 Coming up on DTS T-Mobile makes it all unlimited is Facebook on the decline and how the internet makes it hard to forget your past. This is the Daily Tech News for Wednesday, April 7th, 2021 in Los Angeles. I'm Tom Merritt. And from Studio Redwood. I'm Sarah Lean. Salt Lake City. I'm Scott Johnson. I'm the show's producer, Roger Chang. We literally spent a lot of time talking about what kinds of things you can and cannot eat out of a mug on good day internet. Came up with some recipes, had some breakthroughs. If you'd like that wider conversation, become a member at patreon.com. Let's start with a few tech things you should know. Google will hold its developer conference Google I.O. as a virtual event on May 18th through the 20th. It will be free to anybody to access. Google canceled the event last year. Apple announced AMD Ryzen 5000 editions of its G15 and Alienware M15 gaming laptops in addition to existing laptops with 10th generation Intel chips. The AMD equipped M15 launches April 15th starting at $1,794 and the G15 comes along May 4th starting at $900. The first third-party products that work with Apple's Find My system have launched including VanMoof's S3 and X3 e-bikes, Belkin's SoundForm Freedom True Wireless Earbuds, and the Chipolo One-Spot Tracking Tag. Just like AirPods and iPhones, you can use these devices to find my profile to use that and use the Bluetooth network of Apple devices out there to locate them if they go missing. Uber and Lyft have a driver shortage. Both companies saw drivers drop off the platform during 2020 because of lack of people looking for rides. Drivers are still down around 40% on each platform. Now people are starting to hop in cars again and the services don't have enough drivers to meet the demand. Uber announced it will spend $250 million on incentives to encourage drivers to join back up and Lyft is covering the cost of rental cars, offering $800 sign-up bonuses and promising extra cash if a trip takes longer than nine minutes. Spotify now has an in-app voice assistant on Android and iOS. When the app is open, you can say, Hey Spotify, and then ask the app to play a song or playlist or an artist. You have to have the app open and give it access to your device's microphone for it to work properly. I have a feeling in a couple of years, this will no longer be a story, it'll just be like, Oh, this app doesn't have voice. Why does this have voice? You can't say, Hey app, do my thing. Yeah. Let's talk a little more about what T-Mobile is doing. Scott. Sure. T-Mobile, you all know them and love them. I guess announced the launch of its wireless home internet service. This is different than using your phone at home for internet service or, you know, tying it to your laptop or something. Instead, you get a Wi-Fi gateway that connects to T-Mobile's LTE and 5G networks and then acts as a cable or fiber internet service would in your home. So in effect, it's just like getting wired internet, except it isn't wired. It's very, though T-Mobile says all customers will get at least 50 megabits and the average speed will be around 100 megabits. That's pretty good. Whatever the server, excuse me, whatever the speed you get in your location, you get unlimited data, no throttling, all of that for $60 a month of the 30 million people in the U.S. mainland and Hawaii who can get the service, 10 million are in rural areas. Sorry, Alaska. No good up there. Rollout will be slowed by limited availability of Wi-Fi gateways, which is related to the global chip shortage. T-Mobile announced Wednesday it will upgrade all existing postpaid customers to unlimited plans at no additional cost. That includes former Sprint customers. The U.S. carrier also launched a plan for customers on other carriers to get unlimited plans and trade in their phones. So a lot going on there with T-Mobile. But I got to say, I think that price is pretty strong for that level of broadband and not having any caps or throttling is a huge deal right now. Yeah, just real quickly, making all your plans unlimited, super smart for T-Mobile. Great way to try to grab some market share with Sprint's network. They now have very good coverage, so you might get a lot more people in. And I'm excited as a T-Mobile subscriber. So good move, good competitive move by T-Mobile. The home internet thing is really interesting because this is one of the first big operators, certainly not the first offer wireless internet service at home. Verizon's doing it, bunch of others are doing it. Some people like Starry have been doing it for years. But this is the first big rollout of marketing to say you can use 5G just like you would a cable connection. It's not going to be as good as fiber, but this will be a stable connection. Now granted, not all of these are 5G, so they won't have that capacity reliability of 5G. But you're going to see a lot of companies using wireless as home internet because of the advantages of capacity that 5G offers. Yeah, the whole, I mean, in the business that we're all in, where it it's really important to have something that's very, very true when you're doing a home connection and doing shows. To me, I'm like, 100 megabits per second sounds great. But without being wired, scary, like we talked about a month. Yeah, yeah. We talked pre-show about it. And I didn't mean to interrupt, but when we talked about pre-show, the first thing that came to my mind, Sarah, was this feeling of, oh, no, what's my ping going to be like in my favorite first person shooter? It's a, you know, it's an edge case for gamers, but it's always the first thing I go to when you say wireless, I think latency and inconsistent latency, if it's consistent, even if it's not great, I'm still better with the consistency that I am with something that's just flopping all over the place. And that's the advantage of 5G. And that's why it's it's a little fudgy here, because they're like, some of it will be on LTE, but they're rolling more 5G out everywhere. 5G provides really good lag, you know, really, really decent jitter and latency and great capability. So it's never going to be the same as fiber, though. So if that really matters to you, then this isn't going to be for you. But I think what you were saying, Sarah, is for $60 a month, especially if you're in a rural area that didn't have anything but DSL before now, that's a good option. Yeah, absolutely. Yeah. I mean, this is, this is definitely a, and I, I know some people are out there saying, yes, I'm super excited about this. And please let us know. Uh, feedback at daily technewshow.com if you have thoughts about this. But, but yes, this is, this is something that would frighten me personally. But I also, I am, I, you know, I have the privilege of being able to, you know, plug in my Mac mini. So, so, uh, yeah, again, I pay more than $60 a month for internet. So that's, you know, there's a trade off there. Yeah, I'm paying an extra. I forget what I pay extra per month to Comcast to give me no caps, but it's kind of ridiculous and way overpriced and dumb. I would be tempted by this if it came through here. And it probably will. I think we're, I think we're in an area where we could get good T-mobile access. Wireless is not what it used to be. It's, it's a lot more reliable, especially on 5G. And this means we're going to see more competition because while it's not, it's still, you've got to roll out infrastructure to roll out wireless. If you're somebody like T-mobile that already has it, it's going to be easier to provide a home internet connection this way than to put cable in the ground. So good stuff. On Tuesday in a blog post, Facebook acknowledged the free posting of account information of more than 503 million individuals and provided a few more details. We've talked about this on the show before. The big, the big, the big new thing is that it's freely available. But here's what we know to recap. This information was already available for a fee, but has now been made available for free. That's the news. Facebook says this data set is a combination of data, some of which was scraped from Facebook prior to September, 2019. That's what they said in their blog post, using a flaw in the contact importer tool that Facebook says it fixed in 2019. Basically, you could just ping it with a bunch of numbers and get stuff out of it. That tool was meant to let you use your contact list to find friends on Facebook, but a militia actor could just keep trying phone numbers at random until they hit a match and then access more info about that person. The data set includes phone numbers, email addresses, hometowns, full names and birth dates. It does not include your financial information, health information or passwords. So this is not a data breach in that sense. This is more probably stuff people could find out about you anyway, but it makes it easy in a nice big data set that's all collated together. As we mentioned before, this is useful for fishing or spamming you. So best to be aware it could be out there in case somebody comes with your birth date, full name address and tries to pretend there's somebody they're not, you could say, wait a minute, you could have got that from a Facebook data set, but there's really not a lot of action you can take directly about it. Now, Facebook may face questions about the proper reporting of this breach in Europe. Europe's General Data Protection Regulation, GDPR, came into force May 2018. In April 2018, prior to GDPR, Facebook reported a phone lookup breach had occurred between June 2017 and April 2018, but in the blog post Tuesday, Facebook referred to a contact importer tool. Facebook says it fixed the contact importer vulnerability in August 2019. Facebook says this current data set, as I mentioned, is a combined with additional records, which may be from a later period. But they don't say those later records are necessarily from them. They're being a little fudgy about it. The question is whether any of the additional data in this data set was taken from Facebook post April 2018 and therefore should have been reported under the GDPR. If that's the case, Facebook may face some fines. Facebook is treating this like public collection of data, not a data breach. They're trying to say, this is stuff we couldn't stop people from getting. They just got really good at getting it, hence the lack of reporting or notifying users. You only notify users or report it if it's a breach. Somebody got into your database. If somebody just goes out on the internet and starts scraping stuff off websites, the websites aren't responsible for that. So Facebook's treating it like that. I don't know if you guys think Facebook has a case there or not. Well, you're obviously going to see an uptick in fishing. Well, the more people can scrape from a site, the more they can fish you or the more of these traditional ways of getting people's private data without actually having that private data, those rates go up the more you can scrape. So you could make the argument that there's too much to scrape. And I don't know what that looks like in terms of governmental oversight, but just from a Facebook user standpoint, maybe they have to trim back what's out there, I don't know, or give us more control over what we allow to be scraped. Maybe they already do that. I can list whether I'm married or not, or I can list whether I graduated from whatever college or whatever and or not. So maybe again, it's on us to pull back some of that data. But if it really is just the equivalent of a public site scraping, then I kind of think they're maybe right in this case. I don't know. It's also, I don't know. I mean, Facebook is also, as other platforms also do, wants to be your number one platform for everything. When I first read the story and I was like, doesn't include financial information, which is what other people can glean. I was like, well, that's good. But like financial information on Facebook. Well, yeah, because Facebook has introduced ways to pay for things. That's again, not Facebook is not alone. That is not the only way that you can do this stuff. But huh, financial information, if that were to be something that could be scraped would be an issue. That's not the case right now. But it's something I think, at least for me, I kind of have to remind myself of you have to really trust a platform to give that platform your information because it's going to be more convenient for your life and know that if somebody is smart enough, they might be able to access it. Yeah. I mean, I don't use Facebook. I don't really like Facebook, but I want to be I want to be fair in the criticism. And if this is stuff that could have been gotten otherwise or maybe even was gotten otherwise, these data sets often are a combination of a bunch of things. Then, you know, I don't think it's fair to hold Facebook's feet to the fire for something they didn't do. I know a lot of people want to do it anyway because they just don't like Facebook that much. So I'll be very interested to see because it does feel like they're being a little shady about it. I can't tell if that's just because they don't know where the information came from or if they're really trying to hide the fact that they should have reported this and they're going to get a 2% fine, which is a big fine. All right, folks, we are doing a crossover show this month with this week in Science Saturday, April 17th at 4pm Pacific. Join me, Sarah Roger, Dr. Kiki Blair and Justin from Twists. Let us know what topics you'd like us to tag team on on the show. We want your ideas, email us feedback at dailytechnewshow.com. We're going to put all our minds together and talk about the intersection of tech and science. The show happens again April 17th at 4pm Pacific. Pew Research Center published a new report on how people in the US use social media, speaking of Facebook, YouTube is the most widely used social platform increasing from 73% of adult surveyed in 2019 to 81% this year. So on the up and up Facebook is at number two at 69% an unchanged number since 2019. In fact, most platforms saw stagnation. Besides YouTube only read it saw statistically significant growth growing from 11% in 2019 to 18% in 2021. Instagram held number three at 40% Pinterest at 31 and linked in at 28. But if you use it, you use it a lot. 49% of Facebook users check multiple times a day. Same for 45% of Snapchat users and 38% of Instagram users. TikTok showed up in the report for the first time with 21% of people in the US saying that they use it, but that percentage rises to 48 if you're between the ages of 18 to 29. Wow, I had a lot of discussion prior to this to the show about these stats. And of course, you know, we had to make kind of clear between the three of us that this is, you know, poll data. This isn't like, you know, blockchain verified, you know, data from some servers telling us exactly who's using what. So, you know, take that for whatever you will. But Tom, throughout the idea that maybe this shows things aren't so great at Facebook, showing it being kind of flat for two years is a sign of not just reaching a crescendo or market saturation, it's maybe a sign of not necessarily backlash, but a pulling back. So I don't know, I'd love to hear Tom talk more about that because that conceptually is kind of a, that's a hard pill for Facebook to have to look at, I would think. Yeah, 69% is not enough for me to say, oh, it's saturation. If they're like 84%, 85% somewhere up there, I might say like, oh, well, they're flat because they've just really hit the limit a number of people are going to use Facebook. But I feel like this is the first evidence of a backlash. And whether, like you say, it's people just saying they don't use Facebook, even though they do, because this is self-reported, or whether it's actually representative of usage, I think it's a backlash either way, right? But it is the first evidence, because we've been saying forever, people are going to stop, people say they're going to stop using Facebook, but the usage data stays high. The monthly active users stay high. And this is the first time I've seen, man, over two years, they didn't gain anything in the US. Now, there are other parts of the world where they're certainly gaining. I don't think Facebook is in trouble because of that. But I think this is significant that they have, they have lost people in the United States. Yeah. And it was a tumultuous, you know, a couple of years for them, they were under the spotlight a lot. They had to testify a lot. There were a lot of reasons to be mad at Facebook or to tell your friends to quit or, or whatever it was, you know, not, not the best two years for those guys. The one thing that really stood out to me that surprised me was that YouTube is way up on top, and it shouldn't surprise me. I was saying before the show, of course, this is a site that has something for everybody. It doesn't matter what your age is, what your financial status is, what you're into, what you're not into. There's something for everybody there from the very mundane to the controversial, and it's just all in one site. So, of course, it's, it's number one. But that took me by surprise. I thought it'd be like Facebook, I don't know, maybe Twitter would be up higher than it is, like Twitter's not nearly up there. But people with kids got, people with kids, you got to have YouTube. It's the only way they'll leave you alone for an hour while you're making dinner. The only thing that really, yeah, the YouTube, the YouTube thing to me is I am, I'm not a huge YouTube viewer, but, but I know not just people with kids, but, but particularly families have, you know, they can find a lot of things from YouTube that, you know, can sort of satisfy everyone's needs. The only thing that really struck me is somewhat odd were the Reddit numbers, 11% 2019, 18% in 2021. So it's, it's still, I mean, we're not talking like crazy growth, but I would have thought at this point Reddit would be a little bit more saturated. Like if you're on Reddit already, you're, you're there. You want to be there. You got your subreddit, you do your thing. Yeah, it's a weird site, though, because it's, I agree with you, like the people that it's really designed for, we're at that saturation point, but I feel like Reddit is now suddenly more public to everybody else. And it's starting to be glommed on to by demographics or readers or users who normally wouldn't go to Reddit. So I don't know. It's still mostly young men who make more than $50,000 looking at this stuff with the college that are college educated, which is historically what it's been. And if that's all it was ever going to appeal to it wouldn't be growing. I think Sarah is right. It is starting to appeal outside of that demo. And just anecdotally, you know, my wife uses Reddit for things like she's like, Oh, I went on the Reddit for BTS or Korean food or, you know, like it's becoming more and more of a resource and that follows on them cracking down a little more on some of the more Wild West behavior on Reddit over the past couple of years. So that's interesting. Nextdoor has almost next to nothing. Twitter's just for journalists and podcasters who want to hear each other talk like the rest of this, I guess Pinterest is a little higher than I would have put it, but that's because I'm not in the demo. But it's pretty widely spread evenly. You think it would be mostly female? No, you're wrong. It's actually pretty equally spread between men and women, white and black users, not as much with Hispanic, pretty much, you know, over 65s are short, but the rest are even. So these are interesting numbers. It helps you break your biases to look at this. Lauren Good has an article on Wired called, I called off my wedding. The internet will never forget. In May 2019, Lauren Good ended an eight year relationship. She talks about this in the story and canceled her wedding. She took a picture of her breakfast that day, a fried egg. Why does she still remember that? Because that picture recently popped up as a memory in a photo app, maybe a memory she wasn't super excited to see. She also sees wedding ads on Instagram still collages of wedding photos suggested for her on Pinterest, monthly happy anniversary emails kept coming from wedding wire for years on the day she had originally planned to get married. The algorithm doesn't know she canceled the wedding and memory features are everywhere these days. Facebook launched on this day in 2015. Apple added memories to its photos app in 2016. The widgets that just came out in iOS last year, let you have it just pop up cool stuff from your photos. In 2019, Google photos added memories to its app. Snapchat and Instagram have added memory features. Memories keep you in apps, which in many cases means the apps can then show you ads. So while happy memories may be the sales pitch, anything that keeps you there is a win for the app. Lauren Good isn't the only one to experience this, but most people don't. So the majority rules as far as the algorithm goes, which means it's a lot of work if you want to untrain it. And all that work is on you. They're not tools to help you go remove photos or unlike things or change your Pinterest preferences and companies aren't likely to put in the effort to help because it's not the majority of the users and it doesn't make them any money. Should we all be more careful with what we save, photograph and pin just in case? Yes. I mean, I don't want to, I don't want to say that a company couldn't do well to give you some tools to help control that better. Always do that. But at the end of the day, if I got real weird on a Friday night and posted something dumb and then five years later, I was reminded of it. I'm just being reminded of how dumb I was. Like, it's still on me, right? I feel like it is. I'm sure this is controversial, but I think we should be better stewards of it. I love that that's your example, Scott. You're like, oh, I just got like weird on a Friday and now I don't want to know about it five years later. Okay. So all getting aside. So Lauren Good, friend of the show, um, and this is a really great article. If you, if you have some time to read it, it's, it's good in its entirety, but she, she makes a really good point of, listen, okay, I live a life online. I had all sorts of stuff that was connected to a certain person online and that, that life ended for me. And now I'm constantly reminded of this person in various ways. And you sort of go like, well, okay, if you could, I don't know. I mean, sure, like cancel your, you know, get rid of your Facebook account or, or block the person on Facebook. There are certain, there are certain platforms that you can, you can make this work. I have this exact same issue, well, similar anyway with, uh, with Iowa's photos where once in a while, and I, and I had, I had opted in, you know, where it's like, do you want to be reminded of stuff? And I, I opted in. So I said, yes, every so often I'll be like, on this day in 2011, you were doing this. And I'll be like, oh, that guy, yeah. And it, like it really sucks. It kind of, it kind of ruins your day. And it is not an algorithm that's trying to ruin my day, but what am I going to do? Go through 9,000 photos and try to figure out which ones aren't appropriate for this sort of thing. It requires so much work on the humans part to, to make this work effectively. And most people just aren't going to do that. But at the same time, it can, it can be a real bummer. Yeah. And, and sure, the easy thing is like, well, then don't use that service. Don't use the reminder thing. Don't use the memories thing. Um, and, and sure, uh, that's kind of thrown out the bathwater and the baby at the same time, though, like I love getting old pictures of my dogs, even the dogs that are no longer with us, uh, showing up in my photos widget. It's fun. It's cool. Like, ah, remember this time when we were at the beach? Every so often, the picture that we took of Django, my old dog on her last day with us shows up and I'm like, oh, yeah, I don't really need to see that one come back in the rotation. Right. But how do you do that? I'm like, for me, it's like, you know, I'll put up with that every so happening every so often in order to get all the other fun stuff. It's personal equation for everybody. Right. But it's, it's, it's unfortunate that, you know, you have to go through so much work to be able to use some of this stuff. Some of it you can't avoid. Some of these things that, you know, are just built into the app. It's like, oh, you're just not going to use the Google Photos app because it's going to show memories at the top of the app for you. I mean, uh, and then there's things like that wedding reminder that Lauren was getting where she just couldn't get it to stop. She couldn't even delete her account. They would, they'll let you deactivate it, but not delete it. Yeah. And on the flip side of this real quick, I, there are, there have been multiple times where something will show up in that memories thing and I'll go, I totally forgot I did that. I am reposting that now. I don't even know where that file is. I'm glad I found it here and I'll back it up even. Yeah. So it's not like those times don't happen. Yeah. It's like, I feel like, well, I mean, I don't even want to say like the majority of the time, but some of the time, those photos, you're like, that was so cool. Thank you. I really liked it. I really like this feature. It's just the ones where you go, oh man. Yeah. It's just a bummer that it takes that much work to get rid of those, those bummer moments. Yeah. Yeah. Well, this one might not be a bummer depending on who you are. The Soviet Union's version of Lord of the Rings first aired on Leningrad television back in 1991, while ago. The station's successor, Five TV, recently uploaded the entire work to YouTube in two parts. This particular adaptation focuses only on the first of Tolkien's trilogy, The Fellowship of the Ring, and has its own, as some people would say, Soviet flair. Yeah. It's a whole show or not. Maybe it's not that good. I don't know. I think it's great. I've we covered this on court killers. I'm going to be talking about it on sort of laser. Like this is light and the internet on fire this week. And it feels like because it's just so odd and very Soviet. It was aired like mere months before the Soviet Union ended. It was December 1991 when they lowered the hammer and the sickle in Moscow, the hammer and sickle flag. It's a piece of its time. And Roger was saying he was reading something where they were just so far out of money at this point on Leningrad TV that they're like, yeah, let's let's do what we can with what we got. It shows. Yeah, it looks insanely dumb and I totally want to see it. I would really like some some translated subtitle stuff. Tom, if you're available, we'll work we'll work that out. But yeah, this kind of stuff, I love it when the sort of stuff comes out. It's kind of when I found the the movie that was Spider-Man and Superman in the same movie from an Indian film and it was absolutely not approved by DC or Marvel. But it's wonderful. Just a musical and they dance and they fly together and it's ridiculous. So yeah, more of this. It's what the Internet's for. It's what it was always for. I mean, listen, I Lord of the Rings, the trilogy was like one of my favorite trilogies of all time. So just knowing that there's some version of at least the first book, I will watch this. Yeah. I mean, the Hobbits are dressed like 1800s era Russians and speaking Russian, but it's still Lord of the Rings. Right. The Lord of the Rings. Yeah. But that aside, still really fun and nostalgic for everybody. Yeah. All right, let's check out the mailbag. Oh, let's do it. This one comes from Derek, who says he's from sunny, cloudy, rainy, windy, warm and cold Minnesota. And all true. Well, you know, keep fighting the good fight, Derek. Derek says regarding the Android auto discussion from Tuesday's show, Sarah stated very definitively that Google Maps is far and away better than Apple Maps. Derek says, I have to disagree. I travel weekly for work and I'm often driving in strange cities. I have far more issues with Google Maps turn by turn navigation, sometimes taking me through a series of side streets and exit ramps. Google Maps also waits just slightly longer to announce upcoming exits and turns. Apple Maps tends to suggest the more logical route and can anticipate turns, what lane to be in and proper navigation. Google Maps does have more search and location data available stores, Yelp, that sort of thing. But for turn by turn, not even a contest. Apple Maps wins every time. I mean, I hate to agree with this because I was super annoyed with Apple Maps in the beginning. I thought it was stupid and lame and weird like turn about where Apple's like, we're not working with you anymore. Can do our own thing. And I was just annoyed by it. And the first version was terrible. And anyway, and that was a long time ago, but I just really wrote it off. And then lately, though, I don't know the last five, six, seven times I've had to use navigation point by point stuff. Apple Maps tends to lead me in the wrong direction. Or Google Maps, rather, and Apple Maps don't. They just are better at stuff around the Salt Lake City metropolitan area. Now, that may be different city to city. I don't really know. But a lot of times Kim will turn on Google Maps. I'll turn on Apple Maps. And I'll win. And I'll get us there quicker, better routes, better traffic, notifications, all that stuff. So I feel like they got it. They got there and they got it. But it took a while and it was not the first or second or third version. It was it was a ways down the road. I will admit Apple Maps is much improved. If you're still thinking it's what it was when it launched, you need to try it. It's way better. I don't like that it doesn't work on any of my Android devices for some reason, no matter how hard I try. So, you know, that's a big downside for it. Also, I like Google Waze. I say Google Waze because to remind you that Google Waze but Waze is my go to. Now, if I'm not worried about traffic at all, which is occasionally still true, then I might do Google Maps just out of habit. But Waze is my preference because that'll cut through LA traffic like like a hot knife through butter. Yeah, you've always been a Waze guy, though, like before they picked them up. I remember people would say, Tom, what do you do? Waze, Waze, Waze. I struggled to like Waze. It's very, I don't know, cartoonish or something. But, you know what, Derek, thank you for bringing us up. It's important to remind ourselves that not every app as as as Apple Maps was to me a few years ago is the same app today and companies make improvements all the time. If you have feedback for anything that we have talked about on a previous show, anything we might talk about in a future show, feedback at DailyTechNewShow.com is where to send that email. Also, I'd like to shout out patrons at our master and grand master levels. Today, they include Dan Kolbeck, Chris Benito and John and Becky Johnston. Also, extra special thanks to Jeffrey Zilx, a.k.a. Dark Redeemer, our top 10 lifetime supporter list. You are in that, Jeffrey. Thank you so much. Also, thanks to Scott Johnson for being with us today. Scott, what's been going on with you? Well, actually kind of a big deal this week. I launched a Kickstarter I've been working on for almost two years now and it finally happened. So if you like card games and you like having a little competitive fun with your friends or your family and you like science fiction and you like my artwork. If you like any of those things in any combination, go check it out. The Kickstarter is up now. We kind of blew through our goal, which surprised us. And now we have some really cool secondary stretch goals that have just opened up. It's called Rock Runners Incorporated. You can find the entire thing and all the information at frogpants.com slash Rock Runners. And I hope a bunch of you like it. Excellent. Well, we are live on this show. Monday through Friday at 4 30 p.m. Eastern 20 30 UTC. You can find out more at dailytechnewshow.com slash live bookmark it and join us. We'll be back tomorrow with Justin Robert Young. Talk to you then. This show is part of the Frog Pants Network. Get more at frogpants.com. The club hopes you have enjoyed this program. Ha ha ha ha ha.