 Coming up on DTNS, they caught the Twitter fissure, they think. NVIDIA might want to buy ARM, Microsoft might want to buy TikTok. What is happening? This is the Daily Tech News for Friday, July 31st, 2020 in Los Angeles. I'm Tom Merritt. And from Studio Redwood. I'm Sarah Lane. Also Los Angeles. I'm Lamar Wilson. Oh, and I'm the show's producer, Roger Chang. We were just talking about the premiere of the NBA and all the tech wizardry they did on that. Also, coffee, because coffee is very important, at least to me. Get that wider conversation in our expanded show, Good Day Internet. Become a member at patreon.com slash DTNS. Let's start with a few tech things you should know. YouTube will discontinue its community captions feature that let viewers add subtitles to videos on September 28th due to what it says is low usage plus spam and abuse issues. However, deaf and hard of hearing creators, also those who used it to translate videos into other languages, say this hurts accessibility and also hurts those who can't pay to make their own captions. YouTube told The Verge it would provide creators who have used the feature on at least three videos in the past 60 days, a free six month subscription to subtitling service Amara. Bloomberg sources say Facebook finalized deals with Universal Music Group, Sony Music Entertainment and Warner Music Group to show music videos on its platforms. And Facebook had previously reached agreements with artists and labels to license the use of audio, but didn't have permission to directly host official videos. YouTube is currently the most popular source of music videos on the Internet. Ah, so Facebook going after YouTube, US Federal Communications Commission authorized Amazon's plans for its Project Kuiper satellite constellation. This calls for launching 3,236 satellites to provide broadband coverage. The FCC approved the plan on the condition that Amazon does not unduly interfere with previously authorized satellite ventures. With satellites deorbiting within 355 days of completing their assigned mission. The plan approved by the FCC calls for Amazon to launch half its satellites by mid 2026 and the rest by mid 2029. Talked about earnings yesterday, but it is worth repeating that Alphabet reported its first revenue decline in company history last quarter down two percent. Search revenue was essentially flat from last year due to the pandemic and other revenue, which includes hardware sales was up. Google cloud revenue was up 43 percent, although it still missed expectations. Google ad revenue was up 5.8 percent year over year. And other bets, the non-Google businesses like Waymo and Verily reported an increased loss of one point one two billion dollars. A quick minor correction, YouTube ad revenue was up 5.8 percent. What did I say? You said Google. Oh, YouTube owned by Google. Yes, not the same thing. I respect my job. As we reported Thursday, as we reported Thursday, Amazon revenue was up 40 percent year over year. Some interesting notes from that. Now, AWS was not Amazon's fastest growing segment of the first for the first time. It grew 29 percent. As Amazon says, it helped clients cut usage, which cut spending. North America sales rose 43 percent as people shopped online more and international sales grew 38 percent. Amazon's ad business bucked the trend pandemic trend rising 41 percent and its subscription revenue, essentially Amazon Prime rose 29 percent. Facebook daily users of Facebook in the last quarter increased 12 percent year over year to one point seven nine billion monthly usage across Facebook. WhatsApp and Instagram grew 14 percent to 3.14 billion. I think when I was born, there might not have been that many people on the planet. Facebook warns that usage will be flat or slightly down next quarter because people are starting to go back to regular life. And that ad boycott in July that saw more than 100 companies pull advertising. Well, Facebook reports revenue for the first three weeks of July was in line with Q2's growth rate at 10 percent. In other words, Facebook doesn't seem to act like they felt it at all. And in fact, the North Face and Heineken say they will return to advertising on Facebook in August. Correction, there were three people on earth when you were born. OK, Apple smashed expectations in its earnings report Thursday and then earn is called that follows smashing expectations in a different way. Apple, CFO, Luca Maestri, how do you pronounce it? Maestri, would you say that? Said that compared to the September release of the iPhone 11, the next iPhone is expected to be available a few weeks later. Now, Apple generally never comments on whether it has even has a new iPhone coming, so the delay is less shocking given the disruption to supply chains caused by lockdowns and Qualcomm's report that a client was delaying production. So it's not our president that the 2017 iPhone 10 didn't come out till November. Yes, so they've done a very interesting Microsoft will end support for third party Cortana skills on September 7th, 2020. And in early 2021, Microsoft plans to discontinue the Cortana apps on iOS and Android and remove the current Cortana functionality from the first generation surface headphones and give users a $25 gift card in compensation. Microsoft is also going to remove Cortana from the invoke speakers, turning them into basically just Bluetooth speakers. And those users will get a $50 gift card. All right, let's talk a little more about that Twitter attack. Yeah, a lot has happened since since it posted Thursday that the attack on its admin system, which was earlier this month, was a phone spear phishing attack that targeted a small number of employees. Spear phishing means you know exactly who you're targeting and you have enough personal information about them and trusted contacts to fool them. So it sounds like the attack or attackers spear phished a few employees to gain basic access to Twitter's intranet, where then they gathered enough information to spear phish employees who had access to the Twitter account support tool, which they then used to add email addresses and reset passwords to gain access to actual Twitter accounts. Twitter said, quote, this attack relied on a significant and concerted attempt to mislead certain employees and exploit human vulnerabilities to gain access to our internal systems. End quote. Now, earlier this morning, the FBI, the IRS, the US Secret Service and Florida law enforcement placed a 17 year old in Tampa, Florida under arrest for the phishing attack on Twitter. The suspect has been charged with more than 30 felony charges, including organized fraud, communications fraud, identity theft and hacking. According to Hillsborough State Attorney Andrew Warren, he'll be charged as an adult and may appear in court Saturday morning. Not clear if he acted alone at this time. The 17 year old and possible accomplices tried to gain access to 130 accounts. They successfully posted from 45 of them. They accessed the direct messages of 36 of them and downloaded archived data of seven. Yeah, previously, I thought it could be up to eight, but they've now said that it's seven. And they have released the name of this person. You can find it. We even have a link to the press release about it. We're not using it here because the person is 17. And we don't know who else might have acted with them. They say they're not confirming or denying that he acted alone. So they may still yet have other arrests to go with this. But quick work, honestly, in finding this person. And I think it makes me feel better about resisting the idea that this was some kind of state based attack or that that it was that they were bribing Twitter employees. It sounds like these were young hackers who were really good at social engineering, and that's not unusual. The best hacks in history have been done by people in their teens and just figured out how to get somebody on the phone at Twitter and lucked into tricking them into giving them access to internal tools. Once you have access to any internal tool, you can use that to leverage some kind of spoof where you appear to be somebody that you're not because you have the information, you can start gathering all this credible sounding information. So so my question is at what and this is theoretical, but at what point do obviously we got we got the 17 right. But like, at what point do we go after those employees? And I hate to say this, but just for being dumb, like, like how how sophisticated, which I'm sure we'll find out, was this social engineering where you are so clueless that you're giving access to internal information, you know, I mean, so it feels like a bribe at that point, like, or a, hey, we have your stuff, give us this info. It's it's natural to think that. But it is any one of us who's ever been fished. And I bet you there are people in the audience who have. I certainly have almost been fished knows that you don't have to be stupid to get fished. So it's easy to fish your way into a system. It's not easy, but it's easier to fish your way into a system by just appearing to be someone you're not. You can spoof a phone number to look like it's coming from HR and say, oh, you know what, we need to reset your password and somebody who's really distracted, especially stressed out about COVID-19 and working from home and not really maybe thinking suddenly gives someone a piece of information that they think they're giving to a trustworthy source and they're not. Once you have that, then you you are able to figure out like, who's on the support team? What's the phone number of the official support account? Now I can craft a text message that I send to someone saying, hey, this is the official support account for Twitter. Please click on this link to reset your admin access. Boom, I've got your password. You never even know you got fished at that point. Well, heck, the way you explained it. Yeah, that's terrifying, actually, because I was thinking it's like, oh, they got them to tell them the secret codes or whatever over the phone. Right, right. It doesn't even have to be like that. Wow. The thing about this person and possibly other people, him in particular, being a minor, at least at the time of the attack, and Tom, your point that younger people are really good at this. This is historically, it's not like, hey, a kid can hack into Twitter. And, you know, how, how, how clamped down is Twitter? What is their security team even doing on that side of it? Not surprising what? And I'm not like giving anybody a pass at all is a really big deal, you know, but at a certain age when you're maybe looking for, you know, accolades from hacking peers, you know, online, because you were able to tweet out something about Bitcoin from Joe Biden's official account. And now you got 30 felony charges and you're really young and you got your life ahead of you and you're, you know, you're pretty screwed. If you end up being, you know, being found guilty of all this, you know, that's where it gets really sad. Yeah, no, you're absolutely right. Like it was it was done for the Lowell's, it sounds like. And for the rep. And, you know, even get busted can can sort of enhance your rep. But I'm not sure it's worth it. I would say not. Yeah, I mean, every agency went after them. I was like, wow, life and fishing. Yeah, everybody. So here's the next story. Bloomberg sources say SoftBank is an advanced talks with Nvidia to buy ARM in a deal possibly worth 32 billion. Now, SoftBank bought ARM in 2016 for 31 billion. The source says Nvidia is the only company with concrete discussions and a deal could be done in the next few weeks. Nvidia mostly makes GPUs as Tegra mobile CPUs are used in the Nvidia shield and in the Tindall switch and are based on ARM designs. ARM doesn't manufacture any chips itself. Licensing out its designs and instruction sets to others. So regulatory agencies start your engines. Yeah, if this ends up being true, it's going to be very difficult for Nvidia to convince the industry and the regulators that it should have control of what right now is the premier CPU design provider. And the thing about ARM is like like Lamar said, they don't make any CPUs. They just license their designs and their instruction sets to people. We did a great episode of this on Know A Little More, KnowALittleMore.com if you want to get into it, but they basically don't make anything. And so they can sort of be above the fray. But if Nvidia does make GPUs, but even CPUs and now they own ARM, they're going to be some fears that, you know, maybe they'll keep the best instructions that developments for themselves. Maybe they won't license with all the competitors on on the best terms. And that that's that's going to be a difficult one for them to pass. I totally get why Nvidia would want them. I'm curious how they think they can pass regulatory review. Maybe because I don't know, there were congressional hearings with other companies, you know, Nvidia is like, now's the time, let's strike. Yeah, I'm not sure if it's like, while they're looking the other way, we can we can get it passed them. And I had a regular regular agency that if they decide if the regulatory agencies decide to go forward and let it to happen, it'll be under a bunch of stipulations, basically ensuring that it cannot basically seal off ARM's licensees. Like Apple has a has a license and perpetuity with with ARM and they mostly just use the ARM instructors and they actually they clean sheet up their actual silicon. So it could be something like that. I mean, and Nvidia has been very hard on getting their getting their business away just away strictly from GPUs, but rather doing more investments and more strategic growth in server markets. Yeah, both with GPUs and they would like to get more CPUs into server markets. Buying ARM is a way for them to do that. Yeah, they would have to you're right, Roger, they would have to agree to some sort of shield, like making ARM a wholly owned subsidiary and agreeing to restrictions on how Nvidia's licensing of ARM technology would work internally and that they could never shut it off from other licensees, etc. So yeah, it'll be interesting to see if that actually goes through. Alrighty, Australia announced its draft code of conduct to require Google and Facebook to pay news publishers for some use of their content. We talked about this coming. Now it's here. News companies in Australia would have under this plan three months to negotiate over content that appears in search results, not just Google News, search results and news feeds. That's probably pertaining to Facebook. After the three months, if they can't reach an agreement, the Australian communications and media authority would arbitrate and come up with a compulsory binding decision within 45 days. The code also requires companies to notify news companies of any changes they make to their algorithm, 28 days in advance, provide detail on how users interact with news content on their platform, improve moderation tools to let comments be turned off, that one particularly for Facebook, and label original reporting when some company is not just passing along the same news as everybody else, but dug it up themselves. Breaches of these agreements could result in fines of 10 million Australian dollars per breach or up to 10 percent of a company's local turnover. The code right now only applies to Google and Facebook by name. It could be extended to other companies in the future. They've left themselves that option. But right now it's just Google and Facebook. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission created the Code of Conduct, which will now go into a month long consultation period. And then after that, it'll go to Australia's parliament to be debated and potentially made into law. Facebook says it will consider removing news from its platform if the code is imposed. Remember, this isn't about you posting a link. This is about Facebook hosting news, which they do for a lot of publishers. Facebook says, you know, it wouldn't hurt us if we did that. We could just get rid of that function all together. Google, on the other hand, would have to turn off all Australian news content in its Australian search engine in order to avoid complying with this code. They've really tried to tighten it up. Remember, Spain tried to put in a law that said you have to pay for news and you can't just not pay for news. You have to pay for it. And Google got rid of Google News because that Spanish law only applied to the Google News product here. Australia tried to tighten the news a little and saying this applies to search just in general, so this is going to be a lot harder for Google to evade. Well, also, go ahead, Lamar. Oh, this will be really quick. I'm mixed with this one because I feel like they're shooting themselves in the foot a little bit if the news companies are really the ones pushing this, pushing for this law. Come on, turning off Google search is your traffic is dead. Well, but it also hurts Google to do that, right? So they tried to make the law more. They could they tried to make the law so that Google wouldn't do that. It would make them have to have an extreme thing. I think it's more possible that Facebook just says, yeah, fine, we won't host any news anymore. And that would also hurt Australian publishers. You know, I don't know. I mean, all companies are different. And Google and Facebook, obviously, have large teams dedicated to a variety of different algorithms. It does seem a little insane to me that a news company, let's just say that both Google and Facebook said, OK, we'll play by your rules. We will notify you to any changes to our algorithm 28 days ahead of time. I mean, I don't I don't know that companies spend 28 days changing algorithms. You know, that is that is quite a bit of lead time to explain to an organization who may or may not even understand your intentions, you know, or misinterpret the intentions. That's just that's a strange communication window. It's basically saying once you've got your algorithm change, you can't put it in place for 28 days. You have to tell the publishers so they can adapt to it. It doesn't mean that you can't put it out there. You just have to give the publishers a chance to adjust because it's going to change their ranking in the search. But I don't know that you know what effect it's going to have until it's out there usually anyway. So I don't know. Yeah, you're I don't know, Lamar. Now I'm thinking about maybe you're right. Maybe they just will look at the list of publishers because not every publisher is on this. You have to have a certain amount of revenue. You have to have a certain kind of news that's in the public service. Public broadcasters are not part of this. Only private broadcasters. So it'd be easy for Google to just make a list and say, great, yeah, we will just not index any of those sites. Yeah, some more news coming out of Netflix. The company is rolling out playback speed controls on its Android app. So the speed controls are available on downloaded titles saved for offline viewing. You can choose to stream at half X point seven five X or go faster with one point two five X or one point five X pitch correction will keep voices sounding normal. So it's not going to be sped up chipmunk style and captions will keep in time as well. And you have to choose it for each video that you want to watch. The feature launches August 1st and will roll out to everybody worldwide over the coming weeks, both the National Association of the Deaf and the National Federation of the Blind commended Netflix on adding the playback features Netflix plans to test the feature on iOS and the web, but not on TV versions of the app at this time. Yeah, this was interesting about the Association for the Deaf and Federation of the Blind because for deaf users, it's the idea that you can slow down captioning to be able to make sure you don't miss anything for blind users. I didn't realize this. It's the ability to speed up that's desirable because a lot of blind users prefer to listen faster because they're like, it's just too slow when I'm just hearing it. And so that that is useful for blind users to be able to speed it up. Well, you just ruined me having something to snarky to say about this. I can't I can't say anything bad about it because I'm going to be a I'm going to be a bad person. Go ahead, LaVar. I know, absolutely not. I'm pretty curious, LaVar, like where are we going to go with it? How dare Netflix think that anyone cares about speeding up content? Well, it was just my thought of TV shows. I just I've never used a feature, right? I know YouTube has it. I've just never used a feature of speeding up video because, again, that chipmunk effect and I know they said it's going to get rid of it here. It just I don't know. I just I've never never had a need to do it or slow it down. So it just feels weird. But now that I know it's for accessibility, I'm all for it. Well, and, you know, and I'm with you. I've never slowed down or sped up a pie. You know, I've I've tried just to see what it sounds like. And I go, oh, no, I want it to be normal. But a lot of people, you know, even people who listen to Daily Tech News show or Daily Tech Headlines are like, you know, we love your voices, but you just want to get through it a little bit quicker than the half hour that you give us. And so it is actually a widely used feature. So, you know, Netflix with its huge library is, you know, getting in the mix, at least on the Android. I mean, I speed up podcasts every day. I remember the last time I listened to a podcast at regular speed. I never speed up video either. So I'm curious if you're deaf, blind or otherwise, and you speed up or slow down video, we'd love to hear from you. Feedback at Daily Tech News Show dot com. And folks, if you want to get the tech headlines each day, if you're like, sometimes I just don't have 30 minutes. I only have five. We got something for you. Daily Tech headlines. Go subscribe Daily Tech headlines dot com. Reuters sources say Bite Dance, the parent company of TikTok, is considering listing its business in either Hong Kong or Shanghai. Sounds like they're leaning towards Hong Kong. The sources also say it plans to list TikTok separately. So they would issue public stock for Bite Dance, but issue public stock for TikTok as well. And that listing would happen in either the Europe or the United States, the Europe in either Europe or the United States. Meanwhile, Bloomberg sources say that the United States, maybe later on Friday, might announce an order for Bite Dance to divest its ownership of TikTok. You're like, how could they do that? The US Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States looks at acquisitions and evaluates whether they harm US security. So this is different from the FEC, the FTC, all of that. They'll often look at acquisitions after the fact. And they have reportedly been reviewing Bite Dance's acquisition of Musically, which became TikTok, because TikTok has an office in Santa Monica. So it's under the purview of, oh, this is a partly US operation. So we can review and find out if that acquisition should have been allowed. The New York Times, Bloomberg and Fox Business, all reporting, and others are now, too, that Microsoft is in talks to acquire TikTok. So instead of listing it on the stock exchange, maybe because of this order, Bite Dance will just sell it off. And Microsoft is potentially the company that will buy TikTok. Reuters previously reported that Sequoia and the Atlantic Group were interested as well, so we don't know if things have changed or if just Microsoft jumped in on the game. But I don't know, by next week, we might have a deal that Microsoft is going to take TikTok. I don't know what's going on here. Like this is this is crazy. Hey, listen, yeah, I'm a social media guy. Yeah, I'm not heavy on TikTok, but I know people who make their livings and business office. They've been on edge wondering about how this is going to happen. And my first glance, I'm like, yeah, how can the president or just our government just order a company to we own you now? I'm glad you explained it because that was very confusing for me. And yeah, and then just having another powerhouse of a company, Microsoft, like coming in to take it over and it just seemed like, you know, OK, are you going to have the same issues though? Like just big, big tech owning all it feels like we're going in circles here owning all the data. They literally were just on Capitol Hill about that. So that's why I'm just lost. This is this is just such a weird. This happened in like an hour, right? All of this start coming in and I'm just so confused. Yeah, I mean, just over the past few hours on Friday morning, all of this stuff was breaking. And I think that from the administration's point of view, all they care about is TikTok, which is hugely popular in the United States. And like you said, like all social media apps collects a lot of data about you is not in the hands of a Chinese company. I might I don't know this for sure. My suspicion is they just don't like that it's that popular and in the hands of a non US company, and this would be a way to change that, right? I go, I go, I mean, a rupture. Go ahead. No, no, go ahead. I'll go a little further in this because, you know, not conspiracy theory, but, you know, TikTok users made it made a splash at that at that. Was that Tulsa rally? Yeah, no, I'm glad you brought that up. Yeah, yeah. I don't think that has some revenge things happening there. Maybe I don't think that has much to do with it. It might have something to do with the president being even more eager to do this. But there are plenty of policy reasons to do this from people who don't really care about that one way or the other, but don't like China having that. So I don't think it's wrong to bring it up, certainly. I think it's overplayed how much of an effect that has on this. When if that had never happened, I think it's still I think they would still be after I worry about. And again, this is this is treading on political ground here a little bit. But I worry about the vilification of just, you know, Asia and China. And you're like, we started to get into some some dangerous territory here where it's like just because something's from China is bad. You know, and I really I've never liked that thought process. It's fine if it's from China as long as it's not popular. That seems to be the evidence, right? One plus, which is a Chinese company, can sell stuff all day long. Lenovo is double headquartered partly in the United States, partly in China. So that gives it a pass. But if you're popular and you're in China, there's a target on your back from the United States right or wrong. You're you're right, Lamar, but it's it's Huawei, it's ZTE. And now it's ticked and now it's by dance actually and not tick tock. So yeah, I don't know if I going back to your thought about Microsoft. I don't know if I like the idea of this going to Microsoft as the solution. I almost prefer if it was just spun out as an independent company and we get a little more competition out there. You know, I kept throwing at Turks and Caicos, but it doesn't have to be that any any independent, you know, exterior, not in the US, not in China. Incorporation like Switzerland, I think would be really interesting. But sounds like there just might be a new owner for it. We should buy it. We should like be tennis. That'll be a new Patreon level. Yeah, then we'd have to make ticked. Yeah, let's just get us to the $50 billion level and we will buy it. Well, I'm proud of the whole team just now for not making any Microsoft tick tock clippy jokes. I saw a lot of those on Twitter this morning. Also, you know, I saw it and again, this is, you know, sources, you know, companies and talks to buy other companies. Remember when Facebook was going to buy Snapchat? I mean, that went on for months. You know, that didn't happen. So companies are in talks all the time. But there were also some, you know, and a lot of headscratching like, what, why would this be a thing that Microsoft would do? But then there were there were certain speculation of, well, this could be, you know, how tick tock gets back into India, for example, and there are certain there are certain ways. When you think about it, a certain, you know, from from a particular angle, you think this isn't the weirdest acquisition that's ever been. No. So yeah, it's, you know, we'll see. Figure out how tick tock helps Xbox sell Azure and you will answer. Why Microsoft wants to take it if they integrate tick tock into Xbox? I may just go BSP as Sony fanboy for life. I don't know. Well, if you have thoughts on Microsoft, find tick tock or anything that we talk about on any of our shows, you can join the conversation in our Discord, it's going on 24 seven people and you can join by linking to a Patreon account at patreon.com slash DTNS. What's in the mailbag today? Oh, we got good stuff. Let's highlight a couple. One from Mike, he says he's from two warm Southern New Hampshire. It is summer after all. Mike says I was listening to this week's accidental tech podcast, the host of which spent about 45 minutes on the congressional hearing. Specifically, Tim Cook's portions of it. And one of the hosts wondered why all four CEOs were being grilled together instead of separately, which is a really good question. Wouldn't it have been better for the representatives to focus on one company and one CEO at a time? Well, I went looking for an answer to that, Mike. And I think I found one. This is from the Congressional Research Services official paper on arranging witnesses. This is for the Senate, but I think it applies to the House as well. The paper says, typically, a witness testifying alone makes a statement and then responds to questions from committee members. Committees, however, may also employ a panel format, often for witnesses with divergent viewpoints. It is normally the practice in this case for all panel members to make statements, then for committee members to post questions to the panel or to various panelists, some observers believe this format stimulates debate and elicits more pertinent information. So they must have thought, you know what, if we can bounce back and forth between them, maybe we can catch them contradicting each other or something. I don't know. But apparently they wanted to stimulate debate and elicit more pertinent information and they thought the panel was the better way to do that. Well, we got another email from Nick, Nick with a K says, just a note in regards to Samsung's memory business and how they pivoted, it would have been super easy for them to pivot from phone to computer components because DRAM or DRAM, as Roger says, and flash memory for phones and computers is all made on the same production lines with the same equipment so they can flip the proverbial switch and change from making products for one segment to the next segment as demand rises and falls. That is true, Nick. Good point. Anybody out there work for Samsung or have an insider knowledge of whether that was it because that makes sense to me. I don't know if it was true or not, but that's a good point. Thanks for bringing that one up. Shout out to patrons at our master and grandmaster levels, including Philip Shane, Wendy Hernandez and Paul Thiessen. You're awesome, all of you. Also, thanks to Mark Wilson, also an awesome person. So glad to have you, Lamar. It's been too long. Let folks know what you've been up to. It has. I just put a video on YouTube today talking about how I'm tired of the console wars, the game consoles that I say the game console wars are stupid. So you feel like I do and that includes the PC master race war and all that. It's it's provoking a lot of conversations. So if you want to jump in on that, that's on my YouTube YouTube.com slash Lamar Wilson. Thank you. Indeed. Don't forget, folks, if we get to the $50 billion level, we will buy a TikTok, so go support our Patreon at patreon.com slash D T N S. Our email address is feedback at Daily Tech News Show. We are live Monday through Friday. Join us if you can for 30 p.m. Eastern 2030 UTC and you can find out more at dailytechnewshow.com slash live to Monday. This show is part of the Frog Pants Network. Get more at frogpants.com. I hope you have enjoyed this program.