 Coming up on DTNS, Microsoft launches Windows as a service for real cloud PCs for everyone. Facebook really wants you to post stuff. They'll pay you one billion dollars and fleets are fleeting and reply controls are not forever. Nothing lasts. DTNS starts now. This is the Daily Tech News for Wednesday, July 14th, 2021 in Los Angeles. I'm Tom Merritt. And from Studio Redwood, I'm Sarah Lane. From Salt Lake City, I'm Scott Johnson. And I'm Roger Chang. This show is pretty soon. We were just talking about the prevalence of Olivia, Elizabeth, Vanessa, and other baby names on Good Day Internet. If you want to find out what we were talking about, get that extra show. Become a member of Patreon.com slash DTNS. Let's start with a few tech things you should know. Netflix introduced a new top 10 row for age-restricted profiles across 93 countries available on TV, mobile, and web apps, although not Apple TV at launch. The company will also launch a bi-weekly kids recap email on July 16th, which will include content recommendations and show how to use the new kids' profile features. Facebook is seeking the recusal of FTC chairwoman Lena Kahn from the agency's deliberations regarding new antitrust cases against Facebook. They cite her history of criticizing big tech firms. Amazon filed a similar recusal petition a couple weeks ago, you may remember. The FTC is mowing over whether to file a new antitrust lawsuit against Facebook after a judge throughout the FTC's previous complaint as legally insufficient on June 28th, but gave the FTC 30 days to refile an amended version of the same lawsuit. Apple received a patent for a periscope lens. It calls a folded camera that uses two prisms to increase the focal length of a camera lens without increasing its thickness. Last year, a note from Apple analyst Ming-Chi Kuo claimed that the company would add a periscope lens to 2022 iPhone models. Samsung, Oppo, and Huawei all currently offer phones using similar lenses. We've been telling you to watch out for these government coins. The European Central Bank approved an investigation phase on a digital euro that would complement cash. Phase will last 24 months and focus on design and distribution aspects of a potential digital currency. The bank said early experiments show that digital euro core infrastructure would use negligible power compared to other crypto assets. Facebook confirmed that Amazon acquired a team of over a dozen Facebook employees working on internet connectivity from low-earth orbit satellites. In 2019, Amazon also confirmed it planned to invest $10 billion to launch 3,236 satellites into low-earth orbit by 2029 and received FCC approval to operate a satellite network in 2020. Microsoft fans, have you been inspired? It's Microsoft-inspired going on after all. Scott, what's the big announcement? Well, let me tell you, by the way, does Jeff Bezos count as one of the satellites? Anyway, moving on. Let's get right to it. Microsoft introduced a new, easy to set up and use virtual Windows machine service called Windows 365. Businesses that subscribe to Windows 365 can set up cloud PCs for everybody in their company, all their employees, and can be accessed in any browser or virtual desktop app anywhere. So you get a Mac or whatever you can get in. That includes Apple, Android, and other Linux machines as well. The concept is new, but it builds on the Azure virtual desktop or the AVD. That's the service that makes it simple to use. Microsoft says 80% of its AVD customers use third parties to manage installations. IT can configure the cloud PCs with one to eight virtual CPUs between two and 16 GB of RAM and 64 GB to 512 GB of virtual storage. And because it's virtual, employees can log in from their own devices at home without having to use any kind of VPN for security. All that security happens within the service. Windows 365 launched August 2nd with plans for businesses of one to many, as well as enterprise plans. Microsoft will announce prices on August 1st. We don't know what this is going to cost yet, but a pretty fascinating, actually pretty, seems like a logical thing for them to start leveraging Azure servers to do this very thing. Oh, this is the culmination of Satya Mania. This is what he has been shooting for, I think. Not only, but one of the things he's been shooting for, which is giving away Windows to the consumer practically. They have free updates. We're not going to charge it for new versions of Windows. That's not where we're going to make the money. You make the money on subscriptions and cloud, and this is both. And it's compelling in a hybrid workplace. That was Microsoft's big pitch on this, that if you've got your employees working from home or particularly, as is becoming more and more common, working at home sometimes, working in the office other times, right now you have to do a dance around security. Do you try to lock down their machine? Do you make them use a separate machine? And then you have to maintain all those separate machines? Well, Microsoft just came up with an easy solution. Now, granted, like you said, Scott, this isn't new. There's all kinds of ways to do virtual desktop, including AVD, but this is promising to make it dead simple, where everybody just logs into a browser and it's as if they're running a Windows machine with all the power of Windows, all the programs they need, all the installations, and a lot fewer. I wouldn't say no, but a lot fewer of the security concerns, because it's all tunneled in that browser. I think this is a bigger move than Windows 11. Honestly, Windows 11 is putting a new code of pain on Windows 10 and really trying to help developers a lot, which is great. This is changing the fundamental nature of Windows from being the thing you get to run your desktop to being the thing you get to run your stuff. Whether you're using a Mac, a Buntu machine, or whatever, you'll be able to get a corporate PC. I think this is going to solve a lot of problems for people in businesses who are like, man, I don't want to have to buy a bunch of stuff and maintain it. Well, you don't have to. You can just buy Chromebooks for your employees or let their employees use their own machines. Yeah, one thing that I came away from this was or what comes away from this is like this feeling of the world's changing a little bit, pivoting a little bit in terms of work from home policies. A lot of companies are like, yeah, it turns out a lot of you can work from home or less time in the office or whatever. Pandemic or otherwise, there's a shift happening there and a lot of people are on the move or remote. This is an answer to that. And an easy one. It's not a lot for the IT people to have to worry about. It's a super simple setup and it doesn't matter what they're using, they can access it and get in there. So I don't know if that was part of the plan the whole time, but it feels like a bit of a second win there to be able to say, oh, and we're positioned to be this thing for companies that are rearranging the way people work. And so here we are, Windows is ready for you to do that. And you could argue that, I mean, as far as I know, nobody else is quite that ready. There's certainly other services like this where you can get a virtual PC. Some gamers do this to get gaming PCs and you pay per month for that sort of thing. This isn't for home users yet, but for small companies, I don't know why you wouldn't do this if you need the platform. Yeah, it's such an interesting, I don't know, we've made such a shift from the days of, yeah, I don't know, Windows XP. It really mattered what kind of computer that you were going to run this on. It was supposed to work. You had to make sure you had a certain amount of general specs, but it did change your overall experience. And for Microsoft to be like, we will still do that. There is still certainly a market for this. But this is for just everybody who's just, they're just, they're not going to go all in on the Microsoft suite of products otherwise, but it's really, really great for a group of users, AKA at the enterprise. Yeah. And think about this too. All of this concern about, well, will my machine run Windows 11? There's the whole trusted platform module controversy. If you're doing this, doesn't matter. I mean, yes, on August 2nd, you're going to have a Windows 10 machine, but when Windows 11 comes along, Microsoft's going to upgrade these virtual machines to Windows 11. Now that is the blessing for you as a user. I also think it could be the curse for Microsoft. Azure is incredibly reliable. The lag on this thing seems to be well tuned. They're even doing some fun stuff where they'll process some video encoding locally in the browser so that your video streaming works great, even though you're going through the cloud and all that stuff. We'll see if it works as good as it did in the demo, but the demo was pretty impressive. However, when you are at scale delivering computers to everyone and you upgrade them all with a security patch, much less Windows 11, all of those nightmare stories of machines not working, does that get better? Or does that become a lot worse because everybody gets the problem now? I don't know. Well, there's a side note here and I suspect we buried the lead, but Microsoft tweeted, if it gets 20,000 likes on their tweet, they'll replace the paperclip emoji in Microsoft 365 with Clippy. They had to get Microsoft 365 something. Gee, I wonder if they'll get 20,000 likes. As of this recording, they probably have. All right, so stop me if you heard this next one before. Actually, you won't have to stop me because you for sure heard it. Even CEO Mark Zuckerberg admitted in the announcement writing, investing in creators isn't new for us, but I'm excited to expand this work over time. Yes, the company is setting up another program to pay $1 billion to creators through the end of 2022 so that more creators post original content to Facebook. That is all this is about. Influencers, content creators, whatever you like to call them or whatever they call themselves, can all earn money from using specific Facebook and Instagram features and by hitting certain milestones. So you might say, well, okay, what are those milestones? A lot of the early examples are on Instagram. The Reels summer bonus will launch in the coming weeks and will pay based on the amount of engagement. There'll be a one time bonus for signing up for IGTV ads and a badges in Instagram live bonus pays out on badge related milestones like going live with another account. Select Facebook creators will get an earnings bonus for using in stream ads. So there's some options here. So it's not, you're not getting $1 billion just you, but it's going to be divvied out over various creators depending on how they perform. The program is invitation only for now. So you might be invited. If you are eligible, you'll see an invitation alert when you open up the app sooner than later. Facebook also said it's building a dedicated way for creators to track their bonuses on Instagram and Facebook by the end of the year. So, you know, you get a sense of how well you're doing. Facebook has already paid creators with large TikTok or YouTube followings to use IGTV and Reels on Instagram. We've heard about this before. Content creators move around all the time kind of based on who's offering the money. Back in December, Facebook pledged to invest $10 million over the next two years in the black gaming community with some creators guaranteed monthly payments for using Facebook gaming instead of Twitch. But it's not just Facebook. Back in November, you might recall Snapchat started giving away $1 million a day to content creators. It was a whole big PR push that the company was doing. They wanted people to post to the app spotlight feature, although those payments are no longer active. The company basically made it seem like the money dried up. You know, there's a lot of aspects to this that I attempted to pick at, but they're not unique to Facebook. TikTok, YouTube, Spotify, not Spotify, Snapchat all doing the same thing, which is instead of just paying me, giving me bonuses, giving me motivations and it feels like, man, just cut me out on the revenue, which Facebook is also doing. In fact, Facebook says if you make money on our platform, you get to keep it all right now. So that's pretty good. What does strike me though, is Facebook doing this in the early days of Facebook would be let's build up our audience. Facebook doing it now when they are the dominant platform is we're afraid of losing our audience. We're afraid of losing our creators. And I don't know that that's such a good look for Facebook. I agree. To me, I thought a lot about it since we had some pre-show discussion about this. And I've kind of gone back and forth because you're right. Everybody does it. Mixer famously paid Ninja to leave Twitch for millions and millions of dollars and it didn't work. Twitch folded or rather, Mixer folded and Ninja never had the audience there. You wanted these kinds of things happen across the board, not just social media channels. I don't think it's all that unusual. However, whenever somebody does it, if it isn't early days where they're trying to get a strong foothold right up front, then it strikes me as a little desperate. And in Facebook's case, we're talking about a site that probably should have been ahead of the curve on all of these things. And the only place they really are is Instagram. And even Instagram sometimes seems a little desperate because they'll add a feature that was somebody else's idea and they'll do it quickly and hastily. And not everyone loves the way Reels works compared to TikTok as an example. All this tells me is that Facebook, given whatever everyone's perception of Facebook is, is not the place people first think of when it comes to creators. And that kind of breakout sort of content people. I just don't think that's the place. So this is them saying, well, let's force it to be the place. And I don't, I don't know that it'll work. Right. It's like, I don't know. Sure. A certain amount of money will, will force it to be the place. But I, you know, I was thinking about this this morning, when the New York Times article came out and Cashmere Hill had tweeted, seems like all the new technology just keeps curving back toward creating new forms of television. And I was like, yeah, you know, everybody wants to do video online, but that is a really good point. You know, it's instead of a, I don't know, a burgeoning content creator like myself being like, Hey, NBC, can I, you know, will you please buy my series kind of thing? That still is, that still is very much a thing. But it's more of these platforms saying, we've built all these great tools for you to thrive here. Please come and stay. And we'll pay you to do that. Instead of ripping off a writer by only paying them a four hire fee and not cutting him in on the royalties, you can rip off creators by only giving them bonuses for creating content. You're not even paying them at all. We've definitely not perfected the system here, but it does seem like, yeah, it's like more and more comes to this, who are the big celebrities on this particular network slash platform? And, you know, Facebook is just not immune to this. You have these things that you've built for creators to hang out in, build audiences and be the next biggest thing ever. But it's not that easy. I mean, it's Facebook. It should be easier for this to happen. I think we're at peak Facebook, maybe. Ooh, interesting. All right. Hey, folks, what do you want to hear us talk about on the show? Are you like, yeah, okay, this is great. Great story. But what about this? Well, let us know in our subreddit. Anybody can do it. If you got an idea, don't, don't, don't send it to me in your thoughts. Go post it at dailytechnewshow.reddit.com so we can know all about it. Scientists at the University of Oxford and University of Liverpool published a study in the journal New Media and Society called more diverse, more politically varied, how social media, search engines and aggregators shape news repertoires in the United Kingdom. They analyzed web tracking data from 3000 willing UK participants over a one month period and found that people who use search engines, social media and aggregators for news, instead of just going directly to the news sites they like, were exposed to a more diverse mix of information than those who did not. In other words, social media wasn't causing a filter bubble, as some people assume because of algorithms. The results also found that older people and men have less diverse sources of information than younger people and women. So if that's the case, if it's not the algorithm, what's making us more polarized? Well for one, partisan news sources were more prominent among those diverse sources. The folks just going to a couple of sources tended to go to middle-of-the-road sources. The folks who were getting a diverse view were getting more partisan sources, not necessarily all from the same side, but more of them. And authors in the paper have a theory worth investigating. They wrote, it may be that exposure to conflicting partisan views rather than overexposure to like-minded views will offer a better explanation for the negative outcomes like polarization. Again, instead of saying it's an echo chamber, they're saying maybe it's always seeing extreme ends makes you pick a side more often. Didn't find evidence of that but something worth investigating. It's an interesting line for further study. I mean as we compile news for the show every day, well every weekday, 4 30 p.m. Eastern. But this is something I think about all the time. And I sometimes not to be on my high horse about news too much, but I will sometimes talk to a peer, you know a friend, and they'll explain how they know that something is a piece of news and I'll go, okay, where you're getting this from and where you seem to have this, what your methods are, are a little thin to me. And I think that, yeah, saying that if you have a better spread of news content sources overall, you might have an overall better idea of what's going on in the news. That isn't really, you know, sort of like the groundbreaking part of the story. It's more, I don't know, I mean, I guess some of the gender stuff, the older and younger people, not so much. But I don't know, Scott, did anything jump out at you as being surprising here? Yeah, one of them is right in our part of our copy today. The result also found that older people and men have less diverse sources of information than younger people and women. I found myself in the last year or two, pulling away from too many signals and going to the two or three that I like or trust or otherwise feel good about. And I haven't really ever, like, pulled the camera out and gone, okay, what is it about those three sources that I prefer over this myriad of other options? Or why is it that I feel more comfortable here? And is it just a comfort thing? Is it because this is less volatile or the headlines are less baby? Or like, what is it? I haven't really done that. I've just gravitated to the places that make me less angry, if that makes sense. And so in a way, it's been good for me to do that. But I think maybe I'm maybe not doing it for the reasons I thought maybe I have just gotten to the point where it's like, forget it, there's millions of you trying to get to me. So instead, I'm just going to focus on these three who have me. And that's it. I'm not going anywhere else. And that in its own way is a unexpected result. And now I'm stuck there, whether those whether their bias is there or not, whether I recognize them or not, I'm there. So yeah, this has got me thinking a little bit. Now, am I going to rush out and go time to test every new source I can find and truly see who appeals to me the most and brings the least amount of bias? Probably not. I don't have time. So I think some of this speaks to that that we have less time that we're all swamped with a million things and everybody's trying to talk to us. There's all this kind of wellness information of don't go too crazy about news before bed, for example. Don't over digest just because you're trying to get every angle of every story. And that isn't bad advice either. And what you're doing is probably good for your soul. Well, I'm wondering if maybe I didn't explain this well. I took this as extremely surprising because the general consensus is it's the algorithm that's driving us to hate each other. The algorithm is forcing us into these echo chambers where we only see the news we want to see that reinforces our viewpoint. And this story, this study said, no, you're getting more diverse, not just more sources, more diverse sources from the algorithm. And that is what's driving people to be more partisan. It's not that they're in an echo chamber. It's that they keep seeing all of these different viewpoints. And I think we all would have thought like, oh, lots of different viewpoints. That's great. You'll be exposed to lots of different things. And apparently, I don't know. It's just one study, just one segment, just the UK, maybe not. Maybe when you do what Scott did, maybe that's why Scott did it, where you're like, you know what? I just want a couple of different sources. It's less enraging. Yeah, part of it was advice from you. To be honest, we and I have talked about it a couple of times and you said, yeah, I follow this account and I check this site and I do this other thing. You should do that. And I said, you know what? I should limit what I'm doing. Give up the goods, Tom. What are they? What's going to be different for different people? But yes, I'd be happy to share it. Right. But it was, I mean, for me, it is better for my soul. I feel less stressed about the world because I'm not constantly exposing myself to it. That isn't necessarily, that's not me. That's not me finding the most and best information. That's me retracting a little bit. So I, you know, I have to, I have to look at it that way a little bit and make a decision about the kind of, you know, how much do I want to expose myself to? And am I limiting that by saying, well, it's all too much. I'll stick with my three things because I'm getting old. Like I don't want to do that either. So I don't know. It depends on what I want to make this about me, right? It's important to pick the right three because if they're not good sources, then yeah, you're going to be falling behind. There you go. Speaking of things, you don't ever have to pay attention to ever again and fill your newsfeed with Twitter announced it's retiring fleets. Oh, fleets. We barely, barely knew you. These are the ephemeral tweets that expire after 24 hours. They showed up at the top of the app, assuming you were using the official app, which I think might be part of the problem. That's there. They're a little bit fractured that way. But anyway, they're taking it out due to low usage after launching it back in November. Starting August 3rd, users will see active Twitter. Sorry. We'll see active Twitter live audio chat rooms called spaces at the top of their timeline where the fleets used to be. So they're still going to cram those up there. Twitter also began rolling out the ability to change who can reply to your tweet after you post it. The company previously rolled out the ability to limit who could reply to tweets back in August. But initially, this can only be specified when you originally posted the tweet. Real quick, back to the fleets going away. A lot of people are going to have fun with this and make fun of it or whatever, but it just didn't increase usership. Like there weren't more people joining Twitter. And I don't know why they thought this would do it. It was just an idea lifted from every other social media network for stories or whatever they called them. And they were like very late to that game. And I don't know who there went. You know, it'll drive new viewership or usership. It's these and clearly not. So they're taking it down. I mean, I'm always a broken record about how I'm like, I use tweet bots. So none of the stuff ever applies to me, but I'm not the only one. I am a third party Twitter user. And sometimes there are features where I'm like, that would be nice. I don't have that in my app. I have never fleeted. I've never experienced a fleet. Neither of those things. I am also not surprised that it's going away. And you know, this is one of these things where, you know, it's easy to say, ha ha, look at you, you failed. But Twitter was like, maybe ephemeral tweeting is something that we can, you know, get on the bandwagon with because it's working on other networks. Well, but it's Twitter. So no, it just, it just didn't stick. And after, you know, from November to now, what do we, you know, eight months? Yeah. Yeah. So the company's saying we're not doing this anymore is like, okay, you know, just move on. Pleet you later. What I am interested in though. And I'll keep this brief is the idea of Twitter being able to change who can reply to you after the point at which you tweet. So if I say, you know, hi everybody, you know, I'm a cat. And then like, I'm getting all these responses. And maybe I'm getting responses from like a lot of weird places kind of thing. This is sort of a silly example, right? I can go in later and be like, you know, I'd like to restrict these replies to, you know, people that I follow that sort of thing. The classic case is you express an opinion about a TV show that you didn't realize was going to be extremely controversial. And then you're like, you know what, maybe lock that down to my friends. Right. Yeah. This might be getting out of hand or I just, I now just want to keep the conversation, you know, a little bit more focused. I think this is actually really nice. Yeah. That one seems less controversial to me. But yeah. Yeah. I don't know. Unless you say something really controversial and then say, ha ha. I was luring you. Yeah, I'm not sure if you'll use that feature. Any feature can be abused. I'm sure. But yeah, that one's absolutely obvious to me. You know, it's Twitter. You can do it abusers. A rare demo of Super Mario Brothers 3 that a pre-doom id software coded for MS-DOS PCs back in 1990 is now at the Strong National Museum of Play in Rochester, New York. The elusive demo was reportedly coded in just under a week, complete with a scrolling algorithm coded by John Carmack and then sent to Nintendo in the hopes of getting a contract to develop an official PC port of the game. Would have been a pretty big deal at the time. Apparently, you know, Nintendo had just launched Super Mario Brothers 3 earlier that year in the U.S. and decided to pass. So id software used the technology for Commander Keen. This is legendary, right, Scott? Yeah. I love this story. So I was a little unclear on some of the details. So when this came up today, I was really excited to learn it. I had known that back in the day, id software was, you know, supposed to be bringing platforming, which was a console exclusive kind of experience to PCs. PCs couldn't do it. There were issues with the way screens were refreshing, the way VGA worked, the way the current video hardware worked. Like there just weren't great ways to recreate that experience. And Commander Keen broke those rules and worked and nobody could believe their eyes. I didn't know about this part though. I didn't know they went to them and said, Hey, we got this working here and Nintendo turned them down. Not surprised by that, by the way, that they turned them down, but they turned around and said, all right, fine, we'll make Commander Keen. This is all predating doom. When doom happened, then, you know, it became a legend and still to this day, everybody thought this code was lost to time until now. And now it's not, I, I, I, I still have squirrel. I thank you for, for asking that question in the chat room until it gets taken down by Nintendo. It won't. This isn't publicly available. They're not putting it up on the web for everybody to download. This is a museum that will make it available to researchers who can show they have a, a research reason to look at it. So it's not going to get taken down by Nintendo. This is, this is just academic, but it exists. It's there and, and the museum intends to preserve it, which I think is great. Yeah, very cool stuff. All right. Let's check out the mailbag. We got an email from Mark who had some thoughts about our story on GitHub's co-pilot. You might recall that was from just at the end of June last month. He says, co-pilot trained on all of the public repositories in GitHub to look for similar coding practices. So if you wanted to open a socket and listen, co-pilot can suggest code for you. For about a week, there's been some copyright questioning because GitHub trained on all public repos regardless of license. This reminds me of a story on the show where somebody generated all combinations of notes so that they can cancel all lawsuits due to prior art. In this case, people are suggesting that this is stealing their code because it's been trained on it. But is this really theft? This feels different to me, says Mark. Many people know how to do certain common tasks and co-pilot isn't finding just one example and copying it from a particular repository. Yeah, this is going to turn into a thing. We're going to see lawsuits around this, and this won't be the only example of it because to me, the AI looking at public code means I'm not going through, you know, I'm not sneakily accessing it. It's there and easily accessed, and I'm learning from it just like I could go to GitHub and look at the public code and learn from it. That would not be a copyright violation for me to learn how to code from that because co-pilot isn't copying the code. I think that's the idea. It's like, oh, they're taking my code and giving it. No, no, co-pilot is learning how to suggest code based on the code. Now, maybe they'll suggest code that's similar to code that you put up in your public repository that's copyright protected. I don't know, but is that any different from me doing the same thing? And the answer is courts will decide because even if I think it's this way, somebody else definitely thinks the other way. Thanks, you know, Mark, for pointing that out, and this will end up being a new area where they'll say, well, is an AI the same as a human looking at it? Or is it different? And is the code that results got to give some credit to the code that it learned on and trained on? We saw hints of this with facial recognition where it was like, yeah, they're public faces, but they weren't meant to be used for that. And this is just kind of the next example, I think. Well, it's your feedback that sparks new conversations on our show all that time. So, Mark, you're the best. Thank you so much for that. And if you have feedback on anything that we talk about on the show, please do send it feedback at daily technewshow.com. Speaking of the best, shout out to patrons at our master and grandmaster levels today. They include Scott Hepburn, Bjorn Andre, and Jeff Wilkes. Also, we got a few new bosses, brand new bosses, John Kleist, Gautamon, and Rob L. All just started backing us on Patreon. Thank you, John. Thank you, Gautamon. Thank you, Rob. Yeah, we are up to net because we always lose a few. We always gain a few. I think we're up to on the month right now. So thank you, folks, for being willing to directly fund the show. It's the majority way in which we fund the show, and we certainly appreciate it. So keep them coming. Join the club. Get the applause. We sure do. Yes, it's very fun for me to refresh that one page every morning and say, yay, look at us. Thanks also to Scott Johnson. Every Wednesday, I feel the same way about you, Scott, when I'm like, yay, it's good. What's been going on since we saw you last? Oh, so many things going on. But if you want to get the latest, I would check out frogpants.com and do check that out. There's some changes coming to one of my core long running shows, a show I've been doing for 15 years, the instance, and it's about to change in a big way. If that sounds at all intriguing to any gamers out there, you may want to check it out at the instance.net or frogpants.com. You'll find all of it. And if you're looking to poke me in public and never see me fleet again, go to twitter.com slash Scott Johnson. Well, we are live on this show Monday through Friday or 30 PM Eastern 20 30 UTC. Put it on your calendar. If you haven't already, we'd love to have you find out more at daily tech news show.com slash live and we'll be back tomorrow with Justin Robert Young. Talk to you then. This show is part of the frog pants network. Get more at frogpants.com.