Would I recommend taking a laptop to BMT? What things do you need at tech school? What should you pack and what are you allowed to have? I'm going to be discussing all of those things right after I mentioned our amazing sponsor Sandbox. If you are getting ready to go to BMT, you need to know about Sandbox. Your friends and family need to know about Sandbox because they simplify the process of sending and receiving mail while you're at BMT. First of all, for your friends and family, they can send a letter from anywhere with Sandbox's mobile app. And then when you receive your letter, you literally have everything inside your letter to easily send a letter right back to them. You have a pre-addressed envelope, a piece of paper to write back on, and then you also receive the message from your friends and family and they can even send a colored photo. One of my favorite things about Sandbox was just being able to stay up to date with things that are happening back home because we're at BMT for two months and we feel like there's so much that we can miss out on. But with Sandbox's mobile app, everybody always has their phones on them. And then when something is happening, someone can just write up a message real quick, snap a photo in the moment, and that letter gets shipped out to you. So while I was at BMT, I was able to find out the gender of the baby that my brother and sister-in-law were having. I got letters as quick as two days after they were written. So that made things so awesome and it was always exciting to receive letters as well. But they don't just stop at BMT. People receive Sandbox letters tech school and they also have so many other resources for your friends and family. So be sure to check them out at Sandbox.us. So let's start out with things that you need to pack. I'm going to be completely honest here, not much.  So keep it as light as possible and only pack the necessities you need for yourself. Some things might include contacts and a travel size contact solution and maybe one or two outfits. But when you first arrive at tech school, you're going to be in phase one and you're going to have to wear your uniform at all times. So within that time, phase one, which the time will differ depending on what tech school you're at. And if you want to learn more about the tech school phases, I have a video on that that you can check out so you can have more understanding of how that works. But essentially, whenever you arrive at tech school, you're going to receive your address that day so you can have your family send you what you need and you can also start ordering things online. And by the time you're out of phase one, you can already receive the things that you need to have those two. What do you need to pack literally just the very minimal things that you absolutely have to have. So my suggestion would be maybe skincare, some PJs because even though you have to be in your uniforms at all times outside of your room, you can still sleep in your own PJs. If that is something that makes you more comfortable, I would recommend doing that and maybe one or two outfits that way you have them right away whenever you phase up.  So whenever you get there and you get your address, they can go ahead and send it out and you don't have to worry about your family members going around and searching for the things you need because you already have it packed together and all they have to do is take it to the post office and send it out.  Some questions to ask yourself when preparing for what to pack to tech school is going to be what location are you at, what is the amount of time you're going to be there and what time of year is it going to be when you are there. Now you can go to airmanvision.com and find this information on your tech school length and location so you can have an idea of what it's going to be like when you're there. Because something to keep in mind is you don't have a lot of space when you're at tech school so you don't want your family members sending you your entire closet because you're not going to have a room for it so you just need the essential items that is going to be relevant to the time of year that you're there. This next topic is a very high demand topic. People want to know can I have my electronics at tech school? Well something that is really cool about tech school is it's a lot like college.  Laptop and people have gaming systems. They can have TVs as well so yes you are allowed to have electronics at tech school. Now something to keep in mind with having electronics at tech school is that you are in a shared space so a lot of people have to keep their gaming stuff inside their lockers or if your roommate agrees to it you can keep it on the desk possibly that is just one thing to consider whenever having those bigger items is talking to your roommate about it, seeing what the space is going to be like, what they agree to because of course you want to keep things as cordial as possible whenever you have a roommate, be considerate of their needs as well as your needs. So a lot of people set up their gaming systems inside of their wall lockers so that's something that you can consider once you get to tech school and you see what your setup is going to be. Establish that you are allowed to have electronics, how soon are you allowed to have them whenever you arrive? Well, first you are going to have your phone when you're at BMT they're going to have it locked away but whenever you go to leave they're going to give it back to you. So you are literally going to have your phone right away before you even arrive at tech school. So make sure you have your charger for your phone, you're also allowed to have smartwatches and bring your charger for that as well. Laptops is a different story, some people take small laptops like this to BMT with them. Would I recommend taking a laptop to BMT? No, personally I would not but there are some people that do it. If you have a bigger gaming laptop, absolutely do not bring that at all. And another thing to keep in mind is do not have your family members bring any electronics or anything at all to BMT graduation to give to you to take to tech school but at BMT they will not allow you to take anything from your family members, you can only have the stuff that you have at BMT. So save yourself the trouble, save them the trouble of bringing extra things with them that they don't need to and just go ahead and have them ship that stuff to you whenever you arrive. So basically you can have all of your electronic stuff right away as soon as it's shipped to you or as soon as you buy it whenever you arrive but during phase one you can't have room personalization so you can't have anything out on the desk on display but you can have it locked away in your wallock. So I just realized one of the main things that I didn't mention about having it tech school is a car. I wanna throw that out there. I'm sorry that's at the end. Now this is something that can depend on the tech school that you're at. But if you have tech school for like a month then there's kind of no point in having your car there but it is up to the individual person but you are allowed to have your car at tech school. Hopefully this video helped you all understand what getting things at tech school is like. Pretty easy, right? Be sure to subscribe and I'll see you all in another video.


What's good, George Boris back again with another video. So we got to talk about the rock potentially going away at the WrestleMania to film his next film and how long that may be. So we're going to talk about this. I found this information out on Twitter. So we're going to get right into this one by WrestleMania. This is the tweet of PW Insider. The Rock will be out of action in WWE from May 1st until August 1st to film a movie that would likely take him out of doing anything physical for WWE during that time period. It seems unlikely he'll be wrestling in Saudi Arabia in May. However, WWE hold two Saudi shows a year so it's possible he could be wrestling at a later show. This is just the reports they have right now. And I believe The Rock had already had some prior dates established for his upcoming movie that he's supposed to be in. So it's not a surprise, but I wanted to talk about this only because it kind of proves the point on why The Rock and Roman shouldn't happen at this year's shouldn't have happened at this year's WrestleMania. This further proves the point why it shouldn't have happened only because this is a feud, in my opinion, that shouldn't just be rushed. It should. This should take time to build. And I think they're going in the right direction by not having this feud happen at this year's WrestleMania. Because to be honest with you, the feud would have only been like maybe a month, maybe maybe two months. If that from when he initially from when he initially tried to take Cody spot or Cody gave up a spot, you know, like that's that's relatively not enough time. You know, eight weeks, six to eight weeks is not enough time to really build up such a great feud like this. And we're just seeing teases of it with just some of the things that Roman and The Rock have said in their body language. So and people are just getting hype off the speculation. So I do think they make the right choice on calling the audible and not having this match happen yet. I know a lot of people say, oh, we wanted to happen now, but no, you don't have to rush this. And there's story to tell. For example, if The Rock and Roman was to happen, we know he still was going to do the movie obligations. One or two things was going to happen. Either The Rock was going to win and we weren't going to see a top champion on SmackDown or Roman was going to win. And we weren't going to see a top champion on SmackDown for, you know, the summer months. So it would have been a lose, lose situation for the fans. They would have had their match probably would have been fun. And then that would have been it. Then what? Then what you do for Roman at that point, if he does win that match against The Rock, they were supposed to, you know, have that match at this year's WrestleMania. What happens in Roman? He beat The Rock. Who's beating him? Some say, oh, goon. Possibly, possibly, but you would want to heal in a babyface dynamic anyway. In this particular situation. And I don't even see that happening. So what do you do? You literally would book yourself in the corner. And then at that point, I don't think people would have cared about Cody winning as much, so it just, it wouldn't have worked. It would have, you would have booked yourself once again into a corner. If The Rock wins, I'm sure he would have probably still been feuding with Roman, but he wouldn't have been on TV. So we still would have been left without a champion. Now you put Cody into the mix, you have Cody win. Now we still, we get a champion that's going to be on SmackDown weekly for the most part, and you can build story off of this loss. Because I know a lot of people are thinking The Rock is going to turn on Roman. And I was one of those people that was thinking that was going to possibly happen at this year's WrestleMania. But as I look at it now, I don't think they need to do that. They're playing right into the fact that The Rock is seemingly on Roman side. But I don't think they need to rush that. I do think this year's WrestleMania, The Rock and Roman team end up. There's going to be some issues that tag team match on night one. And then there's going to be some issues in that bloodlines rule match for night two between The Rock and Roman. And I could see a situation where Cody wins, but Roman's going to blame everybody else but himself. That's the story that I can see them portraying. Roman getting mad at everybody else but himself. And the biggest person he's going to get mad at is The Rock. He's going to get mad at him because he's going to possibly feel like, you know, he didn't help out enough. He's the reason why he lost the championship and also the fact that he's not going to be there. And they can play up the fact that The Rock is filming movies and is going to piss Roman off because maybe The Rock gets not The Rock, Paul Heyman is trying to call The Rock to get a hold of him and he's not returning Romans calls.  He's going to be deranged in the sense of he doesn't have the championship. So how can you call yourself the tribal chief when you don't have the championship no more and life after the championship is going to be very different for him. You're going to see hopefully and they do this. His mannerisms are going to be a lot more outburst like he's going to he's going to snap more. He's going to be more disrespectful to his bloodline brother and to the point where they won out and he's going to be disrespecting The Rock. He's going to be trying to call him out. Come back Rock. We need to talk like is going to get to that point where where The Rock is done filming then he'll probably respond and say yo what's going on here like what I thought we were family. I did my part. You couldn't finish the job and then boom you can build because if you have The Rock and Roman happen now there's not much story to tell left especially if The Rock loses there's no story to tell if The Rock wins yet a story to tell but at the same time the majority of the summer months will just be once again with no champion. We'd have to wait even longer but you can build story within the bloodline and Romans frustration until the Rock comes back and to me personally that's a great way to bridge this storyline of Roman post-Wrestlemania no championship blaming everybody else for his for his loss now taking it out on a bloodline. That's where you can create the situation where maybe Jimmy steps away or even solo because we've been waiting for this moment where solo finally says enough is enough.  Or you can build a situation where maybe some of the bloodline members start to slowly but surely you know follow the Rock's orders before WrestleMania or during WrestleMania something like that. You can do so many things but it's better with Cody having a championship and them having their their epic match at next year's WrestleMania or whenever you want to do it but it doesn't need to happen now because you can tell so much more story with the Rock not being there for however long he's going to be out filming the movie. This is why you do certain things like that because if you rush the story now you create a huge gap where the Rocks not going to be there Romans not going to be there then I mean there's no point for Roman to be there especially if he wins. There's literally no point for him to be there until the Rock comes back you feel me. So that's pointless but now you create that story the if Cody wins have him win at WrestleMania 40 Rock goes away Roman feel some type of way and you create that dissension with the bloodline Roman starting to lose it blaming everybody else to to the point where the Rock finally comes back addresses it and they built a few from there. It's simple. I know I see some people say at all now it still shouldn't happen. No bro you don't have to rush it. No great stories aren't rushed you build. Build in anticipation escalate the story. You don't rush it because rushing it all that's going to do you're going to create a situation where now what will you do now how do we follow up on that. Having Roman lose this year helps for the Rock and Roman story going on for the rest of this year and into next year depending on when they want to have that match. So it makes sense and I'm glad they did pull the audible like they did comment down below. Let me know do you guys agree with my point on Cody winning this year and building up that feud even more between the Rock and Roman or do you guys feel like rock and Roman should have happened this year. Let me know how y'all feel down below but I appreciate all of the sport. Rotor and video game. I'm still here to speak to you to rest of the world. Appreciate y'all kicking with me. See y'all next one. Peace.


I appreciate it having the cats. I don't ever disagree with somebody like Admiral Katz. The only thing I want to point out is that I'm old enough. I was in the Navy before the swathes. I don't know what I'm talking about. Maybe the Air Force had their wings. Submariners had their dolphins. We had black shoes. In fact, and then I'll quit telling sea stories, but my last job on Little Rock was one of my collateral duties. I was put in charge of the closed circuit television station. And our theme song was, Mothers of Invention Brown Shoes Don't Make It. Which really endeared me to the Hilo debt. A little rock. So I want to thank y'all. Thank y'all for having me. I'm glad to be back with my fellow surface warriors. I want to thank the cats, the members of this association. Thank you for what you do. Thank you for making sure that we stay apprised of the issues that are facing our surface fleet. And we've got to have strong support from organizations like you. We're going to continue to develop the creative solutions that we've got to have as we face an ever changing, ever more complex world.  Social disorder, political change. Dancing technology around the world continue to drive our foreign policy and global engagement. Now our Navy and our Marine Corps, our America's first line of defense, deployed worldwide. We're America's way team. Uniquely what we provide the Navy and Marine Corps is presence. That constant presence, ready for any challenge that may come over the horizon. Now, I talk about presence a lot, but what does it really mean? First it means that we deploy pretty much the same in times of war and in times of peace. In order to provide that presence that we need, today we have more than 100 ships deployed and more than 30,000 Marines deployed around the world. And they're doing this myriad of missions from airstrikes against ISIL to fighting Ebola, to exercising with our partners and our friends to protect freedom of navigation in the Pacific. And as we've drawn down from two land wars, our sister services talk about reset and coming home. Well, there are no permanent homecomings for sailors and Marines. For 239 years we've deployed continually to keep America adversaries far from our own shores. We deploy not only to fight and win our nation's wars, but also to act as a powerful deterrent to potential adversaries. Second presence means where it matters, when it matters. Because we're forward deployed, we're usually there when a crisis begins to develop. Coming from the sea, we can get any place quicker. We can stay as long as we need to. We bring everything we need and we don't have to ask anybody's permission to operate. Those are pretty significant attributes. When you think about some of the distances involved and some of the time needed to react. Being there, providing that presence, gives our nation's leaders an array of options. And those options range from the humanitarian assistance calls that we get on a very regular basis, including things like Japan, the Philippines, Haiti, to delivering first strikes against ISIL off the deck of the USS George H.W. Bush. And that last one is a great example. When the President decided that we would strike ISIL, the Bush was in the Northern Arabian Sea doing combat air over Afghanistan. Within 30 hours, she was in the Northern Arabian Gulf on station, ready to launch strikes. She was our only option for 54 days. 54 days. And it wasn't because we didn't have other assets in the region. It was because we couldn't get permission to take off armed to do those strikes. We didn't have to ask anybody whether we could take off from the Bush. I think that's one example of just how vital Navy Marine Corps are to our national security. And it goes back through history from the victories over the British frigates 200 years ago, from Manila Bay, Battle of the Atlantic in World War I, the vast reaches of the Pacific in World War II. It isn't only our physical security, as important as that is, that we defend. It's also our economic well-being. The Navy and Marine Corps contribute to our security in a way that's felt by every single American. And the shelves of stores across this country, they're just in time deliveries. And so what we do has a direct impact on the availability of goods and all the prices. I can make a pretty good argument and do a lot that the United States Navy has been the primary reason for the success of the international economic system by protecting the sea lanes and keeping those sea lanes open for everybody involved in peaceful commerce. And the other thing I'm talking about is jobs. In the United States, over 40 million people have jobs directly typed to international seafloor trade, more than one in four working Americans. That's because we live in such an age of globalization and world trade, 90% of all commerce goes by sea. 95% of all our telecommunications and data go under the sea. Our commercial, our economic success is tied to the sea in so many ways and to the rest of the world. And it's not just people who work on imports or on shelves. From farming to fashion, from electronics to energy, manufacturing of all kinds are dependent on the imports and the exports over the world's oceans. So the security that we provide is tied directly to main streets all across this country. And leaving a conquest at great universities have told us about the link between and approved the link between the far presence of the Navy and Marine Corps and the stability of this globalized economy. And while we benefit economically, we also benefit from the way some of this shared economic success helps limit conflict and potential wars. When you look around the world where you see unrest and violence, a lot of times you also find employment, stagnant economies, financial storms, by helping to secure the world's oceans, protect free trade, respond to crisis early, prevent escalation, U.S. Navy, Marine Corps, or Biden to the American people to our security. Providing that presence falls on the surface fleet, the foundation of our Navy. This is sort of a truism, which I have to explain from time to time. The foundation of our Navy is ships. That's what we are. That's why we're the Navy. We have to have right-sized fleet to do what we need to do. Now, I've lost track of the number of times people have come up to me and explained to me how our fleet is shrinking. And so, y'all have heard these numbers before, but I'm going to do it again until nobody comes up and says, fleet shrinking. On September 11th, 2001, the U.S. Navy had 316 ships. By 2008, after one of the great military build-ups in our nation's history, our fleet was down to 278 ships. In the five years before I came into this office, the U.S. Navy put 27 ships under contract. That was not enough to halt the decline in the size of the fleet, and it was also not enough to protect our industrial base. In the first five years I've been in office, we have built, we have put under contract, 70 ships. A smaller-type line. For Navy, in 2014, we launched nine ships. And by the end of the decade, our fleet's going to be back over 300 ships. And so, when you say that, the next criticism you get is, well, yeah, that's great, but you've done it at the cost of aviation. Long. In five years, first five years I've been secretary, we have bought 1,300 naval aircraft. That's 40% more than we've bought in the five years. We're not neglecting ships or planes. And even as we deal with possible impacts of sequester, now it's not the time to give up on the progress that we've made in our shipbuilding. I don't believe y'all to pay for one navy ship with another navy ship. Shipbuilding takes a long time. It's a long lead tax. It takes a long time to get a ship from drawings to commission. It's the least reversible thing we do. If you miss a year, if you cancel a ship, you can't get it back because our industrial base can't happen twice what we had if we miss a year and we try to push it in to the next year. We have to have those gray halls on the horizon. So we're building a battles fleet. First example is a bad example for this audience, but two Virginia-class attack submarines. I know what submariners call us, targets, but we've got to command the undersea as well as the surface. We're building two DDGs. We commissioned a big deck and filled in October. Another one is under construction. In Congress, in the 2015 budget, it's put in money for an additional LPD. We're building other support ships like mobile landing platforms and a four-form staging basis. All of these programs are on schedule and either on or under budget. We also have two carriers under construction. CVN-78 and CVN-79. Now, you've heard as I have about the cost of this carrier program. And it's pretty clear that CVN-78 before is a prime example of how not to build a ship. We started designing it while we were building it. Too much technology that was not mature, not proven, tried to be pushed into this first ship. And it's a cost-plus contract. But since I've come into this office, we've started some very strict oversight. And we're driving down the cost of CVN-78 and, perhaps more importantly, CVN-79. Taking the lessons learned from CVN-78 and applying them to CVN-79 and the Kennedy. And at this point, and I believe going forward, too, I believe that we're strong both ships are under and will remain under the congressional cost cap. So we've made some real progress there. And finally, I want to talk to you about our small services and battles. Today in the shipyard in Marinette, Wisconsin, we've got five freedom class ships currently under construction, including the next USS Little Rock. It's an amazing thing to be able to name Navy ships. And in Mobile, alongside the high-speed vessels that are in serial production, we have five independence class ships under construction. Four in the fleet, and in 2015, the shipyards are going to deliver four more. Now, there's also been a lot of stories about LCS. And usually the facts are at least a couple of years, and usually more than that. The facts cited are usually 34 years behind the reality. There's based on bad data. Because we're in serial production on both places of ship. The costs keep coming down. We're launching on schedule. And when this program started, it did it. But they've been turned around. And this program, in a lot of ways, is an acquisition, a success story, and a model program. And they're coming in well, well, these ships are going to be critical We have a demonstrated need for 52 of them. Last week, we saw the final deployment of the USS Kauffman, our last Perry class fleet. For decades, Perry class has done an outstanding job. Been a central part of our work with our partners in theater security missions, providing lower cost, small footprint approaches to operations. These roles are going to be filled by the Freedom and Independence class of ships. And like every ship we're introducing, these new ships are far more capable than the ones they're replacing. They're operating unmanned systems. They've got a wealth of new innovative technology. And they're going to be far deployed a whole lot more. As Kauffman leaves on her last voyage, USS Fort Worth is in Singapore on her first voyage. She's testing the lessons that we learned from freedoms deployment to Singapore in the last two years. The upgrade we've made to both the hardware and the operating concepts that we based on those lessons, from the systems experience, we've made 400 individual changes to Fort Worth before she deployed. Now, this class of ship and both were variants of equally at home in blue water and brown, Fort Worth is tailor made for the broad expanses of the Pacific, which she crossed to get to Singapore with more or less fuel than had been anticipated. But flexible and agile enough to work in the Latorals and coastal waters Southeast Asia. She's going to be in Singapore for 16 months and we're going to rotate three crews in ship stays where it is. The crews come and join the ship. And immediately after arriving in Singapore she went back to sea part in the search operations for the Air Asia flight. These ships are a test case of the Air Normal part of our fleet. And based on the results of the small surface combatant task force we're improving both variants making them more lethal making them more survival. Ensuring that they are multi-mission. And by improving these we're also doing the constant incremental improvements that we do on every ship class. And even with the additional expense of putting in this increased mortality increased survivability, these ships are still going to come in under the map that was set for them before they had this these improvements. Some of the things we put in is a new over the horizon missile, surface to surface missile, upgraded improved combat systems, a dedicated towed array, sonar and we're hardening certain parts of the ship to make it more survival. And because of the efficiency of the arms and the way we've been able to reduce cost, this ship is still going to be the most affordable in our arsenal. I've talked to everyone, cats talked about my ship for Little Rock. We had a thousand people on that ship. She was an old ship. She was built during World War II and after the war she was laid out putting moth bombs. As a cold war heated up in the fifties, she was pulled out put through a refit that lasted three years. Weapons taken out, new ones put on new sensors added, the entire back of the ship, the stern I guess, the superstructure was taken out and replaced in about as ugly a configuration as you can imagine. But the biggest challenge was the addition of the then revolutionary new weapon the Talos, guided missile. And Little Rock went through that one big conversion of several small ones and served until the past and middle of the 70s. And the history of that ship is one of the hallmarks of the constant drive in the naval profession in the surface community for improvement adaptation. The Navy tore that ship apart inside out and rebuilt it to make it a viable platform for a new age. And we've done that over and over again from the model to the first in power armoured ships during the Civil War to the gunnery revolution led by some junior officers in the last century. Marine Corps development of amphibious warfare between the two war wars by sailors. Our Marines have always looked to be on the cutting edge. And I think we need to embrace a couple of things. One is the tradition of the Navy, a long tradition. And it's a tradition of innovation, developing new ideas. When Little Rock was put into the shipyard and rebuilt as a new kind of cruiser she was redesivated. She started out as a CL light cruiser because that's what the nation needed at the end of World War II. Once she was refitted, recommissioned she was changed to CLG light guided missile cruiser. And it's changed connected to a new and innovative weapon system with a long naval history and tradition. And we've a little bit gotten away from that today. We started naming ships or designating ships with some interesting acronyms that seem to have come out of the Pentagon instead of our naval traditions. And I'm thinking about things like A-F-S-B M-L-P-J-H-S-B and of course L-C-S. It's not an L-class ship. I hear L I think M-Fee. Everybody else does. I hear Latoral and I have to tell you I've spent a good bit of my time explaining what a Latoral is. So I think it's time that we reconnect our tradition of innovation and creative thinking with what we're doing today. Talk with CNO Assistant Secretary for Acquisition Sean Stacklin. We got input from this community and so we're going to start with the L-C-S. One of the requirements that the small service patent task force had was to have a ship with frigate light capabilities. It's a frigate. We're going to call it one. We're going to change the hull designation from L-C-S to F-F-4 for L-C-S. It's going to be the same ship same program of record just with an appropriate and a traditional name. And in coming weeks we're going to announce new hull designations for the other types of ships that I have mentioned. As a former CNO George Anderson once said the Navy has both a tradition and a future and we look with pride and confidence in both directions. For 239 years our Navy and Marine Corps have been agile, innovative, and adaptive. They are deployed. They remain the most responsive option to defend the United States. We have to make sure even through these certain times that it remains so. So from the Navy so for Fortis for every courageous from the Marines so for Fidelis always faithful. Thank you. I know this is a shy group but I've got one, sir. We have eight. Well number one we're driving down the cost of everything. Born in 1901 tree grower on the hardware store in Ackman, Mississippi. Also is one of the cheapest people God has ever seen fit in. Back when I was running for state auditor in Mississippi I met a guy at Wiggins, Mississippi who came up to me and said yes sir I am. He said I'm going to vote for you. If you're half as cheap as the state's money as your daddy is with his we'll be okay. Let me just say I am his son. So that's one way. A second way is don't fall into the trap of paying for one Navy ship with another Navy ship. The fact that big platforms are easy targets for budget cutters. Take a ship. Take a carrier. Take a destroyer.   We're saving at least four billion dollars a year on service contracts today. And it's because now we can track the dollar from when Congress appropriates it to when we get a contract. A couple years ago we couldn't do that. It's hard. And it's not big and you can't say well we're taking that but there's real money there. And it's about setting some priorities and sticking with old protection bill. As long as I possibly can. Good morning. I wanted to ask you there were reports out this week that the Navy's now decided with the Marines to go ahead and opt for the V-22 to take care of the carrier onboard delivery. Can you walk us through that decision and explain what you'll get from the V-22 whether there's additional capabilities? And then I wanted to ask you real quickly I know that the budget is pretty seasonal but we do know that sequestration is due to take effect again in fiscal 16 and we've heard that the Pentagon is going to submit a budget that is over the sequestration limits. Can you just talk about what you think is going to happen with sequestration and whether you think you'll get it lifted. Thank you. Andrew I would have been so disappointed if you hadn't asked me to talk about some things I cannot talk about until the budget drops. And I can't about either one of those and I know that the memorandum has become public before the budget but I'm simply going to have to wait until the budget drops. On the V-22 the one thing I will say about the possible use of V-22 is that is a great example of the Navy Marine Corps team so a great example of using a proven a proven manufacturing process proven asset to get lower costs instead of starting over on a completely new system. So after I think it's still February 2nd after February 2nd I'll be happy to sit down and talk to you about all sorts of details. Well I mean regardless of what budget is put in finally the President's got a responsibility to put in a budget that he believes will protect the United States from there and he takes that very seriously and so do we. Well I've described sequestration using a technical term dumb it and it will have some pretty devastating impacts what my argument has been is that you won't necessarily have a smaller fleet because I'm going to protect sugar but it's going to have bad impact somewhere our bases we're already 70% sustained for our bases and we're looking at that it's going to have an impact not on the forward deployed forces but particularly this is a case of Marines they're going to have everything they need when we deploy the training the equipment but it's the next to go and it's the people at home and their training cycle and their access to equipment that they're going to be impacted and so part of I think part of our job is showing some of those impacts going forward if sequestration were to hit Congress has shown in 1450 we can we can avoid this and again I think it's our responsibility to put in a budget that we think does the job of meeting the missions that the country expects of us and to defend the country who else Mr. Secretary Martin Auto-Crosh with C-Po and magazine and a former Brown shoe I apologize Auto we like surface they take us where we need to go clarification the FF designation will be on the next 20 LCS and the first 32 will be named to be determined pretty much the only thing I will say about it will certainly be on the last 20 we're doing the detailed engineering work and design work right now to do the enhanced survivability enhanced fatality if we can fold those in earlier than 19 which is when we're we'll finish building 32 we can fold it in earlier those ships will be designated FF and one of the great things about the way the small surface combatant task force came out is we can retrofit either version with these upgrades and as ships get retrofitted their designation will change we're looking at what to call the first the first number of what is today and would you respond to the testing evaluation Mr. Gilmore is a criticism that the changes you're making to the next 20 really don't improve that survivability that much well I'll say two things number one Mr. Gilmore was we showed him and his folks the small surface combatant task force in the process we were going through we included them at every step of the way he was there when that decision was made and number two there is no way you can make any Navy ship 100% survival and what you have to look at is what's the role of that ship what survivability does it need to perform that role and there are different levels of survivability that you need and we are absolutely confident particularly with the upgrade but that this ship can do its mission and the C&O keeps pointing out that one of the way ships are survivable is they don't get hit and being fast having a knockout punch of your own to keep from getting hit is one of the best ways of best ways to survive good morning Mr. Secretary alright can you hear me now alright sir first let me be one of the sailors that says thank you for adding into our tradition thank you I didn't realize I was doing it but somebody told me otherwise I thought he was there we're proud of it sir so thank you to my question as I leave after 32 years in the Navy and we see the onset of women in submarines and you talked about building ships in submarines and where our future is going and traditions and so forth and blending all of that in where do you see us right now enlisted and officer females on submarines and when do you think that first one will launch fully integrated with both officer and enlisted great question we've got as you know women officers now SSBN's SSGN's first women officers are now reporting to Virginia class attack submarines in the next little while and I won't nail myself down but not very long we'll come out with the detail plan of integrating enlisted women into our submarine force and it's not going to be it will take a little while to do it but because we'll have to make a few changes here and there structural changes on the subs but it won't take that long we have to add to that question I want to say one more thing we don't have enough women in the Navy we just don't and we're working on it we're working on trying to increase the numbers because as we do we have a stronger we have a stronger force thank you and I'm proud to be your senior enlisted woman in the Navy me too and don't leave 32 years and I'm yours now you sing while she's the singer listening thank you good morning Mr. Secretary my name is Brian McGrath and I'd like to talk to you about fleet size early in the administration especially when Bob Work was your undersecretary the total number of ships seemed to be minimized in favorite discussion of networks in favor of discussion of networks and the networking power as time has gone on the total size the number of the fleet seems to have become more important can you explain that very positive thing sure well because of what you talked about the networking the increased capabilities sometimes dramatically increased capabilities of the ships the ships that are replacing the newer ships are just formal capable and so we don't need as many we don't need a 600 fleet Navy to do the jobs that a 600 fleet Navy would have done 30 years ago but the more we got into it and the more we looked at it and the more we saw the demands and the role that the Navy plays quantity has a quality all of a sudden and our fleet when we got here as I said was shrinking finding out why that was the case getting some of those programs under control driving down the costs so that we could afford the ships took us a while took us a year to get there to be confident that we could and I'm absolutely confident now that we're going to go past the 300 ship mark for the end of this decade and that we will stay at above 300 ships long into the future in order to do all the jobs that we need to do thank you Mr. Secretary thank you Mr. Secretary Mike Seifer well it's great that we're increasing ship numbers and ship building is on the rise on the horizon there's the Ohio replacement program that's going to pressurize all of that so how do you fit in funding Ohio replacement funding the new carriers and then still being able to afford anything else ship building was well I'll give you two big answers to that number one again ship with another Navy ship and two the CNO and I talked about this a lot we testified to this this should not be a Navy build if it is it will take up about half of what we've traditionally spent on ship building for 12 years if you do that the impact will be akin to a greater than sequester because you're going to impact the rest of the fleet or you're going to impact something somewhere else Congress is being very responsive we're beginning this conversation they've set up a fund for the Ohio class replacement now no money is in the fund but it's a great first step we start building these in 2021 we're already spending billions of dollars to do the engineering the R&D the design drawings this sort of stuff but either because this is a national program they pay for with national funds some way it's the most survivable leg of the triad it will be the most survivable leg of the triad is as far to the future as we can say and or maybe ship building needs to be plused up to a count point you you simply cannot gut the Navy for this one of course there's a quick follow up to that I mean I'm hearing from the Air Force that if if you were to get the Ohio replacement funded as a non-service funded program the Air Force would step in and say great idea we need that for the new strategic bomber we need that for Minuteman if the Air Force can make that case have at it to me that's not a good argument this is the most survivable leg of the triad this is one of our very top national priorities they can make that case for some of their programs they should but they shouldn't say don't do it for Navy because somebody else may do it


Daily Tech News Show is made possible by its listeners. Thanks to all of you including Tony Glass, Philip Less, and Daniel Dorado. Coming up on DTNS, Getty Images bans AI made art from its platform, Google lets you edit search results about yourself, and should vehicles try to detect drunk drivers and lock them out? This is the Daily Tech News for Wednesday, September 21st. Do you remember the 21st night of September 2022 in Los Angeles? I'm Tom Baird. I am not Guy Fox, but I am Scott Johnson from the city next to the Great Salt Lake. And I'm the show's producer, Roger Chang. Let's start with a few tech things you should know. Amazon refreshed its Fire HD 8 tablets. I guess they weren't good enough for next week's announcement. But they've added a 30% faster 6-core processor. They have generally thinner, lighter design, 13 hour battery life. The standard $100 HD 8 will give you 2 gigabytes of RAM and wired charging. And if you pay an extra 20 bucks for the $120 HD 8 plus, you get 3 gigabytes of RAM, wireless charging, a little bit better camera. Both support tap to Alexa features so you can control the assistant with touch commands. A ruggedized kids version, which is kind of normal for Amazon to offer that, costs you $50 more, so either $150 or $170 depending on whether you want the plus. You got to serve those ruggedized kids, I always say. As Tom mentioned yesterday, Windows 11's first big feature update is here with a customizable start menu, voice access, system-wide captioning, touch gestures, and more. Check Windows Update in the settings to see if it is available yet for you. If you're on a machine that can't run Windows 11, Windows 10 version 2020, sorry, 22H2 will arrive in October. That will be more than just a security update, though. Microsoft has not detailed what features it will be, though, so you'll have to wait for that. Microsoft also announced it will hold a Surface event on October 12th at 10 a.m. Eastern to show off new devices. Yeah, just a Surface event. Never get tired of that one. Framework and Google have announced the Framework laptop Chromebook edition, so it is a user-upgradable framework laptop like their Windows laptops, but runs Chrome OS instead of Windows. It supports Framework's expansion card system. If you don't know, that gives you four hot swappable slots so that you can decide at any moment which ports you want and which side of the laptop you want them on and swap them out as you need it. You can choose between USB-C, USB-A, microSD, HDMI, DisplayPort, Ethernet, and high-speed storage and mix and match. You can also upgrade the RAM inside of a Framework laptop and the storage that's inside and swap out bezels on the display if you want to change colors. If you want this Chrome OS version of the laptop, pre-orders begin today in the U.S. and Canada, starting at $999 shipping in early December. YouTube did a cool thing, I think, anyway. They announced a beta for Creator Music, which will offer a catalog of songs that can be used for monetized videos. Creators can either pay for songs directly or split monetization revenue with the license holder of that song. Terms of the licensing and revenue split are spelled out when selecting tracks. YouTube also updated its partner program to share ad revenue with YouTube shorts creators. That's a long time coming. Early next year, qualified creators will get a 45% cut of ad revenue from those shorts videos. Giving people a path to legally pay for the music instead of forcing them to break the law if they wanted to use it. I think that's a smart idea. NVIDIA announced the launch of Omniverse Cloud with services that'll let artists and developers design, publish, and operate what they called Metaverse Applications. Basically, 3D stuff. You get the power of big data centers running NVIDIA GPUs to do your 3D workflow. Pretty cool stuff if you're working in 3D animations and avatars and that sort of thing. NVIDIA is betting on Universal Scene Description, or unfortunately, acronym USD. Not US Dollar, Universal Scene Description as the future standard, or as they called it, the HTML of the Metaverse. Omniverse Cloud is based on the USD standard, and it's NVIDIA's first big software as a service offering. The big takeaway, if you like me and in the know on buzzwords and acronyms, in my opinion, is before it gets big, you know that USD does not mean US Dollar. In the Metaverse, it's going to mean Universal Scene Description. I'm actually legit excited about this, and I'm sure this will come up on later episodes when it becomes available, but I think it's a bold move in a new place that people like Adobe aren't ready for. Yeah, it's too early to call USD the standard of anything that might eventually be called the Metaverse, and yes, it's really hard to keep my eyes from rolling when I say the word Metaverse. But if you strip all that away, having a standard that's not from NVIDIA, it's an outside standard, and having a cloud service for making 3D stuff, I think is really cool. This is exciting, buzzwords aside. All right, let's talk a little more about Google delivering on a promise. Promises made, promises kept from Google. Let's find out. At Google I.O. this year, Google announced results about you. Some of you may remember this, a feature that would let you remove some information about yourself from search results. Well, now that feature is rolling out to users in Europe and the US. So I guess promise is kept. We'll see how it goes. In the Google app for Android, if yours has been updated, of course, you can tap on your profile avatar, select the results about you as the menu item. That takes you to a page that explains how that you can do this actual request for the removal, and that takes you out of the search results. If they contain a phone number, home address, or other personally identical information, identifiable information like ID numbers, account numbers, that kind of stuff. Yeah, that's a good point. This is not right to be forgotten. That's a European law about, I would like that embarrassing story about me being arrested taking down. It's not untrue. I just don't think it should be up anymore. This is about doxing. Somebody put up my address, my phone number, my bank account number, and I would like that not to show up from search results. You can make a request from a page while you're searching. If you're looking at search results in the app, you can click on the three dot menu by the result and then choose remove result. Once you do that, you can track the progress of your request on that results about you page that Scott just mentioned. Not all Google app users are going to see this right away. If you don't see it in your particular Google app, I didn't see it in mine on my Android phone. You just hang in there. It'll slowly roll out to everybody. However, if you do have an immediate need to remove results, there's a web page you can go to. We'll have a link in the show notes. It's not real snappily set out loud. It's support.google.com slash web search slash answer and slash 9673730. You'll probably search for it too though. I've got a lot of questions about this. They've been swimming around my head all morning, but I do wonder about one thing in particular. This obviously must be fielded by AI and robots and bots and stuff because this is too much for some individual at some terminal to probably manage given the potential size of how many requests you'll get per day. That only concerns me a little bit because I may be not that much more than if a human being was doing it, but it feels like this might be a situation that gets a little in the weeds when you say, sure, I can't take down an article that's about me being arrested because that's just true and I don't really get to control that. But what if it's an article that somebody wrote that was slanderous about you? That's just an example. If they said a bunch of things that were absolutely demonstrably not true and you have very little recourse to have it taken down, suppose you go through legal hoops to do it, but maybe you don't have the resources to do that, can this remedy that at all? I don't know. I don't know what the granularity is because they don't really detail it. It makes perfect sense to me that if it's personally identifiable, doxable information. Super simple and easy. I don't know how the robots decide you're telling them the truth. There's no robots. This can't be people though, right? It's too big. Google says it's important to note that when we receive removal requests, we will evaluate all content on the webpage to ensure that we're not limiting the availability of other information that is broadly useful, for instance, in news articles. Yeah, when they say we, I think they include their robots. They're doing manual review, my friend. Really? Yeah. That seems enormous. Okay, if they do, I say props to that. I'm not going to say it's entirely 100% manual. There's probably some filtering on one end. You're probably right. But they are definitely putting humans in the process here to make sure. Well, that would be a nice change because most of my interactions with you two and other Google services have issues. It's all robots all the time. So if that's true, that's actually, that's really good news to my ears because I think this is a more personal thing. This is the kind of thing that needs the touch of another human being, for lack of a better way of saying it, to intervene and say, yeah, this is absolutely what he says it is or whatever. Because if computers are deciding that we're going to have false positives, false negatives just going to get weird. And this won't be perfect. But I think, I think I'm leaning toward liking this. I just, I just don't know what the granularity is. Like at what point can I stop getting successful requests? Not that I'd be doing it all day, but you know, like what kinds of requests seem reasonable that aren't going to get chosen and which ones aren't. And again, it's the weeds. So that's why that's why I made the point that this isn't the right to be forgotten. So this is not about this article is embarrassing, but it's true. Those don't count here. That's an entirely different process and it's only in Europe. This is it shows my personal contact info. It shows my contact info with an intent to harm me. It shows other personal info about me. This is all about personal info or it contains illegal information, information that is illegal for people to show or it's outdated. Which I've that's the one category that I'm like, Oh, so if somebody's saying male Tom at 608 Maple Street Arlington, Virginia. I'll be like, yeah, I haven't lived there in years. That's how to get that get that out of there. That's not right. I feel like that's that's interesting that that's in there as well. But most of this is there's data about me that shouldn't be seen or is wrong to be seen. That makes sense. I wonder if there's a way to like, if you had an about Tom page and on that page, you had some personally identical information that you wanted there. Right. For whatever reason, you wanted it there. Could I is some, I don't know, outsider go into their right click that and go, Hey, this should be taken down to mess with you and your disability. Again, that first of all, you have to do it from your from your logged in account. Remember that you can you mentioned you have to tap on your personal profile. So you're already telling Google, here's who I am. So it's going to look and go like, well, Scott, that information isn't about you. Yeah. Toss it right. Right. And so I think that's a that's a huge part of that. If you were able to like create an account where you were pretending to be me, there's still other ways that can go away. This account wasn't created recently. And that's where the review comes in and stops that stuff. So I feel like I'm not good. I would never say what you're talking about is impossible because there are always ways. I feel like it's unlikely, at least unlikely to happen a lot. I like our chances better now that I know there are humans involved. So that is good to know. Yep. Moving on. Let's check this out. The US National Transportation Safety Board or NTSB may have heard of them is recommended measures leveraging new in vehicle technologies that can limit or prohibit impaired drivers from operating their vehicles as well as technologies to prevent speeding. That's a direct quote. So what are we actually talking about here? Okay, so here is what they said in their published proposal. Incentives to get manufacturers to adopt speed adaptation systems. These are systems that range from simple warnings. You're going too fast to actual electronic limits that would slow you down. This would not be required. This is also not the first time the NTSB has recommended it before feels to me like they're just tacking this on like we're doing this other thing that's going to get a lot of headlines.  The one that people are really paying attention to is require. So that's different now. Hey, we suggest this is a really good idea. Require all new vehicles that are sold in the United States to implement passive alcohol impairment detection or advanced driver monitoring or both that would prevent or limit vehicle operation if it detects that you are impaired. Now, if you're out there saying like, well, wait, we have vehicle breathalyzers that are attached to starters. A lot of people, if you get convicted of drug driving, have to do those to get back the right to drive. That's existed for years. The NTSB is recommending a more passive approach than that.  And if it thinks you look drunk, then it intervenes. Interesting. Well, Volvo announced that it's ex 90 SUV will include a driver monitoring system that reads facial expressions to detect distraction or drunk driving. I will attempt to warn distracted drivers. And if it doesn't get a response, slow down and stop the car automatically right over to the side of the road. Yeah, this is I can I can see all the sides of this where where are you at with this one? I'm kind of manic this talk about one I've gone back and forth on. I'm worried because as I read this, I hear the facial detection or remote detection with other technologies, whatever those technologies may be. What do you do if it turns out it's somebody in the early stages of Parkinson's and they they are still allowed to drive legally, but you are detecting some abnormalities in the way that they drive. I would hate to see these people get lumped into this kind of impairment where you're intoxicated. So I'm worried about false positives and things like that, like with anything I feel that way. But I also really like the idea of these technologies getting better and better that can actually detect. You know, motion and translate that to whatever it thinks it means.  And that feels bad to me. But at the same time, I'm like, yeah, well, what if I what if we do catch somebody who's way drunk doesn't realize it got behind the wheel. Thought he was fine for the mile and a half home isn't actually. And then we're going to save lives, maybe his and maybe those he comes in contact with in the same way that mandatory seatbelt save lives. But the difference between these two is that seatbelts, you can see that through line of we did all this testing. It saved this many lives. We now have this data. It's easy to find and read. Therefore it makes sense to make these a mandate slash law where it comes to this. I don't know what that I don't know what this through line is. Like what's the straight line? There really isn't one. Yeah. I go, like I said, I go many ways on this on the one hand. It's a it's a little bit like those those edge cases where you're like, well, I don't want the result. Right. I don't want someone who is drunk driving a car. I don't want someone impaired driving a car where it gets weird is is the so how good is this? How how good is this at detecting? Because what I also don't want is me getting in a car and the car saying you're drunk and me going, I have a touch to drop. You know, I've been sober for a decade or or all your life, you know, like what what's going on? I feel like those are knee jerk reactions to any kind of proposal like this. And that they they there are always ways around them to say like, OK, well, we'll come up with ways to deal with individual cases where someone has a condition that just tends to set this off and we'll figure that out. That is important to do. And that's why the NTSB is just proposing this, not putting it in place, right? This is this is something that that they're they're testing the waters on. But but yeah, I I I like the idea of it detecting and saying, hey, you're drunk. I feel like once it does that, if it does that with a very high level of accuracy, it's irresponsible. It's irresponsible not to have it reduce the ability of the car to drive, right? Sure. Yeah. Well, it'll be interesting to see how this plan pans out. I love the idea of the tech and I hope the implementation is not, you know, too much of a headache. Yeah. Let us know what were you following this? Like, are you like, you know what, even if it means drunks get to drive? Sometimes I don't want the government requiring cars to have this. Or do you feel like, you know what, let's prove that it's accurate. But if it's accurate and maybe that's like a seat belt, like Scott was saying, what do you want to hear us talk about the show, too? Another way to participate is get in our subreddit. You can submit stories and vote on them at dailytechnewshow.reddit.com. Just image marketplace, by the way, yet to put in such a policy. Newgrounds, Purple Port and Fur Affinity have all similar restrictions. Shutterstock, though, seems to be the only one who's letting you still have the AI-generated art. Yeah. It's limited search results, though, so that you can't find AI-generated art. Oh, that's it. Oh, see, I missed that part. That's very interesting. Okay. Getty is doing this because they're concerned about the legal implications. The question of who owns a piece of art generated by an algorithm has not been tested in court. The terms of service of these companies grant ownership to the user in almost all cases. So if your mind jumps to that, like, oh, is mid-journey going to try to claim they own a thing if it gets really popular? It doesn't seem like that's going to be the problem. Since the machine models, though, are trained on copyrighted works, there is some concern that the derivative works might be considered to infringe on the original works that the model was trained on. And sort of a similar concern is that if the algorithm can generate something in the style of, say, Scott Johnson, especially if it was trained on Scott Johnson's work, does Scott get to say, like, oh, that's a not a fair use of my art? This has not been tested in court. Like I said, collecting the images for training appears to be protected under the same laws that allow you to index websites like search engines. So there's nothing illegal about collecting the art and training your model with it. But what is less certain is whether the art that results from that being trained on copyrighted works is a fair use of those copyrighted works. And the thing to remember about fair uses, it's not a right, it's a defense. You are, when you're using fair use, you're saying, yes, I infringed on copyright, but I had a fair use case to do so and I shouldn't be punished for it. It is not certain which way a judge would rule regarding algorithmically generated art based on training for copyrighted works. Well, in the meantime, sites like Getty are playing it a little bit safe and I don't blame them. Getty will rely on users to identify and report images that violate this rule. It's also working with the coalition of content providence, providence rather and authenticity to create some filters, which I also think is a great idea. One could presume an algorithm could be trained to look for words created by an algorithm, but mostly Getty's avoiding liability by having the policy in place. Yeah, just just putting the policy up gives them some defense and then making the effort really helps if somebody did try to sue Getty. They could say, no, it was against our policy. Here's what we did to try to stop it. Go after the person who made the thing, go after majority, go after somebody else. We were trying to stop it. So Getty's just trying to take themselves out of the equation right now. Debbie Scottis once says, someone should try a lawsuit so we can test it and that will happen. I think what I would remind people is that if you're an artist, you may want to use these as a tool. In fact, we've talked before on the show that creating the text that gives you the result you want is harder than a lot of people think. If you haven't tried this, go try it. Scott, I hope it's okay to say like if you try to imitate Scott Johnson's art by telling Mid Journey to make it, it's probably not going to make it as well as Scott yet unless you get really good. If you're able to make it do Scott's artwork credibly, you probably will realize you had to put a lot of work in that. That itself is an artistic skill. It's a skill of description and a skill of imagination and a skill of being able to work with the AI. But it's not as easy as like, well, now anybody can just say, make a Scott thing and then all of his work comes out. Yeah, if you said draw a tree like Scott Johnson, A, you got to figure out which one. There's a popular Marvel Comics artist named Scott Johnson.  So you got that whole thing. These little three, four word sentences you'd see people use on Dali Mini on Twitter or whatever. It ain't going to cut it. It's not going to work that way. There's skill in it. You're absolutely right. There's also so much more to training these AI models to, to, to match up with certain styles. And sometimes it's not just an artist style. It's an era, an era style like we want to be classic, you know, a post Roman rule of era of art. Okay, cool. What does that mean? Has it been trained to do that? On the other hand, there are a couple of situations where I think there's real value in this. I may even brought this up on the show before. So forgive me if I brought this up, but if you're hearing it twice. The idea that you are, let's say a small game developer and you've got a computer RPG plan, CRPG. That's a lot like the Baldur's Gate games. You've got characters to create and you've got profiles to choose and those include avatars.  Those games give you sometimes hundreds, maybe less, but usually hundreds of choices of what to choose. Different genders, different faces, different races, different, all these things within the D&D universe and construct.  A computer model can do it in a certain era style, a painterly oil painting style and cram those all out in about five minutes. Why wouldn't you do that? Like that's amazing. It doesn't address any of these legal issues and then some of that's got to set itself out. But that sounds like a huge boon to that level of creator. And it doesn't necessarily mean that at higher levels, artists are going to be pushed out as well. I think a lot of this is just unknown, but I'm optimistic the more the closer we get to this stuff. So you're not worried about people imitating you? I'm not because they can't. I don't think it's possible yet. I think it will be possible one day. It may not be me they focus on. I wonder if we need a law and we can argue about where the law should draw the line. But I wonder if there's something in there similar to protecting your likeness. So for instance, I can't, even if I look like George Clooney. I mean, God bless me if I could look like George Clooney, I don't. But even if I looked like George Clooney, I couldn't go make a commercial and pretend to be George Clooney because that would be using his likeness. Right. If I implied that I was him, maybe there's something similar to that that needs to be set for this. Like you, you can use text to image generators as long as you're not trying to pass yourself off as an actual artist because it can imitate their style. Right. I feel like that's the template here and that everything else should be fine. If I if I'm an artist who used text to image to generate my art, there's an art to that. Maybe I then did a lot of refining on it, which requires artistic skill of it, more traditional sort. And yeah, we talked about yesterday's show about the kinds of things like the game game designers wanting to be able to use it to just speed up things and do more things. So I do think I do think there's going to be there's going to need to be a law. I also think that before we get a lot, there'll be plenty of court cases that will make a version of what should be legal and not out of what the laws that exist, which is never as good as actually creating something new fit for purpose. Yeah. The only other thing I would add is it's possible that we'll get to a science fiction end on this where a famous artist is about to pass and they want to pass on their skill to another. And that another might be an AI. We do that with real people all the time. People sign your rights tears after someone died. So yeah, why not let a computer do it? I don't think we're that interesting. Like, like what if if I'm just going to keep using you. I'm sorry. What if Scott says when I die mid journey gets the rights to my style of art and they can, they can charge people to make art in the style of Scott Johnson. That would be an interesting then you have block block chain payments. I go to my family and everything's good. Totally. All right, real quickly. Logitech officially announced its G cloud gaming handheld running Android. It has a seven inch 1080p touchscreen with a 16 nine aspect ratio 60 Hertz refresh rate. It's not a monster runs on a Snapdragon 720G processor, four gigabytes of RAM, 64 gigs of storage. The big draws the battery. It's 6000 milliamp hour battery. They're saying it'll get 12 hours of battery life. Now it'll come with the Google Play Store. You'll be able to play Android games. But the other thing they're positioning it as is cloud gaming. They've worked with Microsoft and Nvidia to optimize Xbox cloud and GeForce. Now to run well on this, you can buy it right now. The retail price is $350 that arrives October 17th, but there's a hundred dollar discount if you order early. Yeah, quick, quick comment on this. I'm always interested in these devices just picked up a steam deck not long ago. I've been loving that thing, but they're they're obviously aimed at a very different thing. The fact that they're aiming this as just like almost entirely a cloud gaming device, despite the fact that you can play Android games on it, it is it is powered for that. It is not powered for high end gaming really of any sort. These are this is all pretty slow. I think the only thing that will hold this back from being a huge hit is I think that price is ridiculous. It's too high for this thing. And I think if this was one ninety nine and there was a $50 discount for ordering it earlier, but your ultimate price is one ninety nine. I think they would sell these things like hotcakes and it would go crazy. I think three forty nine is already in base steam deck skew territory. So I don't know why you would do this. This seems way overpriced and I love these sorts of things. I am into these portable gaming devices. Likely this thing will also be great for retro gaming and other things. But so is a steam deck at that entry price. So I just don't know. I'm not sure why this is so expensive. It's my only hang up. Otherwise, I think it looks like a fine piece. Yeah. I mean, if it was Windows at three fifty, that would make maybe more sense. Yeah, be more capable. I don't know. My perception changes. But the fact that it's Android three fifty, which is kind of silly since, you know, a Samsung Galaxy phone is less capable in this in many ways. Gaming wise anyway. Yeah. It's more capable in other ways, but, you know, that's going to cost you $1,200. So my expectations will be built really well.  Like none of those things are concerns to me. This sounds awesome. I just think that price is too high. It's not a loss leader for logitech. Probably. You're right. They're not going to take a big loss. Why would they? They're not going to make money off steam. They're not. I mean, they'll make a little money off of affiliate revenue from recommending X cloud and GeForce now, I suppose. But that's not the same as selling a bunch of games. I think you're right. The margins are slim on everyone else at the moment with maybe Nintendo being the one exception, but they've also got this, you know, advantage of still making the same seven year old hardware, whatever it's been now for the switch. So it's just a weird handhelds are starting to become a big deal again. And with the Odin hitting the market and the four mentioned Steam Deck and devices like this, there's tons of it on Amazon from various Chinese companies. Like we're in a bit of a renaissance for handheld and portable gaming. Yeah. I just wish it was a little more position price wise, but, you know, whatever, I'll probably get one of these because I want to see and I want to review it. I'll let people know what I think. And that sounds like something you might talk about on one of your other shows. What else you got going on these days? Well, you're right. The show would be core. I do actually play retro as well. The core is the show where we talk about all the big goings on in the video game world. And myself, Beau Schwartz and John Jagger host that show and have so much fun that it's entirely possible that we go like two and a half hours sometimes. That's how much we love doing it. We do it every Thursday. You might want to check it out if you're interested in any of the goings on in gaming, including this device. We'll be talking about that. And so much more. You can find core or every get your podcast. Just search for core. And if you're looking for the website, it's at frogpants.com slash core. Now, usually this is the part of the show where we thank new patrons for joining us. I don't know if we don't have any new patrons or if Patreon just has a glitch where it's not showing us because it's not showing me anything happening yesterday at all. And sad as it is, usually you see somebody canceling. If you don't see somebody signing up. And so I, if you have signed up, hang in there. I'm sure the data will arrive and we will thank you then. Thank you for your patience. If you haven't signed up, we'll sign up. Patreon.com slash DTNS. In the meantime, I want to thank Matt DeFriedes, one of our lifetime supporters, been with us for a long time, been supporting at a high level. Thank you for all the years of support, Matt. All right, patrons, stick around. I want to talk to Scott Moore about this AI art stuff on Good Day Internet. You can get that as a patron. You can also catch the show live Monday through Friday, 4 p.m. Eastern 200 UTC. Find out more about that at dailytechnewshow.com slash live back tomorrow with Scott Johnson. Nope. Justin Robbie Young talk to you then. This show is part of the Frog Pants Network. Get more at frogpants.com. The Diamond Club hopes you have enjoyed this program.