Speaker 1: Welcome to tech stuff a production from I Heart Radio.
Speaker 1: You see a sponsored post as your browsing Instagram, then
Speaker 1: you go to a shopping app to buy a product
Speaker 1: that you saw on Instagram. Well, you know that Facebook
Speaker 1: would love to know all about that. And so numerous
Speaker 1: app developers gather even more information about users than the
Speaker 1: users might be aware, because that information can include stuff
Speaker 1: outside of the developers own apps. What the A T
Speaker 1: T function does is give users a notification about how
Speaker 1: an app wants to access their data, including whether they
Speaker 1: want to collect data that is generated in between different apps,
Speaker 1: and it gives users the opportunity to opt out of that.
Speaker 1: And businesses like Facebook do not like this because they
Speaker 1: suspect and probably correct e, that most people are going
Speaker 1: to decline to share such data. That's not fair, yells Facebook,
Speaker 1: you're hurting small businesses. Ah yes, Facebook, champion of small business.
Speaker 1: All Right, I'm gonna drop the sarcasm and just say
Speaker 1: outright that if Facebook is upset about a feature that's
Speaker 1: meant to give users more transparency as to how their
Speaker 1: data is being collected and used, it's not because it
Speaker 1: will quote hurt small businesses end quote. It's because Facebook
Speaker 1: profits off of user data, and any restriction to access
Speaker 1: of user data represents a decrease in revenue for Facebook. Anyway,
Speaker 1: Apple isn't backing down, though. I will say a t
Speaker 1: T was ready months ago, but Apple actually held off
Speaker 1: implementing it in order to get developer feedback and build
Speaker 1: in some other options that would protect user data while
Speaker 1: still giving companies marketing data. I'm signing with Apple on
Speaker 1: this one, and that I think giving people the option
Speaker 1: to either be part of a data collection system or
Speaker 1: to be excluded from it, that's a good thing for
Speaker 1: the individual consumer. Not that I think Apple is necessarily
Speaker 1: being angelic here, that the company is taking a stance
Speaker 1: that I can agree with. It also seems to be
Speaker 1: in line with previous conversations Tim Cook and Mark Zuckerberg
Speaker 1: reportedly had with one another. Uh. There's a story that
Speaker 1: Zuckerberg asked Cook about his advice of what Zuckerberg should
Speaker 1: do in the wake of the Cambridge Analytica scandal over
Speaker 1: at Facebook, and Cook said that Facebook should just delete
Speaker 1: all user data that was generated by third parties, and
Speaker 1: Zuckerberg totally thought that was unreasonable. Um. Again, I side
Speaker 1: with Cook on this one, But then Apple's business is
Speaker 1: fundamentally different from Facebook's business. A Taiwanese publication claims that
Speaker 1: Apple is behind schedule with regard to testing out it's
Speaker 1: augmented reality glasses. According to reports, those glasses look a
Speaker 1: lot like you know, high end sunglasses, but with thicker
Speaker 1: frames to house all the electronics. The lenses themselves would
Speaker 1: act as displays and allow you to see augmented reality
Speaker 1: views of the world around you. If Apple can get
Speaker 1: this right, they could represent a truly revolutionary a R device.
Speaker 1: They could you know, step away from the dorky awkwardness
Speaker 1: of products like Google Glass. And I say that as
Speaker 1: someone who used to own a pair of Google Glass.
Speaker 1: The original schedule, according to these reports, would have had
Speaker 1: Apple in the second phase of testing at this point,
Speaker 1: but that appears to have not happened yet. I should
Speaker 1: add all of these reports are coming from non Apple sources,
Speaker 1: and the company itself has remained pretty quiet about this
Speaker 1: whole project. Apple would likely need to hold another phase
Speaker 1: of testing after the second one, before going through you know,
Speaker 1: more refined testing to tweak things and get it just right,
Speaker 1: and then move toward volume production to make them at scale.
Speaker 1: The original plan, according to these various third party sources.
Speaker 1: Was to get into volume production by the beginning of
Speaker 1: twenty twenty two, but now that might not be very likely.
Speaker 1: We might see Apple announced this project at some point
Speaker 1: this year, but we shouldn't expect to actually get our
Speaker 1: hands on a pair of these until mid twenty twenty
Speaker 1: two at the earliest, and it might be significantly later
Speaker 1: than that. Then again, it's always possible that these sources
Speaker 1: are off and maybe we'll get one more thing by
Speaker 1: the end of one That would be spectacular. I imagine
Speaker 1: these things are also going to be really expensive once
Speaker 1: they launch. And one bit of good news for Apple,
Speaker 1: the company has announced it will be opening up an
Speaker 1: East Coast campus in North Carolina within the raw A.
Speaker 1: Durham Research Triangle Park area. This is a part of
Speaker 1: North Carolina that has a very high density of tech
Speaker 1: companies doing some pretty amazing R and D in fields
Speaker 1: like qualtum computing, machine learning, artificial intelligence, and lots of
Speaker 1: stuff that requires people way smarter than I am. Apple
Speaker 1: says it's going to invest more than a billion dollars
Speaker 1: into creating this campus and that they will employ at
Speaker 1: least three thousand people there. That's a big office Anyway,
Speaker 1: I'm excited to see what sort of facility they create.
Speaker 1: Maybe I'll even be able to visit it one day.
Speaker 1: I mean, North Carolina is like next door to me,
Speaker 1: kind of switching from Apple to fellow goliath Google. There
Speaker 1: is a battle raging between Google and Roku, the company
Speaker 1: that makes online video streaming devices like the Roku stick.
Speaker 1: Roku sent a message out to customers on Monday saying
Speaker 1: that the live TV service part of YouTube TV might
Speaker 1: be shut down on Roku and possibly removed entirely. So
Speaker 1: why is that Moroku's saying we're not doing it? According
Speaker 1: to Roku, Google has been engaging in some anti competitive
Speaker 1: demands and that Google has been looking to implement practices
Speaker 1: that would quote manipulate your search results, impact the usage
Speaker 1: of your data, and ultimately cost you more end quote.
Speaker 1: A Roku rep also said Google might remove consumer access
Speaker 1: to YouTube TV on Roku because Google has been demanding
Speaker 1: these processes and Roku has been resisting those demands. It's
Speaker 1: all a bit vague, and as I record this, I
Speaker 1: don't have many more details. It sounds kind of like
Speaker 1: the next generation version of carriage disputes, and these are
Speaker 1: disagreements and negotiations that happened between platforms like a cable
Speaker 1: service provider and content providers like channels. So, like I said,
Speaker 1: you would occasionally see this with cable TV packages. If
Speaker 1: you've ever been a customer of a specific cable company
Speaker 1: and you wondered why a particular channel, or maybe even
Speaker 1: a group of channels just mysteriously vanished from your service,
Speaker 1: it's likely due to a carriage disagreement. We're seeing similar
Speaker 1: issues now in the world of streaming, but it obviously
Speaker 1: is taking a slightly different tack than the cable version
Speaker 1: and sticking with the online entertainment world. Engagement in that
Speaker 1: world is currency. Creators who can show that they get
Speaker 1: great engagement numbers, can secure sponsorships, and they can make
Speaker 1: lucrative deals. They can get contract work. Heck, drive enough
Speaker 1: engagement and you don't have to hustle. Instead, you have
Speaker 1: to manage the influx of collaboration and sponsorship requests, and
Speaker 1: you get to decide who you're going to work with
Speaker 1: and who you're not. But what happens if it turns
Speaker 1: out that those engagement numbers of yours are based on
Speaker 1: a lie, Well, that's not so good. And sure enough
Speaker 1: it is a problem. Just as people would pay money
Speaker 1: in order to get tons of followers on Twitter and
Speaker 1: raise their online social standing, there have been those who
Speaker 1: have been doing that on Twitch to boost viewer numbers,
Speaker 1: and recently Twitch struck back. The Amazon owned company has
Speaker 1: banned more than seven and a half million bot accounts
Speaker 1: that Twitch says we're contributing to fake engagement. In other words,
Speaker 1: these were bots that exist solely for the purpose of
Speaker 1: making Twitch streamers seem more popular than they really are.
Speaker 1: The accounts didn't belong to real people, according to Twitch,
Speaker 1: They're all just sort of empty shells. And now Twitch
Speaker 1: is using a machine learning process to discover fake accounts
Speaker 1: and then banned them, cutting way back on those fake
Speaker 1: engagement numbers. Now related to this issue are other issues
Speaker 1: where people have used fake accounts to harass streamers, not
Speaker 1: to boost their numbers, but to give them grief. They
Speaker 1: might direct accounts to join a particular person stream and
Speaker 1: then use those accounts to flood that streamer's chat with
Speaker 1: abut and those streamers who weren't trying to boost their
Speaker 1: own numbers, they had nothing, you know, connected to all
Speaker 1: those bots suddenly coming on. They might have their reputations
Speaker 1: tarnished in the process because their numbers take this huge
Speaker 1: jump that they can't easily explain. It makes them look
Speaker 1: like they were the ones trying to buy views. So
Speaker 1: from hustlers taking shortcuts to abusers leveraging tech to intimidate
Speaker 1: or harass other streamers, these boats are pretty lousy, and
Speaker 1: I'm glad Twitch is making moves to get them off
Speaker 1: the platform. Hey have you ever wanted to go to Mars?
Speaker 1: Are you just dying to go there? Well you might
Speaker 1: want to give Elon Musk a call. Then, the SpaceX
Speaker 1: founder said in an interview that people going to Mars
Speaker 1: might not come back alive and that quote a bunch
Speaker 1: of people will probably die in the beginning end quote.
Speaker 1: So if you're looking for a one way ticket now,
Speaker 1: I should say that. On the one hand, I credit
Speaker 1: Musk's blind honesty here. Space is incredibly dangerous. I have
Speaker 1: said many times that space is trying to kill you,
Speaker 1: and Mars isn't much friendlier. The planet's atmosphere is far
Speaker 1: too thin, with too little oxygen for people to breathe,
Speaker 1: so you would have to wear a space suit or
Speaker 1: otherwise be in a pressurized craft. The thin atmosphere coupled
Speaker 1: with a lack of magneto sphere, means that Mars offers
Speaker 1: no real protection against stuff like cosmic radiation, and exposure
Speaker 1: to cosmic radiation is not great. Most proposals I've seen
Speaker 1: for colonies on Mars include building structures underground to take
Speaker 1: advantage of the soil's protection. Cosmic radiation is not good
Speaker 1: at penetrating soil, so you know, put a meter or
Speaker 1: three of ground between you and the cosmos isn't a
Speaker 1: bad idea. We might be able to harvest water on
Speaker 1: Mars and thus be able to both supply water and
Speaker 1: potentially oxygen to people, as well as create rocket fuel,
Speaker 1: but there are unanswered questions as to whether we'd be
Speaker 1: able to actually grow anything in Martian soil yet. And
Speaker 1: the trip to Mars requires months of travel, and once
Speaker 1: you're there, you gotta wait around two years of Earth
Speaker 1: time before Earth and Mars are lined up so that
Speaker 1: you can make a trip back home. That also means
Speaker 1: you have to figure out how you're going to make
Speaker 1: that trip back home, so you have to use a
Speaker 1: spacecraft that can land and then take off again from Mars.
Speaker 1: You could presumably take stuff with you to make this easier.
Speaker 1: But obviously everything you end up taking is going to
Speaker 1: require a much larger effort back here on Earth and
Speaker 1: or descended to Mars in the first place. And all
Speaker 1: of this is really theoretical right now, Obviously we haven't
Speaker 1: sent anyone to Mars. But Musk is right, the project
Speaker 1: of going to Mars is incredibly dangerous with really high risks. Ideally,
Speaker 1: whomever undertakes this challenge will do so with enough support
Speaker 1: to stand a good chance of making it to Mars
Speaker 1: and back again alive. Like that. That is the goal, right,
Speaker 1: You shouldn't just dismiss it. So I don't disagree with
Speaker 1: Musk's assessment that it is incredibly dangerous. However, I do
Speaker 1: feel the way you phrased it seems to be dismissive
Speaker 1: of human life, which I do have a problem with.
Speaker 1: And you know what else, I have a problem with
Speaker 1: some mammals. You see, Residents of Tumbler Bridge, British Columbia,
Speaker 1: experienced a series of Internet outages early Saturday morning this
Speaker 1: past weekend, and the reason was pretty much exactly what
Speaker 1: you would expect. Beavers. Yep, it was a beaver problem,
Speaker 1: as some of those furry critters chewed through fiber cable
Speaker 1: at a couple of different points, severing the connection to
Speaker 1: the Internet at large. The cable had been buried three
Speaker 1: ft underground and it also was coated with a conduit
Speaker 1: that was four and a half inches thick to protect it.
Speaker 1: But that beaver, it didn't care and went to town
Speaker 1: on that cable. It dug it up and chewed through.
Speaker 1: It turns out the beaver was upset at how Bitcoin
Speaker 1: took a tumble last week. Just kidding, The beaver just
Speaker 1: didn't like the way the Falcon and the Winter Soldier ended,
Speaker 1: and it was very upset. It's gonna have to wait
Speaker 1: weeks for Loki to come out on Disney Plus. Now
Speaker 1: I'm still kidding. The beaver, as far as I know,
Speaker 1: has never actually been online, so this was not some
Speaker 1: form of, you know, technological commentary. It did, however, use
Speaker 1: some of the stuff it chewed through to be part
Speaker 1: of its dam, so it made better use of the
Speaker 1: Internet than a lot of us do. And finally, in
Speaker 1: our news that has no relevance to Jonathan whatsoever segment
Speaker 1: Amazon is opening up a quote high tech hair salon
Speaker 1: end quote in London. Now, I have not had to
Speaker 1: see a barber since nine that's the last time I
Speaker 1: had hair. So for all I know, hair salons now
Speaker 1: have robots and food and pill form and flying hairdressers.
Speaker 1: But according to the BBC, this high tech sal on
Speaker 1: will have magic mirrors. Okay, well they're not magic, but
Speaker 1: they are mirrors that incorporate augmented reality features in them
Speaker 1: that will allow customers to see how certain hairstyles and
Speaker 1: colors would look on them before they commit to anything.
Speaker 1: So they'll see their reflection in the mirror, but their
Speaker 1: hairstyle will be a digital overlay and they can figure
Speaker 1: out which one they prefer, So a customer could sit
Speaker 1: down in the chair and flip through different options on
Speaker 1: the mirror to find one that suits them. And I
Speaker 1: think that's pretty cool, and it would mean that people
Speaker 1: like me would avoid the embarrassment that comes with agreeing
Speaker 1: to a stylist feathering your hair when you don't happen
Speaker 1: to know what that actually means. And it was the
Speaker 1: eighties and shut up. The hair salon will also offer
Speaker 1: various beauty products, each one coupled with a QR code,
Speaker 1: so customers can just scan the code on their phones
Speaker 1: and then purchase those beauty products. Through trumpet Please Amazon,
Speaker 1: big surprise there. The whole thing is an experi perament
Speaker 1: that Amazon says isn't an indicator of the future. The
Speaker 1: company says it doesn't have plans to expand this further.
Speaker 1: There are other hairdressers in London who have already expressed
Speaker 1: criticism for Amazon's move, pointing out that the salon industry
Speaker 1: as a whole was hit really hard because of the pandemic,
Speaker 1: like lots of those places went out of business and
Speaker 1: had no way of coming back, and people lost their livelihoods.
Speaker 1: And meanwhile, Amazon has been breaking in enormous amounts of
Speaker 1: revenue all through the pandemic. It does feel a little
Speaker 1: bit like the big, mega corporation is making huge moves
Speaker 1: on smaller businesses. But you could also say that's Amazon's
Speaker 1: corporate history from the beginning when you really break it
Speaker 1: all down. And that wraps up the news for today, Tuesday,
Speaker 1: April twenty one. If you have suggestions for topics I
Speaker 1: should cover on tech Stuff, let me know over on Twitter.
Speaker 1: The handle there is text Stuff h s W and
Speaker 1: I'll talk to you again really soon. Text Stuff is
Speaker 1: an I Heart Radio production. For more podcasts from I
Speaker 1: Heart Radio, visit the I heart Radio app, Apple podcasts,
Speaker 1: or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.