This is Sync Tech. We're talking tax with Tom this morning. That's Tom Yamachika, President and Tax Foundation of OIA. We're talking about acronyms today. We'll be discussing acronyms, and I'll make him tell you what those acronyms stand for. The first one is in the title of our show. It's TANF, T-A-N-F, hoarding. Oh, this is hoarding and tax and whatnot. Good morning, Tom, how are you? Morning, Jake, glad to be here. So the title of our show is TANF Hoarding, and we have a bunch of other acronyms. Maybe you can take a moment and give us the acronym environment of our discussion. Sure. One of the ways our government provides a safety net for those less fortunate is through a program called Temporary Assistance for Needy Families. That's what TANF means. You may have heard of a federal matching program called AFDC, or Abe to Families with Dependent Children. That's what the program used to be. It used to be welfare, but in 1996, AFDC, which is a federal match, was replaced by TANF, which is a block grant program. And that's going to be very important in the discussion that's going to follow. OK, well, then you have to tell us what MOE is. The MOE is another acronym we're likely to encounter in this discussion. What is that? OK, so let me explain how this works. I mentioned that TANF is a block grant program. So what that means is the federal government provides a certain amount of money authorized to the states. It's about $100 million a year. And that is then made available to the states so they can run their programs that are consistent with the federal goals. But not only are the states supposed to spend the federal money to achieve those goals, they're supposed to spend their own money too. And that's what MOE comes from. MOE means maintenance of effort. So the feds expect the states to spend MOE monies and have their own skin in the game, not just the federal money. And again, it always used to be that way. Under AFDC, it was a matching program so that the states had to spend their own money before the feds would kick in.  And the certain amount of money is based on a historical, I think it's 1994, level of spending on their welfare and other homeless programs. The comment on that is 1994 might have well been 1500. I mean, that's a long time ago. If that's supposed to be informative about what's going on now, it's a long way off, isn't it? Right. But it still means that we have to spend about $100 to $150 million a year. Let me show you on a graph. And this is graph number one, what we actually do spend. So on this graph, the blue represents the amount of federal money that we spend, and the orange represents the amount of state money. So the maintenance of effort level is around $150 million. And that's what we spend pretty much every year. And we're authorized about $100 million a year from the federal government. So we can spend that money, again, to further the goals of the federal program. And they're very broad goals, OK? Assisting needing families so children can be cared for in their own homes or the homes of relatives. Reducing the dependency of needy parents by promoting job preparation, work, and a marriage. Preventing pregnancies among unmarried persons and encouraging the formation and maintenance of two-parent families. So I mean, those are pretty broad goals, right? Well, the proof is in the pudding. Yeah. How do you do that? Good question. So you can do it by block grants to people. You can, after they've proven that they are able and willing to work but are kind of unable to for one reason or another, you can have educational programs. You can have employment services like job coaching and placement. All that stuff counts, OK? But the issue that we're going to be talking about today is, well, we're authorized for $100 million a year, roughly. But look how much we're actually spending. So let's go back to that first graph. And you see the blue bars there. Hover around $50, $60 million a year, OK? And I mentioned that we're authorized for about $100 million a year. Now, what happens to the amount that we don't spend? Well, it gets carried over. And that brings us to our second graph, which shows the unobligated balance of the federal monies that is available to the state of Hawaii. What do you mean, unobligated? What does that mean? That means it's sitting around in some federal account earning interest for the feds and not doing anything for us. Because we haven't done our matching. No, it has nothing to do with matching. We have to. I mean, the MOE, I'm talking about the MOE. We have to spend our maintenance of effort, which we've done. Because if we don't do that, we don't get anything, right? So have we spent sufficient MOE to justify getting the whole $100 million? Right. Have we? Yes, we have. Because they're very substantial penalties if we don't make the MOE. But what's been happening here is that the balance has been building up and building up and building up so that in 2021, as Hawaii News now reported, we have crossed the $400 million mark of money that is available to the state of Hawaii, but is sitting somewhere else. Just help me on this. Why is it not being distributed to the state of Hawaii? Because we didn't ask the feds for it. OK. Just a matter of a request. Yeah, what we have to do is we have to come up with programs that meet the federal guidelines. We basically have to start spending the money and ask the feds to reimburse the monies that we've spent. That doesn't sound like rocket science to me. Of course not. The problem is we need to come up with programs and we need to do something about making them work. Now, the base story on this that led to today's discussion was basically found out by a national nonprofit called ProPublica. They investigated several states and they found that a lot of money was being built up and hoarded. And primarily, Hawaii, Tennessee, and Maine hoarding the most cash per person living at or below the federal poverty line. So we are hoarding about $3,000 per person living in poverty. And that $3,000 is sitting in some bank on the mainland that we don't have access to unless we tell the feds, OK, we want to do it on this program. If I got this right, they give us some money. We're supposed to develop programs in those certain areas, those mission areas you read off. And if we don't develop the program, we just keep the money, we hoard the money. That's right. And there's going to be a price to pay for that down the line, maybe in a way of penalties or something about future distributions from the federal government. Am I right so far? Up to the last part, it's not really clear what the penalties are. But in practical terms, we have $50, or we have $100 million that the feds have authorized for us. We're spending 50 of it. We're supposed to use the other 50 to alleviate poverty in Hawaii, and we're not doing it. OK, so the next question is, who is supposed to do that? We are the Department of Human Services. Department of Human Services, DHS here in Hawaii. That's correct. The state agency. And are they aware of this? I mean, did ProPublica contact them? Probably did, eh? They did. They know the problem. They've probably known about the problem for a long time. How come they didn't develop these programs? Well, when they replied to ProPublica, they said they have a lot of ideas. Oh, let's extend employment services like job coaching and placement for non-custodial parents, where have children receiving TANF. And we want to provide diaper assistance to families that are eligible for the program. And they're also considering increasing benefits and offering monthly housing assistance. Well, those are a lot. There's a lot of thoughts, right? There's been no action. This is over a period. What was that chart cover? Five to six or seven years, something? The chart covers, I believe, five years. Five years. But it goes back, I think, a bit further than that.  And maybe you could read them off again. Those missions are pretty vague. As you said, they're very broad. Is that a good thing or a bad thing? It seems to me that it's really hard. Just my reaction is it's very hard to establish programs that accomplish very vague purposes, because you don't know where to put the money. You don't know who to hire. You don't know what kind of functions you want to establish or cause a contract to establish. And so it's, you see, it's like. I mean, I would beg to differ with the broad goals like that. It's easy to establish something, because it's tougher to say it's not going to qualify. These are missions that are, I mean, they're rebuilding the family. They're rebuilding lives. They only apply to people who are in poverty, people whose families are broken in some way, people whose houses broken in some way. I mean, they're really for the disadvantage. That's clear. Yeah, no, the excuse that DHS has given is, oh, geez, well, this is a matching program. And there's stuff that we have to provide for that can't, that's not eligible for federal matching, like when they provide for immigrants from the compact of free association states. Right, the, you know, the Palau truck and Micronesia. Why is that not qualified? Because you have to be a citizen. OK, but the problem is it's not a federal matching program. It hasn't been since 1996. OK, and if they're thinking, if their mindset is, well, we can't spend any more because, you know, we need the legislature to authorize us to spend more, that's just wrong. Why do you say they can do it without legislative imprimatur? No, they have their own budget. OK, but when they budget, this is going to be from federal funds. You know, it's going to be whatever symbol that is, but it's not a funds. A funds is from our own tax dollars. You know, the thing is that they probably have a lot of programs already, right? In the, let's say, the 50 million they're spending. And they probably have other programs too. I mean, this isn't the full coverage of DHS. They do a lot of stuff. They do a lot of stuff for this. They spend $150 million of our money. Yeah, and $50 million of defense. Yeah. OK, so they have a program for the hundred. If they have a program for, what did you say, a hundred million, say, of our money, state money. $150 million, yeah. $150 million for our state money. They have various programs and all addressing problems for the disadvantaged and the poor. OK, now you say, well, you need to spend another, what, 50 million beyond what you spent already out of the federal money. They really have to find new programs, don't they? They have to find new ways, new, you know, new organizational ways to spend that money. They can't be spending it on what they're already spending it on, right? Right. So that requires a little creativity. Yeah, it requires some brain damage there, you know? You have to actually use those brains to come up with ideas and actually implement them, not just, you know, put the ideas down in the paper. Maybe we'll do this, maybe we'll do that. So you're saying that they can do this without the legislative approval. I suppose they have some relationship with the governor's office on this. I mean, they work for the governor, their state department and all that. So what's the bureaucracy involved? What's the bureaucracy that has them give you vague answers or give the public a vague answers and not do anything? Why is this stuck? It seems to me that if the money's hanging on a tree out there, they can just, you know, it's low-hanging fruit. All they've got to do is think of something. Yeah, that's why we're having this discussion today, Jay, because I think there is low-hanging fruit. I don't think they can hide behind the excuses that, oh, we got to spend more state money because that's not true. They just have to come up with, you know, ideas and the implementation of it. What about putting more money into existing programs? In other words, can you read that list of the mission points again so we can talk concretely? Sure. States can use the TANF and state MOE dollars to meet any of the four goals set out in the 1996 federal law, which are assisting needy families so children can be cared for in their own homes or the homes or relatives, reducing the dependency of needy parents by promoting job preparation, work, and marriage, preventing pregnancies among unmarried persons, and encouraging the formation and maintenance of two-parent families. OK, so there must be, boy, that sounds like it's really elusive, actually. There must be programs that are within the state budget that at least touch some of those things. Why can't DHS, and we're talking today about DHS, that's what it's about. Why can't they just take an existing state program and put the federal money in it? Does this have to be a brand new program unrelated to existing state programs? Well, that part I'm not sure about. But I think the way it works is the states have to come up with the program. They have to spend the money and they ask for reimbursement check from the feds. OK, and it has to be within the authorized limits of their block grant, which we know that they're already authorized for it. Like you were saying before, that it's cumulative. So if they're, say, $400 million behind in making their requests, they can make lots of big requests and get $400 million now. Is that the way it works? I believe so, yeah. So we're losing ground, but we're not losing the prospect of taking that money for other projects. So it's a matter of DHS waking up on this, and frankly, establishing huge and ambitious projects right now and doing enormous work with $400 million to help the disadvantaged in our state. And we all know from the newspapers that there are many disadvantaged living below the poverty line in our state that we could help a lot with $400 million. So what is their excuse, actually, for not building the programs and not asking for the money? Is that they ever advance an excuse of any meaningful sort to ProPublica? Not to ProPublica, but when Hawaii News now covered the same topic, they said, well, we have to expend monies for COFA migrants. That's the Compact of Free Association states. That's not an answer. Well, and again, their excuse is they need more appropriations from the state to go out and spend the money. And that's not an answer. And they quoted Ryan Yamane, who is, I think, the chair of the House Health Committee or Human Services Committee. And he said, well, jeez, there's a lot of requests for more money this year. But that is not the point. They have $400 million of low-hanging fruit. They do. That's my point. They don't have to spend more state money. They just have to come up with a program, make a dent in our homeless crisis or our poverty crisis, and pull that money down from the feds. It's not doing anything for us if it's stuck in the federal agency doing nothing. Well, we scrimp and we save. We have such trouble with state revenues and the diversification of the economy. And we worry about every penny. And we've been so careful in COVID. And here's $400 million that they're not spending. Where's the governor on this? I mean, they work for him. I don't know what the governor's position on it is. I don't think he's made that known yet. I mean, is there something I'm missing here, Tom? What is it for a position? They have the money. That's federal law. They have the money. They're not doing anything with it. Well, I think it's just too much work for them. You know, if they gave you $10 million to tell them how to do it or me, we could do it. I know we could. And then that would leave $390 million to spend, wouldn't it? I think it sure would. This has happened in the past, hasn't it? I don't know if you can pull an example out of your memory, but I recall in general that we have often left money federal money on the table. It happened with Department of Hawaiian homelands. It happened with Department of Transportation. We were actually in danger of losing federal monies because, oh, what you guys are doing with the monies that we authorized, but we didn't do anything with it. Oh, well, I guess you don't need it then. What about the state auditor? Seems to me the state auditor could look into this and find, not only in DHS, but other agencies, where they're leaving the low-hanging fruit. Oh, he did. He did. You know, he came up with a report, I think in the summer of 2020, where he looked at the question of, well, do we have unobligated balances sitting in the state accounts somewhere? And he listed a whole bunch of them. And I think he found like $700 or $800 million. It's scandalous, I'm sorry. Yeah, and my point to the legislature has been, look, before you come to us taxpayers for more money, spend the money that you have. Why can't you spend the money that you have? Well, if I appoint you and you get confirmed by the Senate as a director of an agency that is absolutely responsible to take down the low-hanging fruit, take the money. And you don't do that. That's scandalous. Yeah, I believe that's right. And so what's the remedy of the public? First of all, I mean, it sounds like letters sort of go out from the public to the officials involved at DHS and the other agency and to the governor. What are you guys doing? We pay you to handle this. And all these high-priced executives in government who ostensibly could get in there and make this happen, but they don't. And as a result, we, think about it, we the taxpayers are covering the shortfall, aren't we? Of course we are. That's the plain and simple truth. Any shortfall that comes up in government operations is guess who's got to pay for it? Well, I think of all the bish-bash over the state budget and the council on revenues and the possibility of tax increase, the reality of tax increases and all that. And then I think of all this Christmas tree full of money. I just don't understand it. So what does an ordinary taxpayer do to make his will known? What does an ordinary taxpayer do to woke this up? Well, what an ordinary taxpayer can do is, do some phone calling, talk to your elected representative. Your district is represented by somebody. Let them know what your concerns are. Okay, even though you can't go into the capital, you can still call or email and hopefully get some traction, at least with the office staff, even if you can't talk to the elected official himself or herself. But this is a problem. I think it does demand attention. And now I think is a very good time to do it because the legislative committees are in the process of grilling the departments and agencies over how much money they're going to spend in the coming fiscal biennium. But the budget hearings are now, man. So now's a good time to bring some of this stuff up. Are we missing something?  Do they have the slightest reason to defend this inaction? Like I said, what they have been telling people and they told the Hawaii news now is, we can't afford the additional money to pull down the federal match. But I say again, this is not a matching program. It hasn't been since 1996. Get your desks updated or something because somebody should have gotten the memo that we got block grants now and not matching programs. So they just don't know, they haven't kept up. That's what I think. Yeah. Well, I want them to prove me wrong. Okay. You know, I hereby invite them, the department heads and the governor come on and tell us if we're missing something here because what it certainly seems like is that we're throwing away hundreds, many hundreds of millions of dollars that can endure the benefit of the state, the state agencies, the state effort to help the homeless and the poor and the disadvantaged. And I may never read an article about the homeless and the poor and disadvantaged without thinking of this discussion with you today. Well, we should invite them to come on. We hereby do invite them to come on and the governor and explain if we're missing something because in the absence of a good excuse, there is no excuse. There you go. Well, Tom, thanks for bringing this to our attention. I think it's very valuable that there be a gag flying like you and the tax foundation to bring this to the attention of the public. And I hope the word gets out and somebody looks into this, especially now, as you say, in the context of these various hearings and various committees around the legislature, somebody should be asking about this. Absolutely. Well, thank you for having me in your show. Thank you, Tom. Tom Yamachika, president of Tax Foundation of Hawaii, enlightening us on what goes on, enlightening us on what the fiscal policies are and in this case, the fiscal failure is in the state of Hawaii. Thank you so much. And so it's a public service for short time.


Okay, welcome back everyone. This is Silicon Angles theCUBE, our flagship program. We go out to the events and extract the signal from the noise. I'm John Furrier, the founder of Silicon Angles. I'm John Mike Co-host, Stu Miniman filling in for Dave Vellante. We are live in San Francisco for the Red Hat Summit and this is where all the action's happening around open source, cloud, the modern era of infrastructure, software development, dev ops, the whole world's changing a whole new way. We're at an inflection point and we're covering it. Our next guest is a hot startup founder and CTO, Solomon Hikes from Docker, formerly DotCloud. Welcome to theCUBE. Thank you. So you guys are the buzz of the show. Obviously you've got your PR machines in full throttle because we know they hit me up on email all the time but you get senior leadership over there. You guys have been growing. Obviously, Cloud's not new to you guys. So give us a quick update on Docker. What's happening? What's the quick news? We'll get that out of the way and we'll jump into a conversation. Right, so the news today is that Docker and Red Hat are jointly announcing even more collaboration. We had already announced that Docker would be supported as part of the new RHEL version and now we're announcing that Red Hat is committing to supporting Docker in the future. They've announced a gemstone program to train some of their customers to deploying Docker. So there's a whole string of announcements. OpenShift, the OpenShift project has announced that they're standardizing on top of Docker even more, et cetera. Let's talk about Docker for a second.  How many employees you guys have? How much funding you had to name change? Talk about the quick history for the folks who might not know you guys. Sure, so it's 30 of us today and Docker used to be called DotCloud. So we changed names about six months ago from DotCloud. And so we, as part of the name change, we raised $15 million in series B. And before that, as DotCloud, we had raised $10 million in series A in 2011. Why the name changes? Guys fell like, hey, DotCloud was play. You wanted to have a fresher brand. So no one was. You felt it might be fashionable, might be in style. It kind of, we just had to. So what happened is, DotCloud is a platform as a service. It hosts and runs people's applications online, keeps them available, et cetera. And out of that product, as part of that product, we developed a lot of underlying technology, including container deployment and automation technology. And we open sourced that and it became so popular, it became a thing. Even bigger than DotCloud had ever been. And so change in the company was just us admitting, okay, Docker is the biggest thing that we need. So we talk about containers all the time. We always talk about what comes first, the container or the data. And everyone's always argues about containers. It's a really great topic. And first of all, containers are very important. So I want to drill down on that with you. So I tweeted yesterday, do you talk about the container first or data first? Or software first, all three. So let's drill into it. Why are containers so hot right now? And do people worry too much about the container and not about the architecture? How do you balance that? Because you do have to balance it. Yeah, so I think it starts with the application. There's a lot of applications being built today, new kinds of applications, a lot more of them. So I think it does start with the software and what you want the software to do. You want applications that do new things, incredible things. And for that to be possible, you need a new kind of architecture. And so I like to think of the container as the Lego brick that makes that architecture possible. It's the starting point, it's the fundamental unit. Talk about the container a little bit more detail. What is the container? What are you guys talking about? When you say container, define that real quick. So a container is a unit of deployment, right? It's the format in which you package your application, all the files, all the executables, libraries, all the dependencies and one thing that you can move to any server and deploy in a repeatable way. So it's similar to how you would run an iOS app on an iPhone, for example. So Red Hat launched a certification program. You guys, are you shipping it out to Fedora and Linux? Give the details on what's happening with your partnership. So yeah, Docker is now distributed on both RHEL, Fedora and CentOS, now part of the Red Hat ecosystem. And you know, Docker, our goal is for Docker to be available and easy to use on all major operating systems. And obviously Red Hat is right there on top of the list. So Solomon, you know, I've best description, I've heard of what containers do is that really it separates kind of the application management from the infrastructure management. It reminds me a lot of what platform as a service can do also because I should be able to be agnostic to my infrastructure. Can you help reconcile for us as to where containers fit with kind of Red Hat's ecosystem? So, you know, you only work on Linux today.  Right. So, well, Docker came out of platform as a service, right? Docker Cloud itself is a platform as a service. And so it's very connected. You know, you could say platform as a service is a specific way to use containers. By definition, when you're doing a pass, you're offering a specialized value add solution to us for certain kinds of applications, right? And we, you know, we were in the business of doing that with Docker Cloud. What we realized is when you want to build a platform that's really universal that everyone can build on top of, you need to break it down into a smaller fundamental unit because there is no single cookie cutter pass that everyone can use, right? There's a lot of customization going on.  So that's the relationship.  Can you talk about kind of the size of your team and, you know, not just inside the people doing all the coding?  And I think it would be more accurate to say the community built us, you know, Docker was a start project and then people showed up and said, we're going to make this a thing, right? And you guys can tag along if you want. I'm like, okay, well, we'll tag along. And so, you know, the community made that project. And so, I mean, I'm the lead maintainer of Docker, but when I wear that hat of lead maintainer, it doesn't matter where I work. Docker, the company provides an infrastructure to support that project, but the project today has core maintainers and all sorts of contributors that are not employees of Docker, the company. And that's, you know, it reminds me of Linux, kind of a smaller version of Linux, and it's a really cool way to work, to do software. Yeah, so is Red Hat contributing at all to that? Or are there any other vendors? Can you talk a little bit about the ecosystem and who's involved?  You know, other companies have participated either directly or indirectly.  Like, now I worry about forgetting names, but there's, it's a big federated engineering effort. So I want to talk about the competition. Obviously, you guys are getting a lot of buzz. Containers do make a lot of sense. It's a great way to have application delivery. You guys talked about that yesterday with Red Hat. You know, application delivery is really a top priority. Getting things out fast, DevOps, culture, you know, pushing code, but people talk about you guys in contrast to vagrant. How do you guys compare and contrast? Some say it's actually complementary. One's lightweight, one's a little bit heavier. Can you compare and contrast the two approaches? Yeah, I think Docker gets compared to a lot of tools out there in the DevOps world, we get compared to vagrant, we get compared even more to things like Puppet and Chef and, you know, configuration management. And I think the answer is the same for all of those. You don't, it's not, you know, Docker is not a direct replacement for any of those. You can use them together. The main thing is Docker just kind of does its own thing. It's a container engine. That's the category. And vagrant is not a container engine. Puppet and Chef are not a container engine. So I think if you use vagrant specifically since you asked about vagrant, if you use vagrant to manage virtual machines, then they are complementary. And the way a lot of people use them together is they use vagrant as a utility to deploy a virtual box or VMware machine as part of your infrastructure. And so on their laptop, it'll be vagrant. On their in-house cluster, it'll be open stack. It might be EC2, you know, in the cloud. And then on top of that, there's a unified layer to abstract it away. And that's Docker. Wouldn't it be easy just to start bickering about who's got what stuff better than new when everything's was all the same? When apples were compared to apples and oranges, we're compared to oranges. But you essentially have a new category. So two questions. One, how did you overcome that?  You're different, but people can compare, contrast you. So I want to talk about your personal experience with how you articulate that. And then two, let's talk about open stack. What does open stack need to do to evolve when you have kind of a lot of competing interests, but not a direct one-to-one match? There are some overlaps, but there's also synergies. Talk about the dynamic. One, you guys as a kind of a new category buster, and also open stack where there's a lot of co-operations going on where it's not necessarily a direct one-to-one. Yeah, I think competition's always good. What's really important though is the value of open sources and standardizing things and federating effort. So the big thing to watch out for at any given time is, do you want to do something new? Or do you want to join an existing effort? And if you're joining an existing effort, are you doing it constructively? Or are you forking and creating kind of a competing implementation? And I think the problem that the open stack community is dealing with is it's really big. There's a lot of interest in it. But it's hard to agree on the single definition of what open stack is. So I think the test is for it to be one thing and to have one name. Every deployment of it, every implementation of it should be interoperable, should be standardized. And that's something we're very careful about. So Solomon, back to Docker. You guys are not yet fully GA. I believe the last version of your product is 0.10. It sounds like we're close. Can you talk about just customer use cases and where you are with kind of customer deployments today? Yeah, so it is version 010 and we release one new version every month. And we've said that it's not yet recommended to use it in production, but we plan on changing that very quickly. The current plan is to make the next release, the first release candidate for 1.0. Meanwhile, a lot of people are just ignoring our advice and rolling it out of production. So production is, it's a gray area. It depends what you're doing, how comfortable you are, getting your hands dirty with the technology. So we have people today rolling on Docker on sometimes thousands of servers running real payloads and we're telling them, hey, it's not off the shelf and they say that's fine, we're early adopters. Yeah, any data points on how many people are doing it in kind of private environment for public environments or you know, is there any sweet spot for it or is it kind of everywhere? I think it would be my instinctive responsibility. It's half and half. And the sweet spot is when you expect things to not be homogenous. And that's a big selling point. If you expect your application stacked to not be homogenous or your infrastructure not to be homogenous, then it makes a lot of sense to buy into Docker on the day one and make that the only constant because it's very small. Yeah, I don't know too many environments that are homogenous. I mean, that's always especially in the enterprise that that's always the problem is it's you know, always heterogeneous and that wipes it off. Yep. So about open source, I was talking about thread there about you were just on was standardization and federation versus corking and going your own. So let me mention OpenStack. So, you know, is OpenStack standard? Are we there yet? How do you feel about that? Because, you know, there was a moment of euphoric hope with OpenStack than this lull of a lot of people jockeying. But we see it swinging back to almost like it feels like it's going to break through but there's still some fun hanging over it. We got OpenStack Summit coming up. We'll have theCUBE there live in Atlanta this year. So it wouldn't happen. We're also going to drill down. So it feels good last year at OpenStack Summit a lot of deployments, a lot of people voting with their code. Yeah. But there's still a lot of jockeying at the past layer. So at the end of the day, it's about software development and getting the apps out there and for the enterprise to feel comfortable looking under the hood. So I mentioned Lego block design. This is kind of like, this is a good sign for that model. So how do you feel about OpenStack? What do you think is the work areas that need to, you know, get snapping quicker and move faster or they're pretty solid on the standardization? So, I mean, first I'm not an OpenStack expert. So, you know, I can speak to my relationship with OpenStack, how we integrate with it. OpenStack has been an important integration point for Docker because a lot of people who deploy Docker as their abstraction layer for applications do that on an infrastructure that is partly OpenStack. So deploying Docker based applications on OpenStack infrastructure needs to be something that works really well. So from our point of view, OpenStack is about infrastructure, right? It's about compute storage. Managing a single plane of glass kind of thing. So, right. And, you know, it's about, hey, I have machines over there. They're managed by OpenStack. I have machines here. They're on EC2 here on Google. Here, that's my laptop. Get Docker work on all of that as a whole. The higher level stuff of OpenStack, it's not exposed to us. We don't use it. And the people who... Well, the developers on the DevOps side, let's ask different questions.  It's hot to be an OpenStack engineer right now. So from a developer standpoint, this distribution, there's a road, there's lighted in the tunnel. So people are making the investment. So what do you guys talk to those guys about? What do you say, hey, Docker can provide for you X? What is it? So, I mean, I think it boils down to what the identity of OpenStack is. People who today deploy OpenStack and use it are people who are deploying and using infrastructure. That's what OpenStack is used for today in the field. And so people who come to us and they say we roll out OpenStack, they have a very clear idea of how they want to combine the two. And so they tell us, I have OpenStack infrastructure, make it work with Docker for application deployment, and we help them do that. So really deploying applications at the end of the day is the number one thing. Yeah, it's deploying applications in a way, in such a way that they are not tied and locked into any kind of infrastructure. So they're portable. So anti-locking. Anti-locking. Anti-locking, yeah, that's right. That's not a good marketing slogan. I don't know.  What is the big deal about this cloud stuff right now? Why is there so much action going on? Why is the developer community, why is there a collision between open source, enterprise, commercial use, and these new paradigms? Why is it a modern era? Explain to the folks in your own words, why is it so important here at the Red Hat Summit? Yeah, I think, I mean, it's a huge trend, right? And the applications that are being built today are being built for a platform that no one can point to. People can point to the iPhone or to Android and say, I'm building an app for that. But the teams and companies that are building, Gmail, Uber, whatever online service we're using, they can't point to a platform and say, that's what I'm developing on. That's my platform, that's my computer, right? It's just out there, it's cobbled together by all these different tools. It's not standardized. It's almost like we're at the same phase for the cloud that personal computer programmers were at in the 70s, right? Everyone has their own, they have a drawer with their custom compiler, their custom memory manager, everything. Custom bootloader and so the trend is that that stack is being built and everyone's in a frenzy to participate in building it for those of us who are engineers first and to make sure, you know, to reap the rewards of it if you're in business. What would you, what's the docker culture out there? You know, the DNA of the company.  Get some funding, get some good funding behind you. You're in a hot area, application delivery's hot. What's the culture of docker? We like to build things and we're, typically we're the kinds of engineers who get obsessed about the tools and so all of us typically used to work in an environment where, you know, to build good software, you need to invest some of the engineering time in the tools, right?  We just want the tool to be awesome so that if you're building whatever it is that you're building, you have tools that just make you 10 times more productive, right? Just 10 times more innovative.   You've got a big announcement here at Red Hat Summit. You've got docker column, you know, coming up next month, you know, what advice would you give to people out there thinking about hopping on the open source wave and starting a software company? Yeah, I guess, I mean, the first thing that comes to mind is to kind of stick to building what you like to build. You know, docker has been presented as a pivot, but actually it's the closest thing to the initial project we started on 2008. I hate that word pivot by the way, it's such a bad word. You know, we quit our job in 2008 to start an open source project that used containers to automate the deployment of application, you know, abstracting the infrastructure away. That's what we did. No one cared at the time, so we just kind of survived long enough to give it a second try, so it's been six years and it wasn't always easy, but we stuck to it because what else were we going to do? It was the most fun thing to build that we can think of. So I think- Who are your backers? Who is the VCs behind you guys? So, White Combinator backed us in 2010, and then we raised money from Trinity Ventures and Benchmark Capital, and then Greylock recently, you know- Jerry Chen. Yeah, Jerry Chen and Greylock. It's Jerry Chen's first investment, apparently. So, you know- I think so. I think so. Jerry Chen's also a friend of the Cube, so Greylock's some good, you got some good partners behind you. Yeah, they're great. And total funding you raised now? 26 million, I guess. So you got some money in the bank. We did. It's hard to go out of business when you have money in the bank, as I always say, so congratulations, great to see you, and we were looking forward to chatting, obviously Doc, our fan, and Jerry Chen and Greylock and all those VCs. Exciting opportunity, thanks Solomon for coming on the Cube. Founder, we actually have a founder in the house, it's always great to talk to founders of companies, making it happen here. A lot of opportunity, building out, growing, and commercializing open source technologies. All the show rage here at the Red Hat Summit. We'll be right back with our next guest after this short break. Thanks.


Thank you all for being here this morning. It's great to be here at the University of Ontario Institute of Technology. Glad to be joined by Minister Baines, whose work is supporting Canadian innovation and science, and MPs Jennifer O'Connell, Selena Caesar-Chevanne and Mark Holland, all of whom are incredible advocates for this region. And might I just add congratulations to Mark as well. We've announced this morning he will be our new Chief Government WIP. Now I just got to meet with some fantastic young people who showed me the work they're doing in the automotive engineering program. Things like testing aerodynamics in a wind tunnel, which I got to help out with today. Well, at least not hinder too much. It's this kind of technology that makes the Automotive Centre of Excellence here at UOIT a world-class facility. Everything from cars to bicycles to drones are tested here, developing the best quality and performance possible. And our government is committed to supporting work like this that creates economic growth and produces real results. That's why today we're announcing that the federal government is investing nearly nine and a half million dollars to support innovation and training here at the Centre. Really proud of this announcement because this funding will support cutting-edge capabilities like a simulated moving road so researchers can continue to create cleaner, safer technology for Canadians to use every day. Supporting this project means new energy-efficient products that are going to deliver better results while reducing pollution. This project is a smart choice, which is why it has support from the private sector through groups like Magna and Multimatic Engineering. Today's investment isn't just about keeping our research competitive, it's also about creating good jobs for Canadians. This commitment will almost double the workforce at the Automotive Centre of Excellence creating well-paying, skilled, full-time jobs. As a government, we're taking action to support our resilient Canadian workers throughout the auto sector. With smart investments that keep our industry competitive on the world stage, we're protecting jobs and creating new employment for people like the students here today. Of course, everyone says that our young people are the leaders of tomorrow, but they are already the leaders of today. They already make the discoveries that contribute to improving the lives of Canadians and they already work to improve the health of their community. This means that when we invest in young Canadians, we help to make our country more innovative and more prosperous. And we are determined to help our students acquire the skills and training that they need to obtain jobs today and tomorrow. Here at the Institute of Technology, it's clear that opportunities and fields like artificial intelligence and cyber security are growing every day. That's why we created almost 60,000 co-op and work-integrated learning placements for students in science, technology, engineering, and math. But as every student and parent knows, getting a job in a field like engineering means going to college or university and that's expensive. So to make post-secondary education easier to avoid for our youth and their families, we increased Canada student grants by 50%. Everyone should be able to have a post-secondary education no matter how much money their parents make. One of the greatest things about college and university is that it's a place to meet people who have a whole range of experiences that might be different from your own. For example, some people are balancing the demands of a family with their schoolwork and many students attend part-time. We get that. So we increased the eligibility for Canada student grants for people with dependent kids and for folks studying part-time. And once people graduate, they might not have their textbooks anymore, but a lot of people still have their student debts. It can be a heavy burden. That's why we changed the repayment assessment program so no graduate will have to repay their Canada student loan until they're making at least $25,000 a year. Our youth, at the beginning of their career, are an engine of innovation and economic growth. Everywhere I go in our country, I see workers of all ages innovating and contributing to ensuring the competitiveness of Canada on the global stage. It's thanks to the hard work of middle-class that Canada is prosperous and that our future is even more promising. So at the start of a new school year, let me say this to all our students. We are right here supporting you as you study and work hard. Thank you for the world you are busy building and innovating. Thank you all for being here today.


Charles Anderson has supported independent tech news directly starting today. You want to be like Charles? Become a DTNS member at patreon.com slash DTNS. This is The Daily Tech News for Tuesday, June 11th, 2019 in Los Angeles. I'm Tom Merritt. And from Studio Feline, I'm Sarah Lane. And from the jungles of E3 covered from Finland, I am the extremely fatigued Patrick Bejo. And I'm the show's producer, Roger Chang. All right, folks, we got a lot to cover because Patrick has thrown himself on his sword. He has sacrificed his well-being to boil down all of the E3 announcements for us a little later in the show. Thank you, Patrick, for your service. Well, don't thank me until the thing actually happens. It might suck. All right, let's start, however, with a few tech things you should know. U.S. Customs and Border Protection confirmed photos of travelers and some vehicles traveling in and out of the U.S. were stolen in a data breach. The data was transferred to a subcontractors network that wasn't following proper security protocols where a malicious cyber attack took place, a CBP spokesperson told TechCrunch, but also says that its own networks weren't compromised. The agency first learned of the breach on May 31st and says it affected fewer than 100,000 people at a single land border. Opera launched a custom version of its browser dedicated to online gamers and streamers called Opera GX. The browser lets users limit access to CPU and RAM and RAM resources to ensure smoother gameplay. Opera GX also comes with Twitch integration so users can log into their Twitch accounts from the browser's own sidebar. Opera GX is currently in early access and available for download for Windows users. The Atari VCS Retro Console is available for general pre-order from Atari's site and GameStop in Walmart with orders from the retailers expected to ship in March 2020, though crowdfunding backers can get theirs as early as December. The base VCS 400 has an AMD processor and embedded Vega graphics and 4GB of RAM for 249 bucks. A VCS 800 has 8GB of RAM and costs $279. The classic joystick will sell for 49 bucks and the modern gamepad for 59 bucks. And if you buy an all-inclusive 800 model with both controllers, you'll pay a grand total of 389 bucks. So go play out your nostalgia for a mere 389 bucks. Or not. Or not. All right, let's talk a little bit about some nonny three-stuff first. Patrick, tell us what's going on with Foxconn. Well, Foxconn Semiconductor's division chief Yang Liu told an investor briefing that the company has enough capacity outside of China to make all iPhones bound for the US. I guess if you're in Europe, you're out of luck. Liu said 25% of Foxconn's production capacity is outside China in places like Mexico, Brazil, Europe, and India. Liu said investments are being made in India in particular. iPhones made in China are not yet subject to tariffs or other US restrictions, and Apple has given no instructions to change production lines. Yeah, so this is in the event that the US slaps a restriction on iPhones coming from China, or China does it as a retaliatory move. Foxconn thinks it can handle making all the iPhones it needs to, assembling all the iPhones it needs to, in its other manufacturing centers, likely in India, where they've been actually tuning up their factories for Indian production of the iPhones, because India wants those iPhones to be made there. And Patrick, you don't have to worry about that, because your iPhones can be made in China and go to Europe. They could even be made in Europe and go to Europe, looks like. I didn't even think about that, unless China says no iPhones for anyone ever. Yeah, and then we'd all be in trouble. Yeah, right. I mean, if they want to hurt the American economy and psyche, that could be, it seems extreme. But it seems extreme, but you're right. These are times where things that seemed extreme sometimes happen. It's interesting because when Foxconn says 25% of production capacity is already outside of China, you think, okay, well, 75% is still within China, you have a long way to go. But what percentage of that is US-bound? Right. And what percentage of that is iPhone? They have other clients besides Apple. So I think what they're trying to say is we've got a lot of capacity. Maybe people thought we were only in China, but we're not. Last week, someone stole a mini-disc archive of unreleased songs from Radiohead singer Tom York. The thief asked for $150,000 or he'd release the songs online. The songs because as you might have guessed, being on mini-disc dated back to 1997. And so Radiohead said, all right, instead of complaining, this is the quote, instead of complaining much or ignoring it, we're releasing all 18 hours on band camp in aid of extinction rebellion. Never intended for public consumption, some clips did reach the cassette in the okay computer reissue. It's only tangentially interesting. Of course, if you're a big Radiohead fan, tangentially interesting is really interesting. So the recordings will be on sale for 18 days at the price of 18 pounds. That's about 23 bucks US. And if you're like, wait, in aid of extinction rebellion, that's an environmental movement trying to raise awareness about climate change. So they're saying, you okay, instead of paying you 150,000 to stop release, we're going to release them and raise money for this cherry. Well, it's nice that they clearly had backups that were beyond mini-disc for this purpose. I also thought the thief, because Radiohead, you may or may not like the band, but people who are die hard Radiohead fans would easily pay 23 dollars for this. I would easily pay 23 dollars for 18 hours of Radiohead music that I hadn't heard before. I also wonder why the thief picked 150,000, not that the thief was in the right in any way. That is interesting. I could have kind of bumped it up a little bit. The first fee that came to mind. Yeah, in this day and age, maybe half a mil. There has to be a pun with haze to the thief, which is the radiohead album. But I can't find it. I've been thinking about it for, and I can't find it. Sorry. Radiohead, this is interesting. If you recall, did an experiment where they gave away an album telling you you could pay whatever you want, including zero dollars. So it's interesting to see this reaction of like, oh, you're going to give away our music for free? Well, we've done that before. So this time, we'll give it away for money, but the money won't go to us. This is such a perfect answer. And not only are they turning this problematic thing that happened to them into a good thing, but it's also gaining, I think, a lot of positive mindshare towards Radiohead themselves. It's a great PR move. I'm sure they didn't do it for that reason, but it makes them look really cool. Where they use the energy of the thief against the thief. Exactly. It's also not, who knows really, we have to take Radiohead's word for it, but this is not like the upcoming album that everyone has been eagerly awaiting for the last two years. It's stuff that didn't get on albums in the past. So the band might have said, do we really care? I mean, no, we'll have charged people small fee, but it's not the end of the world if it gets out. Eric Allison, head of Uber's aviation division, which is called Elevate, said he expects the Uber Air flying taxi service to be cheaper than driving a car in the long term. Uber plans to launch Uber Air in 2023 in Dallas and Los Angeles, where it will at least be cheaper than a helicopter. If enough people use it though, it'll become comparable to UberX and UberPool. After that, the cost of manufacturing flying taxis needs to come down to make it cheaper than actually owning your own car. Uber's working with Boeing, Embraer, Bell, and just announced today, John Air Mobility on the flying taxis. It'll begin test next year. It's actually starting in Melbourne, Australia. Of course, to make a fleet of autonomous vertical takeoff and landing taxis a success, Uber's going to need places to take off and land. It will also need to keep and retain customer trust and of course, regulatory approval. Yeah. I'll be honest, there's so much to talk about here, including the fact that they need customer trusted regulatory approval for that curve to work out the way they want, which isn't impossible, but it's not a given. But also, this chart proves that owning your own car is still cheaper than taking Uber. Yeah. Well, yeah. It's debatable depending on how often you drive. Sometimes I'm like, why do I own a car? But yeah. Go ahead, Patrick. No, I was going to say that's the thing. When you talk about averages like this, it's cheaper for some people. It's more expensive for some people depending on how much you use your car, how much you use Uber, how much. So it's so broad as strokes go that it's difficult to generalize out of it. But I like the hopefulness of it. You may throw your slings and arrows at it and say, they'll never achieve it. They need to go over too many hurdles to make it happen. But it does seem that Uber is positive about this and willing to pursue it. And it is crazy to imagine a world not that far away. Four years from now, we're here in Los Angeles, people might be paying just a little more than UberX to be able to take a flying autonomous helicopter. That said though, point A to point B in an UberX, if I needed to, I don't know, go wherever I needed to go.  Is the Uber flying taxi going to be able to do that for me? That's where that real estate thing you mentioned becomes a big issue. Where can they take off and land? How convenient is that? How much extra do you have to add to your trip? It's like, okay, it's really fast to get from this landing pad to that landing pad, but then I have to take a car to get where I'm going because the landing pad isn't close enough. All of that sort of thing. All right. We love Mary Meekers yearly state of the Internet report. We usually love to make a major topic out of it. She usually doesn't give it during E3. So here's what we're going to do. I will do my best to summarize what Mary Meekers said in her annual Internet Trends report at the Code Conference on Tuesday, and you folks email us feedback at dailytechnewshow.com. Let us know which parts of this you'd like to have us continue to talk about, and we'll pay attention to that. Meekers been doing the report since 1995. This year it touches on slow e-commerce growth, rising Internet ad spending, freemium subscription business models, telemedicine, the dominance of image sharing as a communication method, interactive gaming, becoming the new social network. Fortnite is the place where people talk more than Facebook maybe. And here's some of the details. She noted that as the Internet is now passing 50% of global penetration, new growth is harder to find. Asia Pacific holds the most potential for growth right now. China has the most Internet users in the world, followed by India and then the United States. And she also notes that time spent on mobile has now passed time spent watching television and digital video makes up about 28% of total video viewing as opposed to TV. The following things, podcast listening, Amazon Echo using, wearable users, on-demand consumers, that's like Uber, Airbnb, that kind of thing. Next door neighborhoods have all doubled in the past two to four years. Non-US based innovation remains robust, especially in data driven and direct financial services. So if you want to look for that kind of robust innovation, you look outside the US right now, but it's still there. She also said data is the new application. And here I'm going to quote, data is now fundamental to how people work. And the most successful companies have intelligently integrated it into everyone's data workflow. People are still majorly willing to share data for personalized experiences. There's a lot of privacy concerns and she touches on that. But if you say, I'll personalize this 70 to 90% of people depending on the situation will say, yeah, that's fine, I will share my data for that. The pace of innovation is now outrunning our ability to adapt even as our ability to adapt increases. So tools that help us to adapt are important. Social media usage is decelerating, as she says. 87% of web traffic is now encrypted versus 53% in Q1 2016. That's a huge victory, something that if you had asked me in 2016, I would not have predicted. People prefer negative news, no matter what they say. And the problem is that the internet amplifies it. And here's a point Meeker makes that I don't hear often. Traditional media then amplifies social media's trending topics. So that just keeps that cycle going even worse. She says freedom is both increasing and falling on the web. So there's there's fewer totally free internet experiences, but there are also fewer totally non free internet experiences. And we sort of are increasing a partly free middle of the road web. Cyber attacks are increasing. Sadly, two factor authentication is stagnant, limiting the effectiveness of it. It was 54% of websites in 2014. It's 52% in 2018. Online education is offering more growth, more users, more choice and lower cost than offline learning, even if it's not necessarily giving you a degree all the time. And super apps are dominating in places like China. She cites grab, rapy and even uber as incorporating the elements of super app features worldwide where you pack in more than just one service into an app. So there you go. We don't have time to dig into all of that, obviously, but I hope that gives you a snapshot. It's worth reading if you want to get the whole 3338 pages. Patrick, Sarah, any first impressions? And yes, it's a long read, lots of data here. So we'll have more to say in the next 24 hours, I'm sure. But I will say of what Meeker has laid out as trends and here's what's changing and here's what's different, nothing is really standing out to me as surprising. Even news outlets amplifying social media stuff. I've been doing that for years. Yeah, nothing is shocking. I think that's the thing about Meeker's report. Because she's usually so accurate on identifying these trends, you shouldn't be surprised, but you may not have thought about it. Yeah, that's true. And it's important. I mean, AI got mentioned once. I sort of like, oh, this is a thing that makes personalization and stuff work better. And it's got a small passage, but not a huge trend. Cryptocurrency, not a mention. I mean, it's as important for the things that aren't in it as the things that are. Podcast listening doubled or the last two to four years. That's interesting to us. Yeah, it really is. Yeah. Well, a lot of investment being made in podcast networks and podcast networks and podcast themselves, crop it up all over the place. I guess time spent on mobile surpassing time spent watching television is interesting, especially because in my house, it's usually a two screen situation. I'm almost never watching TV without can also being on my phone or my computer at the same time. But are you using your, your, your phone when you're not watching TV? Yeah, no, I mean, I, but I also think that I'm, I, I veer towards it more unhealthy mobile user because I think that's also typical. Yeah. Yeah. So, so I don't know if I'm, I'm representing the median, but yeah, this is, it's, it was bound to happen. All right, let's talk Nintendo. Let's do it. Nintendo held its E3 Nintendo direct live stream at Tuesday morning. A full sequel to Zelda, Breath of the Wild is coming and a teaser showed Lincoln Zelda exploring a dungeon together. Luigi's Mansion 3 will include a couch co-op and online mode. Animal Crossing New Horizon for the Switch has been delayed to March 20th, 2020. Two new Smash characters, a Banjo-Kazooie and Dragon Quest's hero. A spinoff game from Netflix's Dark Crystal will come out later this year as well. That's about, I don't know about that, called the Dark Crystal Age of Resistance Tactics. Our resident Nintendo expert, Patrick Beja. What did you think of this year's Nintendo direct from E3? It's always so cute and wholesome that it's difficult to not love. They also had this lovely introduction of the new president of Nintendo of America who's called Doug Bowser. Bowser being the main villain in the Mario series forever. And so they introduced Bowser. Of course, it was the villain from the video game and then Doug came in. It's his actual name, which is mind-blowing. And of course, the announcement of the next Zelda was a crowd pleaser, including for me. Excellent. Alright, folks, if you want to get all the tech headlines each day in about five minutes, be sure to subscribe to DailyTechHeadlines.com. You thought we talked about all the Microsoft news, but Microsoft also will stop adding games to its Xbox Backward Compatibility catalog for the Xbox One in order to focus on its next generation Project Scarlet console. Microsoft is committing to get every Xbox One game to run on Scarlet, plus games from all four Xbox generations. And Xbox players can now choose a gamer tag that's already in use, but it will include a hashtag and some random numbers next to their display name. Original gamer tags like Master Chief or Major Nelson will appear with no numbers next to them, solidifying them as the original owner of that tag. If an Xbox Live member changes their gamer tag, their original will still be up for grabs. So once you let one go, it can go out there without the added stuff. That's just some stuff that broke today about Microsoft. Let's back up, though. Let's get in our helicopter, our ubercopter, and look down above what's been happening at E3 over the past weekend. Patrick, where do we start? So I think what's going to be really interesting for most people listening to this show is the overarching industry trends that we've seen. And of course, that means new hardware. And when I say hardware, I include servers because Stadia detailed its essentially business model. And it seemed really muddy when they first talked about it a little bit before E3, but let's say it's technically E3. I think I was really disappointed because they introduced something that is essentially just a console, except you don't have to buy the console. There's no Netflix of games subscription or anything like that. And my expectation was that Google was going to disrupt the industry in some way like they have disrupted other industries. You know, when Gmail came out, it was crazy because you had this everlasting thing that was, I mean, anyway, we don't need to detail how Google has disrupted things before. Here it didn't have that same oomph. However, what we've learned now is that Ubisoft is going to have a subscription service with Uplay Plus that gives access to all of their games. And that is games that you can install on your PC. However, for streaming, they will be available on Stadia as well. Once Stadia actually launches for everyone for quote unquote free in a few months, I mean in early 2020, they will be able, it means that Ubisoft is accessing everyone's computers through streaming through Google Stadia. So I think the reason we're not seeing a Netflix of games from Google is that it might have been confusing if every other developer that doesn't have the capacity to create a streaming infrastructure for themselves is using Stadia for that. And I'm wondering if that wasn't Google's goal from the beginning, from analyzing the way the industry is moving. Yeah, I mean, it does sound like they're going to put out their own games at Google, but otherwise they don't want to be in competition with other streaming services. They really want to be the provider of that streaming services is what that makes it sound like to me. It does. And I wouldn't be surprised if other big publishers and developers might think, you know what, maybe that's a way we could bypass the other platforms by essentially making Stadia a white box. I mean, it's not really Stadia as its own platform, but everyone can use it to deliver their experiences to customers directly, of course, giving a cut of the action to Google in the process.  But I'm wondering, I'm not certain, but I'm wondering if the bigger vision there is to provide that service for others. We had a lot of people discussing who this was for. And Josh in Japan said, it's for me. I have a gaming PC in one room and a Mac mini attached to my large screen TV in another. I use streaming through Steam, but there's often controller issues, etc. I want to completely switch to Mac, but gaming has always made me keep a PC. Stadia is good. I could still play games on my Mac. Just hope they have accessibility features like button remapping, because I'm disabled. Anyway, there has been a lot of who is this for talk? Well, people who want to use Mac and game. That's me. And Ken from Chicago on Twitter pointed out that another advantage of Stadia is buy a game, play it in five minutes. You don't have to wait for the download. That is very true. But I think one thing we might be losing sight of is everyone's going to have that service. Microsoft is launching Project X Cloud. Sony is very likely to upgrade their PlayStation Now service to work in a similar way. So when we ask what is Stadia for as gamers who know this industry, it's not necessarily streaming. It's just Stadia, which is streaming only without the option to also have a gaming box, because again, streaming is going to be offered by Google, Microsoft, and very likely Sony. Let's talk about Microsoft. We covered their announcements, but now that you've had a little chance to put them in perspective, what do you think? So the reveal of the Project Scarlet was a little bit disappointing to everyone, I think, because we didn't get any more than we got for the PlayStation 5. Essentially, it's the same thing. So that wasn't their big push. Their big push, I think, was Game Pass, which again, we're getting back to subscription services, which is really the big trend in the coming year or two. Game Pass is gaining in popularity, partly because they're offering better deals and partly because it's available on PC. But if you put that together with the launch of the X Cloud, which is supposed to start in October, so before Stadia, and we don't know exactly what is going to be available, it was a little bit vague, maybe it's only using your console for in-house server X Cloud type things in the beginning, but then certainly it's going to be internet servers. So you have the Game Pass and the X Cloud. It's again a quote-unquote Netflix of streaming for everyone. You don't even need to wait for the next generation to get people on board. And once they're on board and they're sort of investing in your ecosystem with your subscription service, does it matter that they want a box for the next generation if your streaming service and subscription kind of upgrade to that automatically? So I think that's why Microsoft is actually pushing Game Pass so hard right now and thinking, you know, the next generation thing, it will be important, but we don't need to push it now and tell people it's going to be great, but you have to wait a year and a half for this. They can tell Game Pass and X Cloud is going to be here soon. All right, so that brings us through sort of the big looming announcements. What else stuck in your brain as cool and interesting at E3? So if you want to talk about cool, just cool, I think we have to mention the Cyberpunk 2077 trailer, which in itself is not gameplay and that's always a little bit disappointing because you don't see the actual game, but the arrival of Keanu Reeves in that trailer was a jaw dropping moment. And especially when he came out on stage, I don't think I've ever seen a more excited crowd anywhere. So that was really, really cool. I guess the Avengers game at the Square Enix conference was exciting because it's Marvel and the Avengers and it's so hot right now. The game itself, we didn't see enough to judge definitively in any way. So that in itself was a little bit disappointing for me because I wanted to see more, but I guess we still have time. It's coming out in May of next year. Yeah, Gary on Twitter was thrown by the fact that they didn't get the original actors to do the voices and he's like, they're so associated with these characters now. It's just, it just feels weird. And they're also done with the characters and so expensive that they got some really great voice actors for video games, though it said basically who's who of the great names in that industry. So we don't know if he's there yet, but perhaps one day Keanu Reeves would like to join our subreddit. He could spit stories and vote on others at dailytechnewshow.reddit.com. He could also be part of our Facebook group, facebook.com slash groups slash daily tech news show. It really would be breathtaking if you did. All right, let's check out the mailbag. Is there is our email from Keanu Reeves? No, it's from Tim unless that's Keanu being clever. No, I think Tim is a different person. Tim has an app tip. It's based on our conversation we had last Friday about dual commands to Amazon's assistant such as turn off the hall light and turn on the entry light. So you can kind of string stuff together. Tim says, one of the many things I love about any list, it's an app, is that when I tell Amazon's assistant to add something to our grocery list in any list, if it's already there, it tells me I already have it on the list, ask me if I want to add it again and listens without me needing to say the wake word again to my answer.  In fact, without having a default list, I can just say Amazon's assistant add potatoes to the list and it knows to default to my main grocery list without me having to say which one. I've heard some good things about any list. Tim continues to make the case. Still though, Tim, I want to know when you ask any list if something is on your list, do you have to say tell any list is something on my list because that's the thing that annoys me about our groceries. Thanks for the feedback, Tim. Keep those app tips going. We love to hear about them. What's working for people and what isn't. Also, thanks to Patrick Beja, triumphantly returning to DTNS. We've missed you. What have you been up to besides E3, of course? Well, nothing. It's E3 all day every day. But if you want to have a complete summary of everything that happened at E3, just go subscribe to Pixels. You will get a two hours discussion between Scott Johnson and myself that we just finished recording an hour and a half ago or an hour ago. And it was great because you get all of it. If you want a slightly longer discussion than what we had here today but shorter than those two hours, just wait for MVGB, the monthly video game briefing, which we are recording tomorrow with Scott, where we'll dive into the really important things from that show. That will be, of course, available to patrons very soon and on its own feed as well. Excellent. That's frogpansons.com slash MVGB. Our goal each month is to get one more patron than last month. And you get so much when you do that. Thursday, you get a column from Roger. Friday or Saturday, you get an editor's desk audio from me. Sarah's in the middle of testing products. She did some Jabra headphones. That's in the archives. She's working on some smart bulbs right now. It's all available at patreon.com slash DTNS. And if you're in the Los Angeles area, come out tomorrow, Wednesday, June 12th from 4 to 6 p.m. at the Farmers Market by the Grove. That's 6333 West 3rd Street in Los Angeles. We're going to have a meetup, hang out, talk, watch the hockey game. At least that's me. I'll be talking up until the hockey game and then I will either be in tears or happy. So come find out. Will I be in tears? 4 to 6 p.m. at the Farmers Market on Wednesday, June 12th if you're in the LA area. At the 326 bar specifically. Yes. Farmers Market is kind of big. Our email address is feedback at dailytechnewshow.com. We're also live Monday through Friday at 4 30 p.m. Eastern 2030 UTC. Find out more at dailytechnewshow.com slash live tomorrow with Scott Johnson. Talk to you then. Bye. This show is part of the Frog Pants Network. Get more at frogpants.com. Bob hopes you have enjoyed this program.