 This 10th year of Daily Tech News show is made possible by its listeners, thanks to all of you, including Mark Gibson, Reed Fishler, Larry Bailey, and our lifetime supporter, Steven Fields. We see you, Steven. On this episode of DTNS, 23andMe suffers more data breach woes, net neutrality breathes yet more life, and Meta has all the updates. This is the Daily Tech News for Thursday, October 19, 2023. From Studio Secret Bunker, I'm Sarah Lane. From Columbus, Ohio, I'm Rob Dunnwood. From the Atlanta area, I'm Nika Montford. And I'm the show's producer, Roger Chen. We were talking before the show about how we all feel about data breaches and what makes data particularly sensitive data. We will get to all of that in this year's show, but let's start with a quick heads. In its Q3 earnings report, Netflix announced it had gained 8.76 million global subscribers during the quarter, which beat expectations. So, analysts were pretty happy about that. Revenue was also up 7.8% year over year to 8.54 billion dollars, and overall memberships were up 10.8% year over year to 247.15 million. The company is also raising prices in the US, with its basic plan now $11.99 per month, that's up from $9.99, and the premium plan now $22.99 per month, up from $19.99. Netflix is also increasing some prices in the UK and France. Those on-ad supported and standard ad-free plans aren't affected by the price hikes, at least not yet. Nokia announced it is cutting up to 14,000 jobs by the end of 2026 after reporting a 20% drop in sales between July and September, prompting cost-cutting measures. 400 million euros in 2024, 300 million euros in 2025. Nokia says this is a necessary step to adjust the market uncertainty and protect long-term profitability and competitiveness. Man, you know, cutting 14,000 jobs and you still have around 75,000. That's a lot, it's a big company. Insider sources say that Elon Musk is mulling removing X, formerly known as Twitter, from the EU to avoid the Digital Service Act's anti-disinformation restrictions, which could cost the company 6% of global revenues if violated. Musk has reportedly become increasingly frustrated with the DSA's rules. EU users currently make up a rather small portion, around 9% of X's global user base. OnePlus unveiled the OnePlus Open foldable phone. Pre-orders start today for $1,699 shipping set for October 26, that's a week from today. OnePlus is marketing the device as a collaborative project with its parent company, Oppo, with the OnePlus Open being sold as the Oppo Find N3 in China. Interesting marketing strategy. AMD announced the Ryzen 7000 Threadripper CPU line for a November 21 launch. There's the Threadripper 700 Pro series focused on the workstation, and the non-pro Ryzen Threadripper 700 series for its high-end desktop, which is known as HEDT market. High-end desktop. Both chips are based on AMD's Zen 4 architecture, and Intel did a deep dive on both, which we will link to in our show notes if you want to know a lot more. So there's a lot of meta-news that came out today. So to start us off, the company announced it is adding its Broadcast Channels feature to the first world out to Instagram and WhatsApp users to both Facebook and Facebook Messenger. Broadcast Channels lets creators and public figures share one to many messages to directly engage with their followers. The Channels feature will come to the two platforms in the coming weeks. Metal also announced that, at least for now, measures to limit potentially unwelcome or unwanted comments on posts about the conflict between Israel and Hamas is coming out. This includes a default setting to filter who can comment on new and public-facing Facebook posts created by users in the region to only their friends and followers. Meta says that users can opt out and change the setting at any time. So, Nega, does any of this filtering, does it mean anything to you, or will this help you out with your usage of Facebook? Not really. I, me and Facebook have kind of a love-hate relationship. It's pretty much for a family type of stuff. So I'm on there periodically. I'll pop in to see what's going on and pop out. But for the most part, it doesn't really affect, you know, my day-to-day use is also with WhatsApp. I pretty much only use it for travel. So it's not going to affect my day-to-day life, but I see that there could be some potential issues with the, especially with the one-to-many broadcasting that could really get some information to people who may not necessarily want it. Yeah, I'm with Unica when I say, I think, because we're both US based, it's like when we travel, you know, Europe would be, you know, an obvious place where a lot of people who might be on the other side of the pond, et cetera, et cetera, using WhatsApp, I'm the same. I might get a message here or there. I'm not on it all that often. What I think is interesting is, and I'm not really on Facebook or Facebook Messenger for that matter all that often either. But I think Facebook Messenger has always felt to me like a very, you know, one-to-one type of product. You know, if you happen to, I don't know, not know someone's phone number or for whatever reason, that's just kind of the place that the two of you connect. Great. It's an option. So is WhatsApp, for that matter. To use that as more of a broadcast tool, for example, after the show is over to say like, Hey, Nika and Rob and I had a great show. Listen here. You know, blast out to all my Facebook Messenger contacts. That seems strange to me. But maybe that's, I guess, exactly. I feel like maybe that would be a cool tool for me. But then if someone was like on the other end, like, Why'd you do this? Say, Oh, well, this is like my new thing, you know, trying to get traction type thing. I think you two have a very United States view of WhatsApp, because folks don't realize this, but WhatsApp is the biggest messaging platform on earth. And it's not even close. It's huge. So when you get outside of the confines of the United States, WhatsApp is absolutely ginormous. And, you know, so these features are big because like a lot of folks, this is just what they use. So this broadcast is like, they don't have to jump into another application. This is the application that they use to communicate. But I get that about WhatsApp. It's more of the same functionality coming to something like Facebook Messenger, which is something that I use more often. But again, it's that, you know, it always feels like a very private chat type of thing. I wouldn't want what I would consider spam in my Messenger. I also wouldn't want to do something broadcasty that would be considered spam. And that's always a fine line that you walk on any platform really. Yeah, I agree. Well, Meta is also beta testing some new things such as disappearing voice messages in WhatsApp. The feature appears to be similar to WhatsApp's View Once feature for videos and photos where a voice message can't be listened to if a recipient dismisses it. You hear it once, all gone. It's not clear when or if disappearing messages will roll out beyond WhatsApp beta, again, beta product, but View Once is still in beta after nearly a year itself. So sounds like the company is trying to figure out how many people care about this, need this, or think it's a bad feature overall. I wanted to ask both you, Nick and Rob, I appreciate the fact that, for example, you know, just using iMessage because that's really the messaging service that I use the most, being able to retract a message, either edit a message or take it back. You know, where the other person sees that I've taken something back, if indeed I have, I think that that, you know, more control is better. It's good that both parties are at least understanding that there was a message sent that that was then rescinded. But yeah, I mean, I guess there's certainly the side of things of, well, you know, what did you say that was so bad that, you know, it had to disappear type thing. But otherwise, this seems to be a feature that we're just all getting pretty used to. Sometimes things are ephemeral. They don't last forever. You're meant to listen to it and it goes away. For me, it's one of those things where if I delete a message is probably because of typo. And if I can't edit it, it's like, let me delete it and retype it again correctly rather than, you know, oh my God, it's up that I didn't meant to send. That's pretty much, you know, my usage of it. But I could see where, you know, if you send something that you, you know, either sent at the head of an emotion that you're like, you know what, I shouldn't have said that I didn't mean it. And you want to pull it back. I, you know, I can, I can see that. Yeah. Disappearing messages. I just think I might be the wrong demographic for it. You know, this stuff exists in like Snapchat and other applications that my kids use and they love it. So I will just concede that I don't understand why this feature is such a big deal. Every time somebody sends me something where it's like, ooh, it's like a, you know, disappearing. I assume it's like, are you going to give me your social security number? What are you about to tell me? That's so crazy that like it could never be heard again. Like, a lot of pressure. But again, this is like you said, Rob, something that the younger set are pretty familiar with across multiple platforms. Before we move on, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, perhaps you've heard of him also announced on Thursday that WhatsApp is rolling out multiple account switching on single Android devices. So if you have an Android phone and you say, I've been waiting for this feature. Well, the company has listened. All right. Let's talk about DNA stealing, or at least the stealing of the data of your DNA. The apparent same hacker who previously leaked user data stolen from the genetic testing company 23andMe. We talked about this a couple of weeks ago on the show had leaked millions of new user records has anyway. So Rob, let's get everybody caught up on what the latest is. So yes. So two weeks ago on October 6 23andMe disclosed that hackers had obtained some user data through credential stuffing, a term for where hackers try combination of usernames or emails and corresponding passwords that are already public from other data breaches basically taking advantage of anyone reusing passwords. On Tuesday, the hacker going by the name Gollum published a data set of 23andMe user information, which included records of 4 million users on the cyber crime form breach forms. TechCrunch reports that at least some of this data matches 23andMe user and genetic information. Now, not surprisingly, 23andMe has prompted users to change passwords turn on to factor off also said it is launching an investigation with help from third party forensic experts to figure out what happened here. The company also has an opt in feature called DNA relatives and this might be interesting, because what it does is let users see the data of other opted in users opt in keyword key term here, whose genetic data might match theirs. I am not a 23andMe user myself, but let's just say, you know, they had my genetic data, I might find a long lost cousin or something that's the idea behind this. But if I have the feature turned on and so does somebody else, and somehow our data gets connected, whoever scraping that data could potentially scrape the data from both people that are deemed relatives in the scenario, potentially. Back on August 11, a hacker on a different forum called Hydra, advertise a set of 23andMe user data as well. A set of user data match some of the user records that were leaked a couple of weeks ago. This is according to TechCrunch, who did some deep diving into this data itself. Now, Nika, stolen data is stolen data. If your data is stolen, you're not happy about it. But when a data breach is DNA stolen data. Do you think that is different? Absolutely, you can change a username, you can change an email, you can change a password, you can turn on two factor. But what you can't do is change a DNA. I don't use any of the genealogy type of products. I would love to know where my ancestry originates. But for me, the idea of my physical matter, physical DNA that's specific to me is floating around out there, knowing that I don't think companies really take into account the level of security that's needed when you're protecting not only digital data but physical data. I just don't want to take that chance and I'm not going to take that chance that conspiracy theory 10-4 had on that this data gets out, a part of me gets cloned, or you never know what is down the road in this technological advanced society or what people are working on and think tanks. The tech could already be there, we just don't know it. It's a little bit too sus for me to be willing to hand that off. Rob, where do you stand on this? You're not going to catch me slipping. This is exactly why you would never find my information in a site like this. The breach part of it is bad enough and that's horrible. But I don't know that I put enough trust in companies not to nefariously use that data to my detriment at some time in the future. So as far as genealogy is concerned with me and my family, we can't assure you because we saw your 23andMe data and you have this marker so we're not going to ensure you. I just think those kind of things will ultimately happen. So like I said, for genealogy for me, it's got to come from somebody named Granny, Big Mama, or an aunt whose first name is hyphenated with Ann at the end. We got to trace it back physically. Exactly. I need people to do it. I don't want to put my, I don't want to spit into a cup and send this off. And you now have my essence in a database that can be used for nefarious reasons. And I really hope that this particular hack, unlike the last pack hack, where it just keeps getting worse and worse every two or three weeks. We just keep carrying another, you know, another shoe fall where oh, it's a little worse than we thought. Oh, it's a little worse than we thought. I hope that is not the case here. You know, some years ago, I mean, and trust me, I am, I was when I adopted my dog within like a month, I sent his DNA off, you know, and got it back because I wanted to know what kind of rate of dog I had. There were some surprises there. You know, it was fun. My mother has been hounding me for years to do something, you know, 23 and me or, you know, ancestry.com or whatever, you know, a DNA test because there's certain things from my dad's side that I'm really the only one who would know at this point. It doesn't change anyone's life. And therefore I've been just kind of like, I don't know, it's on the list of things that I'll like never do. But a couple of years ago, one of my cousins, you know, I asked her, have you done that, you know, any surprises? She said, I would never do that. They're going to put you at a crime scene, you know, with your DNA. At the time I laughed and said, okay, okay, ten foil hat, speaking of, you know, but the more I think about it, the more I'm like, yeah, when it comes to large swaths of data, such as this being in, I don't know, a variety of online forums for whatever reason. It starts to get a little weird. It starts to, you know, it really makes you think it's not just about, oh, okay, you know, I had a stupid password that I reused too many times. But yeah, that is like you said, Nika earlier, that is your very personal, unless you're a identical twin. And nobody's got that genetic makeup that you do. And, and, and yeah, that is data that should not get outside the health care system unless it's meant to help us. Yeah, once you have it, you have it. There's no, there's no going back on that. Yeah, exactly. Let me just change my DNA password. And then, you know, I'll just be, you know, anonymous again. Best of luck, all best of luck. Best of luck. So if you want to stay up to date on the fast moving world of artificial intelligence, you need to listen to AI name this show and launch during DTNS experiment week in August. Each week Tristan Jutra and Tasia Custody wade through the height and doomsday, excuse me, doomsaying to keep you informed about the latest news in the AI world. Catch it at AI name this show.com. All right, this is good news for a lot of folks, although there are dissenting opinions like there are for a lot of things. The US Federal Communications Commission is officially reestablishing net neutrality. Okay, well, looking to making further steps toward that goal. The FCC meets every month to discuss and vote on various proposals, you know, it's a commission after all. The proposed rule, this latest one would prohibit broadband providers from favoring or throttling certain internet traffic. So Thursday, the FCC voted three to two to put the notice of proposed rulemaking or NPRM. You might see that acronym around after today, a lot more up for public comment after which it would go for another vote in several months time. So nothing is being decided today, but it is moving in that direction. As we've talked about on DTNS quite a bit over the years, net neutrality rules have swung back and forth. The current rules attributed to former FCC Chairman, Ajit Pai, who successfully overturned net neutrality during his tenure. Current Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworstle feels differently saying on record as long as I served on the FCC, I have supported net neutrality. But in 2017, despite overwhelming opposition, the FCC repealed net neutrality and stepped away from its title to authority over broadband. This decision put the agency on the wrong side of history, the wrong side of the law, and the wrong side of the American public. Today, we begin a process to make this right. All right, Nika, net neutrality, where do you stand? I'm glad that is coming back. It's one of those things where you have to focus on the greater good of it and making sure that, you know, the public is secure in the way we move because it's ingrained in our society now. There's no going back on that. So, you know, I think this is, you know, best next steps. When it was what repealed back, what was it in 2017? You know, it was a hot topic, a lot of people, it was a really hot topic. So the fact that it seems as if we're trying to get back to making, you know, open internet safe and secure, that's, I think that's a good thing. Well, and, and, you know, I would open this question up to you, Rob. I mean, I think we all agree that we're all in favor of net neutrality on this panel today. But, you know, from a broadband provider saying, well, but, you know, 5% of the people, you know, are, are, are, are hogging the traffic that we have to supply to everyone. Why shouldn't we throttle, you know, things like, I don't know, you know, forky video, you know, from certain sites that are, you know, being pinged a certain amount. Is there really a provider argument here that works? Not really. You know, going all the way back to the late 90s, mid to late 90s, when we started to really see that the internet could be the equalizer for, for small businesses and companies competing with large companies. You know, net neutrality ultimately helps protect that to, to, you know, now we're going back to where you, you know, everybody pays the same for the bits that they get. You can't say, well, we're going to bundle this with this service. Therefore, your internet's going to cost less because that makes it an unfair, you know, unfair playing field for the smaller provider that just can't afford to create those kind of deals. So I am, and I believe that most people probably listening to this show are absolutely fans of us going back to those old rules to where it just kind of makes things more fair for everyone, as far as how you access the internet. And, you know, how data is provided to you. And that argument that it costs more, you know, for broadband providers to provide you, you know, faster data, you know, the bits are not limited. It's not like, you know, it's not like there's a finite amount of water that's coming through. And you know, once you get to a certain amount of water that has come through your pipe, now we've got to, you know, we've got to pull you back on it. So I've never bought those arguments. And I do think that generally this is a good thing. I think it's a great, you know, um, decision for us to go back to the, you know, to the, to the old rules. Yeah, I think you hit it, Rob. When you said equality, when you start to kind of balance a table so that everyone is, is equal and we're all on the same footing, there are certain sets of the population like no, no, no, no, no, I need to be the big dog on top. And so I think that was to me, one of the, the reasonings behind why it was those rules were changed a few years ago is because it did maybe too much of the balancing. And it's like we need to get back the, the unequal balance a little bit to, to favor, you know, certain, you know, companies and groups on their end. Whereas now we're getting it back to a little bit more balanced. Oh, there's no question about that big company said we want our gate back so we can keep it. Well, and of course, right? I mean, you know, it doesn't surprise me that a variety of companies would feel that way, because it's serving for those companies. I think the, the, the concept of there being, you know, a finite amount of data that can be handled, you know, like you said, Rob, is that that is going to be something that people are continually you know, that is thrown at people like, well, but you know, I mean, you know, there's only so much data, right? It's like, well, no, that's not true. There's an infinite amount of data. And you don't want you to think that but no. Yeah, right. As a broadband provider, like go ahead and say that, but I mean, anybody, you either say, okay, it's, it's, it's, it's good for you to be able to, to, you know, put certain internet traffic before other internet traffic or throttle. If you want to say that, say that, and I can disagree with you. But there's not a finite amount of traffic. It's, it's, it never has been a good argument. It just, it just never has. Never has. Well, a good argument to be had is learning a new language, right, Rob? Absolutely. For years, Duolingo has been the de facto after learning a new language enter a new challenger. However, Google, the company, you know, you know, Google's coming into the space. The company is rolling out a new search feature designed to help people practice and improve their English speaking skills. The feature is marketed toward Android users in Argentina, Colombia, India, Indonesia, Mexico and Venezuela and is designed to teach English with personalized feedback with more countries and languages to come in the future. The feature will provide interactive speaking practice for language learners translate translating to or from English, Google said in a blog post. I have to say, well, so first of all, I've been a Duolingo customer. I pay for it. The premium version for years. I practice French. I don't know when I'm, I don't know, waiting in line at the car wash type of stuff. It's fun. It's, it's, it's always been, you know, a fun learning tool for me. I know many of you out there because we've talked about Duolingo use it as well. I am shocked that Google has not gotten into this, this space sooner. It's perfect for Google. I mean, you got Google translate. It's not as if the company isn't trying to help you talk to people who speak different languages or help you learn other stuff like to kind of gamify the whole thing is perfect for Google. I think that you're right that it makes sense from what Google offers that this would be a good thing for them. I however understand that this is not Google's core business. So I just, I just don't trust that this will be around for a significant, is it one of these Google projects that in three years someone is very upset that somebody is launching it and they're going to get a great bonus. And then what happens with it? You know, I absolutely see some of the void of all other Google ads. I mean, Google's got a lot. I mean, I was about to say Google has a lot of data. Have you heard, but Google has a lot of, you know, language data, particularly, you know, I would assume, you know, many folks in the countries that Google's focusing on initially might have jobs, you know, where you're going to get a lot of data. You know, where English is really important, like all of this makes perfect sense, perfect sense. Is it going to be as good as Duolingo? Well, you might argue that Duolingo could use some work itself. But yeah, it's a new frontier for Google trying to help us all learn some languages as long as that language is English for now. Well, Nika Monford, I love your English. Let folks know where they can keep up with your work when you're not helping us on DTNS. You can find me at tech savvy diva pretty much everywhere on the internet. So I'm on Twitter for the most part until it goes away. So Yeah, that would be us. You never know. Every day is a fresh hell. Patrons, stick around for our extended show, Good Day Internet. It's a fun part of the show. We're discussing today how the British Museum is dealing with the aftermath of what it calls an inside job where up to 2000 artifacts were stolen. Kind of a big deal. But just a reminder, you can catch our show live Monday through Friday. DTNS is live, 4pm Eastern, 200 UTC. Find out more at dailytechnewshow.com slash live. And we'll be back tomorrow talking about decarbonizing LA for the Olympics with Molly Wood joining us. That's Molly Fridays. Talk to you then. This show is part of the Frog Pants Network. Get more at frogpants.com. I'm in the club. Hope you have enjoyed this program.