Speaker 1: Welcome to tech Stuff, a production from I Heart Radio.
Speaker 1: Be there and welcome to tech Stuff. I'm your host,
Speaker 1: Jonathan Strickland. I'm an executive producer with I Heart Radio.
Speaker 1: And how the tech are you? It is time for
Speaker 1: the tech news for Tuesday, October two thousand twenty two.
Speaker 1: And boy, how a lot of stuff happened late last
Speaker 1: week and over the weekend. Let's start with G four TV.
Speaker 1: So I did some episodes about G four TV about
Speaker 1: a year ago, where I talked about the formation of
Speaker 1: the channel, you know it's origins and it's merger with
Speaker 1: tech TV under Comcast, and then the subsequent dissolution of
Speaker 1: the channel following years of decline, and that era happened
Speaker 1: between two thousand two and two thousand twelve. Then I
Speaker 1: talked about how the channel was being revived fived in
Speaker 1: twenty twenty one, coming back from extinction. So the Zomba
Speaker 1: five G four TV emerged on November six, and with
Speaker 1: the relaunch, we saw the reappearance of programs like x Play,
Speaker 1: which was a video game criticism show like a review show,
Speaker 1: as well as Attack of the Show, which is more
Speaker 1: of a geeky variety show, and some of the hosts
Speaker 1: from the glory days like Kevin Pereira and Adam Sessler
Speaker 1: returned and they were joined by newcomers to the channel
Speaker 1: like Fiona Nova and Gina Darling and others. But then
Speaker 1: less than a year later, the channel has once again
Speaker 1: gone silent. Comcast Spectator, which in itself is a subsidiary
Speaker 1: of Comcast, sent out a memo on October six, two
Speaker 1: thousand twenty two a lerning the team that due to
Speaker 1: low viewership, the channel was financially unstable, so that essentially
Speaker 1: meant that it probably cost more to produce the content
Speaker 1: on the channel than the channel was actually making. As
Speaker 1: a result, the plug has been pulled and the channel
Speaker 1: is once again dead. The memo goes on to say
Speaker 1: that Comcast Spectator HR will work with the affected staff
Speaker 1: of which they were around, to try and find other
Speaker 1: opportunities and discuss other options. This stinks because there were
Speaker 1: some really cool people working over there, you know, talented,
Speaker 1: hard working folks. I was honestly surprised that the new
Speaker 1: G four TV wasn't more of an online network as
Speaker 1: opposed to an attempt to to go the traditional TV
Speaker 1: channel route. Again, I doubt such a channel would be
Speaker 1: able to attract the same talent pool if it were
Speaker 1: online only like that would be hard to do because
Speaker 1: you typically don't see the same kind of investment for
Speaker 1: that sort of stuff. However, the costs of production would
Speaker 1: be much lower as well. A lot of folks online
Speaker 1: are kind of playing armchair analysts and drawing conclusions like
Speaker 1: that the television era in general is coming to a close,
Speaker 1: and that's why G four TV couldn't find a new audience,
Speaker 1: because the audience has moved away from the medium there
Speaker 1: getting their content online as opposed to on television. I
Speaker 1: would actually have to do some real research to find
Speaker 1: out how likely that is. I mean, I know anecdotally
Speaker 1: that I haven't watched any television programming in years, but
Speaker 1: that's just me. I could be an outlier. I don't know.
Speaker 1: I don't know how how popular TV is in general
Speaker 1: at this point because I'm so far removed from it.
Speaker 1: I'd have to actually look into it. But I just
Speaker 1: want to say that I hope the staff of G
Speaker 1: four TV finds new opportunities quickly and that they are
Speaker 1: all able to pursue their dreams, just under a different banner, because,
Speaker 1: like I said, this stinks. Uh I can't really blame
Speaker 1: Comcast Spectrum from for doing this, right, Like, if they
Speaker 1: were unable to find an audience, you can't really justify
Speaker 1: just running the channel just so it exists. If no
Speaker 1: one's seeking it out, then ultimately you could argue that
Speaker 1: the effort being put forward to create that content is
Speaker 1: wasted and that people could achieve better things by doing
Speaker 1: something else. So I can't really criticize the decision to
Speaker 1: end the channel. I just hate that it was a
Speaker 1: necessity because you know, I like some of the folks
Speaker 1: over there, and um, you know, I I think that
Speaker 1: this stuff they make is worthwhile. That being said, since
Speaker 1: I don't watch TV, I hadn't been watching g for TV,
Speaker 1: so I'm part of the problem, all right. Moving on,
Speaker 1: Also in the geek entertainment sphere is some pretty ugly
Speaker 1: news coming out of Rooster Teeth. Now, if you're not
Speaker 1: familiar with the name Rooster Teeth, it's a company that's
Speaker 1: known primarily for its podcasts and video series that orbit
Speaker 1: the video d games space. They're either directly about video
Speaker 1: games or are kind of tangentially related to video games,
Speaker 1: and it's all with an entertainment spin. The company got
Speaker 1: started with a web series called Red Versus Blue, which
Speaker 1: uses the Halo game engine as a kind of studio,
Speaker 1: actors treating their master Chief characters like digital puppets and
Speaker 1: recording voice over with it. That Little Colonel grew into
Speaker 1: a pretty impressive entertainment network, which ultimately branched out into
Speaker 1: making feature films, premier series, an anime inspired series, and more.
Speaker 1: I've actually had a couple of people from Rooster Teeth
Speaker 1: on this show as guests in the past, including Bernie
Speaker 1: Burns and Jack Potillo. Well, the news out of Rooster
Speaker 1: Teeth this week is pretty awful, and it started when
Speaker 1: news broke that the company, which ultimately is part of
Speaker 1: Warner Brothers Discovery, dissolved several positions, meaning they just eliminated
Speaker 1: these positions from existence. That included one of an online personality,
Speaker 1: a guy named Matt Bragg who posted that he was
Speaker 1: going to go part time on sort of a contract
Speaker 1: basis because of this. Now, that prompted some backlash in
Speaker 1: the community, which then got turned up to eleven in
Speaker 1: intensity when a former Rooster Teeth employee named Caden talked
Speaker 1: about her experiences at the company. Her accusations are numerous
Speaker 1: and disturbing. They range from going unpaid for nine months
Speaker 1: while doing some contract work for the company, to then
Speaker 1: being vastly underpaid and overworked as a producer and a
Speaker 1: director and editor, even to a point where she developed
Speaker 1: pneumonia and then, upon returning to work, was immediately put
Speaker 1: back under the same grueling schedule. She also said that
Speaker 1: she was targeted with a homophobic slur in the office,
Speaker 1: and that slur was used by on screen talent in
Speaker 1: an altered form so that they refer to her with
Speaker 1: this slur while being on camera, and in turn, the
Speaker 1: community got in on using that nickname, though presumably most
Speaker 1: folks didn't know what the significance of the word was.
Speaker 1: Side note, however, Caden herself, in a previous life, like
Speaker 1: fifteen years ago when she was a teenager, had uploaded
Speaker 1: videos that featured her and this was before her transition
Speaker 1: surgery and before her employment at Rooster Teeth, But it
Speaker 1: featured her using homophobic language, anti Semitic language, racist language.
Speaker 1: So that doesn't excuse the treatment she received at at
Speaker 1: Rooster Teeth. But you know, I feel like I need
Speaker 1: to talk about it because otherwise someone's going to bring
Speaker 1: it up and say, yeah, but Cayden said these terrible
Speaker 1: things when she was younger, and doesn't that make her
Speaker 1: a hypocrite? Really? I feel like Caden's arguments were that
Speaker 1: the company failed to act when she brought these concerns
Speaker 1: to HR. And that's the issue, right. It's not that
Speaker 1: Cayden was a perfect person, or that Kayden herself had
Speaker 1: not engaged in terrible UH language and and the expression
Speaker 1: of horrible racist and homophobic ideas herself. She had. That
Speaker 1: was bad that she had done that on her own channel,
Speaker 1: but rather that this indicated a systemic problem within Rooster
Speaker 1: Teeth and that HR did nothing to take action on
Speaker 1: that and to protect employees. That is still a massive problem. UH.
Speaker 1: Caden's behavior was also a massive problem, something that she
Speaker 1: has apologized for in the past, though you know, some
Speaker 1: people are are arguing that that apology wasn't sufficient. I'm
Speaker 1: not here to judge the sufficient nature of apologies because
Speaker 1: that's that's a fool's errand in my mind, But anyway,
Speaker 1: it doesn't change the fact that there were these systemic
Speaker 1: problems that Rooster Teeth. Now, Rooster Teeth issued a statement
Speaker 1: that a lot of people in the community have said,
Speaker 1: isn't nearly enough, saying that the company failed to really
Speaker 1: take accountability for the things that Caden accuses the company
Speaker 1: of doing. Largely this reliance on the exploitation of employees
Speaker 1: who are underpaid by industry standards, while meanwhile some some
Speaker 1: few people at the top are benefiting disproportionately from that labor.
Speaker 1: So it is really ugly. This is not the first
Speaker 1: time that Rooster Teeth has had to face some pretty
Speaker 1: tough scandals. There was a similar one when Mica Burton
Speaker 1: left the company and revealed she had been the target
Speaker 1: of racism and abuse, and the company failed to really
Speaker 1: do anything to help her. Then in scandal broke out
Speaker 1: again when it was made public that one of the
Speaker 1: on screen talent at Rooster Teeth had engaged in predatory
Speaker 1: behavior with the fan base. So this later this controversy
Speaker 1: implies that the company as a whole has failed to
Speaker 1: address those systemic problems within the culture of the organization,
Speaker 1: and many are comparing what's going on within Rooster Teeth
Speaker 1: two similar situations that companies like Activision, Blizzard and uby
Speaker 1: Soft and Uber. Meanwhile, as part of Warner Brothers Discovery,
Speaker 1: I imagine there's a very real worry at executive level
Speaker 1: level leadership at Rooster Teeth about what maybe in the
Speaker 1: future for Rooster Teeth. I mean, as possible they could
Speaker 1: get sold off, because we know that David Zaslov over
Speaker 1: at Warner Brothers Discovery and his team are looking to
Speaker 1: trim billions of dollars off the overall corporate budget, and uh,
Speaker 1: it may very well be that Rooster Teeth could be
Speaker 1: on the chopping block for that, whether it gets sold
Speaker 1: off or dissolved or whatever. Rooster Teeth canceled all of
Speaker 1: its live podcast recording sessions yesterday, likely because the company
Speaker 1: is working to create a response to these accusations and
Speaker 1: community reaction, and the host of that podcast would have
Speaker 1: been potentially been a real mess. Right if you had
Speaker 1: live interactive chat with a podcast recording, it would be
Speaker 1: setting the stage for accusations and criticism and abuse and
Speaker 1: tough questions and it just would have been a big mess.
Speaker 1: Whether this controversy is going to have a lasting effect
Speaker 1: on the company remains to be seen, but it definitely
Speaker 1: has exposed a very ugly side to Rooster Teeth's corporate culture,
Speaker 1: one that arguably has been exposed before in the past.
Speaker 1: But the company had had assured community members that steps
Speaker 1: would be taken to correct it. So, yeah, not a
Speaker 1: good situation. All right. When we come back, we've got
Speaker 1: a lot more news to get through, but first let's
Speaker 1: take this quick break. We're back. Yeah. Formerly known as
Speaker 1: Kanye West, is in the process of acquiring the beleaguered
Speaker 1: social network platform Parlor. Now you might remember that Parlor,
Speaker 1: which brands itself as a free speech platform, became kind
Speaker 1: of a gathering place primarily known for right wing conservatives
Speaker 1: leading up to the twenty twenty election, when there was
Speaker 1: a big spike in interest in Parlor. The service ran
Speaker 1: into some major turbulence, however, when Apple and Google dropped
Speaker 1: Parlor from app stores citing the company's lack of a
Speaker 1: suitable content moderation policy around the same time as the
Speaker 1: January six, two thousand twenty one insurrection. Amazon would then
Speaker 1: subsequently boot Parlor from its hosting service, and so Parlor
Speaker 1: had to find a new host and initially switched to
Speaker 1: a Russian based company called de dos Guard, but then
Speaker 1: switched to an American based company called sky Silk. The
Speaker 1: general reporting round Parlor has indicated that there's been a
Speaker 1: pretty substant hill decline in active users since the return
Speaker 1: from online exile in early one. Anyway, Yea apparently decided
Speaker 1: to purchase Parlor after he received a Twitter ban for
Speaker 1: posting anti Semitic comments. He had also been banned from Instagram.
Speaker 1: And I think it's interesting to point out that Yea
Speaker 1: has been hanging out with a conservative commentator and author
Speaker 1: named Candice Owens recently because Owens happens to be married
Speaker 1: to a man named George Farmer, and Farmer happens to
Speaker 1: be the CEO of Parlor. So that's led some folks
Speaker 1: and allegedly including some folks in Yea's own circles, to
Speaker 1: perhaps suggest that Owens has influenced Yea and kind of
Speaker 1: guided him into buying what is a flailing social media site,
Speaker 1: which will potentially see both her and her husband benefit
Speaker 1: from that sale. And I am not used to reporting
Speaker 1: this kind of drama, y'all. Anyway, when you consider that
Speaker 1: Elon Musk is still in the process of acquiring Twitter
Speaker 1: and that Donald Trump on to found Truth Social it's
Speaker 1: hard to get past the feeling that some highly opinionated,
Speaker 1: rich people think that the real solution to being moderated
Speaker 1: is to go and buy the platform or to make
Speaker 1: your own so interesting stuff there. Over in the UK,
Speaker 1: the Competition and Markets Authority or c m A, which
Speaker 1: is a regulatory body, has set a new precedent by
Speaker 1: ordering Meta to sell off Giffee or Jiffy if you prefer.
Speaker 1: That's the gif creation website that Meta acquired in twenty though,
Speaker 1: of course, in Meta was still known as Facebook. Actually,
Speaker 1: the c m A had already ordered Meta to do this.
Speaker 1: This is not a new decision. However, Meta appealed that decision.
Speaker 1: The matter went back for review, and now after reviewing
Speaker 1: that initial decision, the c m A says, now we're good,
Speaker 1: We're still going to make you sell it. So the
Speaker 1: CMA says that Meta's acquisition hurts competition in the space,
Speaker 1: potentially cutting off Giffee rivals from being able to leverage Facebook,
Speaker 1: or forcing those rivals to give up more user data
Speaker 1: to Facebook in return for being allowed to access the platform.
Speaker 1: Meta reps issued a statement reading quote, we are disappointed
Speaker 1: by the CMA's decision, but except today's ruling as the
Speaker 1: final word on the matter, we will work closely with
Speaker 1: the c m A on divesting Giffee end quote. So
Speaker 1: it looks like the dismantling of meta has begun, or
Speaker 1: maybe this is just the beginning and end of it all.
Speaker 1: We'll we'll have to wait and see. Researchers at the
Speaker 1: security firm z Scaler warned that there's a new data
Speaker 1: stealing malware propagating across Facebook. A phishing campaign called Ductail
Speaker 1: appears to be responsible, and according to a report on
Speaker 1: tech Radar that's titled a phishing campaign is spreading brand
Speaker 1: new malware targeting Facebook users. This malware quote cannot only
Speaker 1: steal Facebook adjacent data, but also other sensitive data stored
Speaker 1: in browsers, such as data related to cryptocurrency, wallet's a
Speaker 1: count information, and basic system data end quote. Ducktail has
Speaker 1: previously distributed malware through LinkedIn messages containing malicious links, and
Speaker 1: it sounds like this particular attack is really insidious and
Speaker 1: that it mostly works within computer memory, which helps it
Speaker 1: evade detection from anti virus programs. It also sounds like
Speaker 1: this started as a spear phishing campaign. UH. Spear phishing
Speaker 1: means that the perpetrators are targeting specific populations. It's not
Speaker 1: just throwing out a phishing attack in general, it's really
Speaker 1: focusing them. So in that case, it involved high level
Speaker 1: employees who had access to company Facebook business accounts. However,
Speaker 1: z scaler is now warning that this campaign has widened
Speaker 1: to target pretty much anyone. Z Scaler says that quote
Speaker 1: the malicious executable files are mostly in dot zep format
Speaker 1: and hosted on file sharing platforms, posing as cracked versions
Speaker 1: of office applications, games, subtitle files, porn related files, and
Speaker 1: others end quote. So once again, just a reminder, don't
Speaker 1: download files from questionable sources. You're playing Russian Roulette with
Speaker 1: your computer and potentially all of your data, including financial data.
Speaker 1: Business Insider reports that Microsoft has recently held layoffs, affecting
Speaker 1: quote less than one thousand employees end quote this week,
Speaker 1: and that the cuts were made across pretty much all
Speaker 1: of the company, including the Xbox division and Microsoft's strategic
Speaker 1: missions and technology departments. Business Insider also references an internal
Speaker 1: email that indicated the company is re prioritizing various projects,
Speaker 1: with some essentially being canceled or shelved. This kind of
Speaker 1: goes in line with what we've been hearing across the
Speaker 1: industry really, as large companies have put in hiring phrases
Speaker 1: and started holding layoffs. Uh. Microsoft has previously said that
Speaker 1: it anticipates it will not lay off more than one
Speaker 1: percent of its workforce globally, but the you know, this
Speaker 1: is part of that process, and I think we're going
Speaker 1: to see a lot more stories about various folks facing
Speaker 1: tough situations like this across the tech industry. So on
Speaker 1: a similar note, Engadget reports that some leaked documents from
Speaker 1: inside Amazon paint a really bleak picture for the company
Speaker 1: when it comes to retaining employees. The report says that attrition,
Speaker 1: which is a nice way to say the loss of
Speaker 1: employees that is both regretted and unregretted, which essentially means
Speaker 1: both the folks who quit and the folks that we
Speaker 1: fired or laid off collectively. They cost the company some
Speaker 1: eight billion dollars annually eight billion dollars billion with a B,
Speaker 1: all because of turnover, whether that's from layoffs and firings
Speaker 1: or folks quitting the company. The documents indicate that about
Speaker 1: twice as many people leave the company on their own
Speaker 1: as opposed to being laid off or fired. So that
Speaker 1: definitely does not paint a nice picture of what it's
Speaker 1: like to work for Amazon. Right, So you've got this
Speaker 1: massive issue of turnover. The vast majority of which involves
Speaker 1: people leaving the company quitting the company, and that you know,
Speaker 1: regretted attrition a people who are leaving on their own
Speaker 1: account was at a low of sixty nine point five
Speaker 1: percent and a high of any one three percent across
Speaker 1: all levels of employees. Yikes. And it goes on to
Speaker 1: add that only one out of three employees even sticks
Speaker 1: around for ninety days or more. That means if you
Speaker 1: get three Amazon employees who joined on you know, January one,
Speaker 1: two out of those three are going to be gone
Speaker 1: before the end of March. Like that crazy. That's an
Speaker 1: insane amount of turnover. And we've always known that turnover
Speaker 1: at Amazon has been a big problem. It's just that
Speaker 1: it hasn't really been quantified like this before these internal
Speaker 1: documents got out. At that rate, Amazon is really going
Speaker 1: to burn through all potential employee options in major cities
Speaker 1: within a couple of years. And then where is it
Speaker 1: going to be. I mean, that sounds like it's hyperbole,
Speaker 1: but other news outlets have actually said exactly the same
Speaker 1: thing that at the rate of Amazon's turnover, the employable
Speaker 1: public in the various cities where Amazon has major operations
Speaker 1: are going to be run through and then you've got
Speaker 1: no one left. So you've got to address these issues
Speaker 1: with retention. It also seems to at least imply that
Speaker 1: working conditions at Amazon are lousy, right otherwise you wouldn't
Speaker 1: have people quitting within three months of getting a job.
Speaker 1: So it's a costly problem that Amazon needs to solve.
Speaker 1: I really recommend reading the whole article. The article has
Speaker 1: the title exclusive Amazon's attrition costs eight billion annually according
Speaker 1: to leaked documents, and it gets worse. And again that's
Speaker 1: over at in Gadget. Okay, I've got a few more
Speaker 1: stories to go through before I get to those. Let's
Speaker 1: take another quick break. We're back. Not too long ago,
Speaker 1: I covered a story about how YouTube was experimenting with
Speaker 1: putting four K content behind a sort of paywall. So
Speaker 1: some users in various regions, but not all of them,
Speaker 1: but some some areas of the world reported that when
Speaker 1: they encountered videos on YouTube that were available to watch
Speaker 1: in four K, they first saw a prompt to upgrade
Speaker 1: to YouTube Premium in order to access the content in
Speaker 1: four A resolution. Now mac Rumors reports that the company
Speaker 1: has ended this experiment, removing the upgrade prompts and returning
Speaker 1: four K content to just being a normal option for
Speaker 1: users to choose from for videos that have that availability.
Speaker 1: The company has indicated that this experiment is officially over.
Speaker 1: They've said so in tweets people have sent in questions
Speaker 1: over Twitter and YouTube accounts of State stated that this
Speaker 1: experiment has ended. However, there hasn't really been any comment
Speaker 1: on what prompted the experiment to come to an end.
Speaker 1: Presumably the decision is not to lock four K behind
Speaker 1: a paywall. It is possible that user backlash convinced YouTube
Speaker 1: leaders that putting higher resolution content behind an upgrade requirement
Speaker 1: would not be an effective way to actually drive people
Speaker 1: to subscribe to YouTube premium. If their conclusion was people
Speaker 1: are just angry and it's not really making anyone subscribe,
Speaker 1: then obviously it doesn't make any sense to institute that
Speaker 1: strategy across the platform because it's not gonna work anyway,
Speaker 1: and it's just gonna take off your user base. So, um,
Speaker 1: I'm not sure what YouTube is going to try next
Speaker 1: to try and increase YouTube Premium subscriptions, but it apparently
Speaker 1: will not be locking content, you know, high resolution content
Speaker 1: behind the paywall. So that's good news if you like
Speaker 1: watching you know, four K content on YouTube and you
Speaker 1: don't want to have a YouTube premium subscription. German regulators
Speaker 1: have now levied a five million dollar fine on Telegram,
Speaker 1: the messaging app that originates out of the United Arab Emirates.
Speaker 1: It's a Dubai based company, and the regulators are saying
Speaker 1: that the reason for the fine, this five million dollar
Speaker 1: fine is that Telegram has failed to fulfill two requirements
Speaker 1: in order to operate a messaging service within Germany. Namely,
Speaker 1: Telegram has not created a legal way for reporting illegal
Speaker 1: content to German officials. So content within Germany that is
Speaker 1: considered illegal must be reported to the authorities, and Telegram
Speaker 1: has not proposed a way of doing that. And the
Speaker 1: other accusation is that Telegram has not named a German
Speaker 1: entity like a company or point of contact, who would
Speaker 1: be responsible for receiving official communications from the German authorities
Speaker 1: or from Telegram, kind of being a liaison between Telegram
Speaker 1: and the German government. Telegram does have the option to
Speaker 1: appeal the fine um and the company has recently named
Speaker 1: a German law firm as sort of a point of contact,
Speaker 1: so potentially one of the two problems has been resolved.
Speaker 1: Whether or not Telegram has formulated an official process for
Speaker 1: reporting illegal activity, I have not heard, so that may
Speaker 1: still be an issue. Finally, the European Space Agency plans
Speaker 1: to launch a demonstration satellite in twenty four that aims
Speaker 1: to push encryption into the quantum age, or at least
Speaker 1: play a part in it. So this plan involves putting
Speaker 1: a satellite, a communication satellite called Eagle one, into orbit,
Speaker 1: and this satellite is going to serve as part of
Speaker 1: a quantum key distribution system and will be used to
Speaker 1: help test different strategies centered around quantum encryption, which is
Speaker 1: important in the age of quantum computing. And I've covered
Speaker 1: quantum computing in the past, but just as a quick reminder,
Speaker 1: quantum computers, at least those that have enough processing capability
Speaker 1: as well as the right algorithms to go with it,
Speaker 1: can pose an enormous threat and existential threat to our
Speaker 1: modern methods of encryption. Um. So your standard computer would
Speaker 1: have to work thousands of years to decrypt a really
Speaker 1: sophisticated encrypted message today like that would just because the
Speaker 1: way classical computers work, it would take so long as
Speaker 1: to be unrealistic to ever be able to decrypt a
Speaker 1: truly well encrypted message, But a suitable quantum computer paired
Speaker 1: with the correct algorithm could do the same thing in
Speaker 1: a relative blink of an eye, because it's effectively solving
Speaker 1: all versions of the problem simultaneously. That's a drastic oversimplification
Speaker 1: of what's going on, but you can think of it
Speaker 1: in those terms. So while a classical computer would be
Speaker 1: working kind of step by step to try and solve
Speaker 1: a problem, the quantum computer is trying to solve all
Speaker 1: of the problem all the same time and quickly comes
Speaker 1: up with solutions that it assigns a probability to. So
Speaker 1: in other words, it's not like you get the solution,
Speaker 1: you get potential solutions with a a likelihood of them
Speaker 1: being correct. That's still way faster, way faster than using
Speaker 1: a classical computer, And that means that quantum computers could
Speaker 1: potentially decrypt pretty much everything that has ever been encrypted
Speaker 1: by computers, which means no more secrets, right. It means
Speaker 1: anything that has been encrypted could be uncovered. That includes
Speaker 1: things like financial transactions. The entire basis of data security
Speaker 1: would be completely undermined by this emergence of quantum computers
Speaker 1: and algorithms that can break encryption. So there is a
Speaker 1: need to establish a new encryption method that can withstand
Speaker 1: both classic and quantum computer attacks, and that is what
Speaker 1: this Eagle one satellite is meant to be part of
Speaker 1: a deployment of technology platforms upon which we can test
Speaker 1: different strategies to see which are viable. We've already seen
Speaker 1: stories of a proposed quantum encryption scheme that ended up
Speaker 1: being vulnerable to classical computer attacks. So this is an
Speaker 1: important and difficult area of research. So really interesting that
Speaker 1: this is looking at a launch. Uh, it really does
Speaker 1: show how how on the verge we are of this
Speaker 1: quantum computing age and how important it is to start
Speaker 1: setting the standards for encryption moving forward. Okay, that's it
Speaker 1: for the news that I have to cover today Tuesday,
Speaker 1: October two thousand twenty two. If you have suggestions for
Speaker 1: topics I should cover in future episodes of tech Stuff,
Speaker 1: please reach out to me. One way to do that
Speaker 1: is to download the I Heart radio app and you
Speaker 1: can navigate over to tech Stuff in the little search
Speaker 1: field and you'll see that there's a little microphone icon
Speaker 1: you can click on and you can leave a voice
Speaker 1: message up to thirty seconds in length. On there. If
Speaker 1: you would like me to use the message in an
Speaker 1: upcoming episode of tech Stuff, just let me know that
Speaker 1: as well. And uh, that's one way to get in
Speaker 1: touch with me. The other is to reach out on Twitter.
Speaker 1: The handle for the show is tech Stuff H s
Speaker 1: W and I'll talk to you again really soon. Y.
Speaker 1: Text Stuff is an I Heart Radio production. For more
Speaker 1: podcasts from I Heart Radio, visit the i Heart Radio app,
Speaker 1: Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.