Speaker 1: Welcome to tech Stuff, a production from I Heart Radio.
Speaker 1: Hey there, and welcome to tech Stuff. I'm your host,
Speaker 1: Jonathan Strickland. I'm an executive producer with I Heart Radio
Speaker 1: and love all things tech. And now it's time for
Speaker 1: the tech news for Tuesday, March nine, twenty twenty one.
Speaker 1: Let's get to it. The New York Times reports that
Speaker 1: White House Press Secretary Jen Saki indicates the United States
Speaker 1: will carry out a mix of actions against Russia due
Speaker 1: to the solar winds hack, which continues to be a
Speaker 1: massive security problem for multiple companies and government agencies in
Speaker 1: the United States and beyond. Those actions will be quote
Speaker 1: seen and unseen end quote. So I'm guessing some of
Speaker 1: them are going to be, you know, pretty obvious, such
Speaker 1: as sanctions against RuSHA, and others will be on the
Speaker 1: super duper sneaky side, like similar cyber warfare tactics. We
Speaker 1: should remember that infiltration, espionage, and exploitation of computer systems,
Speaker 1: it's something that's pretty much always going on between different
Speaker 1: nation states with different levels of success. The solar winds
Speaker 1: hack was pretty darned devastating, so I don't really think
Speaker 1: of it as news news that such things are going
Speaker 1: to happen by the US against Russia, because, like I said,
Speaker 1: that stuff is always happening everywhere, everybody's doing it. It's
Speaker 1: one of the reasons why cyber warfare is terrifying. For example,
Speaker 1: one story I didn't get to last week, and some
Speaker 1: Twitter followers of mine asked me why I didn't it
Speaker 1: was a good question, was that hackers were able to
Speaker 1: exploit some vulnerabilities in a very widely distributed Microsoft product.
Speaker 1: The vulnerableity was with Exchange Server. Now, this is a
Speaker 1: product that's an electronic mail and calendar server, and it's
Speaker 1: used by tens of thousands of companies and organizations around
Speaker 1: the world. Now, Microsoft first claimed that these attacks were
Speaker 1: quote limited and targeted end quote which is kind of
Speaker 1: similar to the attacks we saw with solar winds. Now.
Speaker 1: With solar winds, a ton of systems were hit, but
Speaker 1: the hackers only followed up on a very small percentage
Speaker 1: of those that were hit for subsequent attacks, because that
Speaker 1: first attack was really just getting an end into an organization,
Speaker 1: and then it was the subsequent attacks that did the
Speaker 1: real harm. However, I'm seeing estimations ranging somewhere between twenty
Speaker 1: thousand and thirty thousand compromised organizations in the United States alone,
Speaker 1: and then there are thousands more in other parts of
Speaker 1: the world. The working hypothesis right now is that the
Speaker 1: hackers were from a hacker group that's backed by China,
Speaker 1: and that they exploited several zero day vulnerabilities that Microsoft
Speaker 1: began to patch starting back on March two. A zero
Speaker 1: day vulnerability is one in which those responsible for the
Speaker 1: software in question are unaware of the vulnerability, so it
Speaker 1: represents a way for hackers to potentially take advantage of
Speaker 1: a flaw and exploit it, as was the case with
Speaker 1: these particular four. The vulnerabilities in the Microsoft Exchange server
Speaker 1: gave hackers the chance to create a way to either
Speaker 1: spread more malware or spy on infected systems, or potentially both.
Speaker 1: Microsoft is urging network administrators to apply security fixes right
Speaker 1: away to mitigate the issue, but for systems that are
Speaker 1: already compromised, that's too late. It's like shutting the door,
Speaker 1: but all the windows are open. It doesn't really matter
Speaker 1: at that point. So for those systems, it's going to
Speaker 1: require a more thorough approach to identifying and removing malware.
Speaker 1: In other news, the EU has granted its approval to
Speaker 1: Microsoft's acquisition of ZeniMax Media that is the parent company
Speaker 1: of Bethesda Softworks. Bethesda is the company behind the Elder
Speaker 1: Scrolls series, you know, the one that includes Skyrim, also
Speaker 1: the Fallout series. They're also the current owner of the
Speaker 1: Doom franchise. The price tag for Zenni Max comes in
Speaker 1: at a cool seven point five billion dollars a parentsly
Speaker 1: some the e use finding states that quote, the commission
Speaker 1: concluded that the proposed acquisition would raise no competition concerns
Speaker 1: given the combined entities, limited market position upstream, and the
Speaker 1: presence of strong downstream competitors in the distribution of video games.
Speaker 1: End quote. From all reports, Microsoft plans to have Bethesda
Speaker 1: operate pretty much the way it has been operating, with
Speaker 1: a largely handsoff approach, though with this acquisition, we should
Speaker 1: expect to see lots of titles that are in Bethesda's
Speaker 1: vast library showing up on the Xbox Game Pass service.
Speaker 1: Based on recent announcements from Microsoft, it really looks like
Speaker 1: the cloud based game service is the key to their
Speaker 1: stratag G moving forward, at least for Xbox and Windows.
Speaker 1: Gaming and company representatives say they have no intention of
Speaker 1: turning Bethesda into like an Xbox exclusive or Windows exclusive
Speaker 1: games developer. It looks like Panasonic is moving toward an
Speaker 1: acquisition of its own, this one being the supply chain
Speaker 1: software company blew Yonder. Panasonic had previously secured a twenty
Speaker 1: percent stake in the company in twenty and while as
Speaker 1: of this recording, Panasonic has not acknowledged that it is
Speaker 1: actually moving forward with a full acquisition, that's what it
Speaker 1: looks like is happening. And I always think of Panasonic
Speaker 1: as a consumer electronics company. It's the company that you
Speaker 1: know owns this huge booth that's always right in the
Speaker 1: middle of ce s with lots of TVs and stuff.
Speaker 1: But the truth of the matter is that Panasonic has
Speaker 1: been diversifying quite a bit and moving further out from
Speaker 1: the direct consumer market to become more of a components
Speaker 1: supplier for other companies, and as such, managing supply chains
Speaker 1: becomes much more complicated. It so in that regard, this
Speaker 1: acquisition makes a lot of sense, and it seems like
Speaker 1: Panasonic would be looking at about a six point five
Speaker 1: billion dollar price tag for blue Yonder. And now it's
Speaker 1: time for another COVID related tech topic, which yea, the
Speaker 1: Washington Post published an article stating that research organization I
Speaker 1: p VM tested numerous temperature checking systems, you know, the
Speaker 1: kinds of stuff that you would find in places like
Speaker 1: schools or airports or public venues, that kind of thing
Speaker 1: where they screen people by looking at their skin temperature
Speaker 1: before letting them in. The organization says these devices aren't
Speaker 1: always reliable. In fact, reporter Drew Harrowell word did it
Speaker 1: as quote, the tools are dangerously ineffective end quote. Making
Speaker 1: matters worse is that some administrators are using these devices
Speaker 1: in ways that they weren't intended, such as to measure
Speaker 1: the body temperatures of multiple people at one time. All
Speaker 1: of this is super bad news, as lots of places
Speaker 1: are using these sorts of devices as part of their
Speaker 1: reopening strategies. While COVID is still running rampant throughout the world.
Speaker 1: Here in the United States, several states have eased up
Speaker 1: on restrictions, and the use of tempt checking devices plays
Speaker 1: a part in the messaging that hey, y'all, it's all okay,
Speaker 1: there's a vaccine now, though most of you can't get
Speaker 1: it yet. And besides, we're totally checking temperatures to see
Speaker 1: if anyone's got a fever, so we're all over it now.
Speaker 1: This report shows that the tech being used isn't always reliable,
Speaker 1: so it could miss people who actually do have a fever,
Speaker 1: or have false positives of people who don't have a
Speaker 1: fever showing up as if they do. It kind of
Speaker 1: creates the illusion of safety, which might make people feel
Speaker 1: at ease, but it also opens up the very real
Speaker 1: possibility of actual COVID transmission. Think of it like this,
Speaker 1: You've tested negative for COVID. You've taken a test, it's
Speaker 1: come at negative. You're good to go. But you need
Speaker 1: to go to a public space that does tempt checks
Speaker 1: and you pa us that check no problem because like
Speaker 1: I said, it came back negative. You're you're healthy. So
Speaker 1: once you are inside this public venue, you think, hey,
Speaker 1: everyone else here also had to pass that same test
Speaker 1: I did, Like they had to get screened before they
Speaker 1: came in. So maybe you're not quite as careful as
Speaker 1: you normally would be. You feel like you're in a
Speaker 1: safe space. Maybe you don't keep as much distance between
Speaker 1: you and everyone else as you should. Maybe you don't
Speaker 1: wash your hands as frequently. You can see how an
Speaker 1: unreliable piece of technology could feed into a perception that
Speaker 1: you're safe, when in fact you might not be. Now,
Speaker 1: I don't say this to send anyone into a panic,
Speaker 1: but rather to remind everyone we're not outll the woods yet.
Speaker 1: We still need to take personal responsibility for our own
Speaker 1: health as well as show consideration for our fellow human beings.
Speaker 1: Stay home, if you can, wear masks, practice social distancing,
Speaker 1: wash your hands. It's no time to throw caution to
Speaker 1: the wind, though That's what I see way too often
Speaker 1: on the rare occasions where I do have to leave
Speaker 1: my house. Ours Technica reported on SpaceX's plans for the
Speaker 1: spaceport that it's currently building out in Texas. The company
Speaker 1: had to file its plans with the Texas government and
Speaker 1: so they are publicly available on the Army Corps of
Speaker 1: Engineers site. It's also available for comments from the public.
Speaker 1: The full spaceport is going to have two landing pads,
Speaker 1: one of those is already built, and it will also
Speaker 1: have two launch pads for suborbital missions, meaning they won't
Speaker 1: go all the way out into space like not orbital
Speaker 1: space anyway, and then two other launch pads for orbital missions.
Speaker 1: So far, they the facility already has one suborbital launch pad,
Speaker 1: and it's building its first orbital launch pad. Ours Tannica
Speaker 1: points out that the design of the complex is pretty
Speaker 1: darn compact. Stuff tends to be pretty close together, partly
Speaker 1: because SpaceX has to adhere to certain event restrictions. It
Speaker 1: doesn't own that many acres of land in this part
Speaker 1: of Texas, and there are restrictions like you, they have
Speaker 1: to have stormwater ponds in order to help prevent flooding,
Speaker 1: for example, so some of that space has to be
Speaker 1: set aside for that. SpaceX has to get approval from
Speaker 1: the Army Corps of Engineers, also has to pass an
Speaker 1: environmental impact assessment from the f a A, and SpaceX
Speaker 1: founder Elon Musk has also indicated that he would very
Speaker 1: much like to conquer I'm sorry, I mean incorporate the
Speaker 1: nearby community of Boca Chica Village, which consists of several
Speaker 1: dozen homes, and he wants to boost that up to
Speaker 1: a small city that supports the spaceport. In fact, he
Speaker 1: wants to take that community and turn into a city
Speaker 1: called Star based Texas. Now, I can't decide if that
Speaker 1: sounds cool or corny. There have been reports that SpaceX
Speaker 1: has been a bit pushy with the residents of Boca
Speaker 1: Chica Village, attempting to convince some homeowners to pick up
Speaker 1: stakes and move, and that sounds, you know, not great.
Speaker 1: Tech Crunch reports that it has received confirmation from Apple
Speaker 1: the company is discontinuing it's iMac Pro line of computers.
Speaker 1: The iMac Pro is an all in one computer with
Speaker 1: the computer and display built into a single form factor.
Speaker 1: It was first produced back in December. The standard Imax
Speaker 1: seems to be sticking around, but apparently that standard iMac
Speaker 1: was kind of the go to model for people who
Speaker 1: are kind of looking at that style of computer, whereas
Speaker 1: those who were more interested in a computer that had
Speaker 1: more capability than the standard iMac. We're gravitating towards the
Speaker 1: Mac Pro. Now, if you still really want one, you
Speaker 1: can order one of the remaining models that are currently
Speaker 1: in Apple stock. It'll set you back a cool five
Speaker 1: thousand dollars. And a couple of other quick stories. The
Speaker 1: Guardian has a fun article titled Typographic Attack, Pen and
Speaker 1: paper fool AI into thinking Apple is an iPod now.
Speaker 1: As the headline indicates, the article is about an image
Speaker 1: recognition AI system called clip which should be able to
Speaker 1: figure out basic stuff by examining pictures. However, if you
Speaker 1: were to handwright say the word iPod on a sticky note,
Speaker 1: and then you were to slap that sticky note on
Speaker 1: an apple, as in the fruit, and then you took
Speaker 1: a photo of that and fed it to Clip, that
Speaker 1: text could be enough to convince Clip that, sure enough,
Speaker 1: that piece of fruit is in fact an m P
Speaker 1: three player from Apple Now. According to the Guardian, a
Speaker 1: different test involved just typing up dollar signs on top
Speaker 1: of a picture of a dog, so like just putting
Speaker 1: a text box there and putting in dollar signs, then
Speaker 1: feeding that image to Clip, and it was enough for
Speaker 1: Clip to misidentify it as a piggy bank. The organization
Speaker 1: behind clip open AI acknowledges that this type of typographic
Speaker 1: attack can be effective. The model is able to decipher
Speaker 1: text and interpret it, and that is powerful enough to
Speaker 1: push the model towards misidentifying whatever the thing is it's
Speaker 1: looking at. In some ways, you can think of Clip
Speaker 1: as being a sweet summer child, a naive innocent that
Speaker 1: will believe whatever you tell it. If you post a
Speaker 1: video of an ostrich with the sign Santa clause underneath it. Well, hey,
Speaker 1: there's a chance that will think that that Ostrich is
Speaker 1: in fact Santa Claus. And honestly, who's to say that
Speaker 1: it's not. I mean, we've all been a bit hasty
Speaker 1: to judge, right. As for clip, while this report is
Speaker 1: pretty amusing, it does indicate there's some pretty big opportunities
Speaker 1: for mischief, including stuff that goes well beyond mischief using
Speaker 1: this vulnerability. I suspect that a large part of open
Speaker 1: aiyes work will be refining this AI model so that
Speaker 1: it weights the text interpretation against other elements in an image. So,
Speaker 1: in other words, they're going to have to teach the
Speaker 1: AI that human beings are liars. And finally, in an
Speaker 1: interview for the Infra Nation, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg talked
Speaker 1: about how virtual reality is an exciting field that will
Speaker 1: play a bigger part in online social presence in the future.
Speaker 1: He spoke about the work going into creating realistic avatars
Speaker 1: to represent users and allow them to interact within a
Speaker 1: virtual space together. So think of something like Ready Player one,
Speaker 1: or maybe a more immersive version of Second Life, which
Speaker 1: has its own implications. It really makes me think that
Speaker 1: any big shared virtual space is going to be jarring,
Speaker 1: not necessarily because of the technology, but because of how
Speaker 1: people can be. Some people just like to push boundaries
Speaker 1: or worse, and they can make or break an experience.
Speaker 1: They can make an experience truly unbearable. Also, the level
Speaker 1: of VR that Zuckerberg is talking about makes me a
Speaker 1: little nervous, not because of it being immersive, but because
Speaker 1: of the technology that would be you to make it happen,
Speaker 1: technology like eye tracking, for example. Now, Facebook makes nearly
Speaker 1: all of its revenue from advertising, so I can only
Speaker 1: imagine that Zuckerberg is eager to roll out tech that
Speaker 1: let's Facebook track where users are looking within a virtual world,
Speaker 1: because that's where you're going to see advertising pop up. Right, everyone,
Speaker 1: get ready for the next phase or techno capitalist dystopia.
Speaker 1: But no, seriously, I'm sure it'll be really neat. Well.
Speaker 1: That wraps up the news for Tuesday, March nine, twenty one.
Speaker 1: If you folks have any suggestions for future topics I
Speaker 1: should tackle in tech Stuff, let me know. Reach out
Speaker 1: on Twitter. The handle is tech stuff hs W, and
Speaker 1: I'll tell to you again really soon. Tech Stuff is
Speaker 1: an I Heart Radio production. For more podcasts from my
Speaker 1: Heart Radio, visit the i heart radio, app, Apple podcasts,
Speaker 1: or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.