 Coming up on DTNS Europe wants everyone to use the same phone charger. That sounds crowded. AI gets good at understanding the context of whole books at once and tiny biological robots made from frog cells. This is the Daily Tech News for Friday, January 17th, 2020 in Los Angeles. I'm Tom Merritt. And from Studio Redwood, I'm Sarah Lane. Drawing the top tech stories of the day from Cleveland, I'm Len Peralta. I'm the show's producer, Roger Chang. And we're very happy to have Annalie Newitz, author of The Future of Another Timeline and host our opinions, our correct podcast. Annalie, welcome back. Yeah, thanks for having me again. We were just introducing Annalie to horrifying food mascots and talking about science fiction shows and more on Good Day Internet. You can get that by becoming a member at patreon.com slash DTNS. Let's start with a few tech things you should know. Source is still the Wall Street Journal that Facebook is backing away from a previously announced plan to sell ads in WhatsApp. The team working on the ads has reportedly been disbanded with existing work deleted from WhatsApp code. Facebook still reportedly has long term plans to put ads in the WhatsApp status feature and Facebook will instead reportedly focus on business messaging as a revenue generator. Meanwhile, mobile app developers have filed a class action complaint in the United States against Facebook. The suit claims Facebook, quote, identified and categorized potential market threats, then extinguished those threats. I really want to add with extreme prejudice, but that wasn't in the actual filing. They claim that Facebook cut them off from their access to Facebook data, not to protect people's privacy, but to drive them out of business. Xiaomi says it has resolved its issue with Google integration and people can now use me security camera services with Nest devices. Xiaomi didn't detail the cause of the problem, but Google temporarily suspended me cameras from working with Nest after users reported seeing video feeds from other users. That was disturbing, but they've got it fixed now, hopefully. Let's talk a little bit more about what's going on with Chrome OS. Google's Director of Product Management for Chrome OS, Ken Liu, told Android Polices David Ruddick that Google is working to bring Steam, the video game service, to Chromebook. Liu said this was made possible by Chrome OS's Linux compatibility. Steam is available for Linux and currently if you've got Chrome OS, you can install Steam using the Linux compatibility layer, but there's no official support. Google's reported performance is just not very good for that, so Google stepping in and making it work well would be an advantage. More powerful Chromebooks are apparently on the way as well that would make playing Steam games more viable on a Chromebook. So who thinks we'll get a gaming Chromebook at CES 2021? Yeah, I think that's a pretty good prediction. At this point, especially laying the foundation of we're going to do this, this is happening, Chromebooks will be getting more powerful. It all kind of ties together. I mean, one of the big, big disadvantages to running Steam on Linux is you don't have the full catalog. So that's going to be one thing if someone's like, oh, I'll just game on a Chromebook, even if the Chromebook has the hardware to do it. Annalie, I don't know, does any of this appeal to you? I mean, you know, a more powerful Chromebook would be great. I use a Chromebook pretty regularly, especially when I travel. So it'd be awesome if there was something that I could actually play games on, although I think the issue is also network speed as well. So it's not just going to be about having the nice computer, but actually getting onto a network where you can play a game and not be feeling like it's lagging. Yeah, especially for online stuff and storage. I mean, with Steam, you're downloading your games too for local execution. And so, you know, Chromebooks, I also use a Chromebook as sort of my on the go device and it doesn't have a lot of storage. I don't need a lot of storage on it for that, but I might if I was going to put a lot of Steam games on it. Yeah, exactly. I mean, I wonder at what point does a Chromebook become powerful enough that the company Google has to sort of say, OK, well, this whole promise of it's light, it's, you know, it's it's it's streamlined. You've got our devices, you're online. That's that's that's all you really need turns into something that's very different because it is competing with other laptops. Yeah, I mean, we saw a couple of Chromebooks that were more powerful at CES this past year and they were not huge. But there there there is they are a little bit beefier, a little bit thicker. You know, what I like about my Chromebook is that it's so light. I forget that it's even in a bag when I have it. And yeah, components are getting smaller and more powerful all the time. So that'll become less and less of a problem over time. But I just wonder if this isn't a way to just kind of add one more piece to that Chrome OS puzzle where their their big selling point is portability and and, you know, dead simple security because there are things that just can't happen on it. And so if they say like, hey, we'll add steam to that, too, maybe that just makes it, you know, check one more box. It's not part of the full strategy. UK ISP BT announced that three of its service plans will come with Stadia Premier Edition. That gives you a white Stadia controller, Chromecast Ultra and three months of Stadia Pro. The plans that include Stadia range from 3999 to 4999 pounds per month with speeds from 67 megabits per second up to 300 megabits per second. Their offerings are good until January 30th and then a new offer is planned for February 7th. Yes, speaking of gaming on a Chromebook, I assume they'll be promoting Stadia if they have these gaming capable Chromebooks out there. And I think this is really interesting as an indication of where ISP is are going to go now that their TV and phone bundles aren't so popular anymore. We're seeing more attempts to bundle other things like Disney Plus or in this case, Stadia. I think we're going to see a lot more of these kind of service bundles. Yeah, definitely. I have been playing with the Stadia. That's part of where my my grousing about networks coming from with the Chromebook, especially. And so, I mean, we have a very fast network at home, so it is really fun. I actually had a question for you guys because when Stadia rolled out, I kept thinking about that moment a billion years ago when Microsoft rolled out the Xbox and everybody was like, wait, what Microsoft is doing games and they're doing a console and all this stuff. And it was this kind of right turn that wound up actually making sense in the long run. How does Stadia, how does the roll out of Stadia compare to that? Because I feel like it's a similar thing where Google is suddenly like, all right, we're doing our own game system. We're not just hosting, you know, Pokemon Go. We're actually doing stuff. Yeah, that is an interesting parallel because people didn't trust Microsoft a lot back when the Xbox first came out. And they were there were a lot of jokes about, you know, Xbox games will crash all the time, you know, they'll keep modifying them until they're no good anymore. Like they do with windows and that didn't end up being true. And you hear similar sorts of things like, oh, they'll probably kill Stadia after three months like they do with all their other products and and that sort of thing. So I think that's a really fair parallel. And I do think that the Stadia has a better chance to catch on than I think a lot of people give it credit for. Interesting. Yeah. The EU Parliament held hearings on a new measure that would require a common charging standard for all mobile and portable devices sold in the region. Supporters of the measure say it would cut down on e-waste because you'd just be able to use the charger you have. You wouldn't have to have a package charger because your device uses a different standard, etc. Supporters of the measure also think it would reduce the cost of devices to consumers because those charges wouldn't have to be bundled with the devices all the time. In 2009, the EU set up a voluntary agreement. You may remember that Apple, Samsung and Nokia all signed on to introduce a smartphone charger that fit all models. That agreement expired in 2014. The EU is trying to get that initiative started again. It identified USB 2.0 Micro B, USB C and Apple's lightning as the dominant charging standards. So micro USB, USB C and Apple and is publishing a study on legislative next steps in the coming weeks. Of course, everybody thinks they're going to pick USB C and that would leave Apple in a predicament with iPhone. They already use USB C on the iPad and they certainly use USB C on their laptops, so the laptops aren't part of this. But Apple's resisting in any way. They say a requirement of uniformity would quote freeze innovation and quote be bad for the environment. And if you're thinking, well, that's just Apple resisting anyone telling them what to do, sure, that's part of it. But I also think we've heard these rumors that Apple might be considering a portless phone that relied on wireless charging. And this kind of rule would maybe make that against the law to be like, no, you have to have a port for USB C charging. Yeah, and we've talked about this on the show before and Apple certainly is not the only company that's putting some R&D into figuring out, OK, how do we make these devices wireless eventually? So yeah, this does feel like it would freeze innovation if you're really looking for something that never has to be plugged in. But you're still going to have to have other devices in order to wirelessly charge your device. So the whole idea of like this is bad for the environment, I don't know if I really buy that. I think it's better for the environment to have stuff in that junk drawer that you're not using that could still use a device and you could switch around between device makers more easily. Totally agree. I just think this is great. I hope that they crush Apple with their regulations. Also, I just like to say crush Apple. But yeah, I think it would be much, much better for people if they could have all their devices using USB C. How nice. I mean, I do agree that wireless charging will probably get good enough at some day to mean we don't need the cables. And on that beautiful day, we all won't need the cables. And if we were forced to have cables, that would be a waste and quote unquote bad for the environment. But this is not that day. And I don't know when that day is coming. So on the one hand, I think maybe what would be a reasonable objection is, hey, can you build in a path forward? Because the technology of today won't always be the technology. Let's make sure that we can adapt this rule to the most friendly standard as that gets evolved and have an agreement on how to how to decide what that is. That's not what Apple say, of course. And that's a more long term thinking approach to it anyway. Yeah, and I think any regulation that's well written, which of course there's no guarantee that this will be will have something about that. The regulation itself won't settle on a standard, because if it did, that would completely hold back any kind of innovation. If you were like, everything has to be USBC until the end of time. It has to be worded so that, like you said, there's some mechanism for deciding what the standard is. Maybe we meet every five years to go over it again and decide, all right, now we're going to settle on a new standard. There has to be a length of time where you can just use that cord for all of your devices instead of having the junk drawer that we all have with every Apple plug from history in it. Because I have benefited from the fact that I had a USBC charger for an Android tablet next to my bedside and I needed to charge a Nintendo Switch. Or I needed to charge something else that was USBC and I'm like, oh, this is great. So yeah, it would be nice if everybody agreed on a standard and we all had interoperable chargers. So we didn't have to have that junk drawer like you're talking about. Yeah, I've definitely gotten to the point where, like you tell them, I'm like, maybe this will work. Oh, it works. It fits. Had no idea. Got a lot of them. You know, junk drawers for life. All right, let's talk about health care and facial recognition and see how upset everybody gets. 31 health care organizations in Shanghai are trialing a drug collection terminal with built in facial recognition. Pharmacists and buyers of controlled medications would be asked to verify their identity with a face scan with the hope of identifying high risk buyers and starting to prevent abuse by administrators. Shanghai's anti drug agencies have been testing the machines since back in November and the paper reports that the city plans to achieve full coverage across all medical institutions in the next six months. Now, South China Morning Post takes the very obvious response to this of here's more surveillance in China. And we can certainly go down the road of talking about do we want more facial recognition? Obviously, this is an expansion of facial recognition by a government that wants to expand it as far as possible. But I think what's more interesting to me because I think we can all anticipate what the objections are here. Because this is about making sure that people are getting and let's let's talk about like the real controlled substance is not suit a fed but like things that could harm you if you don't get the proper pharmacist advice. I think there's a real reason to make sure like, OK, the right drugs are getting to the right people. Is there a way that either one of you can think of where you would think this is this could be done right where facial recognition could be allowed in this case because this case is go. Like forget the China part of it if it was run by say, you know, Switzerland. Is there a way this could be implemented that that would be good? Honestly, I have been to pharmacies in the past where I had to pick up something. You know, I was wasn't getting like pseudo-fed run or whatever. But but you know, I was I was not asked for my ID. I, you know, told him, you know, whoever my maybe my birth date and who my insurance was and, you know, and I went on my way and, you know, it was it was my stuff. But I thought to myself, huh, not a lot of security going on here or a pharmacist saying, hey, do you want to know more about the drug? And I go, I don't really have time. And they're like, yeah, whatever. We don't carry either. And so there there are certain kind of lax practices and I'm talking to us only. So I know it's different depending on where you are in the world where I think to myself. This is an added measure of security that if you are the person who's getting a drug for a thing that you need the drug for, this might actually be a better solution. However, lots of privacy implications. And that would that would be worldwide. And and and and I think that there are possibilities for all sorts of other kinds of abuse because you don't actually have a human involved. Annalee. Yeah, I mean, I, I mean, I agree with Sarah. I feel like this is, I mean, ultimately, the issue is that people aren't checking to make sure that people are getting the right drugs. So I don't think we need facial recognition. I think we need humans like better trained pharmacists, people who are actually checking IDs. It just feels like this is a, you know, a solution without a problem, you know, the problem, you know, even if you had over engineered. And I think, you know, in a lot of contexts in the United States to different organizations are trying to come up with reasons to have more surveillance just because they think that it sounds like a good idea and somehow surveillance equals security. But it really, I think, in many cases, especially with medical stuff, it's going to wind up having way more negative consequences than positive ones. I think it's much more likely to result in like profiling, for example. Well, I was thinking about this myself and my quick answer is, if I had proper privacy assurances, which I know that packs in a whole lot of like, okay, but how is that done? But let's, if I had proper privacy insurances that my face would only be used by my pharmacy for this verification and I opted into it and it's sped up the ability for me to get my prescription. Yeah, I think I'd be okay with that. But it's assuring that all of those things can happen and that they're really happening and vetted that makes this an idea that, like you say, I kind of tend to agree, Annaly, without solving those very difficult situations. I'm not sure that we need it. Yeah. The speed of my pharmacy pickup is usually the line, not the ID verification like that. Yeah, I like to tell you, because you sort of slipped in like, if it meant I could get it faster and I'm like, yeah, but that's not what they're talking about. That's not the problem. Yeah, if they could solve that, that would be fantastic. Well, there's a lot of, especially, you know, in this particular story, a lot of emphasis on people are making meth, you know, by going into pharmacies and we've got to clamp down on that. Well, okay, yeah, I mean, that's it. That is a rampant problem of people taking one drug and, you know, burning it down into making something else that is super illegal and really bad for everybody. So if that was really the majority of the issues, well, okay, that's a conversation to have. But again, like you said, Annaly, I'm not sure that that is actually the majority of the issues. All right, we've got a machine learning issue we can try to fix though a challenge for machines trying to understand tech. Is to get the context. For example, the English sentence, I ran out. Does it mean you no longer have any of a thing like I ran out of it or that you left a location like, oh, I just ran out or were you literally sprinting away? You need the context to know what those words mean. Google has a model called transformer that compares words in a paragraph to each other in order to understand the relationship and deduce the context for a particular line that the algorithm is trying to understand. Now, transformer uses a lot of data space. And if it has to do more than a few thousand words, it becomes impractical. It's just using too much space. So Google has a new model called reformer that can understand the context of one million lines using just 16 gigabytes of space. Because instead of comparing all the words in a paragraph, the model uses something called locality sensitive hashing to put similar words in a bucket. And then it just compares the words within the bucket or occasionally nearby buckets. It also uses something called reversible residual layers so it can store activations once instead of once for each layer in the training, which also helps build up that storage data. So the long and the short of it is that Google says it can process the context of an entire book pretty fast and in less than 16 gigabytes. Well, get on it, Google Assistant, because you don't know what I'm saying half the time. And that's that's actually, you know, I joke, I'm half joking. But but yeah, this is this is all we're getting there, right? We're getting to contextual language understanding with a variety of smart devices and assistance and apps that rely on the sort of thing. There are, you know, there was a time and this is like getting better, you know, exponentially quickly. There was a time where I'd be like, oh, if I say a sentence that way, you know, you know, my my Amazon Assistant will just be like, I don't know what you're talking about. And now half the time she's actually kind of getting it. And so a lot of a lot of this, this research is sure being able to process an entire book. That's really cool. But in a real life scenario, whether you're in your car and you're on the go or, you know, you've got your phone in your pocket. I mean, we're all better off because of it. Yeah, and I also really question this idea of how it can process a whole book. Are they talking about that this assistant can somehow like replace cliff notes like it's going to help you analyze a book in social context or yeah, I wasn't quite sure what it was. If I have it right, which I'm not guaranteeing that I do but if I have it right it's not about understanding the whole book it's about being able to use the entire book as as a feed for the context of a line. Right. So it can take. Yeah, it can take the whole book and go like, OK, now I know where this line fits in, which is important for just understanding stuff and will lead eventually to things like your assistant being able to kind of understand the context of what you're saying. And we've got, you know, as we were talking in our pre show, as as the lingo of the world becomes more and more kind of socially convoluted, at least for me, it's like, like, for example, the other day I said to somebody, oh, I got so heated. And he was like, what does that mean? And I was like, I was mad. He was like, oh, yeah. But imagine our assistant being like, are you on fire? Like what's happening right now? So the more of this we have, the better. Yeah. There's a great new book out by Janelle Shane, who does a lot of work with AIs and particularly with text. It's called You Look Like a Thing and I Love You. The book was named by an AI. And, you know, one of the things that's great about her book is that she shows how even when we have these incredibly sophisticated things like reformer, it's still in this weird uncanny valley of meaning where you'll get the assistant kind of almost understanding you or replying in a way or creating text that almost sounds right, but is just a little bit wrong. And she kind of uses that trope of like the silly things that AI says to point out really how far away we are from having that kind of complete understanding. So I think we're really close, but we're also maybe much further away than we realize. Yeah. It's scary how close we are, but reassuring how far we are. Yeah, exactly. It's like there's always going to be those moments where you're like, oh yeah, this is just a machine. It has really no idea what context is at all. Right. Because it's trying to emulate context, right? Yeah, exactly. Or maybe simulate, but it's not doing it the same way we do it. Exactly. Folks, if you want to get all the tech headlines each day in about five minutes, be sure to subscribe to DailyTechHeadlines.com. Scientists from Tufts University, the University of Vermont and WIS Institute at Harvard published early research and proceedings of the National Academy of Scientists about robots made from heart and skin cells derived from the stem cells of a frog that they call Xenobots. Annaly, you pointed out this story to us. Can you explain a little more about the Xenobots? Sure. Yeah, this has been really interesting. It was a huge story in the media this past week. You probably saw it. And I think partly because the researchers came up with this clever name Xenobot for these creatures that they'd made, which are actually not robots. And in fact, they are not programmable. So what they did was they actually do take frog embryos and rip the cells out of them and rebuild it to create these little tiny organisms that are only about a millimeter across. But here's where the programming part comes in. What they've done is worked with people who are in working on simulation in computer science and they're using machine learning to simulate how all of these cells would behave if they were put together in a certain shape. So they've got this blob of cells and they can make it a donut shape. They can make it look like a little tooth with like kind of like legs that move around. They can make all of these different morphologies. And so first they test them in their simulator. So each of these actual little cell creatures are made, they're kind of suggested by algorithms, which are learning about how these cells will behave when they're in a certain structure. And the reason why these cells move around once they've been shaped into the donut shape or the tooth shape is because they're partly made from heart cells, which will always expand and contract. And partly they're made just from regular skin cells. So you get these videos that you can see. I highly recommend that you check it out where you see these little tiny things kind of, they look like they're sort of throbbing like hearts and they'll kind of move around. I'm kind of showing you this. This is what it looks like, but it kind of contracts and as it contracts, it can kind of drag itself along or it can kind of squish itself along just by kind of this the squeezing motion. And you know if they build it in a donut shape they can get it to carry things and there's kind of emergent behaviors. But these are just blobs of cells that are just acting mechanically they don't have any kind of brain they like I said they can't be programmed they're just squeezing. You know they're just acting like heart cells. So the researchers hope that eventually they'll be able to do this kind of thing, working with simulations of cellular structures to create versions of these little bio creatures that have brains. And that will learn things and that over time using this machine learning model, they can start to figure out which versions of these creatures learn the fastest and are the smartest. So the idea would be to eventually create artificial brains, but they're not artificial they're actually biological, which to me is a little creepy. Basically it's you know how do you create a slave race Oh start this way. Start small starts small and I mean but you know you have to think about, you know, the future implications of something like this and as soon as people start talking about, you know, doing things other than say, using this for like drug delivery or for tissue repair, and saying, oh, we want to train them to think. That's that is really kind of when the alarm bell should go off and make you wonder like, are they trying to design slave creatures like. Or, or even if they're not, could what they do be then used to advance a future race of slave frog cells, which, yeah, there's an ethics question there because, yes, you can have these they're like wind up wind up kind of right like you have the little thing with the heart cell legs. Trundle along with a pouch made of skin cells carrying the drug and you send it and you know it'll generally go in the direction you need the drug to go and biodegrade at the right time and it's all dumb. But that has limited applications like they talk about cleaning up micro plastics or digesting toxic materials but if you really want to do this well. If you really want to say, hey, we want you to not just trundle through the bloodstream but we want you to go to the liver. You need that cognitive processing that you're talking about and they're like, oh, well, wait, maybe we could actually use the simulation to create nerve cells that we could basically program. And at that level, it's still probably okay because it just can do one thing or another. It's not thinking. It's not aware. But once you start programming nerve cells, you're right. It's like what happens if you program a few more nerve cells and what if you get a little more complex programming like there's there's a slope there that looks like it might get a little slippery. Yeah, I think for sure it would and you know there's no clear way that we can set a hard barrier there where we can say like well up until this point, it's not a tiny robot slave, but after that point it is. But yeah, as it gets more complex, like if for example it's being used for cleaning up toxins in the environment and you're programming it to be able to sniff out toxins, which is something that you might easily do. At what point and it's making decisions about where to go and making value judgments about which things smell toxic. At what point is then it just a little mouse or some other kind of creature or even, you know, a monkey. So I think has a genetic mutation which can happen in situ and then starts cleaning up things that aren't toxic. Yeah, well, that's the other question, right? That's that's the dangerous question. What if about what if it gets into your lungs and just starts replicating and you've got, you know, frog lung. It's, you know, we never had that before, but I don't know. 2050. It's a big issue. Well, thank you for bringing us this. Yeah, exactly. Yeah, yeah. Focus on the frog lung. I mean, don't focus on the frog lung. Focus on the happy part. Focus on avoiding the frog lung. Well, these science stories will increasingly become part of our new normal as they as they come about. And thanks to everybody who participates in our subreddit science stories and lots of tech stories are there. You can submit stories that you care about and vote on others. Float them up to the top daily tech news show dot reddit dot com. You can also join our conversation. We're chatting in our discord 24 seven. It's like a m p m where you can join by linking to a patreon account at patreon.com slash d t n. We had too much good stuff in our mailbag. What did you pick to read today? Oh, Tom, I'm glad you asked. Justin actually wrote in and said, you all mentioned hip monk is going to retire on January the 20th being avid flyer, both business and personally. What are other services out there that will sort by comfort level? The major metric that hip monk used to rant rank flights was comfort grouped flights with no or short layovers or shortest flight times or just the easiest time to visit an airport, etc. And not just pricing. This made hip monk my go to as I would be happy to spend a touch more to be in a pleasant mood and less stressed when traveling. Justin says this might be a great question for our amateur traveler and indeed it was Chris Christensen got the email and weighed in and said, yeah, there are some similar features on other services. On TripAdvisor flights, you can sort by flight score on kayak and sky scanner. The closest they have is their sort of best versus cheapest or quickest, etc. But Google flights doesn't seem to have a similar feature at this point. I'm interested to see what we get, you know, with the loss of hip monk. If you didn't use hip monk, well, whatever, I used it constantly and it really was good about that. I don't exactly remember what they called it, but it was sort of like the what what what's the most comfortable flight we can give you. And it's not just the shortest flight, you know, and it's not just the airline and it's not just the airport. It's it's a it's a variety of metrics. And so. So yeah, so thanks, Chris. Well, who owns hip monk. Is it concur? It is now. Yeah. That's shutting it down. Maybe concur will take that element of hip monk and implemented in some of its other products because it doesn't sound from what Chris said. Like there's any one to one replacement for that particular sorting mechanism. Well, thanks to Justin for writing in and suggesting Chris to answer your question, which he did. Yeah, team shout out to our patrons at our master and grandmaster levels, including Chris Allen, Degrescia, a Daniels and Ken Hayes. All right, let's check in with Len Peralta, who has been busily illustrating today's show. What have you drawn for us today, Len? You know, I am fascinated by the Zeno bot. And I thought that when I read the article earlier in the week, I was like the very first thing I thought I was like, could you imagine if like this was a branded sort of kids toy that they could play with and make it happen? I think back when I was a kid, Kenner maybe would have come out with something like this. And that is sort of what today's illustration is all about a reimagination called meet Zeno bot an airy new kind of programmable programmable organism. And you can kind of take a look at it and see what it looks like. You can collect them all and digest toxic material and possess this potential cognitive ability. Definitely for 499 it's not bad. It's it's pretty good. And you can give it to your your niece or your nephew for their birthday. It's going to be terrific. I like how you have totally biodegradable and it definitely looks like it's in the middle of biodegrading. That was the thing. It kind of freaked me out about that video is the thing that was kind of moving along there. It was very crazy. But if you're interested in this piece of art, it's actually available at my patreon patreon.com forward slash Len, which you can just download right now. Or you can go the old fashioned way to my online store, lend for all the store dot com and get it there. Thanks for your drawing as usual, Len. And also thanks to Annalie Newitz for being on the show today. Annalie, always great to have you and let folks know where they can keep up with your work. You can find me on the web at Annalie Newitz dot com. You can follow me on Twitter at Annalie in and listen to the podcast, which is called our opinions are correct, which is at our opinions are correct dot com and also anywhere you can download podcasts. Excellent. Now it's it's no Xenobot cartoon, but we have some patreon reward merchandise that was also designed by Len Peralta to celebrate six years of DTNS. You can get perhaps hit the logo on a sticker or a poster or a mug or a T shirt by becoming a patron. Get all the details at patreon.com slash DTNS slash merch. If you've got feedback for us, we've got an email address feedback daily tech news show dot com. We are live Monday through Friday. Join us if you can for 30 p.m. Eastern 21 30 UTC. Find out more at daily tech news show dot com slash live. We're off Monday for Martin Luther King Jr. Day here in the US. We'll be back Tuesday with Patrick Beja. Talk to you then. This show is part of the frog pants network. Get more at frog pants dot com. Hope you have enjoyed this program.