 Wait, go back, Fargo meets Nashville? Wait, what? This goes, the television shows. Okay. Like, if you wanted to do a Fargo meets Nashville, you would set it in Branson. Like, that would be- Oh, right, yeah, yeah, yeah. All-town crime, but also like, people are weirdly famous and they're like outsized famous in Branson and only in Branson, and so they never leave. Branson's Little Opry Theater. World famous locally. Is that it? This is, I searched from Missouri, Branson and Opry and that's where they came up. I just remember the- That's where all the weirdest magicians are. The last time we ever went, I remember there were billboards for Yo-Yo Ma that called him a Japanese fiddle player. Oh no, you know what it is. It's because there's a famous Japanese fiddle player in Nashville, or that place is Grand Ole Opry. And I guess he used to do the circuit between there and Branson. And so they assumed it's an Asian guy with a string instrument, it must be the same guy. It's literally- I don't think that's what happened. I think they just thought, this is a way for us to explain to people who Yo-Yo Ma is. Yeah, but I'm telling you, there is a famous, there's a famous Japanese violinist to fiddle player. He plays like country music and he lives up that way. Like, he's super famous locally. Like, I don't know, outside of that area. I remember because 2020 did a story on him. Right here. A story. This name. Yeah, Shoji- Bipartisan, sorry. I'll post it in slide. What's the name? There it is. What's the name? Shoji Tabuchi, is a Japanese-American country music fiddle-er and singer who currently performs at his theater, the Shoji-Tabuchi Theater in Branson, Missouri. Yeah, I'm sure they were just going off his brand with the Yo-Yo Ma ad. I don't think they were confused. Pretty sure they were. I have people, you know what? I used to give people more credit than they deserved. Nah, I don't think that's a danger. These are shrewd advertisers here. Alrighty. Shall we do a show, Justin? What was that? Are you ready to do a show? Oh, hell yeah, man. Born to do it. We'll need controlled controls. Ah, yes, the controls. The couturels, the couturels. There you go. You have it all. The couturels. All right, here we go. Daily Tech News Show is powered by you. Find out more at DailyTechNewsShow.com slash support. This is the Daily Tech News for Thursday, March 23rd, 2017. I'm Tom Merritt, Justin Robert Young. How are you? Oh, man, I'm having a great time. This is a fun day. We got some good stories. I'm ready to serve the fine DTNS listenership with the best show we can. We are going to bring you bipartisan agreement over internet regulation, my friends. The biggest story on the hill. That's right. We're going to cover it in depth. You thought it was impossible. I know, I know. I'll tell you what. I'm going to prove that notion wrong. All right, let's get right to it with some tech things that you should know. Users of Instagram can now turn on two-factor authentication, which uses SMS to text message you a code every time you log in from a new device. So go set that up. Always a smart move. Apple acquired iOS automation app Workflow and has made the app free. Workflow won a design award from Apple in 2015 in part because of its use of accessibility features. So didn't shut it down. Actually kept it around and made it free and free. I can't wait to learn more at WWDC. And WikiLeaks released more documents in its Vault 7 collection, which appear to reveal CIA methods for cracking MacBooks and iPhones. A bunch of the documents, probably most of the documents are more than seven years old, but there's a couple of current ones in there. And most of the attacks are about the Mac, and most of them require physical access to the machine. You know, it's always interesting to see unredacted documents like this, which is, I think, part of the fascination, even if it's not. Yeah, the peak behind the scenes, if you will. All right, now here's some more top stories. AT&T, Verizon, and Johnson and Johnson have joined in the boycott of non-search ad spending on Google's ad networks. That includes YouTube, due to concerns over ads appearing next to offensive content. There was a Times report, Times of London. Those of you in New York, we're not talking about your times. We're talking about the first times. Times report last week of ads next to extremist content that caused several European ad agencies and media companies, including Havas, the world's sixth largest ad agency to poll their ads. Google announced new tools and policies Monday. We talked about that. But advertisers are not changing their minds. More of them joining the problem. They say they want more details joining the problem. I mean, joining the boycott, sorry. Now, obviously, advertising is Google's golden goose, mostly search advertising. And search ads not affected by this. This is display ads, yeah. Yes, display ads that will largely go out over YouTube, which is a not insignificant advertising platform for Google. This is significant in that the words boycott, Google and ad spending are all in the same headline. Google would prefer to have a billion different headlines that we might read as either more damaging or more embarrassing. Anything that nips away at what actually keeps the lights on and has propelled Google into this tremendous financial position is something that they need to tend to. What I think we're seeing here, though, is the, sorry, are these ad agencies not believing that Google is either responding fast enough or comprehensively enough or is attentive to their needs because they are not saying, okay, if you patch the problem, everybody get back in the pool. They're like, no, no, no. We want to make sure that headline Johnson and Johnson baby powder ad on ISIS beheading video is not a story that we ever say. Exactly. This is a, when we were talking earlier today, I called this a backroom brawl that just spilled out into the street, right? Google has been arguing, look, we're doing everything we can. Yes, this is going to happen. Sometimes we don't like it, but we're limited in our resources to police this sort of thing on the internet. That's just the way the internet works, guys. And the ad agencies are saying no more, mostly because the Times opened the door and said, hey, look, they're fighting, right? The Times is the one that put this in front of the public and advertisers immediately being very adverse to negative public reaction said, uh-uh, no. We are not playing that game anymore. Google, you have to change your ways. Google, of course, Monday said, fine, fine, fine, fine. We'll hire a bunch of people. You've forced our hand. We'll try to do more. We still don't think there's a lot you can do, but we'll try to do more. And the ad agencies aren't budging. That's really what's interesting. I expected, after Monday, this to kind of just settle down. And instead, it's growing. Well, because at the end of the day, these companies, when you're this large, you're spending your ad money somewhere. And Google's position is, all right, fine. We'll fix it, but at the end of the day, you've got a gigantic hole in your budget that has Google written on it. And either you're going to give us that money or you're going to wait a little bit and then give us that money. And we are, we're seeing a little bit of a stare down. And don't forget, Google's not wrong in saying this is a difficult, like a very difficult problem. This isn't a guy in the Google ad office who sits there and takes the ad orders and puts them up on terrorist sites, right? There's nobody watching this. This is all programmatic. And so it's very easy. You guys know this. You know how spam works. You know how easy it is for exploits to happen. It's very easy for someone to fool the system into thinking it's on a trusted site and then it shows up on an untrusted site. On the other hand, we, none of us, I think in this audience, want money going to people who are criminals. And so, yeah, there's responsibility on Google to stop this, but it's also not the kind of thing you can just say, okay, Bob in advertising, just make sure no ads go on the criminal sites anymore. And he's like, mom, man! I have to read those sites. They're disgusting. Yeah. So I'm not trying to exonerate Google when I say that, but it isn't as easy as just flipping a switch. No, no, it absolutely isn't. And listen, advertisers are always kind of perpetually baffled by the internet. Here's another facet. The difference here is that they're putting their money where their mouth is and they're banding together. And again, this is a huge priority for Google because the last thing you want to see is this to spread into something larger that really starts to eat into their business. Meanwhile, Medium launched a subscription service for $5 a month today. All revenue in the first few months will go directly to writers and publishers. Eventually, subscribers will gain access to exclusive stories, early access to interface changes, offline reading and curated reading lists, although none of these features are available at launch. In January, the company laid off 50 employees and announced a move away from the ad-supported business. Welcome to the club of the non-ad-supported media. Yeah, this is, I feel a little odd commenting on this story sitting here doing a show that's entirely supported by its listeners because part of me wants to say, yeah, I hope this works, this is the way it should work. Disintermediate, go straight to your viewers. Medium certainly has a big enough audience that this might work and the people who love Medium really love Medium, so they might be willing to pop down 60 bucks a month. It's all about the approach, it's all about how you ask and it's all about the value people get for that $5. Right now, I think in some ways it's a more compelling proposition to say, give us $5, it goes to the writers than it is to add these features and things later, but it's also, my impression of it, Justin, is it's all sort of the right things they should do if they want to be an ad-free publication platform, but maybe not in the right order. This seems a bit jumbled to me, and for this reason, because you said a lot of people love Medium, but do they love Medium, or do they love the writers that have found a home on Medium? Sure, they love Medium because of the writers, for sure. This is not a top-down thing where Medium is saying, hey, we need to have people covering this and covering that, and there's some way that you can vote it up or vote it down. It's basically just become a way to write an article or a series of articles that don't force you to make a blog, right? That is the killer hook for Medium, is I have an idea that I would like to get out and have a look professional without starting up this whole other thing or trying to jam it into something that it's not supposed to like Tumblr. What is curious to me is that they are launching this by themselves as, hey, pay Medium. Sure, we'll give it for the first few months, of course. Who knows after those few months where the money goes, let's assume that after that, a percentage will still go to the writers. Let's assume, right? That's fair to say. Sure. But if you're a writer, how much are you gonna push a Medium subscription? How much are you gonna put behind the paywall, especially, especially, sorry, when you have an opportunity, if someone's already willing to pay for your work, then you can go on Patreon and you can publish your own articles there and sure, they won't look like Medium articles, but if you wanna put it behind a paywall, there's already ways that you can put writing behind a paywall, very- But this isn't a $5 paywall. That's a key, that's a key part of this. Well, no, no, part of what they wanna offer, they wanna offer- This is $5 a month and everything's, nothing's behind a paywall, but you're supporting the writers. This is the same thing we do with Daily Tech News Show, right? Everybody gets the podcast. They say eventually subscribers will gain access to exclusive stuff. Right, so they're gonna put some things exclusive to the subscribers, but if I'm reading this right, most of Medium will still be just out there for everybody to read. I guess that's what I'm saying though, because what do you think would be the biggest way? If I, all right, so- So here's the way I'm thinking it happens. They go to their most popular Medium people, say you guys are great, you're bringing in the most traffic, we're going to give you a big paycheck in order to do a little bit of exclusive content behind the paywall. If, yeah, but now you already, you're trying to bring in content that I don't know whether or not it's going to be a better value proposition for them to say, so let's say the ringer, Bill Simmons' site, before their value proposition was, hey, we'll handle all your tech, we'll make sure that your site never goes down. We'll do all the work there, you can hire graphic designers to design on top of our system. And in exchange, we will be able to sell big advertising packages that you can use to write stories against, right? Okay. Now they're not doing that anymore. Right. Now they're saying, hey, people love you guys so much, what if we took a cut of you asking and plugging for your fans to subscribe to Medium? Because that's where this comes from. This comes from writers encouraging their fans. Sure. Money to the platform. And on some platforms, like Twitch, it works on others, it might not. I don't know if Medium is in... Honestly, there's a lot of questions about how they make this appeal and that's why I come back to agreeing with you about it being jumbled. I don't know, is it them asking the authors to go and plump down to get people to pay? I don't know. Maybe it's not. And if so, how does that work? And this is not Patreon because it's the entire platform you're paying $5 a month for, not a particular writer. You're paying for access. You're not even paying for access, you're paying for support. So it's the Patreon appeal, but for Medium, as someone in our chat room put, patreon.com slash Medium, versus them saying, okay, so each individual writer can support themselves through direct donations, which is what they shouldn't do that because then only the star writers will benefit. This way, they can divvy it up amongst everybody. I don't know. I don't know. I think it's a bold move though. It's an interesting move. I hope it works because I like Medium, but I'm not convinced. You know what's funny is, I'm more positive about this working and I don't really love Medium. I don't hate it or anything. I just, I don't really ever read it and I don't see the need to put my stuff on it and maybe I'm just being old and crotchety, whereas you actually do love it more than I do. Yeah. Which you're a little more pessimistic about. Well, I mean, we've had great success with the contender stuff, putting it up on Medium. There you go. That explains our positions. I don't have a dog in the hunt. You're like, wait a minute. Hold on, you're what? Changing my what? Well, no, I mean, because nothing would change for me necessarily. I just don't know how many people are going to Medium.com and saying, oh, look at all these great stories I get to read every day that's curated by Medium. I just don't know where people find the value. My suspicion is that people find the value from writers and if they find the value from writers, I don't see how, A, the system directly benefits them in the best way possible or in a way that they can't already with off the rack solutions. Yeah, yeah. Better ways to get money. Would have to be discovery and curation, but yeah. Yeah. After a successful trial, Wells Fargo will roll out cardless withdrawals to 13,000 US ATMs starting on March 27th. Customers will be able to use their Wells Fargo smartphone app to receive a one-time eight-digit code that they will then enter into an ATM along with their standard PIN. Although in some cases, particularly secure ATMs with after-hours access, you'll still need your card. Think particularly of those ATMs that are behind a door and you use your ATM card to get in. Like, you obviously need your card for those still. I love this because to me, it feels like when AT, when Wells Fargo is taking a moment to figure out, you know, like, all right, how do we make ATMs easier and less of a pain in the ass? Like, that means that we are just at a very fundamental sea change when it comes to security, to how we safeguard the things that we care the most about. We were talking earlier today about the idea that abroad, the idea of handing over your credit card to a stranger and letting them take it into another room. Yeah. That's the craziest Cucabara idea that you could possibly concoct, right? Like, this is something that like, hey, why do we need these cards? Why do we need this thing that, you know, obviously there's still a PIN number beyond it, but can't there be different other ways that we can prove who we are and get money out? Yeah, I mean, you're absolutely right. Most of the world looks at us and goes, you don't even have chip and PIN. Even now, you just have chip. And I went to the post office yesterday, they have the chip cards blocked at the US post office. Yeah. You have to swipe still. And we still don't have PIN, it's just chip, which kind of defeats the purpose of chip and PIN security. But this kind of thing, you know, maybe we pull a Kenya and we just leap past the old infrastructure that we are not really rolling out and go right to phones. We have a huge number of phones in people's pockets. I would love to see more banks actually integrate with Android Pay and Apple Pay for their ATMs. To say just use NFC and a fingerprint, boom. But throw your cash that way. Don't even need a code sent to your app or nothing. I think we're absolutely going to get there because the technology is, like you said, in everybody's pockets and it's just gonna be a matter of somebody, you know, being the first value ad proposition. Although now, I mean, now you look at ATMs, I'm with Ally Bank. Ally Bank says, we don't have ATMs. We'll just refund all your ATM transactions. Congratulations, everybody else's ATMs is ours. Boom. On the first story containing a disputed label meant to alert users to fake news has shown up on Facebook. Links to an article entitled the Irish slave trade comes with a disputed by Snopes.com in the Associated Press warning. The Guardian reported that it was able to trigger the warning when attempting to publish the story in San Francisco, but not in Sydney or London, meaning the feature may not be rolled out worldwide. Tom, you have heard on this show, like all these listeners, my fire and brimstone warning that these labels are a hashtag portal to hell, hashtag hell portal. Behold, the gates have opened. The gates are open. Yeah. Okay, as a test case, this isn't a bad one. It's a legit organization, but an entertainment one. The Newport News, they do some seemingly local content in Rhode Island, but a lot of it is extremely tongue and cheek. And this story about the Irish being traded as slaves is playing on a sort of meme about that and the fact that it's not actually true. And yet it is causing some few corners to raise up and say, aha, see, they're already deciding for us what we should see and not attacking the story itself. And I think this is the important thing. Of the people who are criticizing this, they are criticizing Snopes and Associated Press saying that those are biased organizations and shouldn't be trusted to determine whether something is legitimate or not. They're going right after the meat of the issue. Who elected them, Sheriff, of this here town, which is the ultimate problem with this because that will always be a question. You're going like there's no as much as we would love to believe that there is this objective fact that we can tap into the objective fact database. And let's be honest, this story isn't true. It's not true, but also it's satirical, right? Like, you know, it's- Probably, yeah. Well, I mean, and then so now we're policing that line. Well, it's not the onion. This is a site that has true things and also false things. Like it's more along the lines of the inquirer than it is the onion. Sure, but you know, we don't know how these are taken. We don't know the spirit that they're written. We know that these things are disputed and now we are leaving an algorithm that is feeding its information from these organizations. Well, it's an algorithm alerts humans. Humans look at it, say yes or no, whether it should be reviewed. Then it's handed to members of the Pointer Institute, among which are many legitimate organizations in journalism who then review it and if two of them agree it's disputed, not just one, then it gets the alert. When it gets the alert, the alert says, hey, this is disputed, you should know that before you publish it. And then if you decide to publish it anyway, it sells again, just so you know, you're publishing a disputed thing, you say yes and you get to publish it. So it's multiple people have to decide it's disputed from vetted organizations and it's not stopping you from publishing anything. Like it is the most conservative way of going after this that I could probably think of. I don't know how else you could do it, except to not do it. Which I'll tell you what, man, the Occam's razor, the shortest point, you know, like it's, what you've described to me are tremendous good intentions which we all know the road to hashtag hell portal, hashtag portal to hell is paved with. I mean, I'm just saying, this is not that big of a deal. Although to me it is very interesting that it is this story that gets flagged and not one of these like independent American Eagle Dot Biz stories that are just out and out, you know, just taking SEO words and putting them together to try to make a story that you can sell advertising against, right? Well, those might not be wrong, that's the thing, right? Well, I mean, a lot of more, I mean, the ones that are like Clinton arrested or something, like that to me, if you're looking at fake news, that's what that's what part of it is, it's not just an instance of something getting shared. It has to be shared enough that it trips the algorithm, right? So it's, they're only going to go after things that are widely spread in some sort of definition. And I mean, to get to the heart of the matter, I think what you're afraid of waiting for, expecting is that story that gets flagged and then turns out to be true or at least reasonably, arguably true. It won't even need to get to that point. And Tom, I am not waiting, I am not hoping and I am not fearful. I am prophesizing that this will happen. I am laying this out for everybody to see. I have said from the very beginning with this that this is a disaster waiting to happen. All right, let's settle down and talk about something that everyone can agree on taxes. In a statement accompanying Canada's new national budget, the government plans to amend the excise tax act to redefine ride sharing companies as taxi services. This would require goods and services tax to be collected on every ride. Right now, if you're a driver of a ride hailing service, you can get the small supplier provision and exempt you from $30,000 of sales. So it's estimated this charge would cost companies $3 million. In other words, it'll generate $3 million in tax revenue. So what, we're expecting Uber to pull out of Canada in five, four, three, two. No, they won't. I mean, this is pittance. If it's only gonna generate $3 million, it's not even all from Uber, they'll just pay up. They don't need the hassle these days. I guess you wanna know what? Yeah, maybe just the $3 million. Maybe Kalanik should just show up to Ottawa and just hand them a check. Just give a check for $4 million right here. They don't worry, it's on us. Covered, I covered everybody. Grab, lift, whoever. I don't care. Now, hey, who wants to play, try to play ping pong with Justin Trudeau. I think they can get some good press. I mean, this is something that I think we will see more and more, not only in Canada, but also I would suspect in America as ride sharing obviously kind of comes out of its infancy and into its adolescence. It's not going away, whether or not the certain companies that we are talking about flourish or not. I think we're going to, well, anything that's successful, we'll see more taxation. I mean, that's just the name of the game. Folks, if you wanna get all the tech headlines each day in less than 10 minutes, subscribe to DailyTechHeadlines.com. All right, we've got good news, government regulation story. But first, I don't know, it depends on whether your perspective is whether this first part is good or bad news, but it's certainly partisan. Justin, tell us the partisan thing that happened first. Well, the US Senate voted 50 to 48 to eliminate privacy rules approved by the FCC in October. Those rules required ISPs to get customer consent before selling or sharing browser history, geolocation, financial, health information, children's information, social security numbers, and app usage history as well as the content of communication. The bill goes to the US House for approval after which it will need the president's signature. Proponents of the change say it keeps privacy rules consistent between web companies like Google and internet providers like Comcast. So that's the rub, right? On one side, you're saying, I don't want my ISP to know my browser history and be able to sell it to marketers and find out things about me by data mining it. But the argument is, well, Google does that. Yeah. Here's the thing, here's the thing. One of the differences between a web company like Google and an ISP like Comcast in the US anyway is choice. I can easily decide to use another search engine or another email provider or not use Chrome. I can use Safari or Opera or Vivaldi if I don't like Google's policies. However, very few US residents have a choice of a high-speed internet provider. If I don't like Comcast and I wanna keep 50 megabits per second, I can choose Comcast. Yeah. So that brings us to our next story which I'd rather focus on because it's a bipartisan move to solve this underlying issue. Now, it alone isn't gonna solve it but it will move towards creating the conditions that might solve this underlying competition issue. John Brodkin, who does the Lord's Work and Covering Networking for Ars Technica, by the way, has an article up about a dig once proposal. The idea of dig once is that you make everyone put fiber conduits when they install new roads or sidewalks or upgrade roads or sidewalks. You don't even have to run the fiber. You're just putting the conduit in so that it's easy to run it when somebody does wanna run it. And you make it big enough that multiple people can run fiber. It has bipartisan support. Representative Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee, who, by the way, supports wiping out the current net neutrality rules, restricting municipal broadband. She put California representative Anna Eschews dig once proposal on the House Communications and Technology Subcommittee hearing agenda Wednesday. It has many other Republicans supporting it as well. In fact, dig once is supported by former FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler and current FCC Chairman Ajit Pai as well as the CTIA, the lobbyists for the telecoms and CenturyLink, one of the biggest telecoms in the U.S. The opposition is just those big incumbents who would rather not see anybody have an easier time installing competitive networks. This is one of the biggest bugaboos of this show and any of its incarnation, right? Is net neutrality writ large and this competition issue as a problematic vexing solution for it? Because on one hand, it's undeniable that when Google dumped a ton of money into forcing their way to lay fiber in the markets that they did, like immediately competition shifted. Immediately competition caught up. Immediately speeds got better and prices got lower. So with the evidence that we have, the idea that a company even an inexperienced one in the field like Google could change the face of it in each local market is a promising sign. So the idea that maybe it's easier to be able to lay fiber in a lot of these trenches, because again, the reason why, if you want the backstory, well here, I'll let you, if somebody wants to come in and lay new fiber in your hometown, not your hometown, but the general hometown. In Greenville, Illinois. In Greenville, Illinois, they face a litany of problems. Yeah, in fact, there's a story out this week that Google fiber is decided not to roll out in some of the Kansas city area neighborhoods that it had said it was gonna roll out. Where it had collected deposits because they're shifting to wireless and the reason they're shifting to wireless is when you want to lay fiber, even if you get the permits, even if you get the municipality to cooperate, even if you get the incumbents to give you pole access for running fiber in certain places, it still costs money and time to dig and put the fiber in and roll it through. And certain neighborhoods are way more logistically difficult than others, depending on the geography and where you're going. So, granted, we're not saying that this dig once proposal is a one size fits all solution to competition for the telcos in the United States, but it helps because if you know, okay, most of the roads in this neighborhood have conduit, suddenly your costs plummet and your ability and your timeline shortens up and you can roll this out much faster at much lower cost and the estimates are that it adds about 1% cost to the construction of the roads and sidewalks. So it doesn't come free, but at least it's not a ridiculously huge amount. And that is one of those incumbent advantages that all these telcos have is not only is it going to cost you a lot of money to do it anyway, but they can make it as expensive as possible. Think of it like trying to go, trying to get into a litigation battle with a large company. They can just make sure that cases keep getting moved and delayed because they've got lawyers on retainer, you're paying out of pocket. And that's the situation that many upstart internet companies have found themselves into the point where it's chilled, you know, it's chilled competition. I mean, like even Google with a bottomless pit of money is starting to back off saying, Roland Ray and Fiber's kind of complicated. You know, it's not easy. And ultimately it's like, all right, so they have their customers, but that are never going to really make the money back that they're spending to lay this stuff out. And ultimately like, great, good guy, Google, you've made AT&T in Verizon and Comcast offer better speeds at cheaper prices. Thank you for your altruism, for burning this gigantic pile of money and scaring them to the point where they had to take action. But otherwise, yeah, Google's like, well, hey, let's look into this wireless thing because we can do that for a hell of a lot cheaper than having to deal with this total morass. And it's one of the things that blew my mind. A couple of years ago, we had a guy on from South Korea talking about how networks were implemented there and he'd worked in the industry. And it wasn't that they opened up the networks and said, okay, you can build a network, but you have to give everyone access to it. It wasn't that they subsidized things or they put in net neutrality rules. What they did was the government made it easy for anyone to run fiber. They said, you all can run fiber and apartment buildings have multiple fiber ISP connections. And of course, Korea consistently tops the charts in fastest speeds available to people. Now, granted, I know Korea is a small area, but we don't have any equivalent small area within the United States, right? You shouldn't compare the United States directly to Korea, but probably fair to compare Massachusetts to Korea. Hey, how about a region of the country that has exploded with technological advancements, one in which I live in, in the Bay Area? Sure, yeah. We have crap choice. We have absolutely, I mean, I think, but AT&T sent out a hell of a press release about a year ago talking about how gigabit internet was coming to Oakland. So after holding my breath for the last 365 days, I don't seem to have any gigabit internet. There's like, it is so annoying and it is so difficult to make this happen that ultimately, if it takes a government regulation to get government regulations that can favor incumbents to soften so we can have better competition, then I'm glad that this is a bipartisan solution. Well, and this is the kind of thing when we talk about digitrality and I'll say, well, what I'd rather have is us focus on competition. This is the kind of thing that looks at that, right? Again, not the silver bullet. This isn't the thing that solves the competition problem, but we need things like this. We need more things like this that are focusing on that issue. And then some of these other problems become less of a problem because suddenly if you can like, oh yeah, no, I've got four ISPs to choose from and one of them's like marketing themselves really well is, but you know, we're the privacy people. We don't look at your, then I'm less concerned with those FCC regulations because I at least have a choice. Doesn't mean that maybe I still don't want some regulations about privacy to be different for ISPs than websites, but it becomes a different conversation. And let me be, I'm gonna put on my cape and my villainous fedora and let me speak for the bad guys. If you are a startup or you are looking to get into the ISP game, the value proposition of being able to harvest and sell that kind of metadata makes it a more robust financial opportunity if you can become an ISP easier with greater access to customers and make money on that backend by using their data for advertising. Like it incentivizes on, could incentivize on some level people to get in to become in what is a fairly stagnant market. Maybe, I kind of look at it and say, well, if the cost goes down significantly to enter the market, then you don't have as much pressure for people to figure out these other crazy ways to make money. But yeah, it's all academic at this point. I mean, let's just say that, oh man, that's enough money for me. It's not something that is very often said in business, right? If they- No, but there's a pressure of, ooh, do I wanna piss off my customers? Like, yeah, I kind of have to. I really need to, in other words, to make this happen. Whereas if you've got competition, I mean, look at T-Mobile going in there when they actually stayed in competition with the other carriers, did things that the other carriers wouldn't that were customer friendly and distinguish themselves that way. And maybe we see, listen, the bargain basement version of fiber internet is cheaper, you gotta harvest your data if you wanna pay extra, so you can keep all your unmentionables unmentionable and you could do it the other way for higher price. Hey, thanks to everybody who participates in our subreddit. You can submit stories and vote on them in there. It really helps us figure out what you guys want us to talk about, dailytechnewshow.reddit.com. Few messages to get to before we're done here. I'm a proud Patreon supporter. Thank you, Em. I wanted to respond to Joe's request from DTNS 29.92 regarding projects in Africa working on bringing internet to frontier markets. All the way on the other side of the continent, Brick, spelled BRCK, BRCK.com, is a company headquartered in Nairobi, Kenya, doing some really innovative stuff. The team's original product caused quite a stir on the African tech scene. It can switch among different types of connections such as Ethernet, Wi-Fi, 3G or 4G with an eight hour battery. Since they've expanded to enterprise and IoT solutions, if you could kindly pass this info along to Joe, that would be fantastic. So there you go, Joe. Check out brickbrck.com. That's awesome. By the way, Ronny writes, lastpass can do biometrics though, Ubico, lastpass.com. No, through, through Ubico. Through Ubico. Using the Ubiki. Oh, there we go. Lastpass.com slash Ubico. I use this on my password manager, Dashlane and feel reasonably secure. Yeah, they have a little fingerprint thing on there. That's kinda cool. And finally, Ian from Snowy Tuesday, but sunny Wednesday and who knows what it'll be Thursday. Scotland says, I listened to Wednesday's show on my way to work this morning and it brought to mind the article about Tesla testing their power packs. A colleague sent me this link as we were looking to deliver a battery solution on one of our assets and his article should go a ways towards calming any fears about fires in power packs. You've got to read this article at electric.co. It's about fire safety tests on the Tesla fire power packs where they basically set them on fire. And they found that if a fire came from within one of the cells of a Tesla power pack, it was constructed in such a way that it wouldn't catch the other cells on fire. So it's pretty safe that way. And the other thing was if the fire came from outside the power pack and the power pack ignited, it wouldn't set other power packs on fire. Oh, wow. So pretty crazy safety technology and this is a fire safety test that is done with fire departments, not just Tesla internally saying, trust us, we did this. That's great. And also, by the way, what a day at work just lighting stuff on fire. Right, that is a good job. Dude, tell you what. Big shout out to Scotland. Love, Scott. Hey, thank you. Big shout out to you, Justin, Robert Young for joining us as always. What you got going on these days? Oh, well, I'll tell you what, all fans of Diamond Club, DiamondClub.tv of course, where this is a broadcast every day. You can show your support by going to stickers or DIAF.com. That is where we have the new stickers or DIAF meme pack. All your favorite memes redrawn by Matthew Sargent to include our own Diamond Club logo. Go ahead and check it out. $5 gets you the new stickers. $19.99 gets you the mega pack. All the new stickers plus an exclusive one. Plus classic stickers. Plus a jury will buy you a drink token if you're planning on going to any of the conventions this summer where you're gonna run into me and an exclusive original Ruinum wine label. Go ahead and check it all out. Stickers or DIAF.com. Hey, thanks to everybody who gives a little value back to this show for the value they get from it, including Bryce Finley, Eric Rontz, Gerald Downing, and many, many more. All of you guys are the best. Thanks for supporting us at Patreon.com slash DTNS. Our email address is feedback at dailytechnewshow.com. Give us an email. We're live Monday through Friday, 4.30 p.m. Eastern at alphankeekradio.com and diamondclub.tv and our website's dailytechnewshow.com. Back tomorrow to talk to Steve Kovac from Tech Insider and Len Peralta. Speak to you then. Go, go! This show is part of the front pants network. Get more at frogpants.com. Bob, I hope you have enjoyed this program. Butchakoon. Can you hear me? Yes, I can. Cool. We got plenty of show titles today. What's the good ones? You're the best ones. We have the best show titles here. Well, there's hashtag hell portal, which is one. Well, yeah. We've used that one, though, I think, haven't we? Didn't we use it? I think we used both at some point or another. No, we used both. This is a prophecy. I've warned all of you of this prophecy. You need to write them across nine very thick books bound in mahogany. A medium-sized paywall. Where's Google going? Fiber once. Oh, higher speeds for everyone. Can you dig it? I think that's a take from a... Can you dig it? That's got to be the title. Cyrus. Dig it. All right. That's a good one. Pay curtain. Welcome to the hotel Washington, DC. AT&TMs. Get it? AT&TMs. Wait. But it's Wells Fargo. That one may be too clever. Yeah. Might be. Fiber. Honestly, I like higher speeds for everyone. Can you dig it? Justice, did you like higher speeds for everyone? Can you dig it? Or just can you dig it? I just love can you dig it. I kind of like that. Can you dig it? And you got to wear a bathrobe when you say it. Yeah. He's the real deal. No one wasted no one. What I love about that movie is the slaying, because it's late 70s, early 80s. What movie is that? The Warriors. Warriors. Oh, Warriors come out and play. Which is based on a novel. Is it the same name? Warriors. I had never seen the Warriors. And I went to Netflix, or rather, Tim League of the Draft House. Used to do the Rolling Roadshow. And would screen movies at places that were important to the movies. Do you know Tim League? I know a guy. I know a guy who knows a guy. And so I saw the Warriors on Coney Island. Oh, nice. And it was a summer night that was so goddamn hot in Hoboken, where I lived in my roommates. Just getting out and getting on the hot, sweaty ass train and getting all the way to Coney Island, which is a bitch. And then back was like, just beating out there on the beach in Coney Island was just such an absolute pleasure. It was so good. Explain to me, if you would, how is it that one can take the subway to Coney Island, but not to JFK? Don't even start it. It's just such a racket. It is. Yeah. No, you got to get on a bus. And of course, you have three bags, and you're just dragging shit all over the place. I guess they don't. Don't any, some of those Chinatown bus routes, the cheap ones, go to JFK or no. You get a jitney. The Chinatown buses are all to Boston and DC. So they're just, OK, I see. Yeah, it's Chinatown to Chinatown. Those are just excuses to run guns, by the way. Just such a nice first come in. Forget it, Justin. It's Chinatown. I remember like those things used to be a thing, like a really big thing. They were super, I mean, in many ways, it's kind of what Megabus is kind of based off of really cheap fares and just like packing them in. Yeah, you know, it was always like, I remember I had just moved to the city when they started getting big. Like I remember like I was in, still in college, and I would have friends that had graduated and had lived in New York City or lived in Boston and would talk about going on them. But that was like, that was back in the real Wild West, where it was just a feng wa bus. And you would just sit next to somebody that would have an aquarium of like unlicensed snapping turtles, you know, that would just like being smuggled across the border for God knows what. I will say that they wound up becoming fairly civilized, you know, they wound up. Because they got in a bunch of trouble with a bunch of accidents. Well, they did that. And also, I think for the price of, I think, like some kind of regulation, they stopped dropping people off on the streets and would start, they got access to some of the bus terminal lots, like the city made them pay whatever to have the space to drop people off. But the last time that I took one, which Jesus, this has to be about eight years ago, it was a competition in New York. There was three or four lines and they were all going to failure Boston. I forget where we were going. And you would buy your ticket and the other people would yell at you to get a refund for your ticket and buy a ticket with them. And then it just became this like poaching skirmish where they would start yelling at each other. It was hardcore, man. They were scrimping. That is the market economy at work. I know. It also was just like, all right, no one's making this a better solution. Like, you're just badgering me. Just like four, you buy a ticket from somebody that either speaks very little English or does not speak English at all, only to have somebody, three other people who only know refund, refund, refund. What time? What time? What time? This sooner. That's a racket too. They all understand English. They just know enough. Some of that's an act, I'm sorry. They just do that so people don't get too nosy or like don't want to get bogged down. Don't understand. No, move. Roger tries that with me sometimes. Yeah, but I talked to him too much. I talked too much. Except it's Spanish. No English. I'm like, Roger, you don't speak Spanish. No, I know. No, no. No English, no English. I actually saw you do the no, no thing when it's to a stranger. It worked too, no. Yeah, man, I'll tell you what. It was a super fun time. I've never taken a megabus. The megabuses seem nice by comparison. They are the megabuses. The megabus? Yeah, what's that? It's a service that runs up between the Bay Area LA. I think San Diego as well. And I think the guys who run it only have like two or three buses. But they're double-decker buses and they have Wi-Fi and all that. What makes them so attractive is if you get in on the initial run of tickets for a set time, you'll get them really cheap, like $2. But if you wait later, the price goes up. The problem is it's still a bus and you're still stuck on it for eight hours. Yeah, it's still slow because it's on the road. Man, I've never seen a thing. They can't drive faster than 55 miles an hour or 60 or something. Like somebody had a car that had Wi-Fi, but it was all sleeper stuff. And so it was basically a red eye for San Francisco to LA. Uh-huh. Like a car, like a bus or a car in a train? It was like another, it was like a bus, but it was kind of like a tour bus that was really only there to have like the double-decker sleepers, right? I don't know if it's still running though, although I gotta go to LA. Oh, by the way, we gotta figure out, I might, I'll be able to do DTNS next week. Never mind. You will? Okay. I'll be able to do it. Perks up. No, there's, I can't tell if that's a kid or a dog at that store. Are you gonna be here when you do it though? Or are you gonna be back? No, I'll be in Orlando. Oh, okay. On the scene reporting from Harry Potter. I wanna go to Harry Potter. You live right near another here. I know, I wanna go there. I didn't realize, but they also have a locals' rate. Yep, they should do. I should take advantage of it. So many theme parks. That's what's great about this place. I mean, I guess Orlando's the same way, but then you're in Orlando. Yeah. Sorry, no offense to Orlandians. All right. All right, hey, sleepbus.co is a thing. We launched Sleep Bus with a prototype bus in late April, 2016. The response has been incredible. We are working to build and customize a new fleet and expect to open reservations for our Dream Machine soon. Dream Machine. Can't wait to share with you. You know what? As soon as self-driving cars become a regular thing, these things are gonna go away. I'll tell you what, the only reason why I get afforded to go back and forth to LA, like for this thing that I'm doing at the beginning of the week next week is because I have frequent flyer miles. Otherwise, like driving down to LA is a pain in the butt. I would love to do this, to get a full day in and then just go to sleep in a pod and wake up. I'm wondering how they make it safe. So like when you're- This sleep bus would still work in an autonomous car culture. Oh, sure. Hell yeah. Because it's gonna be more expensive to rent an autonomous car that just has you in it. So there'll still be discounts for buses and things. Don't you think? The idea is maximizing your day. It's just not filling a day with stuff. Yeah, but like the great thing with the- So this is the thing. If you were going to another city with a high, the high with a really well set up mass transit system, you'd probably be right. The thing is, once you get in the car and it's self-driving and you're renting the car like you would from enterprise or budget or whatever, it drives you down there. You can still go to other places. So you can still- See, that's not the way I'm imagining it working because the way you're saying it makes sense, but I've been imagining it as a car gets me to where I'm going. I'm there. I don't keep that car. I only then rent another car to go to the next place I need to go. Like I don't need to keep possession of a self-driving car. Yeah, but I think you would though because you'd be using it a lot. And it's probably- That's a lot more expensive though. Well, how would you know? The price is for a self-driving car. No, it's just more expensive to own a car whether it's self-driving or not. No, no, I'm saying you wouldn't own the car. You would rent it in the same way like you would rent a car. Well, so okay, but renting a self-driving car is still going to be more expensive than paying for it. Yeah, but what I'm saying is that- If there's a scale type situation. It's, what is that dog doing? Is that a dog? I thought that was a siren. It's either a dog or a coyote. I don't know. You have coyotes here? My neighbor never had a dog before so I don't know what that noise is. It's creeping me out a little bit. Sorry, yeah. But like you get the bus, but once you get off the bus, how are you going to get to your next destination? Self-driving car. Yeah, so if you had a self-driving car all the way down. You can call an Uber and it's like two bucks. Yeah, but then you have to wait. It's just either have everything in your car and just say, all right, I'll move to the next place. Yeah, yeah, no, you're right. It's more convenient. It's going to be more expensive though. So it's a cost convenience. It's a cost versus convenience and therefore you need to wait. Is it worth the extra hour I lose or two hours to get ready? The idea though, the idea with autonomous cars though is you won't have to wait as long because they'll be good at being around. Yeah, I understand that, but I think what's going to happen really is that people are going to use them like they do rental cars. You rent them for like a week or a weekend and it just drives you around. Granted, yeah, it'll sit around which might not be the most efficient use, but initially that's, I think that's how the usage will go. I don't know. I'll bet you a slurpee. Yeah, well, here we go. Well, we didn't even get to that. I'll bet you a cherry icy. All right. You've heard it here on the post show first folks. I don't know how we tested the validity of our assumptions either. We'll just go get ICs or something. I wanted to mention those, the jet sharing too, because that's big down here. They have it at LAX and Santa Monica both where you can fly to, it's limited locations. I think it's like Vegas and maybe San Francisco and Sacramento on a private jet for like 70 bucks. And the whole point is these are private jets that need to get back somewhere. They wouldn't be carrying passengers otherwise. So you're just defraying the extra cost of- Defraying fuel costs basically. Yeah, fuel cost and keeping an eye on you, having somebody help you on board or whatever, right? That is totally what the US Air Force, I think they think they still do it. It used to be part of the, before they changed it, it used to be part of MAC, the military airlift command. And initially, when they would transport troops and material over, they would have all the space, especially in Europe to fly back as they might as well loaded up with people and stuff. So they would allow, if there were, and this is the thing, it was kind of an on call. You couldn't book a flight, right? If there were space available, you could get on it. You know, a serviceman and their family, you know, if they got tickets at a super discounted rate, would be able to fly, except you would be inside a plane without really any windows or movies or anything like that. But it was super cheap. And I know a few people who managed to cart their families for vacations. They've gone up, it's $109 now. What is it, is it lonely? I've never heard a dog in that place. All right, I am all published. We are good to go. Thanks everybody for watching. All right. Lovely Thursday. Bye guys. Bye.