08,840 --> 00:29:12,240
Speaker 1: o L or e v O t L in this case,

479
00:29:12,240 --> 00:29:16,920
Speaker 1: because they are electric. They look like really large drones,

480
00:29:17,360 --> 00:29:20,520
Speaker 1: like like kind of like quad copter drones, but they're

481
00:29:20,560 --> 00:29:23,640
Speaker 1: big enough to hold people and luggage in them. The

482
00:29:23,720 --> 00:29:27,520
Speaker 1: model mentioned in Andrew Jay Hawkins article about this, which

483
00:29:27,560 --> 00:29:30,560
Speaker 1: was published on The Verge can hold up to five

484
00:29:30,680 --> 00:29:33,400
Speaker 1: people and the idea is to create a home to

485
00:29:33,520 --> 00:29:38,680
Speaker 1: airports service. But I maintain that's actually a misleading phrase

486
00:29:38,760 --> 00:29:42,360
Speaker 1: because these e v O t L vehicles are gonna

487
00:29:42,400 --> 00:29:44,520
Speaker 1: need a lot of clear space in order to land

488
00:29:44,520 --> 00:29:46,400
Speaker 1: and take off from them. I mean they're still gonna

489
00:29:46,400 --> 00:29:49,320
Speaker 1: be able to do this vertically, so not as much

490
00:29:49,360 --> 00:29:52,240
Speaker 1: space as like an airplane would need, but essentially the

491
00:29:52,280 --> 00:29:55,360
Speaker 1: same kind of space that a helicopter would need in

492
00:29:55,480 --> 00:29:57,840
Speaker 1: order to land and take off. So you know they're

493
00:29:57,840 --> 00:30:03,000
Speaker 1: gonna need what what folks are calling to ports, these uh,

494
00:30:03,160 --> 00:30:06,400
Speaker 1: these these small cleared areas where these vehicles can operate,

495
00:30:06,640 --> 00:30:11,200
Speaker 1: very similar to helicopter takeoff pads. Right, it's gonna be

496
00:30:11,280 --> 00:30:12,560
Speaker 1: the same sort of thing as that. It might be

497
00:30:12,600 --> 00:30:15,240
Speaker 1: on the top of the building, it might be in

498
00:30:15,480 --> 00:30:19,160
Speaker 1: an otherwise cleared area, but it can't just be anywhere.

499
00:30:19,240 --> 00:30:21,400
Speaker 1: You're not going to see one of these things pull

500
00:30:21,520 --> 00:30:23,600
Speaker 1: up right outside your home. So it's not like you

501
00:30:23,640 --> 00:30:26,160
Speaker 1: step out the front door, walk down the driveway and

502
00:30:26,280 --> 00:30:29,320
Speaker 1: jump into one of these flying air taxis. That's not

503
00:30:29,400 --> 00:30:32,240
Speaker 1: how it's gonna work. Instead, you're gonna have to head

504
00:30:32,240 --> 00:30:36,240
Speaker 1: to the nearest vertiport two catch your ride to the airport.

505
00:30:36,960 --> 00:30:41,080
Speaker 1: So I think calling it home to airport is misleading.

506
00:30:41,400 --> 00:30:43,720
Speaker 1: I just don't think that's a good way of describing this,

507
00:30:43,960 --> 00:30:45,960
Speaker 1: because you do still have to go somewhere else, and

508
00:30:46,000 --> 00:30:50,479
Speaker 1: depending upon the distribution of vertiports, it might not really

509
00:30:50,840 --> 00:30:53,920
Speaker 1: be that effective of a way to reduce the amount

510
00:30:53,920 --> 00:30:56,760
Speaker 1: of time it takes for you to get to an airport.

511
00:30:57,320 --> 00:30:59,560
Speaker 1: Maybe it will. Also, we don't know how much it's

512
00:30:59,560 --> 00:31:02,600
Speaker 1: gonna cost, We don't know where it's going to be available,

513
00:31:02,720 --> 00:31:05,080
Speaker 1: though Los Angeles and New York are likely to be

514
00:31:05,160 --> 00:31:08,680
Speaker 1: the first cities to use these kind of things. Moreover

515
00:31:08,720 --> 00:31:11,520
Speaker 1: than that, you know, we've we've got that sort of

516
00:31:12,000 --> 00:31:14,680
Speaker 1: element that we have to factor with. But one that's

517
00:31:14,720 --> 00:31:21,040
Speaker 1: even more important is that federal agencies have to create

518
00:31:21,080 --> 00:31:25,640
Speaker 1: certifications and approval processes for these kinds of vehicles, and

519
00:31:25,640 --> 00:31:28,800
Speaker 1: that has not happened yet. Right You're not going to

520
00:31:28,920 --> 00:31:33,480
Speaker 1: have the f a A just allow unlicensed or uncertified

521
00:31:33,480 --> 00:31:38,200
Speaker 1: electric vehicles to fly through airspace. That's not going to happen.

522
00:31:38,720 --> 00:31:44,160
Speaker 1: And no company so far has had its its air

523
00:31:44,240 --> 00:31:49,040
Speaker 1: taxi kind of vehicle receive any kind of certification from

524
00:31:49,080 --> 00:31:53,000
Speaker 1: these agencies. So there's a lot of legal process to

525
00:31:53,040 --> 00:31:55,800
Speaker 1: get through. It's not just technical, although there are other

526
00:31:55,800 --> 00:31:58,680
Speaker 1: technical challenges to like how do you scale up production

527
00:31:59,000 --> 00:32:01,480
Speaker 1: so that you meet demand If it turns out there's

528
00:32:01,600 --> 00:32:04,680
Speaker 1: enough demand where this company is going to need to

529
00:32:05,160 --> 00:32:08,960
Speaker 1: mass produce these vehicles. How does it do that? It's

530
00:32:09,080 --> 00:32:12,480
Speaker 1: very different from producing a single one. So there are

531
00:32:12,480 --> 00:32:14,240
Speaker 1: a lot of unanswered questions, and there are a lot

532
00:32:14,240 --> 00:32:16,479
Speaker 1: of things that have to fall into place before we

533
00:32:16,560 --> 00:32:21,120
Speaker 1: ever see air taxis being used, um, you know, in

534
00:32:21,160 --> 00:32:26,400
Speaker 1: a in an official consumer way. So Delta is pledging

535
00:32:26,400 --> 00:32:30,320
Speaker 1: money into something that could eventually mature into a useful service.

536
00:32:30,640 --> 00:32:32,720
Speaker 1: But we're still a good ways out from that because

537
00:32:32,760 --> 00:32:34,720
Speaker 1: we have all these other steps that have to take

538
00:32:34,800 --> 00:32:40,480
Speaker 1: place first. CNBC reports that the Biden Labor Department has

539
00:32:40,560 --> 00:32:47,520
Speaker 1: released a proposal today that could require regulators and courts

540
00:32:47,560 --> 00:32:54,640
Speaker 1: to reclassify gig workers as employees. Right now, the going

541
00:32:54,760 --> 00:32:57,600
Speaker 1: standard in the United States is to classify folks who

542
00:32:57,600 --> 00:33:02,200
Speaker 1: work in the gig economy as independent contractors, and that

543
00:33:02,280 --> 00:33:05,480
Speaker 1: has pros and cons. On the workers side, one of

544
00:33:05,480 --> 00:33:08,880
Speaker 1: the pros is that independent contractors have a lot more

545
00:33:08,960 --> 00:33:12,520
Speaker 1: freedom to define their own hours, so they can hop

546
00:33:12,520 --> 00:33:16,840
Speaker 1: on and hop off of work at a very flexibly

547
00:33:16,880 --> 00:33:20,840
Speaker 1: at their own schedule. But on the flip side, employers

548
00:33:21,000 --> 00:33:24,640
Speaker 1: can treat independent contractors very different from employees. They don't

549
00:33:24,680 --> 00:33:31,000
Speaker 1: have to, for example, provide health benefits too independent contractors.

550
00:33:31,120 --> 00:33:35,400
Speaker 1: So that's one of the big downsides for people who

551
00:33:35,400 --> 00:33:39,000
Speaker 1: work in the gig economy. They can be heavily exploited

552
00:33:39,440 --> 00:33:42,520
Speaker 1: and receive very little protection in return. They might not

553
00:33:42,600 --> 00:33:46,280
Speaker 1: get overtime pay, they might not be allowed to form

554
00:33:46,320 --> 00:33:49,040
Speaker 1: a union. There are a lot of downsides from the

555
00:33:49,080 --> 00:33:53,320
Speaker 1: employee side. So there's a possibility that in the future

556
00:33:53,320 --> 00:33:57,880
Speaker 1: will see UH a federal level rule put into place

557
00:33:58,600 --> 00:34:03,480
Speaker 1: where companies like door Dash and lift and Uber will

558
00:34:03,520 --> 00:34:09,680
Speaker 1: not be able to classify their workers as independent contractors.

559
00:34:09,719 --> 00:34:12,400
Speaker 1: They'll have to treat them as employees. That would be

560
00:34:12,440 --> 00:34:16,759
Speaker 1: a massive change to their business model. UH. It would

561
00:34:17,000 --> 00:34:19,879
Speaker 1: likely mean we'd see prices go up for a lot

562
00:34:19,920 --> 00:34:23,480
Speaker 1: of these services because the company's gonna pass that that

563
00:34:23,640 --> 00:34:27,840
Speaker 1: cost on to us the end consumer. And honestly, we

564
00:34:27,880 --> 00:34:30,240
Speaker 1: don't know how many of these would even just fold

565
00:34:30,320 --> 00:34:32,879
Speaker 1: up and go away as opposed to trying to work

566
00:34:32,920 --> 00:34:37,080
Speaker 1: within that system. UM. I think, ultimately, from a personal

567
00:34:37,160 --> 00:34:40,799
Speaker 1: opinion standpoint, this is a good move. I really want

568
00:34:40,800 --> 00:34:42,719
Speaker 1: to I always want to see more protections for the

569
00:34:42,760 --> 00:34:46,200
Speaker 1: people who are doing the work. I'm not as concerned

570
00:34:46,239 --> 00:34:48,600
Speaker 1: for the people at the top who are benefiting from

571
00:34:48,640 --> 00:34:53,880
Speaker 1: the exploitation of their workforce, not really losing sleep about

572
00:34:54,160 --> 00:34:57,520
Speaker 1: their how much take home bay they get. At the

573
00:34:57,600 --> 00:34:59,239
Speaker 1: end of the day, I really worry more about the

574
00:34:59,239 --> 00:35:03,480
Speaker 1: people who are actually doing all the labor. So I

575
00:35:03,600 --> 00:35:07,080
Speaker 1: just don't know what happens if this rule goes into place,

576
00:35:07,120 --> 00:35:11,520
Speaker 1: Like I don't know if those models hold up under

577
00:35:11,840 --> 00:35:14,839
Speaker 1: those sets of rules, or if we'll actually see them

578
00:35:14,840 --> 00:35:17,320
Speaker 1: all kind of collapse in on themselves because the only

579
00:35:17,360 --> 00:35:22,320
Speaker 1: way they can exist as a business is through being

580
00:35:22,360 --> 00:35:26,160
Speaker 1: able to exploit the labor force the way it does. UH.

581
00:35:26,239 --> 00:35:28,360
Speaker 1: If it turns out that's the way, I would argue

582
00:35:28,480 --> 00:35:31,080
Speaker 1: that says that business is not a great one for

583
00:35:31,200 --> 00:35:34,759
Speaker 1: us to support, because we shouldn't be exploiting people to

584
00:35:34,840 --> 00:35:37,560
Speaker 1: that level. But I'm also in a position of privilege

585
00:35:37,560 --> 00:35:40,840
Speaker 1: and I understand that, so you know, I'm not suggesting

586
00:35:40,840 --> 00:35:42,759
Speaker 1: that my point of view is the right one or

587
00:35:42,800 --> 00:35:45,200
Speaker 1: the only one or anything like that. It's just kind

588
00:35:45,200 --> 00:35:48,360
Speaker 1: of how I come at things anyway. These are just

589
00:35:48,440 --> 00:35:52,839
Speaker 1: proposed sets of rules. Nothing has been enacted, nothing has

590
00:35:52,840 --> 00:35:56,239
Speaker 1: been voted on, UH, and it may never come to that.

591
00:35:56,640 --> 00:36:01,280
Speaker 1: But it is interesting that we're seeing movement on that front. Finally,

592
00:36:01,360 --> 00:36:07,240
Speaker 1: I wanted to mention that artist Ashley Zelinski has created

593
00:36:07,440 --> 00:36:11,799
Speaker 1: a gallery of art that is based on and inspired

594
00:36:11,840 --> 00:36:16,479
Speaker 1: by images taken by the James web Space Telescope. These

595
00:36:16,520 --> 00:36:23,080
Speaker 1: include three dimensional physical sculptures, includes things like lasers that

596
00:36:23,160 --> 00:36:28,320
Speaker 1: create different images within a foggy environment, and some exhibits

597
00:36:28,360 --> 00:36:32,759
Speaker 1: that require visitors to to don a virtual reality headset

598
00:36:33,280 --> 00:36:37,479
Speaker 1: in order to see virtual uh exhibits, all of which

599
00:36:37,520 --> 00:36:40,760
Speaker 1: are again inspired by these images created by the James

600
00:36:40,760 --> 00:36:45,319
Speaker 1: Webb Space Telescope. And I just think that's really interesting idea. Uh.

601
00:36:45,560 --> 00:36:49,520
Speaker 1: I think that that creates this super cool experience too

602
00:36:50,520 --> 00:36:55,520
Speaker 1: kind of encounter the scientific data, but in a completely

603
00:36:55,560 --> 00:36:58,960
Speaker 1: different context. Right, You're not looking at it as just

604
00:36:59,040 --> 00:37:02,720
Speaker 1: a flat image. You're not looking at it as numbers

605
00:37:02,719 --> 00:37:05,600
Speaker 1: on a chart, you're not looking at it as statistics.

606
00:37:05,640 --> 00:37:09,920
Speaker 1: You're looking at it as an interpretation of that data.

607
00:37:10,120 --> 00:37:15,319
Speaker 1: And I think that's a super cool idea. It's in

608
00:37:15,400 --> 00:37:20,040
Speaker 1: New York City's O n X Studio, and so I'm

609
00:37:20,160 --> 00:37:22,239
Speaker 1: I have not seen it. I don't live in New York,

610
00:37:22,280 --> 00:37:24,960
Speaker 1: so I'm not It's not convenient to me, but I

611
00:37:25,000 --> 00:37:27,440
Speaker 1: would love to visit it because it just sounds like

612
00:37:27,480 --> 00:37:33,319
Speaker 1: such a interesting approach to taking something that is more

613
00:37:33,360 --> 00:37:37,920
Speaker 1: abstract and not as accessible for most of us and

614
00:37:37,960 --> 00:37:41,560
Speaker 1: turning it into something that could have potentially a really

615
00:37:41,600 --> 00:37:45,840
Speaker 1: emotional impact on you. Um. I just love these ideas

616
00:37:45,920 --> 00:37:51,040
Speaker 1: of artists taking inspiration from the scientific endeavors. Of course,

617
00:37:51,040 --> 00:37:52,880
Speaker 1: I say that because I have a tattoo on my

618
00:37:52,920 --> 00:37:55,880
Speaker 1: back that was part of an art project for NASA,

619
00:37:56,040 --> 00:38:00,080
Speaker 1: so so I i I am a canvas for that

620
00:38:00,239 --> 00:38:03,400
Speaker 1: kind of an art project. In fact, we shot a

621
00:38:03,520 --> 00:38:06,600
Speaker 1: video of Forward Thinking where I was getting this hattoo

622
00:38:07,120 --> 00:38:11,719
Speaker 1: as I was delivering the the episode on camera. So

623
00:38:12,400 --> 00:38:14,359
Speaker 1: that's an experience I never thought I would have when

624
00:38:14,360 --> 00:38:16,759
Speaker 1: I was a kid, but I got it, so that

625
00:38:16,840 --> 00:38:19,799
Speaker 1: was kind of cool. Anyway, I just thought that it

626
00:38:19,920 --> 00:38:22,879
Speaker 1: was an interesting concept. If you are in New York

627
00:38:22,920 --> 00:38:24,800
Speaker 1: City and you can go to O n X Studio

628
00:38:24,880 --> 00:38:27,479
Speaker 1: and check this out, let me know what you think,

629
00:38:27,600 --> 00:38:30,680
Speaker 1: because I'm curious. I would love it to be like

630
00:38:30,719 --> 00:38:36,080
Speaker 1: a really awesome, impactful experience. Obviously, with art such a

631
00:38:36,120 --> 00:38:39,520
Speaker 1: personal thing, one person might walk out saying my life

632
00:38:39,520 --> 00:38:42,120
Speaker 1: has been changed forever, and the other person could walk

633
00:38:42,160 --> 00:38:45,000
Speaker 1: out saying I could have done something else with those

634
00:38:45,040 --> 00:38:48,760
Speaker 1: two hours of my time. It's very individual in that way,

635
00:38:49,000 --> 00:38:51,480
Speaker 1: but I am very curious about it. So that's how

636
00:38:51,520 --> 00:38:53,960
Speaker 1: I went in this episode, was talking about that. If

637
00:38:54,000 --> 00:38:56,200
Speaker 1: you have suggestions for topics I should cover in future

638
00:38:56,200 --> 00:38:58,920
Speaker 1: episodes of tech Stuff, reach out. You can download the

639
00:38:58,920 --> 00:39:01,800
Speaker 1: I Heart Radio app for navigate over to tech Stuff,

640
00:39:02,120 --> 00:39:04,520
Speaker 1: use that microphone icon, leave a voice message up to

641
00:39:04,560 --> 00:39:07,640
Speaker 1: thirty seconds in length, or reach out on Twitter. The

642
00:39:07,640 --> 00:39:10,640
Speaker 1: handle for the show is tech Stuff hs W and

643
00:39:10,719 --> 00:39:20,000
Speaker 1: I'll talk to you again, Release it y. Tech Stuff

644
00:39:20,080 --> 00:39:23,279
Speaker 1: is an I heart Radio production. For more podcasts from

645
00:39:23,280 --> 00:39:27,040
Speaker 1: I Heart Radio, visit the i Heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts,

646
00:39:27,160 --> 00:39:29,160
Speaker 1: or wherever you listen to your favorite shows