 Coming up on DTNS, an unidentified nation state attacks a top security firm. Google opens up its built-from-the-ground-up operating system, Fuchsia, and the U.S. wants to break up Facebook. This is the Daily Tech News for Wednesday, December 9th, 2020 in Los Angeles. I'm Tom Merritt. And from Studio Redwood, I'm Sarah Lane. It's all Lake City. I'm Scott Johnson. And I'm Roger Chang, the show's producer. We were just talking about board games, TV shows, and a little bit of trash talk on Good Day Internet. If you'd like to get that expanded conversation, become a member at Patreon.com slash DTNS. Let's start with a few tech things you should know. Amazon updated its Fire TV UI, which includes up to six user profiles, a new home main menu navigation bar, an area for live programming, and new show recommendations. The new Fire TV UI will roll out to the third gen Fire TV Stick and Fire TV Stick Lite over the next few weeks, and other Fire TV devices early next year. Samsung released teaser videos for the forthcoming Galaxy S21, S21 Plus, and S21 Ultra phones. The S21 is shown in light purple with a centered hole punch camera and minimal front bezel. The Ultra was shown with a curved screen and quad camera system. Samsung Unpacked is expected to announce these phones sometime in mid-January. Cruise Automation, the autonomous vehicle subsidiary of GM, is now testing driverless vehicles on public roads in San Francisco, California with the goal to secure a permit to launch a commercial service. Cruise says its test will eventually expand its driverless testing area, adding more complicated environments over time, and eventually also remove that safety operator from the vehicle. Google CEO Sundar Pichai sent an email to Google staff Wednesday about the departure of AI ethics researcher Timnit Gebru. Pichai wrote, quote, we need to accept responsibility for the fact that a prominent black female leader with immense talent left Google unhappily. He said they should review the circumstances of her departure and examine where they could have improved it and led to a more respectful process. On Twitter, Gebru points out that the email did not say Google was sorry for what they did to her and calls on Google to take responsibility. Uber announced it will sell its Uber Elevate Flying Taxi business to Joby Aviation. Joby is developing all electric vertical takeoff and landing vehicles. Joby will use Uber's app to offer air taxi rides as soon as 2023, and Uber will invest $75 million in Joby in addition to the $50 million that it invested earlier this year. Yeah, so if you want our analysis on this story, go earlier in the week, find the one about Uber selling their autonomous driving cars unit to Aurora, substitute Joby for Aurora, and it's pretty much the same situation. All right, let's talk a little more about this big lawsuit, Scott. All right, the US Federal Trade Commission filed a lawsuit on Wednesday alleging or alleging that Facebook illegally maintains, quote, its personal social networking monopoly, though, excuse me, through a years-long course of anti-competitive conduct. That's a direct quote. Evidence was gathered in cooperation with the attorneys general of 46 states, the District of Columbia and Guam, specifically called out as a anti-competitive practices or as those practices, are the acquisition of Instagram and WhatsApp and API restrictions on software developers. The FTC is asking the court to order Facebook to sell off WhatsApp and Instagram. Jeez. Prohibit anti-competitive conditions on developers and require notice and prior approval of future mergers and acquisitions. Similar lawsuit was filed by New York Attorney General Letitia James, I believe they say it, joined by the same states and territories. That is a hardcore lawsuit, Tom Merritt. Yes, it is. First, let's just say up front, the chances of them actually getting a court, even if this went all the way to the Supreme Court, to agree to make Facebook divest itself of Instagram and WhatsApp are very low. It's not impossible, but it's low. So don't get too excited if you want Instagram and WhatsApp to be spun out. It's doubtful that will happen. What they'll probably get is some kind of reparations, some kind of fine, maybe a change in business practices. I imagine they could have a good chance of getting Facebook to have to agree to the notice and approval of future mergers and acquisitions. That part does seem likely, but it will be interesting to follow this case and see where it goes because it's a long shot to get this. And so a lot of people weren't sure if the FTC would even bring this kind of charge, that they might go after a smaller remedy, but they're basically accusing Facebook of buying Instagram to neutralize a direct threat in Instagram and make it more difficult for other social networks to compete. Kind of the same thing with WhatsApp. They wanted to neutralize WhatsApp as a threat to Facebook and make it harder for other messaging apps to get in there. That one's going to be real hard to prove though, because we have a lot of competitive messaging apps out there. So it doesn't seem like they've really suppressed the market for that. And then the API thing is where I think you have the most fertile ground to get a court to agree, which is the restrictions they put on third-party developers on what they can and can't do not only on Facebook, but if they use the API. For example, the FTC uses this in their press release. In 2013, Twitter launched Vine, which let users shoot and share short video segments. And in response, Facebook shut down the API that would have allowed Vine to access friends through Facebook. That is an anti-competitive practice. Whether they're abusing their monopoly to do it or not will be the question the court will decide. Yeah, I mean, the big story, and this kind of happened midday today, so we were all sort of scrambling around like, ah, okay, this is actually a big story. A lot of people are like, this is a really big deal because look, the US is going to dismantle Facebook. Instagram and WhatsApp arguably being the prize possessions of Facebook besides its own news feed itself. And like you said, Tom, it's highly unlikely that that's going to happen. Is this going to be tied up in court for another few years? Probably. But does it set standard for how Facebook and any company that would dare to get anywhere as big as Facebook in the future to not be able to gobble up, you know, I don't know, what did they pay? One billion for Instagram back in the day when there were like 13 people working at Instagram kind of thing, because Instagram was big. And Facebook has a history of replicating kind of cool, trendy stuff that works. I mean, look at Reels on Instagram right now. It's TikTok competitor. You know, it's all, it's all kind of the same thing just to see what sticks and has had oftentimes not a lot of success. Buying the company works for Facebook a lot better than trying to replicate some sort of cool feature that then people have to learn to use. You could argue that's why there are big, whether big targets in this because WhatsApp and Instagram are notably gigantic runaway successes. Then they were already heading that way when they were acquired. And you could also argue they got them at a bargain basement price, but maybe that's why they're being targeted. I mean, I hate to side with Facebook and I'm not really doing that, but for devil devil's advocate reasons, I would say, yeah, this is a huge target. They have billions of users on their main service. And then these secondary products are huge for them. And they would be standalone, gigantic companies on their own that we would talk about individually if they weren't already owned by them. So it makes sense that they're the target, but the idea of buying up your competition to limit their impact on your business and grow it out separately isn't new. And they're not the only ones doing this, but maybe they're doing it the most successfully. I don't know. The question isn't just is it a monopoly? It's not enough to say Facebook as a monopoly. You have to say it is a monopoly and it abused its position as a monopoly to reduce competition. Sometimes a monopoly is perfectly legal. It's not illegal in the United States and in most countries to be a monopoly. It's usually illegal to cause harm because you are a monopoly. And that's where I think they're going to have a problem showing harm. Yes, there isn't another flicker is not doing well. And when they bought Instagram, they sort of dominated the image market. But to your point, Sarah, the reason they keep adding stories and then reels is Instagram is trying to fend off competition from Snapchat and TikTok. So there is competition. There is competition pushing Instagram to change. And I think Facebook can demonstrate that, yeah, maybe Zuckerberg said something unwise in an email once, but there is competition out there. Same with WhatsApp. I mean, there's Telegram and Signal and WeChat and how many other messaging services out there. So I think it's hard to show that they are reducing competition in the marketplaces for those two. That's why I'm less bullish on the idea of them winning over a court to make them get rid of them. On the other hand, the developer stuff, they essentially killed Vine. And I think they might have a better chance of getting Facebook on that one. Do you think that Slack is worth 27 Instagrams? Just to put it in numbers. Slack? Yes, Slack. $27 billion as opposed to a billion. That's what I'm saying. Everything's billions and billions of dollars now. That's like five Star Wars is anyway. I would love for there to be some sort of, okay, let's say we go forward and yes, maybe Facebook is fine, which is likely. And it's sort of said going forward, you can't just gobble up companies that you deem as a future competitor that are small and then make it your own and then you reap all the rewards. So what do we get to? If you have this X amount of users, you can't buy a company that has X amount of users that is on the up and up or it has to be for not too much of a certain price so that the company doesn't willingly sell to you. I mean, there are so many factors in play. I do wonder how this will shake out. Well, there are laws and these laws will be tested in court now, which is, you can't buy a thing when the only reason you're buying it is to put the competitor out of business. There has to be a valid business reason for buying it. And I think Facebook can show that. I look back at the Microsoft case where they wanted to break up Microsoft. They never broke up Microsoft. They just put in some remedies. And I think, yeah, courts are very reluctant to break up a company. You have to really show that it caused harm. And I just don't see it there. Well, meanwhile, what's that made its own allegations? Okay, sending a statement to Axios after it submitted its information for the new Apple Store privacy labels. What's that quote? We believe it's important. Sorry, we believe it's important. People can compare these privacy nutrition labels from apps they download from apps that come preinstalled like iMessage. Many of Apple's own iOS apps do not have App Store listings. They just come with the phone. WhatsApp also said the labels are not are too broad currently, pointing out that WhatsApp cannot see people's messages or precise location, but must use the same labels as apps that do. Yep, there'll be more on that story foe show. Here's another one. For more than five years, Google's been developing an open source operating system called Fuchsia. We talk about it periodically. Its source code has been downloadable up until now, but Google hasn't spoken about it publicly. So you hear bits and pieces, but you sort of like what's going on with Fuchsia. Wednesday, Google posted a call for developers to contribute to the project. This is the first formal announcement related to Fuchsia by Google itself. The company is opening a Fuchsia bug tracker and created public mailing lists. So taking it seriously, Google also published a public roadmap for development. And finally, there's a Fuchsia emulator that can run on both Mac OS and Linux. Yeah, the folks that the co-executive producer on our level on our Patreon get a bonus show where we look at our lineups from five years ago and talk about it. And not too long ago, a couple months back, we saw the first story about Fuchsia. I don't even know if we knew the name Fuchsia back then. And we were wondering like, what is going on with that? Did that ever come about? Well, here we go. And the other significant thing to realize about this is Google built this from the ground up. Mac OS is a Unix derivative. Linux is a Unix derivative. Windows is from the ground up. Unix is from the ground up. And maybe Fuchsia owes a little bit of its lineage to Windows, Unix or Linux or others. But what Google is saying is we started from scratch. We wanted to build this from the ground up. And Roger, you were talking to us in our pre-show about the facts that they're making it very secure by using a microkernel so that it's probably going to lend itself in the early days anyway to Internet of Things and embedded systems and such like things like that. Yeah. I mean, a microkernel is just a designed philosophy where instead of trying to put like the file server and the rest of it all in one kernel and running it all from the same space, you keep only the bare minimum you need to run as an OS and then you put everything else on a separate level. So if something happens to one of those services and it crashes, it doesn't crash the entire OS. The side benefit is that it gives you more control over those bits and pieces, which lends itself better to security. Doesn't mean it's automatically secure because you still need to monitor and oversight it. But it does also allow it to be a lot more scalable. You can do everything from an embedded OS, desktop PC and mobile OS or whatever. So I mean, what they want to do with it, I think sky's the limit at this point. Yeah. I think this is going to be really interesting to watch. Everybody had been wondering in the early days like, what are they going to do with Chrome OS? But at this point, I think what they're doing with it is saying we want developers to work with it. It's not ready for daily use yet. But if you start filing bugs and get on the mailing list and developing it, we'll start to figure out what it's best at right now. So I don't see this as a replacement for Android or Chrome OS. I see it as something that Google has developed to find out what it's good for because they wanted to play with micro kernels, maybe. I don't know. Australia's Treasurer Josh Freidenberg and Communications Minister Paul Fletcher announced the country's framework for commercial deals between Google, Facebook and news publishers will force the two tech companies to pay to carry links to news articles. That's not the newsy part. The fact that they're announcing that they've figured out this code is what's news. But we knew it was coming. We've talked about it on DTNS before. They want to force Google and Facebook specifically to pay to carry more than just the link and the headline to carry what they call snippets. The code will now account for the value of referrals from Google and Facebook. Before it was just, you want to show it, you got to pay for it. Now the code is going to say, but if they're sending you a bunch of traffic, that's valuable and they shouldn't have to pay. They shouldn't get credit for that against what they pay. Also, Instagram and YouTube will not be included in the code. That was previously not part of this. So there's some exceptions built in and they lessened the requirements for advanced notice to changes in the algorithms, both search algorithm on Google and the algorithm on Facebook for the news feed. The code goes up to a vote next year. So this isn't happening right away. There's a lot of time to react. But both companies have previously threatened to stop operating in Australia if the code is passed into law. We'll see if these changes are enough for them to agree to it. Well, it sounds like it's moving in the direction that's more in favor of Google and Facebook. Because of course, the argument from news publishers is, well, if they're just like adding our snippets and people aren't, you know, clicking back to us and we're not getting our own ad revenue, that's why we're upset. That's why the company shouldn't be allowed to do this. But if traffic is being sent to the news publisher and the news publisher at the end of the day gets a lot more engagement and a lot more hits, et cetera, than they would have already, then the news publisher would more likely be less upset. So I would think that Google and Facebook would be sort of thrilled with this idea that Australia is like, we're going forward with this. But we understand that it's not just a, oh, a snippet means that you're stealing news from a publisher. It's all very relative. Yeah, this whole concept of snippets of data or links being used and having a monetary value slapped on those things at a very fundamental level kind of blows my mind that we're, that we're in that conversation space right now. Like it just seems a little bit crazy to me that, that you would, that we are going to start talking about it that way. Now I understand like if somebody takes content, a chunk of the Daily Tech News show and sticks it in their show and calls it their own, that seems really weird and wrong to me, but having this conversation around whether there should be a monetary value attached to snippets of news, which are clearly pointing to other sources just strikes me as odd in the internet. It seems like a weird thing to, you know, get all flustered about, I guess. To be, to be clear, we have a Creative Commons license. So as long as you attribute it to the Daily Tech News show, you can, you can take all the pieces you want from it. And, and I'm sure this is blowing the minds of Google and Facebook that they're having to deal with this in Australia as well, they, they did set up this code so that the payments still can only go one way. If Google and Facebook are judged to have sent more traffic than the value of the payments was worth, they don't get paid by the publishers, right? Right. They only, they only have to pay. They, they can't make money out of this deal. And I think that's why Google and Facebook might end up objecting is like, well, then what they're going to do is they're going to crunch the numbers. They're going to say, well, a fair system would have us not paying anything. So why have a law in the first place? Our traffic is valuable. That's what they've been maintaining since the beginning. Hey, folks, if you want to join in the conversation in our Discord, you could talk about all this stuff and more with other like-minded folks who are in the Daily Tech News show audience. Just joined by linking to a Patreon account at patreon.com slash D T N S. Security company FireEye says it was attacked and unknown intruders accessed their red team assessment tools. Those are tools it uses to test its customer security. Red team refers to the idea that you have a blue team defending something and a red team trying to break into it. And you do it to test the security, not, not to actually break in, but to find out where someone could break in. These tools could help attackers penetrate other companies and also indicate what kinds of vulnerabilities FireEye does and does not test for. So you can learn something about how FireEye defends other companies if you've got these tools. So it's bad that they were accessed. They could also publicly reveal the tools to try to damage FireEye's business, let all their competitors know what kind of tools they use, but there's no evidence that the tools have been put to use yet and FireEye has already developed countermeasures that can detect and block the stolen tools. Those countermeasures are built into their own protections now, but also publicly available on GitHub. Brandon Hoffman, Chief Information Security Officer at Net and Rich, believes the attackers will most likely use the tools to learn how to cover their tracks while using their own custom attack tools. So they, they get the FireEye tools, they can look at them and go, Oh, that's how they detected we were in there. Okay, great. We can modify our own tool that we think is better to stop them from detecting us next time. The attackers primarily though, we're looking for data related to FireEye's government customers. FireEye says it has no evidence that that part of the attack was successful, but they feel like that's what the attackers were mainly in there for. The only thing they did get were the red team tools. FireEye believes due to the sophistication of the attacks that the attackers were state sponsored, that this was a government behind it. CEO Kevin Mandia said the attackers quote, used a novel combination of techniques not witnessed by us or our partners in the past. He said the methods were specifically targeted at FireEye and executed with discipline and focus. So this wasn't some fly by night script kiddies. FireEye does not have evidence of which government was behind the attack and is working with the US FBI and industry partners like Microsoft to investigate. Yeah. So a couple of things. I mean, first of all, FireEye saying because of this, we can make, you know, our own infrastructure stronger, that's almost always a good thing in these situations. The fact that, yes, if there are government contracts that had sensitive information that state sponsored attack was trying to access and that did not happen, also a good thing. Yeah, we'll see. You know, this is, you know, this is the first, first iteration of what might be a longer story. But yeah, now it's sort of like, who did this? Yeah, Roger said Russia before anyone could even breathe this morning. He's probably right. But I wonder, Roger, why did you say Russia? Why do you think it's Russia? I personally don't think automatically it was Russia. I was just saying like a lot of the stories there are just, Russia was the assumed initiation. I'm always loathe to identify this stuff because everybody always says Russia or China, whether they actually know it or not. Now, granted, they're likely suspects here. North Korea would be another one. Iran might be another one. But honestly, we don't know. And FireEye very responsibly is not saying because they don't know either. Well, it seems like it's definitely not domestic though, right? Like that part seems clear because they, you know, definitely does not feel like it was domestic. Correct. Well, this might be good news. Microsoft officially confirmed in a blog post that it's xCloud Gaming Service will come to iOS in 2021. Microsoft is developing a web-based version of the cloud gaming service that you can access from the browser, quite the rage these days, which avoids Apple's strict App Store rules. Microsoft also confirmed xCloud will come to Windows PCs in 2021 as well. Yeah, so are you pumped? Yeah, I am. They're actually, they're basically doing what Luna Amazon service did to get around the iOS restrictions. And it seems to work quite well. So I'm happy to hear that as an iOS user. But mostly I'm excited about the browser side of things because one thing everyone has is a browser. And quite often the games we're talking about will be games that keep our keyboard and mouse enabled or even a controller connected to that computer, that old laptop, you're not getting a lot of power out of now, but running these really high fidelity experiences given the right internet connection over a crappy laptop is a really, really cool idea and a great way to extend your gaming time. So if you're away or just not in front of your Xbox, your TV, this is great. And this is all stuff they had planned from the beginning. So we're just starting to see fruition of these various aspects of the service. It will put it a little bit more imperative in terms of what platforms you can stream this to in the way Stadia and others do. But yeah, like for me personally, it'll be like, I'm on my notebook, I'd like to check in on this game real quick, run a quick mission, but not have to worry about running it locally. And if that can happen seamlessly, this is another prong in the Microsoft strategy right now that I think is really strong value. So I'm very excited about it as a new Series X owner. I look forward to messing around with this stuff even more. Well, as we inch closer and closer to the end of 2020, which seems like it's been a decade long, but just has been a single year. Think about that for a second. 2020, Google does this every year, every year releases its top trending searches. Now, it's not always the most popular searches because there are just certain keywords like Facebook, whatever they're going to show up at the top of Google all the time. These are terms that saw a big spike in 2020 over the previous year, 2019. Starting with the US, the top trending search term was election results, not very surprisingly, actually beating out coronavirus, which was big, but not as big as the election. Kobe Bryant, sadly, who passed away earlier this year, lands at number three, followed by coronavirus updates and coronavirus symptoms. So coronavirus still very popular. Still very popular, but you know, election you won. Gets less virusy when you look at categories. The top baby search was Elon Musk baby. People were very interested in Elon Musk's baby, followed by baby platypus, ice age baby, and Anderson Cooper baby. So I love that baby platypus and Elon Musk baby are in the same category. That's Elon Musk still number one. Yeah. A few other fairly 2020 US search trends had to do with pandemic, I guess. Top beauty was how to cut men's hair. Had a lot of people at home being like, we got to do something about this. How do I do this? Top definition was WAP, W-A-P, we'll leave it there, access protocol, right? Totally. Yeah, because people are like, I need to make sure that my internet is top notch because I'm zooming a lot from home. The top how to was hand sanitizer. People wanted to know how to make hand sanitizer, followed by sourdough bread and whipped coffee. Ah, top recipes. Yeah, whipped coffee is the Dalgona coffee. Good stuff. Oh, man, I was doing sourdough. I was trying to do a sourdough starter for like a month back there. It did not work. It did not end well. The top where is was, where is my stimulus money? Followed by where is my refund? Where is my refunds was literally the search. Where is my refund? With an S on it? Oh, yeah. I want more than one refund than a bad year. Outside of the US, because, you know, again, searches differ depending on where you live. The top UK search was coronavirus. The top Canadian search was US election. The top Australian search was US election. The top Japanese search was COVID-19 infection. And then dipping out of the top five countries among DTNS listeners, Denmark's top search was Robkiller. That's Ram Kugler. Ram Kugler. Rumballs. So Denmark was just like, let's make some rumballs. Yeah. Yeah. Let's just not even go outside anymore. Let's make some rumballs. India's top search was Indian Premier League. Yeah. Okay. Germany and New Zealand's top search, both coronavirus. And Ireland's was how to make a face mask. Ah, look at the Irish. Oh, look at the Irish. Oh, yeah. Just a power horse of the country, you know? Yeah, absolutely. Always doing it for themselves. So, yeah, you got some, a lot of similar stuff going on this year, but a few curveballs as well. Very, very nice. Maybe the first, well, I shouldn't say the first year. It's one of those years where the similarities are, they do stand out, right? The coronavirus? Something worldwide. Yeah. And you don't always get that. We all kind of talked about collectively. Sometimes you get, sometimes you get stuff that's, well, usually it like, oh, that's a weird thing in the UK. Never even heard of it. But this time it's like, yeah, we all, we all have the same problem. Rumballs was the weirdest one and it wasn't even that weird. All right. Let's check out the mail bag. Let's do it. Rob wrote in nice long email. I'll parse it a little bit, but this was in response to our conversation of cutting the cords. What do you pay for? How many services do you pay for? Does it get weird? Do you end up overpaying overall? Rob says, I already buy several of my subscriptions through my Amazon Prime subscription. I also buy extra channels through Sling. I'm also paying for a lot of channels that I don't give a care about, but I also don't have a week to sit down and sort this all out and make sense of it. The time I save is worth more than the money that I'm spending right now. That's how Rob feels. Rob says, if somebody could make sense of this and bring it all into her single umbrella that didn't require me to spend a lot of time thinking about how to waste my time watching TV, they would get rich very fast. And no, Rob says, it won't be Apple and it won't be Sling. No, it probably won't be Sling. It might be Apple. You may not want to use them, but it might be Apple. They really do want to want to do that for you. But that's why I was talking about platforms are the next wave. Platforms that allow you to bring all the apps together, have one bill. I would look for cable companies to try this. Comcast is already trying to do it by letting you add all these services on to its X1 infinity Xfinity subscription. Amazon wants to do it. Roku wants to do it. So, yeah, Rob, you're definitely diagnosed the problem that they're going to try to solve next. Yeah, I agree with you that. Well, Apple already tries to do this a lot with their searches and stuff. They, they, it's not exactly a one stop thing, but it's the channel thing on Apple TV plus that particularly is aimed towards this. Yeah. And so it feels like all that direction is where they're headed. And I think others are headed. So we'll get there, Rob. It's just, it's going, it's going to take some time for now. I just make sure to cancel what I'm not using and pay for it. I am and it's not bad. Well, thanks to Rob and thanks to everybody who sends us feedback. Keep them coming. Always helps the show feedback at daily tech news show.com. Also shout out to patrons that are master and grandmaster levels today. They include Dustin Campbell, Andrew Bradley, and Brad with two D's. Double D Brad. Thanks to Scott Johnson as well. Scott, I know you're, you're a busy man. You're drawing up a storm these days. Where can people find out more about what's going to happen with Fred and Ken? Well, we had, we had a disturbing conversation earlier about what might eventually happen to Fred and Ken. But for now, they're just living their lives over at fredandcan.com. If you're interested in the comic musings of a guy who lives in an apartment with an expired can of creamed corn, I think it might just scratch that itch for you. Head on over there right now. Check out the latest one this week and every week at fredandcan.com. The revelation we found out is that Scott, unlike the makers of lost, hasn't ended mine. I do actually. Hey folks, if you're listening to this mid-morning on December 10th, it's too late. But if it's before that, and you want to get that DTNs Christmas card with Len Peralta custom art on it, sent to your house, go to patreon.com.com slash pledges, find DTNs, look in the right hand column, make sure you've got an address in there, or if you have an address, it's the right one. If you're not a patron, hurry up and sign up daily technewshow.com slash Patreon, because December 10th was the deadline. I'm going to download that database and send it to David Michael. I know a bunch of you are going to not get the card and then email me and go, why didn't I get the card and I'll do my best to help you out. Also, I'll be sending a digital one to everybody as well. So if you're a patron, you're going to get that no matter what. You don't have to do anything for that. But again, daily technewshow.com slash Patreon. We are live Monday through Friday, 4.30 p.m. Eastern 2130 UTC. And we'd love to have you join us live. If you can, find out more at daily technewshow.com slash live back tomorrow with Justin Robert Young. This show is part of the Frog Pants Network. Get more at frogpants.com.