Speaker 1: Welcome to Tech Stuff, a production from iHeartRadio. Hey thereon
Speaker 1: Welcome to Tech Stuff. I'm your host, Jonathan Strickland. I'm
Speaker 1: an executive producer with iHeart Podcasts and How the Tech
Speaker 1: are You. It's time for the tech news for December nineteenth,
Speaker 1: twenty twenty three, and first up. Elon Musk has had
Speaker 1: a pretty rocky twenty twenty three in general, I think
Speaker 1: it's safe to say, and these last few months have
Speaker 1: been particularly challenging. I will add that in my own opinion,
Speaker 1: I feel like this is a rocky road that Elon
Speaker 1: Musk himself has paved. Anyway. The latest of those challenges
Speaker 1: is that the European Commission announced an investigation into x,
Speaker 1: the social platform formally known as Twitter. This has to
Speaker 1: do with the new Digital Services Act in the EU,
Speaker 1: which came into effect this past August. This law sets
Speaker 1: out rules regarding stuff like disinformation, transparent advertising, and illegal
Speaker 1: content on the Internet. So the goal was really to
Speaker 1: bring the member states of the EU, all of which
Speaker 1: have their own local sets of laws on these matters,
Speaker 1: closer into alignment to have a sort of universal set
Speaker 1: of rules for the whole of the EU. For my
Speaker 1: fellow American listeners think of it as the difference between, say,
Speaker 1: a federal law regarding a specific matter, and a state
Speaker 1: law similar to that. Anyway, the commissioners say that it
Speaker 1: appears X has not been compliant with this new law,
Speaker 1: and that the platform has failed to do any significant
Speaker 1: work to prevent or respond to illegal content and disinformation
Speaker 1: posted to it. In particular, the focus is on information
Speaker 1: in the wake of the conflict between Israel and Hamas.
Speaker 1: On top of that, the commission argues that X has
Speaker 1: made use of a quote suspected deceptive design of user
Speaker 1: interface in the quote, and you might think, well, what
Speaker 1: the heck do they mean by that? Well, Lisa O'Carroll
Speaker 1: of The Guardian has an explanation. It's due to how
Speaker 1: X markets and operates the blue check mark system. Now
Speaker 1: I'll remind you that back in the Twitter days, a
Speaker 1: blue check mark was a verification mark, right. It was
Speaker 1: meant to verify that an account belonged to the person
Speaker 1: it claimed to represent. So that way, if you saw
Speaker 1: a celebrities account and there was a blue check mark
Speaker 1: next to it, you could be assured that indeed the celebrity,
Speaker 1: or more likely the celebrities PR team owns that account,
Speaker 1: but now a blue check mark merely indicates someone who
Speaker 1: has paid to have the blue check mark, which comes
Speaker 1: with a few little actual benefits in addition to having
Speaker 1: the blue check mark appear next to your name. The
Speaker 1: investigation is in the earliest stages and there is a
Speaker 1: lot to cover, Like they're wondering if does the blue
Speaker 1: check mark actually mislead people into thinking that somehow an
Speaker 1: account that has a blue check mark is more reliable
Speaker 1: than one that doesn't. So there's a lot more that
Speaker 1: has to go on. It's just a preliminary investigation at
Speaker 1: this point, and I am sure this comes as unwelcome
Speaker 1: news to mister Musk. If the EU determines that X
Speaker 1: has violated the Digital Services Act, the consequences can be
Speaker 1: pretty severe. Punishments can include a fine of up to
Speaker 1: six percent of the company's annual turnover. That's a UK
Speaker 1: term that essentially means gross revenue, So before you take
Speaker 1: all your expenses out, it's how much money you made
Speaker 1: before you had to deduct expenses For X. That would
Speaker 1: be pretty awful, as the company has already had massive
Speaker 1: drops in revenue as it is. They could even potentially
Speaker 1: block X from operating within the EU. So this is
Speaker 1: a big deal and we'll have to see how this
Speaker 1: story unfolds. If the recent past is anything to go by,
Speaker 1: it will probably not go well for x unlast elon
Speaker 1: Musk's asides to remove himself from that situation entirely, which
Speaker 1: I don't see happening, but I think that's really the
Speaker 1: only way out for the platform. Next up. Comcast has
Speaker 1: now confirmed has been the target of a data breach,
Speaker 1: potentially affecting nearly thirty six million customers. Tech crunches Carly
Speaker 1: Page has a piece on this. It's titled Comcast says
Speaker 1: hackers stole data of close to thirty six million Infinity customers.
Speaker 1: So the issue appears to be related to a weakness
Speaker 1: in enterprise hardware, namely some networking devices made by a
Speaker 1: company called Citrix. So Comcast uses Citrix devices in its
Speaker 1: own network, and hackers discovered a vulnerability in certain Citrix
Speaker 1: gear last summer. Citrix responded by creating and then making
Speaker 1: available some security patches, but not everyone was right on
Speaker 1: top of the ball there and didn't implement the security
Speaker 1: patches fast enough, including apparently Comcasts, so that gave hackers
Speaker 1: the chance to exploit the vulnerability in Comcasts systems this
Speaker 1: past October and access customer data, and we're just hearing
Speaker 1: about it now, right, Like Comcasts found out about about
Speaker 1: a month later and now we're hearing about it. So
Speaker 1: what kind of data was accessed? Comcast hasn't fully explained
Speaker 1: that yet. Apparently they're still investigating it, but they said
Speaker 1: that at least for some customers, it includes a lot
Speaker 1: like their name, their username, a hashed version of their password,
Speaker 1: so in other words, sort of an encrypted version, no
Speaker 1: telling how strong the encryption is. The customer's address, their
Speaker 1: other contact informations like email, phone number that sort of stuff,
Speaker 1: their data birth, the last four digits of their Social
Speaker 1: Security number, and any security questions and answers they may
Speaker 1: have provided, you know, the stuff like what was the
Speaker 1: street you grew up on? Kind of questions. Comcast has
Speaker 1: been reaching out the customers and require them to do
Speaker 1: a password reset, while also recommending that they enable two
Speaker 1: factor authentication. This is where I recommend to all of
Speaker 1: y'all that you use multi factor authentication whenever it is available.
Speaker 1: Multi factor authentication does not guarantee that you're absolutely safe
Speaker 1: from attacks, but it does raise the bar enough so
Speaker 1: that I would say most attackers won't bother putting forth
Speaker 1: the effort to get past it. Now I did say most,
Speaker 1: not all. So there is no such thing as a
Speaker 1: perfectly safe system. But you can at least improve your
Speaker 1: security and thus eliminate like ninety eight percent of the
Speaker 1: potential attacks you could face, and I think that is
Speaker 1: a worthwhile effort. If you're in the United States and
Speaker 1: you are a last minute shopper type and the holidays
Speaker 1: are right here upon us, maybe you were planning on
Speaker 1: getting someone an Apple Watch, specifically a Series nine or
Speaker 1: an Ultra to Apple Watch, you better hop to it,
Speaker 1: because once three PM rolls around on the twenty first,
Speaker 1: which is this Thursday, those watches will be off store
Speaker 1: shelves in the US. And that's because Apple is facing
Speaker 1: a ban by the International Trade Center or ITC all
Speaker 1: because of a little sensor that's present in those two
Speaker 1: models of the Apple Watch. So a company called Massimo,
Speaker 1: which makes medical devices, is in a patent dispute with
Speaker 1: Apple over a sensor called an SPO two sensor. It's
Speaker 1: designed to measure the blood oxygen models. So Massimo or Masimo,
Speaker 1: I don't know how you say the name of the company. Essentially,
Speaker 1: they're saying Apple infringed upon a patented technology. It's an
Speaker 1: allegation that Apple veheminently denies. But in the face of
Speaker 1: this ITC ban, Apple is preemptively making the move to
Speaker 1: pull all Series nine and Ultra two models off the
Speaker 1: shelves for the time being. Within the US, the matter
Speaker 1: is up for review. President Biden will actually have the
Speaker 1: authority to either veto or allow the ban to continue.
Speaker 1: If he does not veto the ban, Apple can still
Speaker 1: actually appeal that decision in federal courts, but it would
Speaker 1: mean that the tech would be off limits for US customers,
Speaker 1: at least within the United States. I mean you could
Speaker 1: technically travel somewhere else and buy one of these, I guess.
Speaker 1: According to Victoria Song of The Verge, Apple is also
Speaker 1: working on a software solution that, if approved by the ITC,
Speaker 1: could serve as a workaround for the issue, so there
Speaker 1: wouldn't have to be any changes to the hardware and
Speaker 1: Apple could continue to sell them in stores in the
Speaker 1: United States. So I'll have to see what happens with this.
Speaker 1: Google has agreed to a settlement with the US States,
Speaker 1: as in all fifty United States states in a massive
Speaker 1: anti trust lawsuit. So this lawsuit focused on Google's Play Store,
Speaker 1: the Android App Store essentially, and the United States was
Speaker 1: accusing Google of operating an anti competitive platform by controlling
Speaker 1: the stuff like app distribution and Android device is and
Speaker 1: forcing app developers to pay fees for in app transactions.
Speaker 1: Right like Google would take a cut of all in
Speaker 1: app transactions. That's something that Apple has also faced in
Speaker 1: courts in the United States recently. So if a judge
Speaker 1: approves this settlement, because it has not been approved as
Speaker 1: of the time I'm recording this, Google will have to
Speaker 1: pay seven hundred million dollars and says it will introduce
Speaker 1: greater competition in the play app Store to boot. Of
Speaker 1: that seven hundred million, seventy million would go to a
Speaker 1: fund that the US States would divvy up. The other
Speaker 1: six hundred and thirty million would go to a fund
Speaker 1: that would pay out to Google consumers. In the process
Speaker 1: of the settlement, Google admits no wrongdoing, which is often
Speaker 1: a case with court settlements. Now, this is just the
Speaker 1: latest news in an ongoing year of scrutiny on Google
Speaker 1: from various regulators. So I think we're going to have
Speaker 1: a lot more stories about various governmental organizations applying pressure
Speaker 1: to Google next year. But you'll have to listen to
Speaker 1: my Predictions episode that'll be coming up in a little
Speaker 1: more than a week and a half to learn more
Speaker 1: about that. Yep, it's coming back. Speaking of coming back,
Speaker 1: we'll be back to after we take this quick break
Speaker 1: to thank our sponsors. We're back. Sean Lenas of CNN
Speaker 1: has a story about how Microsoft believes operatives from China
Speaker 1: are making use of generative AI in an effort to
Speaker 1: mislead US voters. So the images are meant to sow
Speaker 1: discord among voters and to push the divide that already
Speaker 1: exists between the left and the right to even greater extremes. Really,
Speaker 1: it's about making extremists, and y'all, we do not need
Speaker 1: outside help to do that. We're really good at it ourselves.
Speaker 1: But admittedly, if you put your thumb on the scale,
Speaker 1: it does speed things up considerably. So this campaign appears
Speaker 1: to largely center on creating kind of iconic images through AI,
Speaker 1: and these images are meant to highlight specific issues in
Speaker 1: the United States to a degree that I would actually
Speaker 1: call absurd. I looked at some of these images and
Speaker 1: I'm thinking this feels like it's parody or satire, right,
Speaker 1: it's so over the top. However, according to at least
Speaker 1: some folks over in Microsoft, the efforts are proving to
Speaker 1: be effective because they are driving engagement online at least
Speaker 1: on certain platforms. According to lin Gas, other companies have
Speaker 1: reported a rise in Chinese backed misinformation campaigns as well,
Speaker 1: where they've actually taken action to take down these campaigns,
Speaker 1: and some of them at least appear to not be
Speaker 1: particularly effective, but they are happening. So it's a reminder
Speaker 1: to not accept everything you encounter online, specifically on social
Speaker 1: networking sites, at face value. Rob Stump of Inside Evs
Speaker 1: has an article titled Volkswagen will bring back physical buttons
Speaker 1: in new cars and Yeah, that pretty much gives away right.
Speaker 1: The title says that the company has decided to walk
Speaker 1: back recent design changes in their electric vehicle line, and
Speaker 1: those design changes saw a lot of touchscreen interfaces and
Speaker 1: haptic capacitive buttons replace physical buttons that were on things
Speaker 1: like control panels and steering wheels. So Volkswagen had really
Speaker 1: kind of made this declaration that they were going to
Speaker 1: go buttonless, but it turns out that the customers, the drivers,
Speaker 1: send a very clear message to the company saying don't
Speaker 1: do that. Customers reported that the touchscreen interfaces and those
Speaker 1: haptic capacitive surfaces on the steering wheel were distracting and
Speaker 1: frustrating and potentially even dangerous to use. As such, the
Speaker 1: company has started to revise the design on the ID
Speaker 1: two electric vehicle, which reintroduces some but not all, of
Speaker 1: the physical control buttons. The whole Brewjaja prompted Volkswagen CEO
Speaker 1: to say the design change to touch interfaces quote did
Speaker 1: a lot of damage end quote to the brand. Now
Speaker 1: keep in mind, Volkswagen is the same brand that was
Speaker 1: behind the diesel Gate scandal years ago. I mean, arguably
Speaker 1: that company is still trying to recover from that brew ha,
Speaker 1: So it knows a lot about damaging itself. Yeah, and
Speaker 1: this story mostly is focused in Europe, like that's where
Speaker 1: a lot of these vehicles have been released and the
Speaker 1: objection to them has followed. I will personally say, I'm
Speaker 1: not a driver, so it's not like I have any
Speaker 1: real expertise in this area, but I do find an
Speaker 1: off putting to be in a vehicle where everything is
Speaker 1: like a touch based interface because it requires to me
Speaker 1: at least to spend more time looking at the interface
Speaker 1: to figure out what I need to do in order
Speaker 1: to achieve the outcome I want. And if I were
Speaker 1: a driver, that would mean my attention would be off
Speaker 1: the road, and that I think is pretty darn dangerous.
Speaker 1: I was gonna say reckless, but ironically that seems like
Speaker 1: that would be the wrong word to use. Anyway, Volkswagen
Speaker 1: has said, you know what are bad, We'll go back
Speaker 1: to buttons, so we'll see how those look in future models.
Speaker 1: Speaking of cars, this week, Canada is likely to announce
Speaker 1: that all new cars will need to be zero emissions
Speaker 1: vehicles by the year twenty thirty five. And by that
Speaker 1: I mean actually, some Canadian governmental agency will issue a statement,
Speaker 1: not that Canada itself will suddenly gain sentience and begin
Speaker 1: to speak Anyway, The point is it seems like Canada
Speaker 1: is following in the footsteps of several other countries around
Speaker 1: the world that are also setting requirements on new vehicles
Speaker 1: to be as carbon free as far as emissions go
Speaker 1: within a little more than a decade. This doesn't cover
Speaker 1: used vehicles. Obviously, you could still have an internal combustion
Speaker 1: engine vehicle in Canada. It's not like they're being outlawed,
Speaker 1: just that any new vehicle from twenty thirty five on
Speaker 1: has to be emissions free. I find it somewhat amazing
Speaker 1: that I could well live to see gas stations become
Speaker 1: largely obsolete, like get such an It's such an integrated
Speaker 1: thing in my life I think of, Like I have
Speaker 1: childhood memories of going to gas stations and stuff. It
Speaker 1: is wild to me to think that within ten fifteen
Speaker 1: years those could pretty much become, you know, completely converted
Speaker 1: over into like charging stations and stuff. It just is odd.
Speaker 1: I don't know. Maybe it's just because I'm old. And
Speaker 1: in Space News, NASA demonstrated the enormous power of the
Speaker 1: Deep Space Optical Communications project or DSOC by beaming an
Speaker 1: ultra high definition video from space to Earth using laser beams.
Speaker 1: And I know what you're thinking, a video of what?
Speaker 1: What did NASA's video contain? Well, maybe you didn't ask
Speaker 1: that question, you probably can guess. I mean it's a
Speaker 1: digital video. Yes, it was of a cat, because some
Speaker 1: memes just won't go away. Now, this particular cat is Tater's,
Speaker 1: an orange tabby, and the video shows Taters joyfully chasing
Speaker 1: a little laserbeam dot around an environment, and the transmitter
Speaker 1: is a board of spacecraft called Psyche. That spacecraft is
Speaker 1: nearly nineteen million miles away from us, but you'll be
Speaker 1: relieved to hear that little Taters has his pause firmly
Speaker 1: on the ground. Taters did not go on a ride
Speaker 1: helped to space. What they did was they shot the video,
Speaker 1: or actually they took a video and downloaded it and
Speaker 1: then they saved it to Psyche. Spacecraft's hard drive essentially
Speaker 1: sent the spacecraft out into space, and then it beamed
Speaker 1: the video back to us at a speed that was incredible,
Speaker 1: faster than broadband speeds here on the ground. It took
Speaker 1: a less than two minutes for the message to travel
Speaker 1: those nineteen million miles. It actually they said it took
Speaker 1: less time for the spacecraft to beam the video down
Speaker 1: to Earth than it took for them to transmit the
Speaker 1: video from the receiver station to the headquarters, which is
Speaker 1: pretty amazing. The experiment really helps pave the way for
Speaker 1: long distance transmissions in space. That's something that's going to
Speaker 1: be a key component in missions to places like Mars
Speaker 1: or beyond. If we want to set up really good
Speaker 1: colonies on places like Mars or the Moon. Using this
Speaker 1: kind of laser communication technology will be key to bringing
Speaker 1: down the delay times as much as possible and being
Speaker 1: able to communicate seamlessly or as close to it as
Speaker 1: we can. Okay, I've got just one article recommendation for
Speaker 1: you all today. TJ. Thompson and Daniel Angus wrote a
Speaker 1: piece for The Conversation, although so I actually found it
Speaker 1: on tech Explore and the piece is titled data Poisoning.
Speaker 1: How artists are sabotaging AI to take revenge on image generators.
Speaker 1: And I've talked about data poisoning before on this show,
Speaker 1: but it's a good article to get a grounding in
Speaker 1: what's going on. As you probably know, a lot of
Speaker 1: artists are upset that AI companies have been using artists'
Speaker 1: works to train up generative AI, but they haven't gotten
Speaker 1: the artist's consent to do that. So it's sort of
Speaker 1: like if you found out someone was using your work
Speaker 1: to train your replacement without ever telling you, Like they
Speaker 1: might be saying, hey, you're putting in great work, and
Speaker 1: they really mean it, because they mean your great work
Speaker 1: is training up the person who's going to take over
Speaker 1: your job. Anyway, as this piece explains some artists are
Speaker 1: experimenting with ways to trip up AI so that it
Speaker 1: produces really poor output, so check it out. And that's
Speaker 1: it for this episode of tech Stuff. I'll have one
Speaker 1: two other tech news episodes before we close out the year.
Speaker 1: I've also got a bunch of special episodes kind of
Speaker 1: looking back over some of the big tech stories of
Speaker 1: twenty twenty three, so check those out. And they'll even
Speaker 1: be special ones publishing on weekends so you can check
Speaker 1: those out too. And yeah, thanks to all of you,
Speaker 1: Thanks to the amazing production staff who have stepped up
Speaker 1: to help me out during the holiday season. I really
Speaker 1: appreciate it, including super producer Tari. I hope you are
Speaker 1: enjoying your holiday and to all of you out there,
Speaker 1: I wish you happiness and health and I'll talk to
Speaker 1: you again really soon. Tech Stuff is an iHeartRadio production.
Speaker 1: For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts,
Speaker 1: or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.