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 --> 00:00:14,440 Speaker 1: Hey there, and welcome to tech stuff. I'm your host, 3 00:00:14,520 --> 00:00:17,600 Speaker 1: Jonathan Strickland. I'm an executive producer with I heart radio, 4 00:00:17,720 --> 00:00:20,200 Speaker 1: and how the Tech Are you? It's time for the 5 00:00:20,200 --> 00:00:26,960 Speaker 1: Tech News for Tuesday, September. Two. The epic battle between 6 00:00:27,000 --> 00:00:31,680 Speaker 1: Apple and epic Games continues, and now the U S 7 00:00:31,720 --> 00:00:34,480 Speaker 1: Department of Justice is waiting in all right, so let's 8 00:00:34,560 --> 00:00:38,199 Speaker 1: recap the story so far. Apple has a policy that 9 00:00:38,360 --> 00:00:42,720 Speaker 1: any APP that allows in APP purchases must use apple's 10 00:00:42,760 --> 00:00:45,879 Speaker 1: own payment system, and that means that apple gets a 11 00:00:46,000 --> 00:00:49,680 Speaker 1: slice of the PIE, which, ironically, is not apple pie, 12 00:00:49,720 --> 00:00:53,400 Speaker 1: but instead key line pie epic games. The producers of 13 00:00:53,479 --> 00:00:59,800 Speaker 1: fortnite sidestepped this process by suggesting two players on I 14 00:01:00,000 --> 00:01:03,040 Speaker 1: os devices that they use a little work around that 15 00:01:03,040 --> 00:01:06,120 Speaker 1: would allow the players to purchase credits directly from epic 16 00:01:06,200 --> 00:01:09,880 Speaker 1: games and outside the Apple System, and then use those 17 00:01:10,240 --> 00:01:14,920 Speaker 1: in the IOS game. That would give epic the entire Pie, 18 00:01:14,920 --> 00:01:20,880 Speaker 1: slice of key line. Apple responded swiftly by removing fortnite 19 00:01:20,959 --> 00:01:24,959 Speaker 1: from the APP store and prevented anyone from download to 20 00:01:24,959 --> 00:01:28,319 Speaker 1: get further, although folks who had already had it were 21 00:01:28,360 --> 00:01:31,920 Speaker 1: just fine, and it kind of escalated from there. What 22 00:01:32,080 --> 00:01:35,360 Speaker 1: followed was a lawsuit in which epic argued that Apple's 23 00:01:35,360 --> 00:01:40,240 Speaker 1: approaches anti competitive, that locking developers into this ecosystem was 24 00:01:40,360 --> 00:01:43,560 Speaker 1: inherently unfair. And this is something, by the way, that 25 00:01:43,600 --> 00:01:45,959 Speaker 1: we're seeing play out in courts all over the world 26 00:01:46,040 --> 00:01:49,040 Speaker 1: right now, with different people coming forward, to different companies 27 00:01:49,040 --> 00:01:53,040 Speaker 1: coming forward to say apple's approaches inherently unfair. Now, the 28 00:01:53,080 --> 00:01:56,800 Speaker 1: initial courts decision was a bit of a muddled affair. 29 00:01:57,200 --> 00:02:00,520 Speaker 1: Neither epic nor apple was entirely happy about it, so 30 00:02:00,600 --> 00:02:06,360 Speaker 1: both sides appealed the decision. Now, interestingly, apple one more 31 00:02:06,800 --> 00:02:10,160 Speaker 1: than it lost, because the court decided that apple doesn't 32 00:02:10,160 --> 00:02:13,320 Speaker 1: constitute a monopoly, at least not in this case, and 33 00:02:13,400 --> 00:02:16,120 Speaker 1: that's kind of understandable in the sense that fortnite can 34 00:02:16,120 --> 00:02:20,399 Speaker 1: be played on just about any platform, possibly even your refrigerators. 35 00:02:20,400 --> 00:02:23,040 Speaker 1: So it's hard to point at this and have a 36 00:02:23,080 --> 00:02:28,040 Speaker 1: court understand that this potentially constitutes anti competitive behavior. However, 37 00:02:28,960 --> 00:02:31,799 Speaker 1: the court did rule that apple cannot prevent APPs from 38 00:02:31,840 --> 00:02:36,240 Speaker 1: offering links to alternative payment systems in their APPs, and 39 00:02:36,320 --> 00:02:38,639 Speaker 1: apple really didn't like that. They don't want that to 40 00:02:38,680 --> 00:02:41,120 Speaker 1: happen because the company has really been transforming into more 41 00:02:41,160 --> 00:02:45,679 Speaker 1: of a services oriented company after being a hardware focused 42 00:02:45,720 --> 00:02:49,760 Speaker 1: company for decades. This brings us to what's going on now. 43 00:02:50,080 --> 00:02:53,400 Speaker 1: An appeals court is preparing to hear arguments from all 44 00:02:53,440 --> 00:02:58,200 Speaker 1: sides about the original decision, and the Department of Justice 45 00:02:58,320 --> 00:03:01,080 Speaker 1: and the State of California have both secured a little 46 00:03:01,120 --> 00:03:04,720 Speaker 1: bit of time to present some arguments to the court. Now, 47 00:03:04,720 --> 00:03:07,480 Speaker 1: the D O J is not allowed to take sides 48 00:03:07,840 --> 00:03:10,639 Speaker 1: per se, but the agency hopes to prove that the 49 00:03:10,680 --> 00:03:15,600 Speaker 1: lower court's decisions about apple not being a monopoly were 50 00:03:16,240 --> 00:03:20,119 Speaker 1: shortsighted that apple had in fact violated antitrust laws such 51 00:03:20,160 --> 00:03:23,360 Speaker 1: as the Sherman Act. The D O J says that 52 00:03:23,440 --> 00:03:27,440 Speaker 1: the lower courts interpretation sets a disastrous precedent that weakens 53 00:03:27,480 --> 00:03:31,600 Speaker 1: antitrust law, particularly in the digital landscape, and that this 54 00:03:31,680 --> 00:03:34,560 Speaker 1: needs to be corrected so that the US government has 55 00:03:34,600 --> 00:03:38,280 Speaker 1: the ability to enforce antitrust laws and prevent any company 56 00:03:38,720 --> 00:03:43,520 Speaker 1: from becoming an unimpeachable monopoly. Complicating matters is that the 57 00:03:43,600 --> 00:03:46,960 Speaker 1: D O J is ramping up its own antitrust lawsuit 58 00:03:47,000 --> 00:03:50,400 Speaker 1: against Apple, so it will be important for the lawyers 59 00:03:50,400 --> 00:03:52,120 Speaker 1: to present their case in a way that doesn't come 60 00:03:52,160 --> 00:03:55,680 Speaker 1: across as biased. The State of California, meanwhile, is going 61 00:03:55,720 --> 00:03:58,000 Speaker 1: to present arguments on how the court should treat the 62 00:03:58,040 --> 00:04:02,920 Speaker 1: state's Consumer Protection Law, called the unfair competition law, within 63 00:04:02,960 --> 00:04:07,240 Speaker 1: the context of this lawsuit. The Washington Post reports that 64 00:04:07,360 --> 00:04:10,960 Speaker 1: US Customs has been maintaining a database filled with travelers 65 00:04:11,000 --> 00:04:15,360 Speaker 1: electronic data, some of which dates back fifteen years now. 66 00:04:15,440 --> 00:04:18,839 Speaker 1: It has long been an issue that people entering the US, 67 00:04:18,880 --> 00:04:24,000 Speaker 1: including US citizens returning to America, have sometimes been prompted 68 00:04:24,240 --> 00:04:29,640 Speaker 1: to hand over customs access to their electronic devices. Now 69 00:04:29,760 --> 00:04:32,120 Speaker 1: U S courts have, for some reason deemed this as 70 00:04:32,160 --> 00:04:36,080 Speaker 1: being acceptable. Honestly, I think this very much ranks as 71 00:04:36,160 --> 00:04:39,800 Speaker 1: unreasonable search and seizure, which is something the constitution is 72 00:04:39,800 --> 00:04:43,760 Speaker 1: supposed to protect us against. Anyway, there's no legal reason 73 00:04:43,839 --> 00:04:46,800 Speaker 1: anyone should have to hand over their log and credentials 74 00:04:46,839 --> 00:04:50,600 Speaker 1: to their devices, and finding out that customs has been 75 00:04:50,680 --> 00:04:54,000 Speaker 1: downloading and storing this information for more than a decade 76 00:04:54,680 --> 00:04:57,880 Speaker 1: is a huge red flag. What's worse, the Post reports 77 00:04:57,920 --> 00:05:01,919 Speaker 1: that essentially any employee of the agency can access any 78 00:05:02,160 --> 00:05:05,599 Speaker 1: of that data. So imagine for a moment that you 79 00:05:05,680 --> 00:05:08,760 Speaker 1: are returning to the United States and that you are 80 00:05:08,800 --> 00:05:12,640 Speaker 1: coerced into handing your phone over to customs agents and 81 00:05:12,720 --> 00:05:15,920 Speaker 1: you are further prompted to unlock your phone and then 82 00:05:15,960 --> 00:05:19,360 Speaker 1: they download everything that's on your phone, all without due cause. 83 00:05:19,960 --> 00:05:22,720 Speaker 1: You haven't done anything wrong, or at the very least 84 00:05:22,760 --> 00:05:25,279 Speaker 1: you haven't done anything to warrant this kind of a search. 85 00:05:25,680 --> 00:05:28,200 Speaker 1: And now they have all of the Dat on your phone, 86 00:05:28,240 --> 00:05:31,400 Speaker 1: all your contacts, all your calendar appointments, all of your 87 00:05:31,440 --> 00:05:37,240 Speaker 1: location history, your browsing history, your photos, your documents, everything 88 00:05:37,279 --> 00:05:40,840 Speaker 1: that was on that device has been downloaded and anyone 89 00:05:41,320 --> 00:05:45,320 Speaker 1: within the agency has the capability of potentially accessing it. 90 00:05:46,120 --> 00:05:49,160 Speaker 1: That is unthinkable, right? I mean it doesn't take much 91 00:05:49,200 --> 00:05:52,919 Speaker 1: imagination to come up with dozens of terrible scenarios where 92 00:05:52,960 --> 00:05:56,960 Speaker 1: this could become a problem. Like blackmail alone is a 93 00:05:57,080 --> 00:06:02,280 Speaker 1: terrible possibility. More than that, other agencies like the FBI 94 00:06:02,480 --> 00:06:05,640 Speaker 1: can request and get access to this kind of database 95 00:06:05,680 --> 00:06:07,640 Speaker 1: and it starts to sound a lot like a dystopian 96 00:06:07,680 --> 00:06:12,040 Speaker 1: authoritarian state. U S Senator Ron Widen sent a letter 97 00:06:12,080 --> 00:06:15,200 Speaker 1: to the agency last week raising concerns about this practice 98 00:06:15,200 --> 00:06:18,400 Speaker 1: and saying it amounts to unfair search and seizure on 99 00:06:18,480 --> 00:06:22,159 Speaker 1: American citizens. Whether anything will actually be done about this 100 00:06:22,240 --> 00:06:26,400 Speaker 1: policy or if some court case finally escalates the issue 101 00:06:26,480 --> 00:06:30,000 Speaker 1: so that the Supreme Court weighs in, hopefully to curtail 102 00:06:30,080 --> 00:06:33,480 Speaker 1: the practices again. Seems like a pretty clear cut violation 103 00:06:33,520 --> 00:06:35,960 Speaker 1: of the fourth amendment to the Constitution. All of that 104 00:06:36,080 --> 00:06:38,880 Speaker 1: remains to be seen. A couple of weeks ago, I 105 00:06:38,880 --> 00:06:42,320 Speaker 1: talked about how twitter had cleaned house by deleting a 106 00:06:42,360 --> 00:06:46,440 Speaker 1: bunch of body accounts. They're all pushing propaganda, and while 107 00:06:46,520 --> 00:06:50,159 Speaker 1: that in itself isn't that unusual, in this particular case 108 00:06:50,560 --> 00:06:54,720 Speaker 1: the propaganda promoted the United States and its policies in 109 00:06:54,760 --> 00:06:58,360 Speaker 1: places like Russia and China. Now we often hear about 110 00:06:58,400 --> 00:07:02,760 Speaker 1: coordinating the campaigns meant spread misinformation within the United States, 111 00:07:03,160 --> 00:07:07,440 Speaker 1: and often these campaigns originate out of countries like China 112 00:07:07,480 --> 00:07:10,760 Speaker 1: and Russia, but it's kind of odd to hear about 113 00:07:10,880 --> 00:07:14,840 Speaker 1: the opposite. And now the Pentagon has ordered a review 114 00:07:14,920 --> 00:07:19,120 Speaker 1: of information warfare operations that rely upon social network platforms 115 00:07:19,160 --> 00:07:23,600 Speaker 1: like twitter and Meta across all military branches. So the 116 00:07:23,640 --> 00:07:26,440 Speaker 1: Under Secretary for policy at the Department of Defense, the 117 00:07:26,440 --> 00:07:29,840 Speaker 1: guy named Colin Call, has told all the branches of 118 00:07:29,840 --> 00:07:33,000 Speaker 1: the military that have these kind of operations that they 119 00:07:33,000 --> 00:07:36,760 Speaker 1: have to provide a full report on the scope, scale 120 00:07:36,840 --> 00:07:40,520 Speaker 1: and techniques of those programs by next month, at least 121 00:07:40,520 --> 00:07:43,720 Speaker 1: according to The Washington Post. I think the concern here 122 00:07:44,240 --> 00:07:46,680 Speaker 1: is that it's really bad optics for the US to 123 00:07:46,760 --> 00:07:50,560 Speaker 1: engage in similar tactics that Russia and China are using 124 00:07:51,080 --> 00:07:54,080 Speaker 1: while at the same time the US government has slammed 125 00:07:54,200 --> 00:07:57,080 Speaker 1: social networks for allowing these kind of things to proliferate 126 00:07:57,200 --> 00:08:00,240 Speaker 1: here in the United States. Ends up looking more than 127 00:08:00,280 --> 00:08:04,880 Speaker 1: a little bit hypocritical. Now, maybe the military opts relying 128 00:08:04,880 --> 00:08:07,760 Speaker 1: on these approaches would argue that the narrative they are 129 00:08:07,800 --> 00:08:12,480 Speaker 1: pushing isn't misinformation. Sure, it puts the US and its 130 00:08:12,520 --> 00:08:15,840 Speaker 1: policies in a positive light, but maybe they argued, this 131 00:08:15,920 --> 00:08:20,000 Speaker 1: isn't lying, it's just it's just giving part of the 132 00:08:20,040 --> 00:08:23,559 Speaker 1: story that they otherwise don't get. However, I suspect folks 133 00:08:23,560 --> 00:08:25,720 Speaker 1: in Russia and China would say pretty much the same 134 00:08:25,760 --> 00:08:28,760 Speaker 1: thing about what's going on here and anyway, it'll be 135 00:08:28,800 --> 00:08:31,880 Speaker 1: interesting to see what comes of this. Now propaganda has 136 00:08:31,920 --> 00:08:36,280 Speaker 1: long been a well used and reliable tool around the 137 00:08:36,320 --> 00:08:40,040 Speaker 1: world to spread specific messages and points of view, so 138 00:08:40,120 --> 00:08:42,280 Speaker 1: I wonder if we're going to see the government create 139 00:08:42,400 --> 00:08:45,600 Speaker 1: kind of a framework within which it might be okay 140 00:08:45,640 --> 00:08:49,280 Speaker 1: to use that capability within the digital world. If not, 141 00:08:50,360 --> 00:08:53,920 Speaker 1: one makes the digital world different from, say, dropping physical 142 00:08:54,040 --> 00:08:57,440 Speaker 1: pamphlets from an aircraft onto areas in an effort to 143 00:08:57,440 --> 00:09:00,520 Speaker 1: spread similar messages? That's something the United States has done 144 00:09:00,920 --> 00:09:06,840 Speaker 1: frequently throughout its history, sending messages to citizens in places 145 00:09:06,840 --> 00:09:09,880 Speaker 1: where they can't get access to information in other ways. 146 00:09:10,559 --> 00:09:14,120 Speaker 1: We've made use of those tactics in the past. So 147 00:09:14,559 --> 00:09:17,680 Speaker 1: it kind of raises the question if that sort of 148 00:09:17,720 --> 00:09:21,600 Speaker 1: thing is wrong in the digital space, why? Like, what 149 00:09:21,760 --> 00:09:25,000 Speaker 1: is it that makes it different? These are complicated questions 150 00:09:25,000 --> 00:09:26,960 Speaker 1: and I don't pretend to have the answers. I do 151 00:09:27,080 --> 00:09:31,720 Speaker 1: find it fascinating, however. Something else that is, I hesitate 152 00:09:31,760 --> 00:09:35,520 Speaker 1: to use Laura, fascinating but certainly captivating, is an article 153 00:09:35,720 --> 00:09:39,040 Speaker 1: that I read in Rolling Stone magazine. It is titled 154 00:09:39,280 --> 00:09:43,800 Speaker 1: How many women were abused to make that Tesla, and 155 00:09:43,880 --> 00:09:48,040 Speaker 1: the article goes into detail about the work culture at Tesla, 156 00:09:48,120 --> 00:09:52,040 Speaker 1: the electric vehicle company, as well as Elon Musk's personal 157 00:09:52,120 --> 00:09:57,120 Speaker 1: history with, quote unquote, fratish behaviors from the article, and 158 00:09:57,160 --> 00:10:01,640 Speaker 1: also how seven women have brought lawsuits against Tesla alleging 159 00:10:01,760 --> 00:10:06,280 Speaker 1: sexual harassment the story even goes beyond Tesla and mentions 160 00:10:06,320 --> 00:10:10,959 Speaker 1: how spacex engineer Ashley Kozak wrote about similar issues over 161 00:10:11,000 --> 00:10:16,480 Speaker 1: at SPACEX, another Elon Musk company. I recommend this article. 162 00:10:16,960 --> 00:10:19,880 Speaker 1: I will warn you it has a lot of extremely 163 00:10:20,040 --> 00:10:24,239 Speaker 1: upsetting information and allegations in it, but if those allegations 164 00:10:24,240 --> 00:10:28,240 Speaker 1: are true, it really paints the corporate culture of Tesla 165 00:10:28,320 --> 00:10:32,400 Speaker 1: and other musk companies in a really terrible light, akin 166 00:10:32,520 --> 00:10:34,440 Speaker 1: to the kind of stories we heard coming out of 167 00:10:34,440 --> 00:10:38,160 Speaker 1: gaming companies like activision blizzard and before that UBI soft 168 00:10:38,440 --> 00:10:41,679 Speaker 1: and before that the stuff we heard coming out of Uber. 169 00:10:42,360 --> 00:10:45,400 Speaker 1: For many people out there, news that companies in the 170 00:10:45,440 --> 00:10:49,400 Speaker 1: tech sector have a particularly ugly problem with Misogyny and 171 00:10:49,400 --> 00:10:53,040 Speaker 1: sexual harassment is going to come as no surprise. Right 172 00:10:53,080 --> 00:10:55,559 Speaker 1: this is old news, in fact. I'm sure there are 173 00:10:55,640 --> 00:10:59,239 Speaker 1: listeners of this show who have either experienced or witnessed 174 00:10:59,360 --> 00:11:02,720 Speaker 1: something on those lines at companies in the tech sector. 175 00:11:03,160 --> 00:11:06,360 Speaker 1: But pieces like this indicate that companies really do need 176 00:11:06,400 --> 00:11:09,520 Speaker 1: to work harder at stamping out these kinds of culture 177 00:11:09,960 --> 00:11:13,360 Speaker 1: and that shareholders should demand more from the companies that 178 00:11:13,440 --> 00:11:16,840 Speaker 1: they invest in. I mean, it's a bad investment ultimately, 179 00:11:17,320 --> 00:11:21,600 Speaker 1: because sooner or later the cards come crashing down. You 180 00:11:21,600 --> 00:11:25,080 Speaker 1: would rather invest in a company that has a supportive 181 00:11:25,120 --> 00:11:28,240 Speaker 1: and healthy culture and not one that's predatory. I'm sure, 182 00:11:29,280 --> 00:11:31,520 Speaker 1: or at least I'm sure for listeners of this podcast. 183 00:11:31,520 --> 00:11:33,640 Speaker 1: They're probably people out there who really don't care as 184 00:11:33,679 --> 00:11:35,840 Speaker 1: long as they get a return on the investment, but 185 00:11:36,640 --> 00:11:39,520 Speaker 1: they wouldn't listen to this show. Right. Okay, we've got 186 00:11:39,559 --> 00:11:41,520 Speaker 1: some more news stories to get to. Before we get 187 00:11:41,559 --> 00:11:54,120 Speaker 1: to that, let's take a quick break. We're back over 188 00:11:54,160 --> 00:11:57,640 Speaker 1: in the European Union, courts upheld a ruling that says 189 00:11:57,679 --> 00:12:01,520 Speaker 1: Google must pay a truly annoyed or miss fine of 190 00:12:02,559 --> 00:12:07,760 Speaker 1: about four point one to billion dollars. Now, to be fair, 191 00:12:08,320 --> 00:12:12,600 Speaker 1: that's actually a reduction of the original find. The original 192 00:12:12,679 --> 00:12:15,920 Speaker 1: find from the first court case was closer to four 193 00:12:15,960 --> 00:12:21,320 Speaker 1: point three billion dollars. So Google got a deal, they 194 00:12:21,440 --> 00:12:23,880 Speaker 1: got a break. It's just four point one two billion. 195 00:12:24,400 --> 00:12:26,880 Speaker 1: Now all of this actually stems from a case that 196 00:12:26,960 --> 00:12:31,000 Speaker 1: was originally filed back in two thousand and fifteen, in 197 00:12:31,040 --> 00:12:34,360 Speaker 1: which the European Commission ruled that Google was engaged in 198 00:12:34,440 --> 00:12:40,000 Speaker 1: anti competitive practices with the android operating system, essentially saying 199 00:12:40,040 --> 00:12:44,400 Speaker 1: Google had actively taken advantage of its enormous installed base 200 00:12:44,520 --> 00:12:49,400 Speaker 1: in Europe. Something like of EU citizens have an android device, 201 00:12:50,080 --> 00:12:55,280 Speaker 1: and they forced every android device out there to have 202 00:12:55,360 --> 00:12:59,160 Speaker 1: apps like chrome and search pre installed on them, and 203 00:12:59,200 --> 00:13:03,920 Speaker 1: that this ended up giving Google and unfair advantage in 204 00:13:04,000 --> 00:13:10,400 Speaker 1: those areas, because competing search and browsers were, uh, not 205 00:13:10,640 --> 00:13:14,640 Speaker 1: pre installed. The original decision was handed down in two 206 00:13:14,679 --> 00:13:19,360 Speaker 1: thousand eighteen, so the case began in t the decision 207 00:13:19,400 --> 00:13:23,040 Speaker 1: in the fine came in because, you know, justice moved swiftly, 208 00:13:23,800 --> 00:13:26,400 Speaker 1: and yeah, that meant that the original case took like 209 00:13:26,440 --> 00:13:29,760 Speaker 1: three years to resolve, but Google then appealed the decision. 210 00:13:30,120 --> 00:13:32,960 Speaker 1: It took another four years for the appeal to work 211 00:13:33,000 --> 00:13:36,400 Speaker 1: its way through the system and for courts to find 212 00:13:36,440 --> 00:13:38,960 Speaker 1: that Google still guilty and still needs to pay a fine, 213 00:13:38,960 --> 00:13:41,320 Speaker 1: although it's slightly lower than what it was originally. And 214 00:13:41,320 --> 00:13:44,360 Speaker 1: that's where we are now. So does this mean that 215 00:13:44,400 --> 00:13:46,600 Speaker 1: Google is going to have to cough up more than 216 00:13:46,640 --> 00:13:52,960 Speaker 1: four billion bucks? Not necessarily. Google can appeal this decision 217 00:13:53,040 --> 00:13:55,480 Speaker 1: as well, which would push the matter up to the 218 00:13:55,559 --> 00:13:59,520 Speaker 1: highest court in the EU, where perhaps it could get 219 00:13:59,679 --> 00:14:03,040 Speaker 1: a front decision or maybe the fine would be further reduced. 220 00:14:03,120 --> 00:14:07,320 Speaker 1: Will have to wait and see. Mozilla, conducted a study 221 00:14:07,559 --> 00:14:10,720 Speaker 1: on Youtube and found that the platforms tools for telling 222 00:14:10,760 --> 00:14:14,160 Speaker 1: Youtube that you don't like a particular video or you 223 00:14:14,200 --> 00:14:18,040 Speaker 1: don't want to have similar content show up in your recommendations. 224 00:14:18,800 --> 00:14:21,840 Speaker 1: They don't work very well, those tools. And this is 225 00:14:21,880 --> 00:14:25,360 Speaker 1: interesting because I have noticed something similar in my own 226 00:14:25,480 --> 00:14:29,960 Speaker 1: use of Youtube, particularly recently. But you know, anecdotal evidence 227 00:14:30,080 --> 00:14:32,200 Speaker 1: isn't real evidence. So I never brought it up on 228 00:14:32,240 --> 00:14:35,440 Speaker 1: the show because I thought, well, this is just my experience. 229 00:14:35,480 --> 00:14:38,520 Speaker 1: What if it's an outlier? But in my case I 230 00:14:38,560 --> 00:14:41,480 Speaker 1: was watching a lot of video essays about different types 231 00:14:41,480 --> 00:14:44,840 Speaker 1: of things, including a ton about pop culture, and it 232 00:14:44,880 --> 00:14:47,800 Speaker 1: was really just, you know, critiques about different things like 233 00:14:47,880 --> 00:14:52,240 Speaker 1: movies or series, and really well thought out and well 234 00:14:52,320 --> 00:14:56,800 Speaker 1: researched arguments. But I noticed that some of the video 235 00:14:56,920 --> 00:15:00,960 Speaker 1: essays that were creeping into my recommendations weren't real video essays. 236 00:15:00,960 --> 00:15:04,480 Speaker 1: They were really just thinly veiled manifestos for right wing 237 00:15:04,600 --> 00:15:08,520 Speaker 1: talking points. Now, I am not a right wing person 238 00:15:08,800 --> 00:15:11,000 Speaker 1: by a long stretch. I'm sure this comes as no 239 00:15:11,160 --> 00:15:14,200 Speaker 1: surprise to anyone who's listening to me. This is not 240 00:15:14,280 --> 00:15:18,080 Speaker 1: me judging that point of view. Rather, it's just me 241 00:15:18,160 --> 00:15:22,840 Speaker 1: saying that's not my worldview or my philosophy, and in 242 00:15:22,880 --> 00:15:26,920 Speaker 1: most cases my opinions are almost the opposite of the 243 00:15:26,960 --> 00:15:29,880 Speaker 1: stuff that was showing up in these videos that were 244 00:15:29,960 --> 00:15:35,200 Speaker 1: posing as critiques on pop culture. So I started tagging 245 00:15:35,240 --> 00:15:38,240 Speaker 1: those videos as don't recommend this channel to me because 246 00:15:38,280 --> 00:15:41,760 Speaker 1: I didn't want to see them anymore. They weren't interesting 247 00:15:41,800 --> 00:15:44,080 Speaker 1: to me, I didn't agree with the point of view. 248 00:15:44,360 --> 00:15:47,880 Speaker 1: I just found them frustrating. But then I would get 249 00:15:47,920 --> 00:15:51,440 Speaker 1: nearly identical videos. Now it might be a different channel 250 00:15:51,560 --> 00:15:54,320 Speaker 1: and a different host, but the videos contained the same 251 00:15:54,360 --> 00:15:59,480 Speaker 1: talking points, the same tactics of presenting right wing ideology 252 00:15:59,600 --> 00:16:04,160 Speaker 1: discusised as a video essay on pop culture, and I 253 00:16:04,280 --> 00:16:07,640 Speaker 1: just felt like I was constantly trying to knock down 254 00:16:07,920 --> 00:16:11,280 Speaker 1: one recommendation and I would just get a different one 255 00:16:11,400 --> 00:16:14,080 Speaker 1: that was essentially the same thing the next day. Well, 256 00:16:14,080 --> 00:16:17,800 Speaker 1: according to Mozilla, my experience is by no means unique. 257 00:16:18,080 --> 00:16:21,520 Speaker 1: The organization used a tool to measure how effective youtube's 258 00:16:21,640 --> 00:16:26,200 Speaker 1: features are. The tool Mozilla used could track when viewers 259 00:16:26,240 --> 00:16:31,240 Speaker 1: were clicking on dislike, not interested, don't recommend channel and 260 00:16:31,280 --> 00:16:34,040 Speaker 1: remove from history to see how much of an effect 261 00:16:34,080 --> 00:16:38,400 Speaker 1: that had on the recommendations engine. Would it prevent similar 262 00:16:38,600 --> 00:16:41,760 Speaker 1: videos from popping up in the recommendations engine, or would 263 00:16:41,760 --> 00:16:46,400 Speaker 1: it not? And it found that hitting dislike would reduce 264 00:16:46,560 --> 00:16:51,040 Speaker 1: only twelve percent of bad recommendations in the future, meaning 265 00:16:51,600 --> 00:16:53,840 Speaker 1: that you would still get those kinds of videos. If 266 00:16:53,840 --> 00:16:56,800 Speaker 1: you clicked not interested, it was worse. It only prevented 267 00:16:56,840 --> 00:17:01,120 Speaker 1: eleven of similar material popping up and recommendations. If you 268 00:17:01,200 --> 00:17:04,119 Speaker 1: chose don't recommend channel, it was a little bit better, 269 00:17:04,200 --> 00:17:06,920 Speaker 1: but only up to forte so you're still less than 270 00:17:06,960 --> 00:17:11,119 Speaker 1: fifty of of reduction of those kinds of videos popping 271 00:17:11,160 --> 00:17:15,840 Speaker 1: up in your recommendations, and removing videos from history prevented 272 00:17:15,880 --> 00:17:19,520 Speaker 1: only of bad recommendations in the future. If you're wondering 273 00:17:19,560 --> 00:17:21,359 Speaker 1: how they came up with those numbers, they had a 274 00:17:21,400 --> 00:17:25,880 Speaker 1: control group that did not hit any of those dislike 275 00:17:25,960 --> 00:17:28,719 Speaker 1: features at all, and so what they were doing was 276 00:17:28,760 --> 00:17:31,760 Speaker 1: seeing how many similar videos were popping up in the 277 00:17:31,520 --> 00:17:36,160 Speaker 1: recommendations of someone who wasn't taking these measures versus people 278 00:17:36,240 --> 00:17:39,920 Speaker 1: who were, and that's how they got those reductions. Now, 279 00:17:39,960 --> 00:17:44,840 Speaker 1: Youtube reps say that the recommendation engine doesn't automatically prevent 280 00:17:45,040 --> 00:17:48,880 Speaker 1: all similar material from popping up, largely to avoid creating 281 00:17:48,960 --> 00:17:52,600 Speaker 1: echo chambers, and that makes sense. I can agree with that. Right, 282 00:17:53,000 --> 00:17:57,040 Speaker 1: you don't want tools to end up funneling people into 283 00:17:57,160 --> 00:18:01,360 Speaker 1: very narrow points of view and then attentially escalating that 284 00:18:01,480 --> 00:18:05,439 Speaker 1: and creating extremists. That makes sense, but at least in 285 00:18:05,480 --> 00:18:07,919 Speaker 1: my case, it wasn't like I was getting videos that 286 00:18:07,960 --> 00:18:11,840 Speaker 1: had well reasoned arguments made in good faith in an 287 00:18:11,920 --> 00:18:15,480 Speaker 1: attempt to convince me that the point of view represented 288 00:18:15,480 --> 00:18:18,480 Speaker 1: in the video was a valid one. Instead, I was 289 00:18:18,520 --> 00:18:23,360 Speaker 1: getting videos that were reinforcing concepts that I fundamentally disagree with, 290 00:18:23,800 --> 00:18:26,679 Speaker 1: and they weren't supporting those concepts. It's not like they 291 00:18:26,720 --> 00:18:30,600 Speaker 1: were creating an argument to support the ideology. It was 292 00:18:30,680 --> 00:18:35,199 Speaker 1: just a repetition of those talking points anyway. The study 293 00:18:35,359 --> 00:18:38,960 Speaker 1: seems to show that Youtube does not prioritize user feedback, 294 00:18:39,359 --> 00:18:43,160 Speaker 1: which could explain why some people have a frustrating experience 295 00:18:43,240 --> 00:18:47,800 Speaker 1: when they're on the platform, me included. Both Uber and 296 00:18:47,960 --> 00:18:52,400 Speaker 1: rock star have been hit by hackers, possibly the same one, 297 00:18:53,040 --> 00:18:56,719 Speaker 1: and in Uber's case, the company has issued multiple statements 298 00:18:56,800 --> 00:18:59,600 Speaker 1: in the wake of the attack. They said that the 299 00:18:59,640 --> 00:19:03,560 Speaker 1: attack gained access to Uber's systems by compromising an Uber 300 00:19:03,680 --> 00:19:09,959 Speaker 1: e x t contractors account. Uber was able to detect 301 00:19:10,040 --> 00:19:15,159 Speaker 1: this intrusion. That's being kind, because they left messages, but 302 00:19:15,359 --> 00:19:18,280 Speaker 1: uber responded by locking out the account and a few 303 00:19:18,280 --> 00:19:22,359 Speaker 1: other accounts that could have been compromised, but they didn't. 304 00:19:22,560 --> 00:19:24,920 Speaker 1: They weren't able to do this until after the attacker 305 00:19:24,960 --> 00:19:28,520 Speaker 1: had already gained access to numerous tools, which included them 306 00:19:28,720 --> 00:19:32,600 Speaker 1: gaining access to, and then posting within, the company's slack channel. 307 00:19:33,080 --> 00:19:35,560 Speaker 1: Hardly a low profile move. It's not the kind of 308 00:19:35,600 --> 00:19:38,840 Speaker 1: thing you do if you're trying to be super sneaky 309 00:19:39,000 --> 00:19:44,000 Speaker 1: and really embed yourself within a targets system. This is 310 00:19:44,040 --> 00:19:47,080 Speaker 1: something you do in order to make a point or 311 00:19:47,200 --> 00:19:51,760 Speaker 1: to needle a target or whatever. Now Uber is investigating 312 00:19:52,000 --> 00:19:55,720 Speaker 1: if there was any material impact to the company. So 313 00:19:55,760 --> 00:19:59,040 Speaker 1: they're looking into what, if any, information the attacker actually 314 00:19:59,080 --> 00:20:05,760 Speaker 1: accessed duringing this incident and maybe potentially downloaded. During the incident, 315 00:20:05,880 --> 00:20:09,439 Speaker 1: some of Uber's customer support features were disabled, but beyond that, 316 00:20:09,480 --> 00:20:14,960 Speaker 1: it sounds like the disruption wasn't that noticeable outside the company. Though, again, 317 00:20:15,520 --> 00:20:18,359 Speaker 1: until Uber has a better idea of what information the 318 00:20:18,400 --> 00:20:21,920 Speaker 1: attacker might have accessed and potentially copied, it's really hard 319 00:20:21,960 --> 00:20:25,919 Speaker 1: to judge how bad this attack was. I mean, the 320 00:20:25,960 --> 00:20:29,040 Speaker 1: attack itself was bad, because getting that level of access 321 00:20:29,160 --> 00:20:33,199 Speaker 1: is not great, but how damaging it was remains to 322 00:20:33,200 --> 00:20:35,960 Speaker 1: be seen. Uber is working with the Department of Justice 323 00:20:36,040 --> 00:20:39,840 Speaker 1: and the FBI in an investigation into this and, as 324 00:20:39,880 --> 00:20:42,600 Speaker 1: it stands, the chief suspect for the attack was the 325 00:20:42,640 --> 00:20:47,159 Speaker 1: hacking group lapsus L A. P S U dollar sign, 326 00:20:47,680 --> 00:20:50,880 Speaker 1: which has been on quite the run this year, having 327 00:20:51,000 --> 00:20:55,400 Speaker 1: been named responsible for hacks into companies like Cisco and 328 00:20:55,560 --> 00:20:59,520 Speaker 1: Microsoft and OCTA, among others. I mean these are companies 329 00:20:59,560 --> 00:21:04,960 Speaker 1: that are own for helping create a more secure environment 330 00:21:05,040 --> 00:21:08,280 Speaker 1: and they were targets of hacks by the same hacker group. 331 00:21:08,400 --> 00:21:12,679 Speaker 1: So yeah, they mean serious business. Okay, we've got a 332 00:21:12,720 --> 00:21:16,800 Speaker 1: few more news items to talk about, but before we 333 00:21:16,840 --> 00:21:28,920 Speaker 1: get into that, let's take one more quick break. All right, y'all, 334 00:21:28,920 --> 00:21:31,680 Speaker 1: by the time you hear this episode in video, will 335 00:21:31,720 --> 00:21:35,359 Speaker 1: have held an event to announce the next generation of 336 00:21:35,480 --> 00:21:40,000 Speaker 1: its gpus, or graphics processors. The code name for the 337 00:21:40,160 --> 00:21:45,000 Speaker 1: new processor architecture is love lace, which is after Ada lovelace, 338 00:21:45,080 --> 00:21:48,680 Speaker 1: the enchantress of numbers. So we expect that these new 339 00:21:48,720 --> 00:21:52,120 Speaker 1: processors are going to have a new kind of architecture 340 00:21:52,200 --> 00:21:55,480 Speaker 1: to make them more power efficient more powerful. That kind 341 00:21:55,480 --> 00:21:58,840 Speaker 1: of thing. Analysts expect that in video will announce a 342 00:21:58,920 --> 00:22:02,479 Speaker 1: new forty series of cards, like an r t x 343 00:22:02,560 --> 00:22:08,199 Speaker 1: forty eight. The current, you know, flagship gpus are the 344 00:22:08,480 --> 00:22:11,639 Speaker 1: R T X thirty eight and the thirty nine. So 345 00:22:11,680 --> 00:22:14,399 Speaker 1: we might be getting two different forty eighties and a 346 00:22:14,480 --> 00:22:18,239 Speaker 1: fort by by the rumor mill. By the time you 347 00:22:18,280 --> 00:22:21,399 Speaker 1: hear this, you'll know because the event will have happened. 348 00:22:21,400 --> 00:22:24,760 Speaker 1: You can just google it with ethereum. Shifting to proof 349 00:22:24,800 --> 00:22:29,240 Speaker 1: of steak and an increased availability for graphics cards in general. 350 00:22:30,160 --> 00:22:33,359 Speaker 1: Maybe this will mean that the most powerful cards in 351 00:22:33,480 --> 00:22:36,760 Speaker 1: the market will actually be something that gamers can more 352 00:22:36,840 --> 00:22:40,600 Speaker 1: easily get their hands on, if they have the cash. 353 00:22:40,960 --> 00:22:44,560 Speaker 1: That is. These cards frequently cost well over a thousand dollars. 354 00:22:44,960 --> 00:22:47,640 Speaker 1: Some of them creep up to around two thousand dollars. 355 00:22:47,640 --> 00:22:51,040 Speaker 1: So it's not the type of component for a budget Gamer, 356 00:22:51,080 --> 00:22:53,840 Speaker 1: because that's just the graphics card. That doesn't include any 357 00:22:53,880 --> 00:22:57,240 Speaker 1: of the rest of the computer. But maybe this will 358 00:22:57,280 --> 00:23:00,840 Speaker 1: also mean prices for the last generation of cards will 359 00:23:00,840 --> 00:23:02,560 Speaker 1: go down a little, because I would still love to 360 00:23:02,560 --> 00:23:05,920 Speaker 1: get my hands on a thirty eight. I. The computer 361 00:23:06,040 --> 00:23:08,520 Speaker 1: I use for gaming doesn't have anywhere close to the 362 00:23:08,960 --> 00:23:12,920 Speaker 1: of that thirty eight card. Anyway, I might do a 363 00:23:13,119 --> 00:23:16,920 Speaker 1: follow up on Thursday if the company reveals anything particularly 364 00:23:17,080 --> 00:23:22,120 Speaker 1: interesting the demand for university lester over in the UK 365 00:23:22,640 --> 00:23:25,840 Speaker 1: conducted a study in which researchers found that young children 366 00:23:26,200 --> 00:23:30,560 Speaker 1: are losing the equivalent of a full night's sleep each week. 367 00:23:31,040 --> 00:23:33,920 Speaker 1: So they're losing the equivalent of one night's sleep per 368 00:23:33,960 --> 00:23:37,280 Speaker 1: week because they're staying up to be on social media 369 00:23:37,440 --> 00:23:41,800 Speaker 1: on their various electronic devices. The study found that around 370 00:23:41,800 --> 00:23:45,199 Speaker 1: twelve point five of all ten year olds wake up 371 00:23:45,200 --> 00:23:48,360 Speaker 1: in the middle of the night in order to check notifications, 372 00:23:48,960 --> 00:23:51,000 Speaker 1: which is a big old yikes for me. You know, 373 00:23:51,080 --> 00:23:53,479 Speaker 1: one of the big reasons I got off social media 374 00:23:53,920 --> 00:23:57,520 Speaker 1: was because I found myself bowing to the whims of notifications, 375 00:23:58,160 --> 00:24:00,480 Speaker 1: and over the last couple of years I've really made 376 00:24:00,480 --> 00:24:03,200 Speaker 1: an effort to reduce the number of notifications I get, 377 00:24:03,640 --> 00:24:09,000 Speaker 1: whether it's personal or, much to my coworkers Chagrin, work related. 378 00:24:09,359 --> 00:24:11,760 Speaker 1: That's because I recognized that it was starting to harm 379 00:24:11,800 --> 00:24:14,879 Speaker 1: me to have notifications pop up all the time. It 380 00:24:14,920 --> 00:24:19,679 Speaker 1: was hurting my productivity, my creativity, my mental health. So 381 00:24:20,480 --> 00:24:23,560 Speaker 1: I made a real effort to reduce the notifications, which 382 00:24:23,600 --> 00:24:27,320 Speaker 1: means I'm a little more slow to respond to things 383 00:24:27,720 --> 00:24:31,720 Speaker 1: than some of my coworkers, but you know, it's better 384 00:24:31,800 --> 00:24:33,679 Speaker 1: to be a little slow rather than to just have 385 00:24:33,720 --> 00:24:36,879 Speaker 1: a complete mental breakdown and no longer be able to 386 00:24:36,920 --> 00:24:41,040 Speaker 1: respond at all. Now, young kids, they are not necessarily 387 00:24:41,080 --> 00:24:45,800 Speaker 1: going to be cognizant of the effects of these sort 388 00:24:45,840 --> 00:24:49,159 Speaker 1: of behaviors, of staying up and losing the equivalent of 389 00:24:49,240 --> 00:24:53,000 Speaker 1: a night's sleep each week. And younger children need more sleep. 390 00:24:53,240 --> 00:24:56,240 Speaker 1: They need it in order to recuperate. They need it 391 00:24:56,280 --> 00:24:59,080 Speaker 1: so that they can learn more effectively and grow in 392 00:24:59,080 --> 00:25:04,359 Speaker 1: a healthy way. So interrupting that process is not great. Now, 393 00:25:04,880 --> 00:25:08,960 Speaker 1: I am not a parent. It is not my business 394 00:25:09,000 --> 00:25:11,640 Speaker 1: to tell other people how to take care of their 395 00:25:11,720 --> 00:25:15,480 Speaker 1: kids because I don't have kids and uh, far be 396 00:25:15,600 --> 00:25:20,080 Speaker 1: it from me to give parenting advice. But maybe, if 397 00:25:20,119 --> 00:25:24,240 Speaker 1: you have kids, consider limiting screen time and maybe even 398 00:25:24,320 --> 00:25:28,040 Speaker 1: putting away devices at night so that those devices aren't 399 00:25:28,080 --> 00:25:32,199 Speaker 1: accessible until perhaps the next day. So just make that 400 00:25:32,240 --> 00:25:35,800 Speaker 1: a regular part of the routine. That's what I would suggest. 401 00:25:35,880 --> 00:25:39,159 Speaker 1: I realized that that may not be easy in a 402 00:25:39,200 --> 00:25:42,480 Speaker 1: lot of households, particularly if the kids are already accustomed 403 00:25:42,520 --> 00:25:46,160 Speaker 1: to always having their devices on them, but Um, yeah, 404 00:25:46,240 --> 00:25:47,920 Speaker 1: I mean, you know, you want your kid to grow 405 00:25:48,000 --> 00:25:50,840 Speaker 1: up healthy, so it's probably a good idea to to 406 00:25:50,960 --> 00:25:53,439 Speaker 1: limit that screen time. Probably a good idea for me 407 00:25:53,520 --> 00:25:55,359 Speaker 1: to do it to myself even more than I already have. 408 00:25:56,359 --> 00:25:59,200 Speaker 1: NASA will be testing the launch vehicle for the Artemis 409 00:25:59,320 --> 00:26:05,000 Speaker 1: one mission and tomorrow running a cryogenic demonstration. So in 410 00:26:05,040 --> 00:26:07,760 Speaker 1: this demonstration they aren't going to be firing up the engines, 411 00:26:07,960 --> 00:26:10,159 Speaker 1: there's not gonna be any sort of countdown or anything 412 00:26:10,200 --> 00:26:13,800 Speaker 1: like that. This test is to see if the team 413 00:26:13,840 --> 00:26:16,639 Speaker 1: has managed to fix the issues that led to a 414 00:26:16,720 --> 00:26:20,320 Speaker 1: hydrogen leak, which in turn forced NASA to delay the 415 00:26:20,400 --> 00:26:24,120 Speaker 1: launch earlier this month. So, as a reminder, the artemist 416 00:26:24,119 --> 00:26:27,760 Speaker 1: program is aimed at going back to the moon and 417 00:26:28,000 --> 00:26:32,120 Speaker 1: artemist one is to be an unscrewed mission, meaning there's 418 00:26:32,119 --> 00:26:35,040 Speaker 1: no crew aboard. I know when I say uncrewed it 419 00:26:35,080 --> 00:26:37,760 Speaker 1: sounds like I'm saying it's not a crude mission in 420 00:26:37,800 --> 00:26:41,200 Speaker 1: the sense of it's, you know, it's egalitarian and refined. 421 00:26:41,320 --> 00:26:43,560 Speaker 1: That's not what I mean, though. I'm sure everyone's on 422 00:26:43,600 --> 00:26:47,080 Speaker 1: their best behavior. But now, in this particular one, the 423 00:26:47,080 --> 00:26:51,159 Speaker 1: Orion capsule, which would normally hold astronauts, will instead be 424 00:26:51,240 --> 00:26:54,479 Speaker 1: carrying some mannequins as well as the snoopy doll, and 425 00:26:54,520 --> 00:26:57,479 Speaker 1: then it will fly off to do an orbit of 426 00:26:57,520 --> 00:27:00,200 Speaker 1: the moon before returning to Earth to touch down own 427 00:27:00,240 --> 00:27:03,719 Speaker 1: in the Pacific Ocean. But, as I mentioned, while the 428 00:27:03,720 --> 00:27:07,679 Speaker 1: original launch was planned for earlier this month, a hydrogen 429 00:27:07,800 --> 00:27:10,439 Speaker 1: leak to one of the four engines in the in 430 00:27:10,480 --> 00:27:13,760 Speaker 1: the launch vehicle, one of the fourth thrusters uh, forced 431 00:27:13,880 --> 00:27:17,800 Speaker 1: NASA to delay things. Engineers have since made repairs to 432 00:27:17,840 --> 00:27:20,520 Speaker 1: the system. They found a possible cause of the leak 433 00:27:20,840 --> 00:27:25,080 Speaker 1: as they discovered an indentation on part of the disconnect 434 00:27:25,160 --> 00:27:29,840 Speaker 1: line and they think maybe that was the problem and 435 00:27:29,880 --> 00:27:34,320 Speaker 1: they repaired that. So on Wednesday's test tomorrow, the launch 436 00:27:34,359 --> 00:27:38,120 Speaker 1: team will use a slower process to feed liquid hydrogen 437 00:27:38,200 --> 00:27:42,320 Speaker 1: to the engines to cool them down to operational levels, 438 00:27:42,359 --> 00:27:45,520 Speaker 1: and they'll do that in the hopes that this kinder, 439 00:27:45,600 --> 00:27:49,280 Speaker 1: gentler approach will let engines reach the proper temperature while 440 00:27:49,320 --> 00:27:52,440 Speaker 1: putting less strain on the system as a whole. If 441 00:27:52,440 --> 00:27:56,600 Speaker 1: that works out, NASA could plan a new artemis one 442 00:27:56,680 --> 00:28:00,920 Speaker 1: launch for as earliest September, with October second listed as 443 00:28:00,960 --> 00:28:04,359 Speaker 1: a backup date should whether or some other event delay things. 444 00:28:04,440 --> 00:28:08,800 Speaker 1: This is, of course, assuming that space force gives them 445 00:28:08,960 --> 00:28:10,679 Speaker 1: the go ahead to do this, because they do have 446 00:28:10,720 --> 00:28:15,520 Speaker 1: to get space forces permission to launch due to the 447 00:28:15,520 --> 00:28:18,120 Speaker 1: fact that this is out of the the original schedule, 448 00:28:18,440 --> 00:28:21,680 Speaker 1: but here's hoping it all works out. Finally, two years 449 00:28:21,680 --> 00:28:25,760 Speaker 1: ago the Chinese Lunar Exploration Program launched a spacecraft called 450 00:28:25,800 --> 00:28:33,640 Speaker 1: the Chong Five. The name Chang references a Chinese moon goddess, 451 00:28:33,840 --> 00:28:38,720 Speaker 1: and my apologies for my pronunciation, but that spacecraft included 452 00:28:38,800 --> 00:28:42,120 Speaker 1: an orbiter which would stay in lunar orbit around the Moon, 453 00:28:42,720 --> 00:28:46,400 Speaker 1: and it also had a lander that had a second 454 00:28:46,720 --> 00:28:50,560 Speaker 1: spacecraft called in a cinder connected to it. So this 455 00:28:50,720 --> 00:28:54,320 Speaker 1: disconnected from the orbiter. The lander then touched down on 456 00:28:54,360 --> 00:28:57,000 Speaker 1: the moon, with the ascender put perched on top of 457 00:28:57,040 --> 00:29:00,960 Speaker 1: the lander. The Lander collected samples from the Moon's surface 458 00:29:01,440 --> 00:29:06,240 Speaker 1: and then transported those samples to the ascender, which then 459 00:29:06,560 --> 00:29:10,360 Speaker 1: launched off the lander, blew up to meet the orbiter 460 00:29:10,440 --> 00:29:14,240 Speaker 1: and rendezvous with it. Transferred the sample to the orbiter 461 00:29:14,800 --> 00:29:19,880 Speaker 1: and then the ascender was de orbited it. It landed 462 00:29:19,920 --> 00:29:22,440 Speaker 1: back on the Moon's surface. It just said my job 463 00:29:22,560 --> 00:29:26,400 Speaker 1: is done and it detached, went back and landed on 464 00:29:26,400 --> 00:29:30,160 Speaker 1: the moon. The orbiter meanwhile left Lunar Orbit, returned to 465 00:29:30,200 --> 00:29:34,360 Speaker 1: Earth and brought the samples back. So China became the 466 00:29:34,480 --> 00:29:38,480 Speaker 1: third country in the world to retrieve samples from the 467 00:29:38,560 --> 00:29:42,400 Speaker 1: lunar surface, the first being America the second one being Russia. 468 00:29:42,560 --> 00:29:46,120 Speaker 1: Well now, two years later, Chinese scientists say that within 469 00:29:46,160 --> 00:29:50,840 Speaker 1: that sample was a very small crystal that contains helium three. 470 00:29:51,400 --> 00:29:55,440 Speaker 1: Now this is not totally unexpected, because scientists have long 471 00:29:55,520 --> 00:29:59,800 Speaker 1: hypothesized that there are large helium three deposits on the moon. 472 00:30:00,480 --> 00:30:03,560 Speaker 1: But you might wonder, well, why is this even important? Well, 473 00:30:03,640 --> 00:30:07,800 Speaker 1: helium three could potentially be the fuel used by future 474 00:30:07,960 --> 00:30:12,120 Speaker 1: fusion reactors. A huge advantage of helium three is that 475 00:30:12,200 --> 00:30:16,880 Speaker 1: the fusion process would not produce any radioactive particles, but 476 00:30:17,000 --> 00:30:22,680 Speaker 1: it would produce a lot of electricity energy. However, helium 477 00:30:22,800 --> 00:30:26,840 Speaker 1: three is pretty darn scarce here on earth, so it 478 00:30:26,880 --> 00:30:30,320 Speaker 1: could mean that the moon becomes a major source of 479 00:30:30,440 --> 00:30:33,520 Speaker 1: fuel for the future. All of that is still pretty 480 00:30:33,520 --> 00:30:38,640 Speaker 1: far off, because the tech for creating sustainable fusion reactions 481 00:30:39,040 --> 00:30:42,240 Speaker 1: remains elusive in general and for helium three in particular. 482 00:30:42,800 --> 00:30:46,320 Speaker 1: But if we were able to solve those issues, it 483 00:30:46,320 --> 00:30:50,080 Speaker 1: would mean that the moon would become a really valuable 484 00:30:50,760 --> 00:30:54,120 Speaker 1: resource for our energy needs here on earth. In fact, 485 00:30:54,120 --> 00:30:57,520 Speaker 1: it could become a battle ground as various nations try 486 00:30:57,560 --> 00:31:00,560 Speaker 1: to establish a presence on the moon for the purposes 487 00:31:00,600 --> 00:31:04,360 Speaker 1: of mining resources that could fuel stuff here on earth 488 00:31:04,440 --> 00:31:08,240 Speaker 1: or beyond. Sounds a lot like a hindland short story. 489 00:31:08,800 --> 00:31:13,040 Speaker 1: Those always turn out great. All right, that's the news 490 00:31:13,240 --> 00:31:18,120 Speaker 1: for Tuesday September two. Y'All, I should also report that 491 00:31:18,520 --> 00:31:22,640 Speaker 1: I will be on vacation next week and so I 492 00:31:22,680 --> 00:31:26,240 Speaker 1: will likely be putting up some reruns. Maybe I can 493 00:31:26,480 --> 00:31:28,800 Speaker 1: record a couple of updates if I have enough time 494 00:31:28,840 --> 00:31:31,760 Speaker 1: to do so, two older episodes. I'm going to do 495 00:31:31,800 --> 00:31:33,720 Speaker 1: a quick look and see if there are anything that 496 00:31:33,800 --> 00:31:36,560 Speaker 1: I can maybe do some short updates for and and 497 00:31:36,600 --> 00:31:39,880 Speaker 1: give you some new content. But yeah, I'll be gone 498 00:31:39,880 --> 00:31:43,080 Speaker 1: for a week and then I will return and I 499 00:31:43,120 --> 00:31:46,880 Speaker 1: will be re energized. Maybe it'll all depend on whether 500 00:31:47,160 --> 00:31:50,040 Speaker 1: we get hit by hurricanes while I'm on vacation. We'll see. 501 00:31:50,400 --> 00:31:52,840 Speaker 1: But if you have any suggestions to send me, then 502 00:31:53,000 --> 00:31:54,440 Speaker 1: there are a couple of ways of doing so. One 503 00:31:54,520 --> 00:31:56,640 Speaker 1: is to download the I heart radio APP, which is 504 00:31:56,680 --> 00:31:59,320 Speaker 1: free to download and use. You can navigate over to 505 00:31:59,360 --> 00:32:02,160 Speaker 1: the tech stuff part of the APP. There's a little 506 00:32:02,240 --> 00:32:05,200 Speaker 1: microphone that you can click and you can leave up 507 00:32:05,200 --> 00:32:08,800 Speaker 1: to thirty second message for me and let me know 508 00:32:08,840 --> 00:32:11,520 Speaker 1: what you would like to hear on future episodes. Or 509 00:32:11,600 --> 00:32:13,800 Speaker 1: you can reach out on twitter. The handle for the 510 00:32:13,800 --> 00:32:17,640 Speaker 1: show is tech stuff, H S W and I'll talk 511 00:32:17,680 --> 00:32:27,120 Speaker 1: to you again really soon. Yeah, tech stuff is an 512 00:32:27,120 --> 00:32:30,800 Speaker 1: I heart radio production. For more podcasts from my heart radio, 513 00:32:31,120 --> 00:32:34,320 Speaker 1: visit the I heart radio APP, apple podcasts or wherever 514 00:32:34,400 --> 00:32:35,920 Speaker 1: you listen to your favorite shows.