1 00:00:04,440 --> 00:00:12,240 Speaker 1: Welcome to tech Stuff, a production from iHeartRadio. Hey there, 2 00:00:12,280 --> 00:00:15,920 Speaker 1: and welcome to tech Stuff. I'm your host, Jonathan Strickland. 3 00:00:15,960 --> 00:00:18,840 Speaker 1: I'm an executive producer with iHeartRadio. And how the tech 4 00:00:18,880 --> 00:00:21,480 Speaker 1: are you? It's time for the tech News for Thursday, 5 00:00:21,560 --> 00:00:26,400 Speaker 1: July twenty seventh, twenty twenty three. And y'all, I'm looking 6 00:00:26,440 --> 00:00:30,600 Speaker 1: forward to having a week or maybe two when hopefully 7 00:00:30,640 --> 00:00:34,239 Speaker 1: the X news will die down a bit and I 8 00:00:34,240 --> 00:00:37,000 Speaker 1: can skip talking about Elon Musk. But today is not 9 00:00:37,200 --> 00:00:41,560 Speaker 1: that day. In fact, Musk shows up for multiple reasons today. 10 00:00:42,200 --> 00:00:46,560 Speaker 1: So the Wall Street Journal reports that X dot com 11 00:00:46,600 --> 00:00:51,320 Speaker 1: formerly known as Twitter, is allegedly adding a new requirement 12 00:00:51,760 --> 00:00:57,560 Speaker 1: for brand accounts on X. So companies that have maintained 13 00:00:57,560 --> 00:00:59,920 Speaker 1: an account on X will have to meet a new requirement, 14 00:01:00,280 --> 00:01:02,760 Speaker 1: and that is to spend a minimum of one thousand 15 00:01:02,840 --> 00:01:07,119 Speaker 1: dollars per month on advertising or else they'll lose their 16 00:01:07,240 --> 00:01:13,039 Speaker 1: verification status. Once again, we see that verification is not 17 00:01:13,480 --> 00:01:16,640 Speaker 1: verification on X. Or maybe you could argue it does 18 00:01:16,760 --> 00:01:21,080 Speaker 1: verify you. It verifies that you paid for a checkmark. Now, 19 00:01:21,400 --> 00:01:24,000 Speaker 1: I will note there are exceptions. There are some people 20 00:01:24,040 --> 00:01:28,000 Speaker 1: who had truly massive followings on Twitter, and they were 21 00:01:28,080 --> 00:01:31,920 Speaker 1: gifted their checkmarks back after initially having them stripped away, 22 00:01:32,520 --> 00:01:35,240 Speaker 1: and most of those accounts will very quickly tell you, 23 00:01:35,480 --> 00:01:38,039 Speaker 1: in no uncertain language that they did not pay to 24 00:01:38,080 --> 00:01:42,520 Speaker 1: get the check mark back anyway. According to Musk, this 25 00:01:42,680 --> 00:01:46,679 Speaker 1: is really about protecting those brands, that the one thousand 26 00:01:46,720 --> 00:01:49,640 Speaker 1: dollars per month fee is high enough to prevent rap 27 00:01:49,680 --> 00:01:53,880 Speaker 1: scallions from creating accounts posing as a brand, and so 28 00:01:54,280 --> 00:01:58,520 Speaker 1: it cuts down on scammers who weren't really a thing 29 00:01:59,600 --> 00:02:02,640 Speaker 1: before you could just pay for a check mark anyway. 30 00:02:02,720 --> 00:02:07,559 Speaker 1: Skeptics argue that Musk's company is scrambling for revenue, having 31 00:02:07,600 --> 00:02:12,360 Speaker 1: lost a significant amount, like fifty percent of the advertising 32 00:02:12,440 --> 00:02:14,600 Speaker 1: dollars that were coming into the company over the last 33 00:02:14,639 --> 00:02:17,720 Speaker 1: several months, and that this play is similar to making 34 00:02:17,800 --> 00:02:20,760 Speaker 1: users pay a subscription fee for that check mark, plus 35 00:02:20,800 --> 00:02:22,920 Speaker 1: you know, some other features that come with it, and 36 00:02:22,960 --> 00:02:25,760 Speaker 1: that it's really just a way to slow down losses. 37 00:02:26,160 --> 00:02:28,600 Speaker 1: It'll be interesting to see which brands continue to stick 38 00:02:28,639 --> 00:02:31,520 Speaker 1: around on X. Some of them are big enough where 39 00:02:31,840 --> 00:02:35,040 Speaker 1: one thousand dollars a month isn't really that big of 40 00:02:35,080 --> 00:02:38,640 Speaker 1: a commitment, but others are smaller and that you know, 41 00:02:38,680 --> 00:02:41,520 Speaker 1: that's a significant investment, and I think a lot of 42 00:02:41,560 --> 00:02:44,000 Speaker 1: brand managers are going to start asking themselves if there's 43 00:02:44,080 --> 00:02:48,160 Speaker 1: even enough value associated with being on X to go 44 00:02:48,240 --> 00:02:50,160 Speaker 1: to the trouble or if they should just you know, 45 00:02:50,480 --> 00:02:53,440 Speaker 1: ditch and go to threads or some other platform instead 46 00:02:54,080 --> 00:02:58,200 Speaker 1: speaking of X. You won't be speaking of X in Indonesia, 47 00:02:58,320 --> 00:03:00,520 Speaker 1: or at least you wouldn't have been. Earlier this week, 48 00:03:00,560 --> 00:03:06,120 Speaker 1: Al Jazeera reported that on Tuesday, Indonesia more or less 49 00:03:06,160 --> 00:03:10,760 Speaker 1: accidentally blocked Musk's platform because of the domain name x 50 00:03:10,960 --> 00:03:16,120 Speaker 1: dot com because in Indonesia they associated that domain with 51 00:03:16,680 --> 00:03:20,600 Speaker 1: sites that would host adult material and Indonesia has strict 52 00:03:20,680 --> 00:03:25,519 Speaker 1: laws against pornography. The Ministry of Communication and Informatics reached 53 00:03:25,560 --> 00:03:28,840 Speaker 1: out to x dot com to confirm that it is 54 00:03:28,880 --> 00:03:33,160 Speaker 1: in fact meant solely to host Twitter and not a 55 00:03:33,440 --> 00:03:36,880 Speaker 1: platform for pornographic material. But this meant that twenty four 56 00:03:37,000 --> 00:03:40,480 Speaker 1: million people living in Indonesia were unable to access x 57 00:03:40,720 --> 00:03:44,160 Speaker 1: slash Twitter that day unless they were using like a 58 00:03:44,240 --> 00:03:47,840 Speaker 1: VPN or something I guess. Not long ago, I talked 59 00:03:47,880 --> 00:03:54,160 Speaker 1: about how the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration or NHTSA 60 00:03:54,400 --> 00:03:57,440 Speaker 1: here in the United States is investigating a car crash 61 00:03:57,480 --> 00:04:00,920 Speaker 1: that happened back in twenty eighteen actually, and one of 62 00:04:00,960 --> 00:04:03,120 Speaker 1: the cars involved in that was a Tesla vehicle that 63 00:04:03,160 --> 00:04:07,560 Speaker 1: allegedly was in advanced driver assist mode autopilot or full 64 00:04:07,600 --> 00:04:11,040 Speaker 1: self driving mode in other words. Now, according to CNBC, 65 00:04:11,400 --> 00:04:17,120 Speaker 1: California's Attorney General's Office has launched its investigation into Tesla, 66 00:04:17,480 --> 00:04:21,440 Speaker 1: and this investigation is looking into both the issue of 67 00:04:21,600 --> 00:04:25,960 Speaker 1: safety with Tesla's autopilot system, as well as seeking comment 68 00:04:26,040 --> 00:04:28,880 Speaker 1: from Tesla owners about whether or not they feel they 69 00:04:28,880 --> 00:04:31,800 Speaker 1: were the target of false advertising when it came to 70 00:04:31,839 --> 00:04:36,760 Speaker 1: Tesla's driver assist features. This might also include Tesla customers 71 00:04:36,960 --> 00:04:40,800 Speaker 1: who paid into the full self driving system, which is 72 00:04:40,839 --> 00:04:43,760 Speaker 1: still an advanced driver assist feature. It's not, as the 73 00:04:43,839 --> 00:04:48,440 Speaker 1: name seems to suggest, an actually fully autonomous method of 74 00:04:48,480 --> 00:04:52,000 Speaker 1: operating your vehicle. So this is still very early on 75 00:04:52,480 --> 00:04:56,760 Speaker 1: in the Attorney General's office investigation into Tesla. It's early 76 00:04:56,880 --> 00:05:00,000 Speaker 1: enough that CNBC wasn't able to get any confirmation from 77 00:04:59,839 --> 00:05:03,719 Speaker 1: the the office that it's actually engaged in such an investigation. 78 00:05:04,160 --> 00:05:07,960 Speaker 1: They did, however, talk with people who say they had 79 00:05:08,000 --> 00:05:11,200 Speaker 1: been in contact with the Attorney General's Office and answered 80 00:05:11,240 --> 00:05:14,960 Speaker 1: some questions about their experience with Tesla. It is too 81 00:05:15,000 --> 00:05:18,120 Speaker 1: early to assume any kind of outcome here or what 82 00:05:18,279 --> 00:05:22,159 Speaker 1: the office might demand of Tesla. Shouldn't find evidence of 83 00:05:22,680 --> 00:05:27,920 Speaker 1: false advertising or other issues. So it's just the earliest 84 00:05:28,000 --> 00:05:31,560 Speaker 1: days of this investigation and it may end up not 85 00:05:31,600 --> 00:05:34,240 Speaker 1: turning into anything. We'll just have to wait and see. 86 00:05:34,279 --> 00:05:38,279 Speaker 1: In certain sections of the Chinese city Chingdu, there are 87 00:05:38,480 --> 00:05:41,960 Speaker 1: no Tesla's allowed right now now. The reason for this 88 00:05:42,440 --> 00:05:45,760 Speaker 1: is that the city is hosting the World University Games 89 00:05:45,920 --> 00:05:50,440 Speaker 1: this week, and Chinese President Shi Jinping will visit the 90 00:05:50,480 --> 00:05:54,640 Speaker 1: city as part of the opening celebration, which is tomorrow. 91 00:05:54,800 --> 00:05:57,839 Speaker 1: The concern is that Tesla vehicles, which rely on optical 92 00:05:57,880 --> 00:06:00,880 Speaker 1: camera systems for the purposes of things like that collision detection, 93 00:06:01,600 --> 00:06:06,360 Speaker 1: could end up operating as a surveillance threat, so police 94 00:06:06,360 --> 00:06:09,080 Speaker 1: have been told to turn away drivers in Tesla's if 95 00:06:09,120 --> 00:06:12,120 Speaker 1: they should approach certain venues now. Elon Musk in the 96 00:06:12,200 --> 00:06:15,760 Speaker 1: past has said that Tesla obeys whatever local data laws 97 00:06:15,839 --> 00:06:19,600 Speaker 1: are in place in all the regions where Tesla's are 98 00:06:19,640 --> 00:06:22,960 Speaker 1: on the roads, but it sounds like Chinese authorities don't 99 00:06:22,960 --> 00:06:26,080 Speaker 1: want to take any chances, and have subsequently demanded that 100 00:06:26,279 --> 00:06:29,159 Speaker 1: cameras on wheels not be allowed near the places Shi 101 00:06:29,240 --> 00:06:34,680 Speaker 1: Jenping will visit. I suspect we won't see any official 102 00:06:34,760 --> 00:06:39,479 Speaker 1: outcry from Tesla the company because the Chinese market is 103 00:06:39,520 --> 00:06:43,159 Speaker 1: a critical one for Tesla, so it would shock me 104 00:06:43,920 --> 00:06:48,919 Speaker 1: if the company made any noise about this. What do 105 00:06:49,040 --> 00:06:57,400 Speaker 1: the following companies have in common? BMW, Honda, General Motors, Yundi, Mercedes, Benz, 106 00:06:57,800 --> 00:07:02,039 Speaker 1: Kia and Stalantis. That last one might not sound familiar 107 00:07:02,120 --> 00:07:03,880 Speaker 1: to you, but they own a whole bunch of car companies. 108 00:07:03,960 --> 00:07:06,960 Speaker 1: And if you in fact said, oh, those are all automakers, 109 00:07:07,279 --> 00:07:10,720 Speaker 1: you get partial credit. But beyond that, if you had said, 110 00:07:11,120 --> 00:07:14,040 Speaker 1: those are seven companies that are aiming to build out 111 00:07:14,080 --> 00:07:18,120 Speaker 1: an EV charging network to rival that of Tesla's in 112 00:07:18,160 --> 00:07:22,040 Speaker 1: North America, well then you get full marks. Because these companies, 113 00:07:22,080 --> 00:07:25,480 Speaker 1: which you could argue, really drag their collective feet. While 114 00:07:25,480 --> 00:07:28,760 Speaker 1: Elon Musk was directing Tesla to build out supercharger stations 115 00:07:28,800 --> 00:07:31,520 Speaker 1: all over the place, are now trying to push back 116 00:07:31,960 --> 00:07:37,400 Speaker 1: against Tesla's dominance in the space. So right now, Tesla 117 00:07:37,440 --> 00:07:42,800 Speaker 1: has approximately twenty two thousand supercharger stalls in North America. 118 00:07:43,160 --> 00:07:46,520 Speaker 1: This is according to Business Insider, that puts them by 119 00:07:46,840 --> 00:07:50,960 Speaker 1: far in the lead for EV charging stations. They have 120 00:07:51,240 --> 00:07:55,600 Speaker 1: completely eclipsed everyone else. But this coalition of automakers hopes 121 00:07:55,640 --> 00:08:00,240 Speaker 1: to build out more than thirty thousand charging stations. And 122 00:08:00,280 --> 00:08:03,440 Speaker 1: if you're wondering who currently holds number two in North 123 00:08:03,480 --> 00:08:07,160 Speaker 1: America for EV charging stations, that would actually be Volkswagen 124 00:08:07,240 --> 00:08:11,120 Speaker 1: backed company Electrify America. But they just have three, five 125 00:08:11,480 --> 00:08:14,320 Speaker 1: and ninety two. That is a far cry behind the 126 00:08:14,360 --> 00:08:19,160 Speaker 1: twenty two thousand now. Obviously, the need for charging stations 127 00:08:19,160 --> 00:08:22,640 Speaker 1: are one of the big reasons why EV adoption is 128 00:08:23,080 --> 00:08:26,640 Speaker 1: facing an uphill battle. Right, you have to have confidence 129 00:08:26,680 --> 00:08:30,280 Speaker 1: among consumers that they can actually recharge their cars and 130 00:08:30,320 --> 00:08:34,080 Speaker 1: not get stranded somewhere. And so this is a real need. 131 00:08:34,840 --> 00:08:38,600 Speaker 1: But you might ask, well, why are automakers rushing forward now? 132 00:08:38,640 --> 00:08:41,520 Speaker 1: I mean, this need has existed ever since people started 133 00:08:41,520 --> 00:08:44,559 Speaker 1: to talk about electric vehicles again. Well, there are a 134 00:08:44,600 --> 00:08:47,559 Speaker 1: couple of big reasons why it's happening now. One is 135 00:08:47,600 --> 00:08:50,320 Speaker 1: that evs are going to become increasingly common in North 136 00:08:50,360 --> 00:08:53,440 Speaker 1: America moving forward because a lot of automakers are moving 137 00:08:53,440 --> 00:08:58,000 Speaker 1: away from internal combustion engine vehicles. There's this global migration 138 00:08:58,320 --> 00:09:03,040 Speaker 1: away from those and for the purposes of manufacturing it 139 00:09:03,080 --> 00:09:06,239 Speaker 1: makes sense, and also, I mean it's cheaper to manufacture 140 00:09:06,280 --> 00:09:09,520 Speaker 1: evs than it is internal combustion engine vehicles. They are 141 00:09:09,640 --> 00:09:13,680 Speaker 1: simpler in design. Another reason is that the automakers would 142 00:09:13,760 --> 00:09:16,800 Speaker 1: rather be able to create their own charging standard than 143 00:09:17,000 --> 00:09:22,040 Speaker 1: to allow Tesla to dictate that standard, because if Tesla's 144 00:09:22,080 --> 00:09:27,520 Speaker 1: technology becomes the universal charging technology, that would mean automakers 145 00:09:27,559 --> 00:09:30,080 Speaker 1: would have to pay a license fee to Tesla in 146 00:09:30,160 --> 00:09:33,360 Speaker 1: order to make use of that tech, and that would 147 00:09:33,400 --> 00:09:36,400 Speaker 1: be great news for Tesla to rake in money for 148 00:09:36,520 --> 00:09:40,600 Speaker 1: licensing out its technology to other companies, but generally speaking, 149 00:09:40,880 --> 00:09:42,920 Speaker 1: companies would rather not have to do that if they 150 00:09:42,960 --> 00:09:45,440 Speaker 1: can find a workaround. So it sounds like the group 151 00:09:45,480 --> 00:09:48,160 Speaker 1: wants to build out charging stations that lift some of 152 00:09:48,160 --> 00:09:51,440 Speaker 1: the ideas that Tesla incorporates in its technology. For example, 153 00:09:52,120 --> 00:09:54,640 Speaker 1: to pay for charging, you would just plug in your vehicle, 154 00:09:54,800 --> 00:09:57,480 Speaker 1: and when you do that, the vehicle communicates with the 155 00:09:57,559 --> 00:10:03,040 Speaker 1: charging station, identifies itself, Your account automatically gets deducted whatever 156 00:10:03,080 --> 00:10:07,640 Speaker 1: the charge was for the juicing up your vehicle, and 157 00:10:07,679 --> 00:10:09,000 Speaker 1: you go on your way. You don't have to take 158 00:10:09,000 --> 00:10:12,679 Speaker 1: out a credit card or anything. That's a great feature 159 00:10:12,880 --> 00:10:15,000 Speaker 1: and it's one that I think these automakers are looking 160 00:10:15,040 --> 00:10:17,920 Speaker 1: to incorporate in their own solutions, so you could say 161 00:10:17,920 --> 00:10:22,160 Speaker 1: that they're going to be copying a lot of Tesla's features, 162 00:10:22,200 --> 00:10:25,440 Speaker 1: maybe not in operation, but in effect. My guess is 163 00:10:25,520 --> 00:10:28,600 Speaker 1: that's what we're going to see. Now, we're not done 164 00:10:28,600 --> 00:10:32,040 Speaker 1: with Tesla just yet. Reuter's reports that the company overpromised 165 00:10:32,040 --> 00:10:36,040 Speaker 1: how far its vehicles could drive on a single charge, and, 166 00:10:36,200 --> 00:10:38,960 Speaker 1: in an effort to avoid festen up to that issue, 167 00:10:39,400 --> 00:10:42,600 Speaker 1: would cancel appointments of drivers who were concerned that their 168 00:10:42,640 --> 00:10:46,960 Speaker 1: car wasn't performing up to standard. So, as a driver, 169 00:10:47,320 --> 00:10:50,640 Speaker 1: you would get behind the wheel of your Tesla, started up, 170 00:10:50,679 --> 00:10:52,520 Speaker 1: and you would see an estimate of how far you 171 00:10:52,520 --> 00:10:55,120 Speaker 1: could go on the current battery charge of your vehicle. 172 00:10:55,160 --> 00:10:59,680 Speaker 1: No pun intended. The drivers saw that their actual driving 173 00:10:59,760 --> 00:11:02,880 Speaker 1: range was lower than what the estimate was, and then 174 00:11:02,920 --> 00:11:06,320 Speaker 1: it was frequently, i mean like always lower. So naturally 175 00:11:06,400 --> 00:11:09,400 Speaker 1: some of the drivers sought an appointment with a Tesla 176 00:11:09,480 --> 00:11:12,079 Speaker 1: service center to see what was up, just assuming, oh, 177 00:11:12,480 --> 00:11:14,920 Speaker 1: something is wrong with my vehicle, because I'm never able 178 00:11:14,960 --> 00:11:18,600 Speaker 1: to achieve the driving range that is estimated when I 179 00:11:18,600 --> 00:11:21,559 Speaker 1: get in my vehicle. So, according to Reuter's, Tesla had 180 00:11:21,600 --> 00:11:26,360 Speaker 1: a team in place dedicated to canceling those types of 181 00:11:26,679 --> 00:11:30,199 Speaker 1: service appointments, because ultimately the only thing that was going 182 00:11:30,240 --> 00:11:34,000 Speaker 1: wrong was that the algorithm estimating the driving range was 183 00:11:34,160 --> 00:11:37,160 Speaker 1: way too optimistic. I suppose they could have tried to 184 00:11:37,160 --> 00:11:40,160 Speaker 1: fix the algorithm, but then the driver would likely notice 185 00:11:40,160 --> 00:11:43,800 Speaker 1: that their car now was estimating lower ranges than before, 186 00:11:44,320 --> 00:11:46,480 Speaker 1: and that if you're a driver, you would say, well, 187 00:11:46,480 --> 00:11:48,920 Speaker 1: they fixed the wrong dang part of the car. They 188 00:11:48,920 --> 00:11:50,560 Speaker 1: should have made the car be able to do what 189 00:11:50,559 --> 00:11:53,000 Speaker 1: it said it could do, not change what it said 190 00:11:53,040 --> 00:11:56,800 Speaker 1: it could do to something less Reuters couldn't find information 191 00:11:56,880 --> 00:12:00,800 Speaker 1: on when, or what, how or how all that algorithm 192 00:12:00,800 --> 00:12:03,199 Speaker 1: could have changed over the years, but Business Insider offered 193 00:12:03,280 --> 00:12:07,079 Speaker 1: up the encouragement that Tesla vehicle driving performance has actually 194 00:12:07,080 --> 00:12:10,680 Speaker 1: improved significantly over the years, so chances are you don't 195 00:12:10,760 --> 00:12:13,880 Speaker 1: encounter the same issue now. But doesn't change the fact that, 196 00:12:14,040 --> 00:12:18,880 Speaker 1: if this investigation is accurate, Tesla arguably engaged in false 197 00:12:18,960 --> 00:12:22,719 Speaker 1: advertising for years. Okay, we've got a lot more news 198 00:12:22,760 --> 00:12:24,840 Speaker 1: stories to go. It was a busy week. We're going 199 00:12:24,920 --> 00:12:36,480 Speaker 1: to take a quick break. We'll be right back. We're back. 200 00:12:37,080 --> 00:12:40,760 Speaker 1: Bloomberg reports that the US Federal Trade Commission is preparing 201 00:12:40,840 --> 00:12:45,920 Speaker 1: an enormous antitrust lawsuit against Amazon, and that the FTC 202 00:12:46,160 --> 00:12:50,400 Speaker 1: may even seek to break Amazon up a bit in 203 00:12:50,679 --> 00:12:55,480 Speaker 1: a corporate restructuring, and Amazon would have to spin off 204 00:12:55,559 --> 00:12:58,439 Speaker 1: parts of its business that would be huge. It's something 205 00:12:58,480 --> 00:13:02,240 Speaker 1: that we really haven't seen in the tech sector for decades. 206 00:13:02,720 --> 00:13:05,679 Speaker 1: Like the last time I remember them attempting to do 207 00:13:05,720 --> 00:13:09,040 Speaker 1: this was with Microsoft in the nineties, and ultimately that 208 00:13:09,160 --> 00:13:13,000 Speaker 1: decision was reversed, but initially that was going to happen 209 00:13:13,040 --> 00:13:15,560 Speaker 1: to Microsoft. So at the heart of the matter with 210 00:13:15,679 --> 00:13:19,400 Speaker 1: this particular case is Amazon's policies that appear to reward 211 00:13:19,520 --> 00:13:23,960 Speaker 1: merchants who rely on Amazon tools and then restrict merchants 212 00:13:24,200 --> 00:13:26,840 Speaker 1: who do not. That can mean that a merchant that 213 00:13:26,920 --> 00:13:30,040 Speaker 1: plays ball with Amazon will find itself popping up in 214 00:13:30,080 --> 00:13:34,160 Speaker 1: relevant searches more often or appearing as a suggested product. 215 00:13:34,520 --> 00:13:37,360 Speaker 1: You know, when you buy something or you've got something 216 00:13:37,400 --> 00:13:38,960 Speaker 1: in your cart and you see a message that says 217 00:13:38,960 --> 00:13:41,800 Speaker 1: people who bought this also bought this other kind of 218 00:13:41,800 --> 00:13:45,079 Speaker 1: stuff that kind of thing, And merchants who do not 219 00:13:46,360 --> 00:13:50,720 Speaker 1: use Amazon tools and services that are optional will find 220 00:13:50,720 --> 00:13:53,640 Speaker 1: that their products get buried deep in search results. That's 221 00:13:53,679 --> 00:13:57,360 Speaker 1: what the allegation is, and customers are not likely to 222 00:13:57,440 --> 00:14:01,600 Speaker 1: see the results at all, so they don't buy those products, 223 00:14:01,679 --> 00:14:05,439 Speaker 1: and the merchants who either can't afford or don't want 224 00:14:05,520 --> 00:14:09,040 Speaker 1: to use Amazon services end up being punished as a result. 225 00:14:09,320 --> 00:14:12,320 Speaker 1: So the FTC says, one, this is happening, and two 226 00:14:12,720 --> 00:14:17,439 Speaker 1: this practice is clearly anti competitive because Amazon owns the marketplace, 227 00:14:17,559 --> 00:14:21,240 Speaker 1: it dictates the terms, It awards advantages to people who 228 00:14:21,600 --> 00:14:25,720 Speaker 1: pay those optional Amazon services, and denies those advantages to 229 00:14:25,760 --> 00:14:28,720 Speaker 1: merchants who do not. I will keep an eye on this. 230 00:14:28,880 --> 00:14:31,440 Speaker 1: Bloomberg reports that the FTC's plan is to bring this 231 00:14:31,480 --> 00:14:35,680 Speaker 1: litigation against Amazon in August, and if that happens, it 232 00:14:35,760 --> 00:14:38,480 Speaker 1: might well warrant a full Tech Stuff episode to kind 233 00:14:38,480 --> 00:14:42,880 Speaker 1: of talk about this and previous antitrust suits that were 234 00:14:42,880 --> 00:14:46,200 Speaker 1: brought against tech companies, and maybe even talk about why 235 00:14:46,240 --> 00:14:50,520 Speaker 1: there was a very long gap between the efforts in 236 00:14:50,560 --> 00:14:53,800 Speaker 1: the nineties and what we're seeing play out today. One 237 00:14:53,840 --> 00:14:57,000 Speaker 1: story I did not cover on Tuesday, honestly because I 238 00:14:57,040 --> 00:14:59,040 Speaker 1: just needed more time to read up on it to 239 00:14:59,080 --> 00:15:02,400 Speaker 1: get it my head wrapped around it was that Google 240 00:15:02,440 --> 00:15:06,760 Speaker 1: has introduced a new specification called the Web Environment Integrity 241 00:15:06,840 --> 00:15:11,440 Speaker 1: spec so this specification would create an application programming interface 242 00:15:12,040 --> 00:15:15,640 Speaker 1: or API. The purpose of this API is that websites 243 00:15:15,640 --> 00:15:18,880 Speaker 1: could enable it to inform them if the browser and 244 00:15:18,960 --> 00:15:22,720 Speaker 1: the device running the browser is trusted by a third 245 00:15:22,800 --> 00:15:26,640 Speaker 1: party that would be called the a tester. So in 246 00:15:26,680 --> 00:15:30,240 Speaker 1: other words, the website could say, hey, is this person 247 00:15:30,400 --> 00:15:34,040 Speaker 1: or thing that's visiting my site? Is that trustworthy or not? 248 00:15:34,160 --> 00:15:36,040 Speaker 1: And this third party would say either yes or no. 249 00:15:36,640 --> 00:15:41,560 Speaker 1: The idea here is this would help websites differentiate real traffic, 250 00:15:41,880 --> 00:15:44,480 Speaker 1: you know, like traffic coming from actual human beings on 251 00:15:44,600 --> 00:15:48,880 Speaker 1: actual consumer devices or whatever, or if the traffic was 252 00:15:48,920 --> 00:15:52,720 Speaker 1: coming through some automated system like a bot. That One 253 00:15:52,720 --> 00:15:55,280 Speaker 1: of the use cases they mentioned would be to determine 254 00:15:55,280 --> 00:15:58,640 Speaker 1: if an interaction with an AD was one that was 255 00:15:58,680 --> 00:16:02,080 Speaker 1: taken by a real world, hure human being or if 256 00:16:02,120 --> 00:16:05,360 Speaker 1: someone just program bots to do it and artificially run 257 00:16:05,440 --> 00:16:08,640 Speaker 1: up the ads click through. But critics are calling this 258 00:16:08,720 --> 00:16:13,880 Speaker 1: approach akin to putting DRM on the web. DRM, in 259 00:16:13,880 --> 00:16:17,240 Speaker 1: case you're not familiar, stands for digital Rights management. If 260 00:16:17,240 --> 00:16:19,840 Speaker 1: you've got any sort of negative associations with that term, 261 00:16:19,960 --> 00:16:26,080 Speaker 1: it is totally understandable. DRM not always but frequently makes 262 00:16:26,080 --> 00:16:29,640 Speaker 1: it harder for legitimate consumers to actually enjoy the products 263 00:16:30,000 --> 00:16:33,800 Speaker 1: they legitimately bought, and it only stands as a minor 264 00:16:33,840 --> 00:16:36,960 Speaker 1: inconvenience to people who are determined to steal stuff because 265 00:16:37,040 --> 00:16:40,000 Speaker 1: invariably they find a way to break the erm. So, 266 00:16:40,040 --> 00:16:43,600 Speaker 1: in other words, most of the time, maybe just much 267 00:16:43,600 --> 00:16:45,920 Speaker 1: of the time, let's be kind, much of the time, 268 00:16:46,360 --> 00:16:48,760 Speaker 1: it fails to solve the problem it was designed to stop, 269 00:16:49,240 --> 00:16:53,040 Speaker 1: i e. Piracy And meanwhile, it makes the normal experience 270 00:16:53,120 --> 00:16:56,200 Speaker 1: worse for everyone who's playing by the rules, which is 271 00:16:56,480 --> 00:17:00,400 Speaker 1: doubly bad, right, and yet it's still a thing anyway. 272 00:17:00,600 --> 00:17:04,399 Speaker 1: A big concern about Google's approach is that this could 273 00:17:04,520 --> 00:17:07,879 Speaker 1: mean and a tester, the third party that tells you 274 00:17:07,920 --> 00:17:11,360 Speaker 1: whether or not something is trustworthy or not, could arbitrarily 275 00:17:11,520 --> 00:17:16,800 Speaker 1: decide that a particular browser or platform is untrustworthy and 276 00:17:17,119 --> 00:17:20,919 Speaker 1: just blacklist it. And if that a tester is like Google, 277 00:17:21,400 --> 00:17:24,560 Speaker 1: because Google suggested that Google Play would serve as the 278 00:17:24,600 --> 00:17:28,399 Speaker 1: a tester for Android platforms, well that means Google effectively 279 00:17:28,440 --> 00:17:32,200 Speaker 1: becomes a gatekeeper. And if you are a developer who 280 00:17:32,200 --> 00:17:36,280 Speaker 1: has created an alternative browser, it may mean that you 281 00:17:36,480 --> 00:17:38,959 Speaker 1: no longer have a business because no one can use 282 00:17:38,960 --> 00:17:41,200 Speaker 1: your tool to access anything, at least not on an 283 00:17:41,200 --> 00:17:46,040 Speaker 1: Android device because the third party a tester, has determined 284 00:17:46,080 --> 00:17:49,320 Speaker 1: that your tool is not trustworthy. So if Google decides 285 00:17:49,320 --> 00:17:52,560 Speaker 1: a particular browser is untrust trustworthy, can effectively block them 286 00:17:52,600 --> 00:17:56,160 Speaker 1: from accessing the web. That seems more than a little 287 00:17:56,240 --> 00:18:00,000 Speaker 1: like overreach. If you ask me now, Similarly, you would 288 00:18:00,080 --> 00:18:03,879 Speaker 1: assume that Google would name like Microsoft to be the 289 00:18:03,920 --> 00:18:07,600 Speaker 1: gatekeeper or the a tester for Windows based machines, and 290 00:18:07,640 --> 00:18:13,119 Speaker 1: Apple would undoubtedly be the gatekeeper for iOS and macOS devices. 291 00:18:14,000 --> 00:18:17,240 Speaker 1: Considering the conversation these days often circles around the problem 292 00:18:17,320 --> 00:18:20,439 Speaker 1: of a centralized web that is the realm of just 293 00:18:20,480 --> 00:18:24,240 Speaker 1: a few powerful tech companies, this seems like a supremely 294 00:18:24,720 --> 00:18:28,320 Speaker 1: bad move. It's like a direct strike against the open web. 295 00:18:29,119 --> 00:18:32,240 Speaker 1: I think it is likely that we will eventually see 296 00:18:32,280 --> 00:18:35,600 Speaker 1: regulators oppose this approach. I think that's most likely to 297 00:18:35,640 --> 00:18:38,720 Speaker 1: happen first in places like the EU the European Union, 298 00:18:39,160 --> 00:18:43,919 Speaker 1: because they are very quick to spot and oppose things 299 00:18:43,920 --> 00:18:49,240 Speaker 1: that are anti competitive or monopolistic. Switching gears, Meta has 300 00:18:49,320 --> 00:18:53,359 Speaker 1: had a great week financially. The company showed that it 301 00:18:53,400 --> 00:19:00,040 Speaker 1: had increased ad engagement and sales figures dramatically beating industry estimates, 302 00:19:00,080 --> 00:19:02,960 Speaker 1: and they leaned heavily on AI tools to do so. 303 00:19:02,960 --> 00:19:05,280 Speaker 1: So this is like a double win for Meta, right 304 00:19:05,359 --> 00:19:08,640 Speaker 1: one they're able to show how well their business worked, 305 00:19:08,640 --> 00:19:11,679 Speaker 1: and two they were able to demonstrate the effectiveness of 306 00:19:11,720 --> 00:19:15,720 Speaker 1: AI in this particular application. The improved performance led to 307 00:19:15,760 --> 00:19:18,840 Speaker 1: a surge in the company's stock price, and just like that, 308 00:19:19,000 --> 00:19:23,360 Speaker 1: Meta saw sixty billion dollars tagged on top of its 309 00:19:23,400 --> 00:19:29,080 Speaker 1: market value. World's turn on such things. Meta also showed 310 00:19:29,080 --> 00:19:31,919 Speaker 1: that it had improved ad engagement and sales on its 311 00:19:32,040 --> 00:19:35,920 Speaker 1: Reels product within Instagram, which of course is another big deal, 312 00:19:36,760 --> 00:19:40,480 Speaker 1: and investors are very much encouraged and advertisers are flocking 313 00:19:40,640 --> 00:19:43,320 Speaker 1: to Meta. I meanwhile, you know x dot Com over 314 00:19:43,359 --> 00:19:45,240 Speaker 1: there is saying brands need to cough up a grand 315 00:19:45,240 --> 00:19:48,040 Speaker 1: a month to stay checked on the site. It's like 316 00:19:48,160 --> 00:19:51,359 Speaker 1: night and day these companies. Anyway, while Meta the company 317 00:19:51,440 --> 00:19:54,040 Speaker 1: is doing great, I think it is really important for 318 00:19:54,119 --> 00:19:57,959 Speaker 1: users to remember that this increase in performance ultimately comes 319 00:19:58,040 --> 00:20:01,120 Speaker 1: back to the fact that Meta is very good at 320 00:20:01,119 --> 00:20:05,400 Speaker 1: collecting your data. It's very good at sussing out what 321 00:20:05,560 --> 00:20:08,600 Speaker 1: you like and what you want and then serving that 322 00:20:08,720 --> 00:20:11,560 Speaker 1: up to you. By sharing the information with advertisers. Just 323 00:20:11,560 --> 00:20:14,000 Speaker 1: something to always keep in mind, you know, because we 324 00:20:14,119 --> 00:20:17,760 Speaker 1: are the product here. So while if you're an investor 325 00:20:17,760 --> 00:20:20,000 Speaker 1: in Meta, you're probably happy to hear that the company 326 00:20:20,040 --> 00:20:24,200 Speaker 1: had such a great turnout this week, but if you're 327 00:20:24,200 --> 00:20:27,240 Speaker 1: a user, you need to remember, like there's a there's 328 00:20:27,280 --> 00:20:30,320 Speaker 1: a dark side to all of this. Here's another story 329 00:20:30,400 --> 00:20:35,160 Speaker 1: about anti competitiveness. This time we've got three big tech 330 00:20:35,160 --> 00:20:38,680 Speaker 1: companies that are banding together to compete against two other 331 00:20:39,000 --> 00:20:42,760 Speaker 1: big tech companies. In fact, the story involves the big 332 00:20:42,840 --> 00:20:46,800 Speaker 1: five tech companies. It involves Google and Apple, who are 333 00:20:46,920 --> 00:20:50,119 Speaker 1: kind of in the dominant positions on one side, and 334 00:20:50,160 --> 00:20:54,600 Speaker 1: the combined might of Meta, Microsoft and Amazon on the other. 335 00:20:55,040 --> 00:20:59,679 Speaker 1: And what is the battleground? Map apps digital maps, So 336 00:20:59,720 --> 00:21:03,439 Speaker 1: currently on Apple and Google dominate the digital map space, 337 00:21:03,560 --> 00:21:07,080 Speaker 1: right Like, if you're using an iOS device, chances are 338 00:21:07,119 --> 00:21:09,439 Speaker 1: you're probably using Apple Maps. If you're on Android, you're 339 00:21:09,440 --> 00:21:12,320 Speaker 1: probably using Google Maps. If you're on Apple and you're 340 00:21:12,320 --> 00:21:14,720 Speaker 1: fed up with Apple Maps, you may be using Google Maps. 341 00:21:15,080 --> 00:21:17,840 Speaker 1: Although that's unfair. Apple Maps was very bad when it 342 00:21:17,920 --> 00:21:22,240 Speaker 1: first launched, but they fix that and in some cases, 343 00:21:22,280 --> 00:21:26,040 Speaker 1: Apple Maps gives much better directions than Google Maps. I've 344 00:21:26,040 --> 00:21:28,560 Speaker 1: had that happen a couple of times where my partner 345 00:21:30,320 --> 00:21:33,280 Speaker 1: their map would end up bringing us to a location 346 00:21:33,480 --> 00:21:39,000 Speaker 1: much more efficiently than my Android Google Maps navigation would 347 00:21:39,000 --> 00:21:42,840 Speaker 1: take us. So it goes both ways anyway. App developers 348 00:21:42,880 --> 00:21:46,359 Speaker 1: that want map functionality in their apps frequently they have 349 00:21:46,400 --> 00:21:49,399 Speaker 1: to pay one or the other, or maybe even both 350 00:21:49,480 --> 00:21:53,880 Speaker 1: Google and Apple to access their map data to help 351 00:21:54,000 --> 00:21:59,080 Speaker 1: populate the app that the developer is creating. Meanwhile, these 352 00:21:59,119 --> 00:22:02,320 Speaker 1: other three big companies are saying, why can't we get 353 00:22:02,359 --> 00:22:05,600 Speaker 1: some of the money. So these three companies in partnership 354 00:22:05,600 --> 00:22:09,080 Speaker 1: with tom Tom are releasing data that app developers can 355 00:22:09,160 --> 00:22:11,919 Speaker 1: use to build out their own map functions, and that 356 00:22:12,000 --> 00:22:14,439 Speaker 1: way they could bypass the need to pay Google or 357 00:22:14,480 --> 00:22:19,200 Speaker 1: Apple for that information. Now, these groups are not building 358 00:22:19,280 --> 00:22:22,879 Speaker 1: their own map app. We're not getting a third contender 359 00:22:23,040 --> 00:22:27,439 Speaker 1: against Google and Apple Maps. Instead, what they're doing is 360 00:22:27,520 --> 00:22:32,320 Speaker 1: they're giving developers the opportunity to access this mountain of 361 00:22:32,520 --> 00:22:35,960 Speaker 1: underlying data, and it's up to the developers to build 362 00:22:35,960 --> 00:22:39,399 Speaker 1: the map software that they want and the experience they 363 00:22:39,440 --> 00:22:41,880 Speaker 1: have in mind. Personally, I think it's a good move. 364 00:22:42,200 --> 00:22:48,400 Speaker 1: Competition is important, Competition inspires innovation. Competition can keep prices lower. 365 00:22:48,920 --> 00:22:51,520 Speaker 1: It'll be interesting to see if this initiative actually challenges 366 00:22:51,600 --> 00:22:55,960 Speaker 1: the existing duopoly in the digital map space. However, Okay, 367 00:22:57,119 --> 00:23:00,200 Speaker 1: I've got, oh my gosh, so many more stories. We're 368 00:23:00,200 --> 00:23:01,639 Speaker 1: going to do one more before we do a break. 369 00:23:02,040 --> 00:23:06,920 Speaker 1: I'm calling an audible y'all, cause gosh, there's so many stories. 370 00:23:06,960 --> 00:23:11,399 Speaker 1: So in Hollywood, strikes continue with the Writer's Guild of 371 00:23:11,400 --> 00:23:16,880 Speaker 1: America and sag AFTRA unions. One of the many issues 372 00:23:16,920 --> 00:23:21,960 Speaker 1: that these two unions are facing in Hollywood centers around 373 00:23:22,640 --> 00:23:25,919 Speaker 1: artificial intelligence and its place in Hollywood and if it 374 00:23:26,040 --> 00:23:29,680 Speaker 1: even should have a place. If it does, where should 375 00:23:29,720 --> 00:23:35,880 Speaker 1: the restrictions be. Meanwhile, Netflix pulled focus when Netflix's search 376 00:23:36,000 --> 00:23:40,960 Speaker 1: for an AI product manager became public knowledge. So, according 377 00:23:41,000 --> 00:23:46,240 Speaker 1: to Netflix's you Know job opening, they're offering up to 378 00:23:46,400 --> 00:23:50,320 Speaker 1: nine hundred thousand dollars per year as a salary for 379 00:23:50,359 --> 00:23:55,080 Speaker 1: a suitably qualified person to be an AI product manager. Meanwhile, 380 00:23:55,520 --> 00:23:59,200 Speaker 1: sag AFTRA argues that nearly ninety percent of working actors 381 00:23:59,240 --> 00:24:02,040 Speaker 1: earn less than two twenty six thousand dollars a year. 382 00:24:02,480 --> 00:24:06,080 Speaker 1: By the way, that's the threshold an actor must meet 383 00:24:06,359 --> 00:24:10,080 Speaker 1: if they are to receive medical benefits from the union, right, 384 00:24:10,080 --> 00:24:13,000 Speaker 1: they have to get twenty six thousand dollars from acting. Actually, 385 00:24:13,000 --> 00:24:15,520 Speaker 1: I think it's twenty six four hundred and seventy. You 386 00:24:15,600 --> 00:24:17,919 Speaker 1: have to make at least that much just from acting 387 00:24:18,560 --> 00:24:21,720 Speaker 1: in order to qualify for medical benefits. So you might 388 00:24:21,800 --> 00:24:25,000 Speaker 1: supplement your acting with other jobs and you might make 389 00:24:25,040 --> 00:24:28,800 Speaker 1: more than twenty six thousand, but the union only counts 390 00:24:28,800 --> 00:24:32,159 Speaker 1: it if it is derived from your work as an actor. 391 00:24:32,760 --> 00:24:36,639 Speaker 1: So the argument here is that the vast majority of 392 00:24:36,680 --> 00:24:42,040 Speaker 1: actors are being exploited. And meanwhile, here's Netflix putting out 393 00:24:42,080 --> 00:24:45,280 Speaker 1: an ad for an AI expert who will be making 394 00:24:45,320 --> 00:24:48,639 Speaker 1: nearly a million dollars a year. So the narrative emerging 395 00:24:48,680 --> 00:24:50,720 Speaker 1: from this labor strike has largely been on the side 396 00:24:50,720 --> 00:24:53,160 Speaker 1: of writers and actors, as they point out that there's 397 00:24:53,200 --> 00:24:57,520 Speaker 1: not actually a shortage of money in Hollywood. Rather, studios 398 00:24:57,560 --> 00:25:00,560 Speaker 1: are attempting to withhold as much money for things like 399 00:25:00,680 --> 00:25:05,439 Speaker 1: executive compensation and for shareholder return, while the people who 400 00:25:05,480 --> 00:25:09,720 Speaker 1: are responsible for actually making the stuff that Hollywood profits 401 00:25:09,720 --> 00:25:12,679 Speaker 1: off of are left out of the conversation, or worse, 402 00:25:13,200 --> 00:25:17,320 Speaker 1: their work is actively being threatened by a predatory use 403 00:25:17,400 --> 00:25:21,960 Speaker 1: of artificial intelligence. Okay, one more, the US Securities and 404 00:25:22,080 --> 00:25:26,040 Speaker 1: Exchange Commission, or SEC, has some new rules that are 405 00:25:26,080 --> 00:25:30,879 Speaker 1: bound to hit publicly traded companies hard. These rules state 406 00:25:31,320 --> 00:25:35,640 Speaker 1: that if a company detects a cybersecurity breach that could 407 00:25:35,680 --> 00:25:40,000 Speaker 1: affect the company's bottom line, it has four days to 408 00:25:40,040 --> 00:25:44,800 Speaker 1: publicly disclose that breach. Now, you're probably aware that many 409 00:25:44,880 --> 00:25:47,960 Speaker 1: times a company will detect a breach, but then keep 410 00:25:47,960 --> 00:25:51,639 Speaker 1: that information under wraps for weeks or sometimes months, or 411 00:25:51,640 --> 00:25:54,480 Speaker 1: maybe even up to a year, as people within the 412 00:25:54,520 --> 00:25:57,359 Speaker 1: company determine how best to respond and to try and 413 00:25:57,400 --> 00:26:00,240 Speaker 1: limit the amount of damage that could be done to 414 00:26:00,280 --> 00:26:04,800 Speaker 1: the company by revealing it. The SEC has taken a 415 00:26:04,800 --> 00:26:09,639 Speaker 1: stance that this approach hurts investors. That's the primary concern 416 00:26:09,720 --> 00:26:12,639 Speaker 1: for the SEC. I mean, it also hurts consumers. But 417 00:26:12,720 --> 00:26:15,919 Speaker 1: they're saying no, investors deserve to know this because that 418 00:26:16,080 --> 00:26:20,640 Speaker 1: has a direct effect on their investment. So the only 419 00:26:20,680 --> 00:26:24,359 Speaker 1: exceptions the SEC will consider to this four day rule 420 00:26:24,800 --> 00:26:28,879 Speaker 1: are cases where revealing the breach could impact national security 421 00:26:29,200 --> 00:26:33,600 Speaker 1: or public safety, or if a company could successfully argue 422 00:26:33,680 --> 00:26:37,040 Speaker 1: that the breach did not affect the company's bottom line. 423 00:26:37,480 --> 00:26:41,560 Speaker 1: And to be clear that for daytimer only starts ticking 424 00:26:41,600 --> 00:26:44,760 Speaker 1: once a company has made that determination. So if a 425 00:26:44,800 --> 00:26:49,119 Speaker 1: company you know, takes it's real sweet time to determine 426 00:26:49,160 --> 00:26:51,800 Speaker 1: if that breach actually is going to have a bottom 427 00:26:52,320 --> 00:26:56,840 Speaker 1: line effect. That four days doesn't start until you know, 428 00:26:57,520 --> 00:27:01,600 Speaker 1: the conclusion is arrived at, which seems like it's a 429 00:27:01,840 --> 00:27:05,080 Speaker 1: possible loophole to me. But anyway, if it's a publicly 430 00:27:05,119 --> 00:27:08,760 Speaker 1: traded company, it is obligated to come forward within four days. Obviously, 431 00:27:08,760 --> 00:27:11,800 Speaker 1: private companies are exempt from this. They have their own 432 00:27:11,840 --> 00:27:15,760 Speaker 1: private shareholders, they are not beholden to these rules. The 433 00:27:15,840 --> 00:27:18,680 Speaker 1: adoption of these rules came down to a three to 434 00:27:18,720 --> 00:27:23,160 Speaker 1: two vote. The SEC is made up of five people 435 00:27:23,200 --> 00:27:26,960 Speaker 1: on the board, and it split right down party lines. 436 00:27:27,000 --> 00:27:31,080 Speaker 1: You had three Democratic appointees and two Republican appointees. The 437 00:27:31,119 --> 00:27:34,480 Speaker 1: three Democrats voted in favor of the two Republicans voted against. 438 00:27:34,840 --> 00:27:38,000 Speaker 1: And there are arguments both for and against these rules, 439 00:27:38,160 --> 00:27:40,600 Speaker 1: and maybe one day I'll do a full episode to 440 00:27:40,720 --> 00:27:44,960 Speaker 1: talk about those. It does get more involved and complicated 441 00:27:45,000 --> 00:27:48,359 Speaker 1: than we can chat about here. Okay, I still have 442 00:27:48,480 --> 00:27:51,879 Speaker 1: several news stories to get through, so let's take another 443 00:27:51,920 --> 00:27:53,919 Speaker 1: break and then we'll get back and get through this 444 00:27:54,080 --> 00:28:08,360 Speaker 1: epic news episode. We're back so Reuter's reports that Google's 445 00:28:08,480 --> 00:28:13,760 Speaker 1: sister company, Weimo, the autonomous vehicle company, has parked to 446 00:28:13,880 --> 00:28:16,800 Speaker 1: use a pun and at least temporarily its efforts to 447 00:28:16,880 --> 00:28:22,560 Speaker 1: create self driving trucking technology. Instead, Weimo will focus on 448 00:28:23,280 --> 00:28:26,600 Speaker 1: ride haaling services, you know, essentially an alternative to things 449 00:28:26,640 --> 00:28:30,119 Speaker 1: like Uber and Lyft. I'm honestly really surprised by this. 450 00:28:30,800 --> 00:28:35,159 Speaker 1: I had assumed that the trucking application would be the 451 00:28:35,200 --> 00:28:38,160 Speaker 1: one more likely to steal focus. I mean, it seems 452 00:28:38,840 --> 00:28:41,200 Speaker 1: like that would be a more achievable goal to me. 453 00:28:41,360 --> 00:28:44,360 Speaker 1: But perhaps I'm just way off base here. The company 454 00:28:44,440 --> 00:28:47,480 Speaker 1: is forming a strategic partnership with Diamler Truck North America, 455 00:28:47,920 --> 00:28:51,440 Speaker 1: so Diamler's going to take over the trucking operations aspect. 456 00:28:51,800 --> 00:28:55,880 Speaker 1: Weimo will attempt to dominate the autonomous ride hailing services 457 00:28:55,920 --> 00:28:59,000 Speaker 1: industry in cities like San Francisco and Los Angeles out 458 00:28:59,040 --> 00:29:04,280 Speaker 1: in California, as well as Phoenix in Arizona. Some scientists 459 00:29:04,320 --> 00:29:08,200 Speaker 1: at the Quantum Energy Research Center in South Korea, as 460 00:29:08,200 --> 00:29:10,640 Speaker 1: well as a researcher at the College of William and 461 00:29:10,680 --> 00:29:13,840 Speaker 1: Mary in Virginia in the United States, have claimed that 462 00:29:13,920 --> 00:29:17,360 Speaker 1: they made a monumental breakthrough which is putting it lightly. 463 00:29:18,040 --> 00:29:21,200 Speaker 1: They say they've created a material that can achieve super 464 00:29:21,240 --> 00:29:26,240 Speaker 1: conductivity at room temperatures and room pressure air pressure. So 465 00:29:26,320 --> 00:29:29,400 Speaker 1: let's break this down. So you can pass electricity through 466 00:29:29,400 --> 00:29:32,720 Speaker 1: an electrical conductor. Right, conductors can allow electricity to pass 467 00:29:32,760 --> 00:29:37,360 Speaker 1: through them, whereas an insulator resists electricity passing through it. 468 00:29:38,280 --> 00:29:42,480 Speaker 1: But under most circumstances, the amount of electricity you put 469 00:29:42,720 --> 00:29:45,880 Speaker 1: into a conductor is going to be more than the 470 00:29:45,880 --> 00:29:48,480 Speaker 1: amount of electricity you'll measure at the other end of 471 00:29:48,520 --> 00:29:51,440 Speaker 1: the conductor. You're going to lose some energy in the 472 00:29:51,480 --> 00:29:55,000 Speaker 1: process because some of the electricity gets lost in the 473 00:29:55,000 --> 00:29:57,440 Speaker 1: form of heat. This is why you have to have 474 00:29:57,880 --> 00:30:02,480 Speaker 1: all those cooling systems and things like super powerful gaming computers, 475 00:30:02,960 --> 00:30:06,160 Speaker 1: because they end up losing a lot of energy in 476 00:30:06,200 --> 00:30:08,400 Speaker 1: the form of heat, and you got to dissipate that heat. 477 00:30:08,440 --> 00:30:10,920 Speaker 1: Because of the wise things go wrong, but it ultimately 478 00:30:10,960 --> 00:30:15,920 Speaker 1: means you have an inefficiency in your system due to 479 00:30:15,960 --> 00:30:18,760 Speaker 1: this loss of energy in the form of heat. But 480 00:30:18,880 --> 00:30:22,600 Speaker 1: a superconductor is a material that, under the right conditions, 481 00:30:23,160 --> 00:30:27,440 Speaker 1: can conduct electricity with zero loss. There's no electrical resistance, 482 00:30:28,040 --> 00:30:31,440 Speaker 1: there's no loss in energy. You get the same electricity 483 00:30:31,440 --> 00:30:34,240 Speaker 1: coming out as you got putting into it. But to 484 00:30:34,320 --> 00:30:37,800 Speaker 1: achieve this, typically you need to do stuff like super 485 00:30:37,800 --> 00:30:41,479 Speaker 1: cool the conductor down to a wicked cold temperature, like 486 00:30:42,200 --> 00:30:45,040 Speaker 1: getting close to absolute zero. That's how cold you need 487 00:30:45,080 --> 00:30:48,280 Speaker 1: to get. And or you may need to use really 488 00:30:48,280 --> 00:30:53,280 Speaker 1: incredible pressure in an effort to create a super conductive material. 489 00:30:53,680 --> 00:30:57,160 Speaker 1: So this is difficult, it is dangerous, it is expensive. 490 00:30:57,720 --> 00:31:01,040 Speaker 1: But if someone were to create a material that was 491 00:31:01,160 --> 00:31:05,440 Speaker 1: a perfect conductor at room temperature and room pressure, that 492 00:31:05,520 --> 00:31:10,400 Speaker 1: would be beyond astonishing. That is what this team is 493 00:31:10,440 --> 00:31:13,520 Speaker 1: claiming to have done. They say they've made this new material. 494 00:31:13,560 --> 00:31:18,320 Speaker 1: They took stuff like lead and sulfur and phosphorus and oxygen, 495 00:31:18,400 --> 00:31:21,840 Speaker 1: and they baked it all together at super high temperatures 496 00:31:22,120 --> 00:31:25,680 Speaker 1: and ended up with this dark gray solid material that 497 00:31:25,760 --> 00:31:29,600 Speaker 1: they claim can perform as a superconductor at temperatures as 498 00:31:29,680 --> 00:31:34,600 Speaker 1: high as eighty six degrees fahrenheit or thirty celsius, which 499 00:31:34,640 --> 00:31:40,000 Speaker 1: is unthinkable. Now their work has yet to be accepted 500 00:31:40,080 --> 00:31:45,000 Speaker 1: by a peer reviewed journal. There are plenty of scientists 501 00:31:45,080 --> 00:31:49,800 Speaker 1: who are skeptical of these results for very valid reasons. 502 00:31:50,280 --> 00:31:53,560 Speaker 1: There have been previous reports of similar achievements from others, 503 00:31:54,040 --> 00:31:56,239 Speaker 1: and it always has turned out to have been a 504 00:31:56,280 --> 00:31:59,480 Speaker 1: mistake or a hoax, and not something that anyone else 505 00:31:59,520 --> 00:32:02,840 Speaker 1: could replace Kate. So we need to wait for independent 506 00:32:02,880 --> 00:32:06,840 Speaker 1: teams to either verify or refute these results, to essentially 507 00:32:06,880 --> 00:32:10,040 Speaker 1: try and do the exact same thing this team says 508 00:32:10,080 --> 00:32:12,360 Speaker 1: they did and see if they get the same results 509 00:32:12,920 --> 00:32:15,880 Speaker 1: before we can draw any kind of scientific conclusion about this. 510 00:32:16,240 --> 00:32:19,200 Speaker 1: It is way too early to get excited about this possibility. 511 00:32:19,680 --> 00:32:22,520 Speaker 1: The team will have a very high threshold of proof 512 00:32:22,560 --> 00:32:26,320 Speaker 1: they have to meet before the scientific community will accept this. 513 00:32:27,120 --> 00:32:31,640 Speaker 1: So it's probably not true because it is just it's 514 00:32:31,720 --> 00:32:35,640 Speaker 1: such a huge leap. But if it were true, it 515 00:32:35,640 --> 00:32:39,200 Speaker 1: would lead to massive advancements and lots of areas of 516 00:32:39,200 --> 00:32:45,160 Speaker 1: engineering and science. So I am very skeptical, but man, 517 00:32:45,200 --> 00:32:48,160 Speaker 1: I hope it's true. Like I don't think it is, 518 00:32:48,400 --> 00:32:51,960 Speaker 1: but I hope it is, because that again would mean 519 00:32:52,000 --> 00:32:56,000 Speaker 1: that you could do things like create superconductors to power 520 00:32:56,040 --> 00:32:59,920 Speaker 1: things like particle accelerators without the need for these massive 521 00:33:00,040 --> 00:33:05,000 Speaker 1: cooling systems to keep all the powerful magnets you need 522 00:33:05,680 --> 00:33:09,920 Speaker 1: at the correct temperature in order to operate the particle accelerator. 523 00:33:09,960 --> 00:33:13,960 Speaker 1: That suddenly makes particle accelerators cheaper to build, which means 524 00:33:13,960 --> 00:33:16,720 Speaker 1: you can make more powerful ones and learn way more 525 00:33:16,760 --> 00:33:19,800 Speaker 1: about the universe. Like you see how it could be 526 00:33:19,880 --> 00:33:23,800 Speaker 1: incredible if it is true. I just doubt it is. 527 00:33:24,240 --> 00:33:28,200 Speaker 1: I hope I'm wrong. I hope other independent teams end 528 00:33:28,320 --> 00:33:32,040 Speaker 1: up replicating those responses or results, and that we see 529 00:33:32,040 --> 00:33:34,560 Speaker 1: that the research team was right on the money. That 530 00:33:34,560 --> 00:33:37,200 Speaker 1: would be amazing. Now I've said this many times on 531 00:33:37,240 --> 00:33:40,800 Speaker 1: this show, but space is hard. Also, it's trying to 532 00:33:40,880 --> 00:33:43,800 Speaker 1: kill you. So it should come as little surprised that Boeing, 533 00:33:44,240 --> 00:33:47,480 Speaker 1: which has been working on the Starliner spacecraft, which is 534 00:33:47,640 --> 00:33:53,959 Speaker 1: a capsule size spacecraft, smaller than the Orion but bigger 535 00:33:54,000 --> 00:33:59,800 Speaker 1: than the Apollo capsule of the old Space Race days, 536 00:34:00,240 --> 00:34:04,160 Speaker 1: Boeing has lost a lot of money developing the star 537 00:34:04,280 --> 00:34:09,760 Speaker 1: Liner because of lots of unforeseen problems they've run intwo 538 00:34:10,120 --> 00:34:12,560 Speaker 1: so far on this project. Like we're talking one point 539 00:34:12,640 --> 00:34:15,960 Speaker 1: one billion dollars worth of losses now, in case you 540 00:34:15,960 --> 00:34:20,400 Speaker 1: weren't familiar, Boeing's star Liner is one of two space 541 00:34:20,440 --> 00:34:26,680 Speaker 1: capsules the NASA had tapped as being a way to 542 00:34:26,719 --> 00:34:31,279 Speaker 1: transport astronauts to and from the space station, as well 543 00:34:31,320 --> 00:34:35,239 Speaker 1: as other platforms that would be in lowerth orbit. So 544 00:34:35,320 --> 00:34:40,560 Speaker 1: the two were Boeing's Starliner, which has yet to become 545 00:34:40,600 --> 00:34:46,480 Speaker 1: a thing, and SpaceX's Dragon two capsule. So Boeing had 546 00:34:46,520 --> 00:34:49,560 Speaker 1: to scrap a test launch recently. It was supposed to 547 00:34:49,560 --> 00:34:52,920 Speaker 1: be a launched this month with two astronauts aboard a 548 00:34:52,960 --> 00:34:57,520 Speaker 1: Starliner capsule, but Boeing discovered that one of the components 549 00:34:57,560 --> 00:35:01,799 Speaker 1: in the capsule is flammable, which is bad, and in 550 00:35:01,800 --> 00:35:05,040 Speaker 1: that case it's a kind of tape that can be 551 00:35:05,120 --> 00:35:10,280 Speaker 1: removed from the capsule, but it was a potential fire hazard, 552 00:35:10,600 --> 00:35:12,680 Speaker 1: So that was one reason why it had to be scrapped. 553 00:35:13,000 --> 00:35:14,960 Speaker 1: And the other is that they found that the links 554 00:35:15,360 --> 00:35:19,239 Speaker 1: that connect the capsule's parachute to the capsule itself do 555 00:35:19,400 --> 00:35:23,880 Speaker 1: not meet NASA's safety standards. These seem like valid reasons 556 00:35:23,880 --> 00:35:26,680 Speaker 1: to cancel a test flight. The fact that NASA was 557 00:35:26,719 --> 00:35:31,440 Speaker 1: getting this close to a launch date before Boeing revealed 558 00:35:31,440 --> 00:35:34,640 Speaker 1: these problems has raised some red flags. So now the 559 00:35:34,680 --> 00:35:36,880 Speaker 1: Space Agency is taking a much closer look at the 560 00:35:36,920 --> 00:35:40,680 Speaker 1: star Liners designed to see what, if any other problems 561 00:35:40,760 --> 00:35:44,719 Speaker 1: might be present. So this might mean that we might 562 00:35:44,800 --> 00:35:48,560 Speaker 1: have to wait until twenty twenty four. Star Liners first 563 00:35:48,680 --> 00:35:53,440 Speaker 1: test with astronauts aboard a capsule. Meanwhile, SpaceX has taken 564 00:35:53,520 --> 00:35:57,120 Speaker 1: up the slack. Speaking of space, NASA announced a partnership 565 00:35:57,160 --> 00:35:59,240 Speaker 1: with the Department of Defense here in the United States 566 00:35:59,520 --> 00:36:04,560 Speaker 1: to launch a nuclear powered rocket by twenty twenty seven. Now, 567 00:36:04,560 --> 00:36:09,960 Speaker 1: to be clear, the launch vehicle would use conventional chemically 568 00:36:10,000 --> 00:36:12,840 Speaker 1: fueled boosters to lift off of Earth. You wouldn't have 569 00:36:12,880 --> 00:36:18,320 Speaker 1: a nuclear reactor generating the thrust force to launch into orbit. 570 00:36:18,400 --> 00:36:23,480 Speaker 1: But once you got far enough out, then the spacecraft 571 00:36:23,600 --> 00:36:28,120 Speaker 1: would utilize what is essentially a nuclear reactor to generate heat. 572 00:36:28,840 --> 00:36:34,239 Speaker 1: This heat would then in turn superheat a liquid hydrogen 573 00:36:34,800 --> 00:36:38,759 Speaker 1: into a gas, so the gas would expand dramatically as 574 00:36:38,800 --> 00:36:41,800 Speaker 1: it heats up, and then by passing through a nozzle, 575 00:36:42,280 --> 00:36:46,120 Speaker 1: the gas would propel the spacecraft for it would provide 576 00:36:46,160 --> 00:36:49,920 Speaker 1: the thrust. Then you got nuclear propulsion. Doing this, however, 577 00:36:50,440 --> 00:36:52,640 Speaker 1: is going to be tricky. First of all, you got 578 00:36:52,640 --> 00:36:56,160 Speaker 1: to work with some very strict rules about nuclear reactors. 579 00:36:56,560 --> 00:37:00,560 Speaker 1: So any spacecraft that's going to have essentially a nuclear 580 00:37:00,600 --> 00:37:02,799 Speaker 1: reactor on board it is going to have to meet 581 00:37:02,840 --> 00:37:05,839 Speaker 1: those safety requirements. You also have to figure out how 582 00:37:05,880 --> 00:37:08,719 Speaker 1: to make it super duper duper duper safe. So that 583 00:37:08,800 --> 00:37:11,239 Speaker 1: if the launch were to go wrong, you don't end 584 00:37:11,360 --> 00:37:15,040 Speaker 1: up dropping like a nuclear reactor on Florida or something. 585 00:37:15,480 --> 00:37:19,360 Speaker 1: There are other challenges that are less doomsdayish. For example, 586 00:37:19,719 --> 00:37:22,920 Speaker 1: eventually a nuclear powered rocket would run out of propellant, 587 00:37:23,200 --> 00:37:27,040 Speaker 1: right if you're using liquid hydrogen as you're propellant. Well, 588 00:37:27,040 --> 00:37:29,680 Speaker 1: first you're gonna have to keep that stuff at twenty kelvin, 589 00:37:30,080 --> 00:37:32,720 Speaker 1: which is not that much higher than absolute zero, because 590 00:37:32,719 --> 00:37:38,280 Speaker 1: above that hydrogen will boil from liquid form into a gas. 591 00:37:38,520 --> 00:37:40,360 Speaker 1: So you have to manage that. You have to manage 592 00:37:40,360 --> 00:37:42,800 Speaker 1: the temperature of the propellant or else you're going to 593 00:37:42,880 --> 00:37:47,200 Speaker 1: be losing propellant. And then once you're out of propellant, well, 594 00:37:47,320 --> 00:37:50,160 Speaker 1: the engine's not really doing anything. I mean, the nuclear 595 00:37:50,200 --> 00:37:53,279 Speaker 1: reactor will be hot, but there's no propellant heat up, 596 00:37:53,360 --> 00:37:57,360 Speaker 1: so it's not going to generate additional thrust. So you 597 00:37:57,520 --> 00:37:59,720 Speaker 1: just have a nuclear reactor in space at that point. 598 00:38:00,239 --> 00:38:03,000 Speaker 1: It would require refueling the propellant if it were to 599 00:38:03,120 --> 00:38:06,200 Speaker 1: keep going. I'm sure engineers will encounter plenty of other 600 00:38:06,280 --> 00:38:08,640 Speaker 1: challenges as they work to meet this goal. By twenty 601 00:38:08,800 --> 00:38:14,920 Speaker 1: twenty seven, SETI aka the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence, announced 602 00:38:14,960 --> 00:38:18,640 Speaker 1: that researchers have uncovered a new method to separate signal 603 00:38:18,680 --> 00:38:22,360 Speaker 1: from noise. So when it comes to searching for extra 604 00:38:22,480 --> 00:38:27,520 Speaker 1: terrestrial intelligence, we mostly focus on detecting radio waves, but 605 00:38:27,840 --> 00:38:31,879 Speaker 1: any radio waves from extraterrestrials would be pretty faint by 606 00:38:31,920 --> 00:38:34,839 Speaker 1: the time they reached us, assuming that these extraterrestrials are 607 00:38:34,920 --> 00:38:37,319 Speaker 1: a very far way away, which seems to be a 608 00:38:37,320 --> 00:38:40,960 Speaker 1: pretty safe assumption. Meanwhile, we are pumping all sorts of 609 00:38:41,040 --> 00:38:45,000 Speaker 1: radio waves out of Earth, so you have to tune 610 00:38:45,000 --> 00:38:48,160 Speaker 1: out all the stuff we earthlings generate that's interference in 611 00:38:48,239 --> 00:38:51,239 Speaker 1: this case, and then you can look for signs of 612 00:38:51,400 --> 00:38:54,000 Speaker 1: you know, I don't know, alien television programs or whatever. 613 00:38:54,480 --> 00:38:57,200 Speaker 1: But it becomes a real challenge. So the researchers say 614 00:38:57,239 --> 00:38:59,759 Speaker 1: that this new approach looks for repeated patterns in a 615 00:38:59,800 --> 00:39:04,640 Speaker 1: saygals amplitude, which is called scintillation. They're looking for scintillation, 616 00:39:05,320 --> 00:39:08,800 Speaker 1: and they propose that they can use scintillation to filter 617 00:39:09,040 --> 00:39:13,600 Speaker 1: out human generated signals, because human generated signals do not scintillate, 618 00:39:14,160 --> 00:39:16,120 Speaker 1: So you get rid of all the stuff that isn't 619 00:39:16,280 --> 00:39:20,319 Speaker 1: scintillating and focus on the stuff that is. And by definition, 620 00:39:20,960 --> 00:39:24,440 Speaker 1: those signals have to come from beyond Earth, because we 621 00:39:24,520 --> 00:39:27,200 Speaker 1: don't generate those kinds of signals, so it must have 622 00:39:27,280 --> 00:39:30,319 Speaker 1: come from somewhere else. Now that being said, that does 623 00:39:30,360 --> 00:39:33,480 Speaker 1: not necessarily mean it will end up coming from intelligent 624 00:39:33,600 --> 00:39:35,920 Speaker 1: life outside of Earth. There's a lot of stuff in 625 00:39:35,960 --> 00:39:39,239 Speaker 1: space that generates radio waves, and not all of it 626 00:39:39,320 --> 00:39:43,120 Speaker 1: is sentient or intelligent. It's just that's one of the 627 00:39:43,120 --> 00:39:48,400 Speaker 1: byproducts of the different celestial bodies out there. However, this 628 00:39:48,440 --> 00:39:51,640 Speaker 1: approach would definitely cut back on the problem of radio interference, 629 00:39:52,000 --> 00:39:54,880 Speaker 1: So if the truth is out there, this approach will 630 00:39:54,920 --> 00:39:58,840 Speaker 1: make it a little less difficult to detect. And finally, 631 00:39:59,360 --> 00:40:03,040 Speaker 1: I have an ar article recommendation for you. David Pierce 632 00:40:03,160 --> 00:40:06,440 Speaker 1: wrote a piece for The Verge titled The Little Search 633 00:40:06,520 --> 00:40:10,240 Speaker 1: Engine That Couldn't. This tells the story of some former 634 00:40:10,320 --> 00:40:14,560 Speaker 1: Google programmers who left Google and created an alternative search 635 00:40:14,600 --> 00:40:20,759 Speaker 1: engine called Neva n Eeva, and reportedly it's faster than 636 00:40:20,760 --> 00:40:23,880 Speaker 1: Google Search. It also is ad free. So why have 637 00:40:24,000 --> 00:40:26,880 Speaker 1: so few people heard about this, let alone used it. 638 00:40:27,400 --> 00:40:30,400 Speaker 1: The article is well worth a read, and as always, 639 00:40:30,440 --> 00:40:32,960 Speaker 1: I have no connection to the Verge and I do 640 00:40:33,040 --> 00:40:35,839 Speaker 1: not know David Pierce, although I did once sit next 641 00:40:35,840 --> 00:40:38,920 Speaker 1: to David Hyde Pierce the actor at a restaurant, but 642 00:40:38,960 --> 00:40:41,600 Speaker 1: that's a different person. I don't even know why I 643 00:40:41,600 --> 00:40:44,640 Speaker 1: brought it up anyway. That article again, it's on the 644 00:40:44,760 --> 00:40:48,320 Speaker 1: Verge and it's called The Little Search Engine That Couldn't. 645 00:40:48,960 --> 00:40:52,280 Speaker 1: And that's it for the Tech News for Thursday, July 646 00:40:52,440 --> 00:40:56,000 Speaker 1: twenty seventh, twenty twenty three. Man, this was an epic 647 00:40:56,080 --> 00:40:59,880 Speaker 1: news episode, tons of news. I was thinking that it 648 00:41:00,000 --> 00:41:02,120 Speaker 1: would be fairly light. I usually think Thursdays will be 649 00:41:02,200 --> 00:41:06,960 Speaker 1: lighter than Tuesdays, but man, we just got a ton 650 00:41:07,040 --> 00:41:09,719 Speaker 1: of stuff in the second half of the week. I 651 00:41:09,760 --> 00:41:12,480 Speaker 1: hope you are all well, and I'll talk to you 652 00:41:12,520 --> 00:41:22,960 Speaker 1: again really soon. Tech Stuff is an iHeartRadio production. For 653 00:41:23,080 --> 00:41:27,920 Speaker 1: more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, 654 00:41:28,040 --> 00:41:30,040 Speaker 1: or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.