WEBVTT - Tech News: Using ChatGPT to Win the Lottery

0:00:04.440 --> 0:00:12.400
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to Tech Stuff, a production from iHeartRadio. Hey thereon

0:00:12.520 --> 0:00:15.800
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to Tech Stuff. I'm your host, Jonathan Strickland. I'm

0:00:15.800 --> 0:00:19.479
<v Speaker 1>an executive producer with iHeartRadio. And how the tech are you.

0:00:19.920 --> 0:00:23.239
<v Speaker 1>It's time for the tech news for Thursday, April twenty seventh,

0:00:23.320 --> 0:00:28.800
<v Speaker 1>twenty twenty three. Now, maybe you've seen this headline. Man

0:00:28.920 --> 0:00:33.720
<v Speaker 1>uses chat gpt to pick winning lottery numbers. That is

0:00:33.840 --> 0:00:35.879
<v Speaker 1>a heck of a claim, right, I mean that is

0:00:36.080 --> 0:00:38.200
<v Speaker 1>bound to get you to click through to the article.

0:00:38.440 --> 0:00:41.640
<v Speaker 1>Of course, if you read the actual story, it deflates

0:00:41.680 --> 0:00:45.519
<v Speaker 1>things a little bit. The story happened in Thailand. The

0:00:45.560 --> 0:00:49.199
<v Speaker 1>winner received the equivalent of fifty nine bucks. It's not

0:00:49.280 --> 0:00:52.280
<v Speaker 1>exactly enough to retire on. They have gone on to

0:00:52.400 --> 0:00:57.320
<v Speaker 1>TikTok to talk about what they claim has happened. But

0:00:58.040 --> 0:01:02.840
<v Speaker 1>what about chat GPT giving winning numbers? Well, first, I

0:01:02.840 --> 0:01:06.720
<v Speaker 1>couldn't find any verification that it actually happened. But let's

0:01:06.720 --> 0:01:09.240
<v Speaker 1>go ahead and assume the story is true. There's no

0:01:09.319 --> 0:01:12.280
<v Speaker 1>reason for us to just think that it's all made up.

0:01:12.959 --> 0:01:17.000
<v Speaker 1>The lottery drawn this case was of four numbers, and

0:01:17.080 --> 0:01:21.840
<v Speaker 1>apparently this man used some hypothetical situations while chatting with

0:01:21.959 --> 0:01:26.040
<v Speaker 1>Chad GPT and also asked the bot to analyze past

0:01:26.160 --> 0:01:29.880
<v Speaker 1>numbers and then suggest four numbers to pick for the

0:01:29.959 --> 0:01:33.000
<v Speaker 1>upcoming lottery. Now I don't have all the details, but

0:01:33.120 --> 0:01:37.400
<v Speaker 1>I can say that for random events, you cannot predict

0:01:37.400 --> 0:01:42.240
<v Speaker 1>the future based upon the past. Each event is independent

0:01:42.480 --> 0:01:44.560
<v Speaker 1>from the others. If you flip a coin and it

0:01:44.600 --> 0:01:48.200
<v Speaker 1>comes up heads, and it's a normal coin with the

0:01:48.240 --> 0:01:51.240
<v Speaker 1>heads and the tails, you cannot predict that the next

0:01:51.280 --> 0:01:54.160
<v Speaker 1>coin flip will be heads or tails. I mean, you

0:01:54.160 --> 0:01:57.000
<v Speaker 1>could try, but you can't be sure. Like there's no

0:01:57.640 --> 0:02:01.960
<v Speaker 1>legitimacy to the guess. And that's because each flip is

0:02:02.000 --> 0:02:06.880
<v Speaker 1>independent of all other flips. Over the long term, you

0:02:06.920 --> 0:02:10.360
<v Speaker 1>should see a fifty to fifty distribution of heads versus tails,

0:02:10.400 --> 0:02:12.720
<v Speaker 1>but from one flip to the next, there's no way

0:02:12.720 --> 0:02:16.840
<v Speaker 1>of predicting it. So this is assuming you're working with

0:02:17.000 --> 0:02:20.560
<v Speaker 1>actual random events. So long as the lottery system is

0:02:20.600 --> 0:02:25.280
<v Speaker 1>working properly, it should not matter what past numbers indicate.

0:02:25.760 --> 0:02:30.160
<v Speaker 1>But if there is a bias in the system, then

0:02:30.280 --> 0:02:32.600
<v Speaker 1>it would be possible that a computer could pick up

0:02:32.600 --> 0:02:37.079
<v Speaker 1>on patterns that would be otherwise a little difficult to spot.

0:02:37.360 --> 0:02:39.320
<v Speaker 1>It still would be a heck. Of a guess to

0:02:39.440 --> 0:02:43.520
<v Speaker 1>land winning numbers based off patterns, because chances are it's

0:02:43.560 --> 0:02:45.680
<v Speaker 1>not the exact same four numbers coming up over and

0:02:45.720 --> 0:02:47.720
<v Speaker 1>over again. If that were the case, then I can

0:02:48.000 --> 0:02:51.280
<v Speaker 1>guarantee you someone would come in and say, okay, we

0:02:51.400 --> 0:02:53.880
<v Speaker 1>need to look at what's going on here. It's far

0:02:53.919 --> 0:02:57.800
<v Speaker 1>more likely that a lottery commission would notice patterns before

0:02:57.840 --> 0:03:00.600
<v Speaker 1>anyone else would, and would demand a full audit of

0:03:00.639 --> 0:03:02.799
<v Speaker 1>the system to make sure that things were running fair

0:03:02.840 --> 0:03:07.079
<v Speaker 1>and square. Also, chad GPT only has access to information

0:03:07.480 --> 0:03:11.560
<v Speaker 1>up to twenty twenty one. Anything from twenty twenty one

0:03:11.760 --> 0:03:17.520
<v Speaker 1>forward isn't accessible. So if chad GPT were drawing information

0:03:17.800 --> 0:03:21.560
<v Speaker 1>from past lottery numbers, they would be very old. And

0:03:21.639 --> 0:03:24.480
<v Speaker 1>to me that suggests that the lottery system would probably

0:03:24.520 --> 0:03:28.000
<v Speaker 1>have been replaced or altered at some point in the

0:03:28.080 --> 0:03:31.320
<v Speaker 1>years between twenty twenty one and twenty twenty three, and

0:03:32.320 --> 0:03:36.000
<v Speaker 1>I guess well the year, so all three of those years,

0:03:36.560 --> 0:03:40.960
<v Speaker 1>and that these old patterns, if they did exist before

0:03:41.000 --> 0:03:44.680
<v Speaker 1>twenty twenty one, probably shouldn't exist today. So you couldn't

0:03:45.440 --> 0:03:47.960
<v Speaker 1>even if those patterns were there, you couldn't draw from

0:03:48.000 --> 0:03:51.920
<v Speaker 1>that and make a meaningful guess for today's numbers. Of course,

0:03:52.640 --> 0:03:56.280
<v Speaker 1>it's possible this man was feeding the more recent lottery

0:03:56.360 --> 0:03:59.800
<v Speaker 1>numbers to chat GBT manually that could be the case,

0:04:00.160 --> 0:04:02.920
<v Speaker 1>but again, unless something hinky is going on with the

0:04:02.960 --> 0:04:07.920
<v Speaker 1>actual lottery system, there's really nothing but coincidence connecting the

0:04:08.000 --> 0:04:12.720
<v Speaker 1>chatbot's suggestions to actual winning numbers. It's not like chat

0:04:12.760 --> 0:04:17.640
<v Speaker 1>GPT could analyze all the variables involved in the numbers

0:04:17.680 --> 0:04:20.719
<v Speaker 1>being picked and then predict the most likely outcome. It

0:04:20.760 --> 0:04:23.960
<v Speaker 1>doesn't even know all the variables. So I would caution

0:04:24.440 --> 0:04:27.719
<v Speaker 1>anyone against putting their faith in a chat bot to

0:04:27.800 --> 0:04:30.120
<v Speaker 1>help them win the lottery. And I know I'm being

0:04:30.160 --> 0:04:32.800
<v Speaker 1>a little bit flippant about this, but there really is

0:04:32.880 --> 0:04:36.640
<v Speaker 1>a danger when folks start to treat AI as if

0:04:36.680 --> 0:04:40.200
<v Speaker 1>it is magic, that somehow it does not obey physical

0:04:40.279 --> 0:04:43.919
<v Speaker 1>laws or can get around hard limitations to our knowledge.

0:04:44.440 --> 0:04:49.360
<v Speaker 1>That opens up the chance for fraud, chicanery, and general scumbagginess.

0:04:49.960 --> 0:04:57.200
<v Speaker 1>An organization called the Association for Mathematical Consciousness Science or AMCs,

0:04:57.520 --> 0:05:02.160
<v Speaker 1>has issued an open letter saying, and I am paraphrasing here, Hey,

0:05:02.640 --> 0:05:04.840
<v Speaker 1>before we do too much more work in AI and

0:05:04.880 --> 0:05:08.440
<v Speaker 1>potentially create a conscious machine, we should really learn more

0:05:08.480 --> 0:05:12.159
<v Speaker 1>about consciousness in general. Now, if you've been listening to

0:05:12.200 --> 0:05:14.400
<v Speaker 1>tech stuff for a while, you've probably heard me talk

0:05:14.480 --> 0:05:19.840
<v Speaker 1>about how human consciousness is a complicated, nuanced thing and

0:05:19.880 --> 0:05:23.880
<v Speaker 1>we don't fully understand it. And these experts are saying

0:05:23.920 --> 0:05:27.080
<v Speaker 1>that we need that kind of understanding in order to

0:05:27.080 --> 0:05:30.320
<v Speaker 1>have a better approach with AI, if and when it

0:05:30.680 --> 0:05:34.560
<v Speaker 1>achieves consciousness. Now, for the record, right now we appear

0:05:34.600 --> 0:05:39.960
<v Speaker 1>to be far from that kind of situation. Even seemingly

0:05:40.000 --> 0:05:44.360
<v Speaker 1>sophisticated AI agents are when you boil it down following

0:05:44.400 --> 0:05:50.240
<v Speaker 1>some conceptually simple processes. Now there's a complex system supporting

0:05:50.240 --> 0:05:54.599
<v Speaker 1>these processes, but if you really boil it down, it's

0:05:54.760 --> 0:05:59.640
<v Speaker 1>all about statistical probabilities. So while an AI chat bought

0:05:59.680 --> 0:06:03.680
<v Speaker 1>like chain GPT can seem to communicate like a person,

0:06:04.200 --> 0:06:08.960
<v Speaker 1>it actually lacks any consciousness or motivation or intent. But

0:06:09.000 --> 0:06:12.480
<v Speaker 1>there's a fear that without a more thoughtful approach, serious

0:06:12.520 --> 0:06:16.159
<v Speaker 1>mistakes could be made that could cause unintended harm, whether

0:06:16.240 --> 0:06:19.760
<v Speaker 1>to people or to the discipline of AI. This is

0:06:19.800 --> 0:06:22.719
<v Speaker 1>in line with what some other open letters we've seen

0:06:22.760 --> 0:06:25.599
<v Speaker 1>from various experts and concerned individuals have said. And while

0:06:25.600 --> 0:06:29.200
<v Speaker 1>I think it's still early to think about these things.

0:06:29.279 --> 0:06:32.039
<v Speaker 1>It's actually better to think about them early than to

0:06:32.160 --> 0:06:35.240
<v Speaker 1>wait until it's an active problem and then you're trying

0:06:35.240 --> 0:06:38.359
<v Speaker 1>to find a solution. Tech Crunch has an article about

0:06:38.400 --> 0:06:42.000
<v Speaker 1>the recent rise and reaction to deep fake audio projects

0:06:42.040 --> 0:06:47.000
<v Speaker 1>that digitally recreate an artist's voice to make new songs. Now,

0:06:47.040 --> 0:06:50.560
<v Speaker 1>I've talked about how the music industry recoiled in horror

0:06:51.080 --> 0:06:54.080
<v Speaker 1>when an AI generated song called Heart on My Sleeve

0:06:54.560 --> 0:06:59.839
<v Speaker 1>featured the AI synthesized voices of Drake and the Weekend,

0:07:00.120 --> 0:07:03.520
<v Speaker 1>and the song went viral. Studios began to scramble to

0:07:03.520 --> 0:07:05.839
<v Speaker 1>see what sort of legal protection they could cling to

0:07:06.040 --> 0:07:09.560
<v Speaker 1>in order to prevent an avalanche of AI impersonators releasing

0:07:09.640 --> 0:07:13.160
<v Speaker 1>music that sounds like a famous artist recorded it, when

0:07:13.200 --> 0:07:16.280
<v Speaker 1>really that person had nothing to do with it. Fun fact,

0:07:16.600 --> 0:07:20.720
<v Speaker 1>such legal protection doesn't really exist here in the United States.

0:07:21.040 --> 0:07:22.920
<v Speaker 1>I mean, if someone were to decide they wanted to

0:07:22.920 --> 0:07:25.720
<v Speaker 1>make prints sing the Hills Are Alive from the sound

0:07:25.760 --> 0:07:28.880
<v Speaker 1>of music, Well, in that case, there is a copyright

0:07:28.920 --> 0:07:33.400
<v Speaker 1>issue there because that song exists under copyright. But for

0:07:33.560 --> 0:07:37.360
<v Speaker 1>a brand new song, that gets way more complicated because

0:07:37.520 --> 0:07:40.960
<v Speaker 1>music studios wouldn't own the rights to that song that's

0:07:41.000 --> 0:07:44.080
<v Speaker 1>brand new and while I bet that wouldn't stop studios

0:07:44.120 --> 0:07:47.800
<v Speaker 1>trying to use copyright strikes to take down stuff from

0:07:48.280 --> 0:07:52.120
<v Speaker 1>people who had deep fakes of artists that those studios represented,

0:07:52.680 --> 0:07:56.720
<v Speaker 1>arguably that approach doesn't have much legal support because there's

0:07:56.720 --> 0:08:01.040
<v Speaker 1>no copyright infringement going on. Earlier this week, I mentioned

0:08:01.080 --> 0:08:04.400
<v Speaker 1>that musical artist Grimes is taking a different approach. She's

0:08:04.440 --> 0:08:07.520
<v Speaker 1>welcoming fans to use AI to recreate her voice for

0:08:07.640 --> 0:08:11.160
<v Speaker 1>new songs, provided they give her a fifty percent share

0:08:11.160 --> 0:08:14.360
<v Speaker 1>of royalties. Other artists are doing something similar. A few

0:08:14.360 --> 0:08:16.920
<v Speaker 1>of them are just saying, hey, go nuts out there,

0:08:17.000 --> 0:08:20.000
<v Speaker 1>do whatever you like. But the tech Crunch article brings

0:08:20.080 --> 0:08:22.800
<v Speaker 1>up a critical point for a lot of artists. This

0:08:22.920 --> 0:08:27.160
<v Speaker 1>possibility is brand new, and tons of people probably aren't

0:08:27.160 --> 0:08:30.320
<v Speaker 1>even aware that it's possible, and they haven't given their

0:08:30.360 --> 0:08:34.760
<v Speaker 1>consent to being copied, and that consent issue is important.

0:08:34.840 --> 0:08:36.960
<v Speaker 1>It gets to the heart of one of the really

0:08:37.040 --> 0:08:40.839
<v Speaker 1>big problems with deep fakes. A deep fake can rob

0:08:40.920 --> 0:08:44.920
<v Speaker 1>someone of agency, and it's become a really serious issue

0:08:45.000 --> 0:08:48.120
<v Speaker 1>in cases where someone has used deep fake technology to

0:08:48.160 --> 0:08:50.160
<v Speaker 1>make it seem as if a person has appeared in

0:08:50.200 --> 0:08:55.319
<v Speaker 1>say an adult film, when in fact that person didn't digitally,

0:08:55.720 --> 0:08:58.920
<v Speaker 1>that person is being forced to perform in an adult

0:08:58.960 --> 0:09:01.839
<v Speaker 1>film without their can. I really want to do a

0:09:01.880 --> 0:09:05.240
<v Speaker 1>full episode about that issue in particular, but to do so,

0:09:05.559 --> 0:09:07.520
<v Speaker 1>I feel I need to get some guests on who

0:09:07.520 --> 0:09:10.959
<v Speaker 1>can give me their own first hand perspective, because otherwise

0:09:11.000 --> 0:09:13.520
<v Speaker 1>it's just me sitting at a microphone saying this sounds

0:09:13.760 --> 0:09:17.320
<v Speaker 1>really bad. I think we already know it sounds really bad,

0:09:17.360 --> 0:09:21.080
<v Speaker 1>but getting that firsthand perspective of what it is like,

0:09:21.440 --> 0:09:25.320
<v Speaker 1>the reactions you get, the impact it can have on

0:09:25.400 --> 0:09:28.160
<v Speaker 1>your life when someone else just uses technology to make

0:09:28.200 --> 0:09:30.319
<v Speaker 1>it seem as if you did something you didn't do.

0:09:31.280 --> 0:09:33.640
<v Speaker 1>I feel like there needs to be a deeper episode

0:09:33.720 --> 0:09:38.240
<v Speaker 1>about that. Anyway. My hope is that once the dust

0:09:38.280 --> 0:09:43.520
<v Speaker 1>settles around this AI deep fake music issue, we figure

0:09:43.520 --> 0:09:45.800
<v Speaker 1>out a way for people to be able to give

0:09:45.920 --> 0:09:49.840
<v Speaker 1>consent to being copied if they don't mind it, or

0:09:49.880 --> 0:09:55.000
<v Speaker 1>to deny consent and receive protection against unwanted copies if

0:09:55.040 --> 0:09:59.319
<v Speaker 1>that's their preference, because right now we lack the framework

0:09:59.600 --> 0:10:03.360
<v Speaker 1>to deal with this situation. The Sydney Morning Herald reports

0:10:03.400 --> 0:10:07.320
<v Speaker 1>that China's Cyberspace Administration has now unveiled rules that set

0:10:07.360 --> 0:10:10.560
<v Speaker 1>strict boundaries for AI chatbots in China. I talked about

0:10:10.559 --> 0:10:13.080
<v Speaker 1>this in a past episode, So really it's just the

0:10:13.120 --> 0:10:17.960
<v Speaker 1>next stage in that development where this administration has pushed

0:10:17.960 --> 0:10:22.199
<v Speaker 1>out rules that do what you would expect, that chatbots

0:10:22.240 --> 0:10:26.400
<v Speaker 1>need to have socialist core values and they cannot contradict

0:10:26.559 --> 0:10:29.960
<v Speaker 1>the state. Again, no big shock here. If you are

0:10:29.960 --> 0:10:33.400
<v Speaker 1>familiar with China, you know that that country has a

0:10:33.840 --> 0:10:38.440
<v Speaker 1>reputation for not being particularly lenient when it comes to

0:10:38.520 --> 0:10:43.480
<v Speaker 1>questioning authority. And in an earnings call yesterday, Mark Zuckerberg

0:10:43.520 --> 0:10:45.760
<v Speaker 1>had a bit to say about AI as well. First,

0:10:45.880 --> 0:10:49.040
<v Speaker 1>that through AI, Meta has been able to better serve

0:10:49.120 --> 0:10:52.520
<v Speaker 1>content to users, and by better serve, I mean the

0:10:52.559 --> 0:10:55.720
<v Speaker 1>AI helps to choose what content is served to specific

0:10:55.800 --> 0:10:59.560
<v Speaker 1>users in an effort to keep them engaged longer, which

0:10:59.600 --> 0:11:03.000
<v Speaker 1>really just spoils down to what do you give somebody

0:11:03.160 --> 0:11:06.400
<v Speaker 1>that will keep them around, that will make them stay

0:11:06.400 --> 0:11:09.000
<v Speaker 1>on the platform and see more ads and generate more

0:11:09.040 --> 0:11:11.480
<v Speaker 1>revenue for the company. We've talked in the past how

0:11:11.520 --> 0:11:15.160
<v Speaker 1>Meta's various recommendation algorithms are designed with the goal of

0:11:15.280 --> 0:11:18.319
<v Speaker 1>keeping people glued to their platforms, and it sounds like

0:11:18.360 --> 0:11:21.640
<v Speaker 1>the AI tools are aiding in that effort, particularly on

0:11:21.720 --> 0:11:25.840
<v Speaker 1>Instagram with the incorporation of reels. In addition, the company

0:11:25.880 --> 0:11:30.240
<v Speaker 1>plans to integrate AI into other features, potentially into stuff

0:11:30.320 --> 0:11:33.040
<v Speaker 1>like chat So it's possible we could see chatbots or

0:11:33.080 --> 0:11:37.120
<v Speaker 1>elements of chatbots worked into tools like Messenger or wattsapp.

0:11:37.520 --> 0:11:41.000
<v Speaker 1>Considering how Snapchat users are currently review bombing their app

0:11:41.200 --> 0:11:44.480
<v Speaker 1>for the integration of an AI chatbot, I think Meta

0:11:44.520 --> 0:11:47.600
<v Speaker 1>should tread lightly here. Okay, we've got more news stories

0:11:47.600 --> 0:11:59.520
<v Speaker 1>to go, but let's take a quick break. Okay, we're

0:11:59.559 --> 0:12:01.760
<v Speaker 1>back a little bit more to say about that earnings

0:12:01.840 --> 0:12:05.360
<v Speaker 1>call that Mark Zuckerberg had for Meta, It went really,

0:12:05.400 --> 0:12:11.040
<v Speaker 1>really well for the company. Zuckerberg revealed that Meta outperformed expectations.

0:12:11.080 --> 0:12:14.840
<v Speaker 1>It earned a profit of five point seven billion dollars

0:12:14.920 --> 0:12:17.599
<v Speaker 1>for the first quarter of this year. Now, part of

0:12:17.640 --> 0:12:20.360
<v Speaker 1>that is undoubtedly due to the fact that Meta has

0:12:20.400 --> 0:12:23.959
<v Speaker 1>cut way back on costs, particularly in the form of

0:12:24.040 --> 0:12:28.000
<v Speaker 1>you know, salaries and stuff, because Meta famously laid off

0:12:28.040 --> 0:12:32.840
<v Speaker 1>around twenty one thousand people starting late last year in

0:12:32.880 --> 0:12:35.880
<v Speaker 1>the quest to make twenty twenty three the Year of Efficiency.

0:12:36.280 --> 0:12:39.000
<v Speaker 1>But on top of that, Zuckerberg said that Facebook had

0:12:39.040 --> 0:12:42.520
<v Speaker 1>nearly three billion monthly users each month this year, and

0:12:42.600 --> 0:12:45.559
<v Speaker 1>I mean, yeah, the company is performing well from that perspective,

0:12:45.559 --> 0:12:48.720
<v Speaker 1>no doubt about it. Zuckerberg also didn't just talk about

0:12:48.800 --> 0:12:52.040
<v Speaker 1>AI either. He said the company remains dedicated to the

0:12:52.080 --> 0:12:56.280
<v Speaker 1>development of the Metaverse. Whether anyone will want it by

0:12:56.320 --> 0:12:59.280
<v Speaker 1>the time it gets here remains an open question. The

0:12:59.400 --> 0:13:04.559
<v Speaker 1>UK's Competition in Market's Authority or CMA, has blocked Microsoft's

0:13:04.600 --> 0:13:09.000
<v Speaker 1>planned acquisition of Activision Blizzard. Now, technically this move just

0:13:09.080 --> 0:13:12.240
<v Speaker 1>blocks that acquisition in the UK, but since we're talking

0:13:12.240 --> 0:13:16.040
<v Speaker 1>about global entities here, it becomes a challenging situation for

0:13:16.120 --> 0:13:19.839
<v Speaker 1>Microsoft to move forward. It also sets a precedent while

0:13:19.920 --> 0:13:23.320
<v Speaker 1>other regulators, including ones in the US and the EU,

0:13:23.480 --> 0:13:27.200
<v Speaker 1>are considering this deal. The CMA's justification for blocking the

0:13:27.200 --> 0:13:30.359
<v Speaker 1>deal was a concern that Microsoft could create a monopolistic

0:13:30.400 --> 0:13:35.520
<v Speaker 1>command of the cloud gaming market. Right now, there's not

0:13:35.840 --> 0:13:38.880
<v Speaker 1>much of a cloud gaming market, but the thought is

0:13:38.920 --> 0:13:43.760
<v Speaker 1>that it's precisely at this stage where regulators cannot allow

0:13:43.800 --> 0:13:47.160
<v Speaker 1>a massive company, Microsoft being one of the world's largest,

0:13:47.480 --> 0:13:50.760
<v Speaker 1>to reduce the number of potential companies in the space,

0:13:50.920 --> 0:13:55.400
<v Speaker 1>or to prevent other competitors from accessing certain titles, which

0:13:55.400 --> 0:13:58.600
<v Speaker 1>would give Microsoft an unfair market advantage. In the process,

0:13:59.160 --> 0:14:03.920
<v Speaker 1>Microsoft reps understandably criticize this result, with arguments ranging from

0:14:04.040 --> 0:14:07.240
<v Speaker 1>you don't understand this market to the UK is going

0:14:07.320 --> 0:14:10.160
<v Speaker 1>to be sorry for doing this to me. See Also,

0:14:10.280 --> 0:14:14.840
<v Speaker 1>the company may appeal the CMA's decision, but uh, let's

0:14:14.880 --> 0:14:17.960
<v Speaker 1>just say that rarely works out in the long run.

0:14:18.280 --> 0:14:23.360
<v Speaker 1>The CMA is not an organization known for reversing its decisions. Also,

0:14:23.400 --> 0:14:27.280
<v Speaker 1>in Microsoft News and On, by default feature in the

0:14:27.280 --> 0:14:32.240
<v Speaker 1>Microsoft Edge browser has been snooping on users all right.

0:14:32.560 --> 0:14:35.600
<v Speaker 1>So this feature is meant to let people who follow

0:14:35.720 --> 0:14:40.680
<v Speaker 1>different content creators on different platforms to aggregate their interests

0:14:40.920 --> 0:14:42.840
<v Speaker 1>so that they have a single place they can go

0:14:42.960 --> 0:14:46.000
<v Speaker 1>to look for updates. So that way, instead of having

0:14:46.080 --> 0:14:49.280
<v Speaker 1>to go platform to platform and check on the content

0:14:49.320 --> 0:14:51.560
<v Speaker 1>creators you like to see if there's anything new, you

0:14:51.600 --> 0:14:54.280
<v Speaker 1>would go to this one destination and all the new

0:14:54.360 --> 0:14:57.240
<v Speaker 1>stuff would be updated there. This, by the way, is

0:14:57.240 --> 0:15:00.720
<v Speaker 1>not a novel idea. I used to rely on tools

0:15:00.760 --> 0:15:03.480
<v Speaker 1>that no longer exist that did this kind of stuff

0:15:03.520 --> 0:15:06.720
<v Speaker 1>with news articles. It's really what RSS feeds were intended

0:15:06.760 --> 0:15:10.520
<v Speaker 1>to do back in the day. But anyway, something went

0:15:10.600 --> 0:15:14.120
<v Speaker 1>wrong with a recent update to Edge see. The way

0:15:14.160 --> 0:15:16.960
<v Speaker 1>this tool is supposed to work is that when you

0:15:17.080 --> 0:15:21.880
<v Speaker 1>go to a page on a platform that supports this feature,

0:15:22.320 --> 0:15:27.000
<v Speaker 1>and only then Edge would send the URL to Microsoft

0:15:27.040 --> 0:15:32.600
<v Speaker 1>through a domain called bingapis dot com. But a redditor

0:15:32.960 --> 0:15:38.280
<v Speaker 1>user with the handle hackermchacker face or mchackface. I'm sorry,

0:15:38.360 --> 0:15:42.720
<v Speaker 1>I didn't mean to misidentify you, hacker mchackface. They posted

0:15:42.960 --> 0:15:45.560
<v Speaker 1>that a recent update to Edge now has it where

0:15:46.000 --> 0:15:50.080
<v Speaker 1>the browser sends every URL to every web page you

0:15:50.200 --> 0:15:54.239
<v Speaker 1>visit to that domain. So it's not just the creator

0:15:54.320 --> 0:15:58.160
<v Speaker 1>pages that have this tool built into the page where

0:15:58.160 --> 0:16:01.840
<v Speaker 1>it triggers this to happen. It's happening on any page

0:16:01.880 --> 0:16:04.920
<v Speaker 1>you go to. And as I said, this feature is

0:16:05.000 --> 0:16:09.600
<v Speaker 1>on by default, so using Edge means you are broadcasting

0:16:10.040 --> 0:16:13.640
<v Speaker 1>every URL you go to to Microsoft, which is a

0:16:13.680 --> 0:16:17.320
<v Speaker 1>gross breach of privacy. Now you can go into settings

0:16:17.360 --> 0:16:20.720
<v Speaker 1>an Edge and turn this feature off, but the fact

0:16:20.760 --> 0:16:24.000
<v Speaker 1>it's on by default and it's pulling everything in the

0:16:24.040 --> 0:16:27.520
<v Speaker 1>process ain't great. Microsoft reps have said that the company

0:16:27.560 --> 0:16:30.800
<v Speaker 1>is aware of the problem and will quote take appropriate

0:16:30.880 --> 0:16:35.600
<v Speaker 1>action to address any issue end quote. Finally, we all

0:16:35.640 --> 0:16:38.000
<v Speaker 1>know that last year was a tough one for Netflix,

0:16:38.040 --> 0:16:40.960
<v Speaker 1>The company revealed late last spring that it had a

0:16:41.080 --> 0:16:43.880
<v Speaker 1>decline in subscribers for the first time in more than

0:16:43.920 --> 0:16:47.920
<v Speaker 1>a decade, and then investor confidence dropped like a stone.

0:16:48.160 --> 0:16:52.520
<v Speaker 1>Since then, Netflix has been implementing different strategies to improve revenue.

0:16:53.040 --> 0:16:57.200
<v Speaker 1>One of those, famously is cracking down on password sharing.

0:16:57.680 --> 0:17:01.040
<v Speaker 1>This is something that Netflix has already implemented within certain

0:17:01.120 --> 0:17:05.440
<v Speaker 1>markets like Spain, and now a few months after Netflix

0:17:05.440 --> 0:17:09.840
<v Speaker 1>introduced the initiative in Spain, research firm Cantar says it

0:17:09.960 --> 0:17:14.960
<v Speaker 1>estimates more than one million former Netflix customers have canceled

0:17:15.240 --> 0:17:21.040
<v Speaker 1>their subscriptions there in Spain. This could change Netflix's strategy

0:17:21.160 --> 0:17:24.840
<v Speaker 1>to activate this password crackdown in other markets, including here

0:17:24.880 --> 0:17:27.760
<v Speaker 1>in the United States. We are on the schedule to

0:17:27.800 --> 0:17:31.560
<v Speaker 1>get Netflix's new rules this quarter now. To be clear,

0:17:31.800 --> 0:17:35.000
<v Speaker 1>company reps at Netflix say they expected to see a

0:17:35.040 --> 0:17:38.879
<v Speaker 1>decline in response to this password policy, But the loss

0:17:38.920 --> 0:17:42.480
<v Speaker 1>of a million subscribers in Spain, which I imagine has

0:17:42.520 --> 0:17:45.440
<v Speaker 1>to be a much smaller market than say the United States,

0:17:46.160 --> 0:17:49.280
<v Speaker 1>where the impact will be far larger, well, I mean

0:17:49.320 --> 0:17:52.920
<v Speaker 1>it looks rough for Netflix. Honestly, I don't even know

0:17:52.960 --> 0:17:55.840
<v Speaker 1>what the best approach is for the company. It expanded

0:17:55.880 --> 0:17:58.680
<v Speaker 1>to the point of saturation in a lot of markets,

0:17:58.920 --> 0:18:01.639
<v Speaker 1>and once you're there, it's really hard to achieve growth

0:18:01.680 --> 0:18:05.000
<v Speaker 1>without doing stuff like hiking prices, but not hiking them

0:18:05.040 --> 0:18:08.399
<v Speaker 1>so high that you convince folks to leave. Or you

0:18:08.440 --> 0:18:10.879
<v Speaker 1>can do stuff like try to crack down on loopholes

0:18:10.920 --> 0:18:14.080
<v Speaker 1>like shared passwords, but that hasn't gone well for them either.

0:18:14.640 --> 0:18:16.880
<v Speaker 1>I don't know what the right approach is. The streaming

0:18:16.920 --> 0:18:21.880
<v Speaker 1>market in general is still one that is complicated and

0:18:22.040 --> 0:18:25.600
<v Speaker 1>not fully understood, and a lot of companies are struggling

0:18:25.600 --> 0:18:29.159
<v Speaker 1>with how to balance paying for prestige content to it

0:18:29.359 --> 0:18:33.480
<v Speaker 1>attract and keep users, and to generate enough revenue to

0:18:33.520 --> 0:18:36.600
<v Speaker 1>cover all the costs and make a profit on the side.

0:18:36.720 --> 0:18:40.880
<v Speaker 1>It's hard. And that's it for the tech news for today, Thursday,

0:18:41.000 --> 0:18:43.920
<v Speaker 1>April twenty seventh, twenty twenty three. I hope you're all well,

0:18:44.560 --> 0:18:54.240
<v Speaker 1>and I'll talk to you again really soon. Tech Stuff

0:18:54.320 --> 0:18:58.840
<v Speaker 1>is an iHeartRadio production. For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit

0:18:58.880 --> 0:19:02.439
<v Speaker 1>the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to

0:19:02.480 --> 0:19:03.399
<v Speaker 1>your favorite shows.