Let's give Roger control and start the show. Maybe that's how we'll start our videos from now on. It'll all, it'll have a dual purpose of giving me a regular open to the show and reminding me to give Roger control of the screen. Do you think I should download the beta? I was wondering about that. Very long time since I've downloaded a beta OS. I rely on my machine for so much more that I used to that I didn't do the beta last time but I've got, I think I might. I don't think I'm gonna do it on my phone though. I feel like at this point I really only use my laptop as like a mobile computing and like Shopify machine. So I feel like I might be able to do it. Wait, which OS? Sorry. Mac OS Sierra and iOS 10 Roger. Well, I don't have any iOS devices. Well then you won't be downloading that beta. Nope. I will not download the Sierra one either. Is everybody else running around with Pokemon? Pokemon Go? I caught one in my lift yesterday. Really? Yeah. It was sitting next to you? It was on the window sill. Huh. It's kind of brawl. What if it was driving? At the bar and there were none around. It was on the street? Yeah. Cheats, cons, windows and tricks. Yes, so I think we're good. I think we're great. Tomorrow's guest, Darren Kitchen and Len Peralta? Mm-hmm. Darren Kitchen, what a just a beautiful man Darren is. He's a gem. Just a real sweetheart. Stand up guy. Does a great bird imitation. They're great. I love them. Well, did you see that his snap from earlier yesterday had Shannon doing a bird imitation? Oh yeah. No, no, no. Yeah. That was them, cause I was giving Darren a shout out. Right, right and he got excited about the shout out. He got excited about the shout out so he and Shannon did the Dr. Bird imitation. We've got a couple of minutes before I really need to start the show. So I wanted to show off my current geek shot glass that I got yesterday. Oh snap. Yeah, I tell you what, we might need to figure out some what's it called. So wait, you are doing CreateCon. Yes. Gotcha. And then officially, is your Labor Day announcement? I am not doing, no, we talked about it on Sword and Laser. I will not be at DragonCon this year. Not yet. Yeah, I will be in Korea. Oh shoot, really? Yeah, Korea and Japan. Is that like a vacation thing or? Yeah. Hey, nice. So yeah, we gotta talk to you about shows and stuff over that period. Gotcha. I'll be away, I'll be away. But we should probably do this show first. Should we? Or should we talk schedule first? We can do that, yeah. Yeah? Yeah. I mean. Yeah, oh yeah. These are all traditional, but. Well, the first anniversary is paper. Tradition. All right, here we go. This episode of the Daily Tech News Show is brought to you by me. If you'd like to bring the next episode to yourself, go to dailytechnewshow.com slash support to be part of the show. Let's do this, Tom. This is the Daily Tech News for Thursday, July 7th, 2016. I'm Tom Marry, joining me on Thursdays. Justin Robert Young, coming to you live from downtown Oakland-ish. How's it going, Justin? Oh, we're bringing you from the heart of Oakland's news district to your living room. This is me. Is that the new name for your neighborhood? Oakland's news district? You know, I've always, for whatever reason, I've always liked that name, like the idea that there would be a news district. It just always tickles. Well, yeah, I guess Fleet Street is that for London, right? And I don't know that there are any others like that. Well, when I used to live in New York, I was always just delighted by how many districts, and it didn't matter if there was one store there. It was just like, ah, yes, like the Flint Rubbers District, but there's one store that sells Flint or something. Oh, we're gonna talk about news today. Pew Internet Research has got some new numbers on where you're getting your news hints. If you're young, it's social networks. If you're old, it's television, or maybe even newspapers, if you're really old. We're gonna talk about what that means and what your responsibilities as a consumer are now that you've got these infinite choices on the internet. Mac OS Sierra and iOS 10 betas are coming from Apple today at beta.apple.com. Remember, they're betas. So go in at your own risk. Here are some more top stories. Android Police reports its sources say Google is building two Android Wear devices for release after the next wave of Nexus phones. One watch, codenamed Angel Fish, would have LTE built in as well as GPS. The other, called Swordfish, would not have those two things, but both of them would have heart rate monitoring and integrated Google Assist so that you could talk to it. Swordfish, Angel Fish, codenames probably won't stick around, but it's interesting, Justin, to see Google making steps towards even more product manufacturing. They're not manufacturing it themselves, but this is a Google-made product, not something that is the norm with Android Wear, which is them saying, hey, these are the line of Android Wear watches out there. That is the path forward for them. And I hope that Angel Fish, Angel Fish is the one that I'm very excited about, because it obviously is the promised land future of smart wearable devices that they can off, they can activate autonomously, and they're not necessarily tied to something else. I hope that it is what we hope it is, and not just a stopwatch that counts down the five seconds that the battery will last while LTE and GPS are both enabled. Now, we have an interesting situation with Google and hardware going on, that I just alluded to, obviously, there are people who make their Android devices without Google's approval. They don't get the Google Play Store and all that. That's being litigated in parts of the world like Europe. There's people who make it with approval. They have to have the Google Play Store and the Google Search Engine, et cetera, but otherwise everything is determined by the manufacturer of the phone or the device. Then there's the Nexus devices, which don't get to put anything extra on them. They're like Microsoft's signature editions. They're done with the cooperation of Google, but HTC makes them or Huawei makes them. Now, we've got the Pixel C, and by the way, thanks to Chris for sending us a Pixel C, which is all Google. By the way, best Android tablet I've ever used, the Pixel C. If Google does follow the rumors and starts making their own versions of phones themselves, not Nexus devices, but devices designed by Google and watches as well, does that mean that Google becomes more like Apple or can Google continue to straddle this line of four different ways of doing things? Google just wants market share. That's what the entire Android Play has been from the very, very beginning, is let's figure out the way that we can get the most Android phones in the hands of the most people at any cost. So let's make these deals with manufacturers so they can slam them with bloatware despite the fact that part of the appeal of the iPhone was that it comes without bloatware, right? Except for the stuff that Apple puts on it. Now, you might just see an evolved situation where if you look at these manufacturers and you said, hey, look, if we came out with our own stuff, what would you do? And the manufacturers, by and large, would probably just say, I don't know, keep putting out these same phones that we're putting out because there's still a moneymaker for us and the market is so crowded anyway that we're all in these very specific niches and you doing something that would be the higher end of a Google Android phone does not necessarily hurt us. And we're all not waiting in line to make the Nexus this year as opposed to next year. So I don't think it is quite the scandal that it would have been, let's say, five years ago where things were a little bit more delicate. It's a mature system now and Google just going out and making proper Android phones just kind of makes sense to fit into that ecosystem. Yeah, I mean, in a certain sense, it may take the pressure off other manufacturers like we can't really do these phones anymore. So maybe Google taking it convinces them to get out of the market. Remember, this market is stagnating. I think with watches, that's part of what's going on is people just aren't gravitating to watches, not just by Google, but by anybody in the numbers that people expected. So Google may think, well, we can juice this market. We can make this happen. Yeah, I don't know. I don't know. I hope, I hope, I hope, I hope. But this Angelfish, the idea of having the LTE and GPS on one watch at this point, to me, has all the hallmarks of a classic Google Icarus move where they just, they put all the things that we wanted. Not the first, not the first watch to go LTE, but I hear what you're saying. Yeah. Avast software, boy, announces intention to acquire AVG technologies for $1.3 billion. Avast cited the need to scale their business into the internet of things market as a primary factor for the acquisition. The combined user base of Avast and AVG will grow to 400 million endpoints, of which 160 million are mobile. And Avast spokesman confirmed the company will still keep the AVG brand. I guess they're an AVG spokeswoman. Not, well, they will be eventually. Big, big move, right? These are two of the top five antivirus makers, among other things. They do more than just that. So a huge combination. And the internet of things needs security. So if we get more firepower towards that, that's a good thing, too. The internet of things, which has been as buzzed about as it has been slow to grow into complete acceptance by our culture. When this stuff goes wrong, a virus in your lights, a virus on your thermostat, is something far different than just having your browser spam into 90,000 different windows for various different products, right? Like, this needs to happen. The antivirus technology on these things needs to be something that is there, especially. Yeah, we should not need antivirus technology. We should have properly secured devices that have intrusion detection on their cloud services so that we as a user don't think about it at all. Or they should not have cloud services, and they should have proper security and firewalls that work on your own router. But yeah, the old Windows XP laptop run an AVG antivirus model is not going to work for the internet of things. You're absolutely right. Especially as we all talk, I think both of us are talking into an always-on microphone in our various Amazon devices, right? Yeah, and I've got some internet-controlled light bulbs. Every once in a while, they do something weird. And I'm like, firmware glitch or hack? Yeah. I've got them isolated. So I'm hoping they're not, I'm pretty sure they're not going to become a vector into something else. But I don't trust the manufacturers to have secured them yet. And by the way, nor should you. Yeah. Starting July 11, Facebook will allow a small percentage of users in India to download video for offline viewing. Videos can only be viewed within the Facebook app. I mean, obviously there's workarounds to everything, but that's what it's designed to do. And publishers can choose not to allow the offline viewing if they so desire. What do you think? And my instinct on this is to say, this has to come to broader markets. And if they are testing it with India, the idea of spotty internet connections ruining an experience is something that I think. I mean, there's spotty internet and there's spotty internet. In India, what they're dealing with is not just spotty internet, but expensive data. And for somebody who's like, hey, I'm at home, I'm on the Wi-Fi, or better yet, I'm at work on their Wi-Fi, I can download this and watch it on the way home without incurring data charges. That's a big advantage. I think in places like the US, that is not as much of a concern. And Facebook is more into let's make sure that you are doing the experience right. Because downloading for offline viewing is always going to be a little clunkier than just the live stream as intended. So is this Facebook leaning back to different countries that are not as far along in terms of ubiquitous internet and saying, okay, will you guys get this until you get up to speed in hoping that these markets outgrow it? Or do you think that there will be a spot in countries like America and Western Europe and Eastern Europe that has faster internet than we do, that there is a space for downloading video and watching it later? I don't think so. I think Facebook is probably like Netflix and others saying, what do we need to do until the internet is ubiquitous? Because we really don't wanna spend a lot of time on designing for a system that isn't gonna be used 20 years from now. It's all a question of timing. And so I think that's why Facebook says, all right, let's test this out in India. Maybe if it works in India, they just roll it out to everybody because hey, it works, it works, why not? But I don't think it's something that is going to be needed in the long term. It's just such a city-based philosophy, right? Like the idea that, oh, well, we'll just wait until everybody has internet everywhere. And it's like, that's just never going to be the case unless you are in major markets. Like, maybe, maybe not, I don't know. I think, yes, your right rural areas are going to be slower to have constant connectivity, but there's more connectivity in rural areas than there ever has been before. You're right. And there's crazy balloon projects and drone projects that can bring entire continents into connectivity. It drives me up a wall. When I would listen to just blowhards like you on CNET and on Twitter, I would just be in my far-flung, only the 15th largest media market in South Florida. And you, Technorati in Silicon Valley would be talking about, oh, jeez, well, it'll be two or four years and everybody will have internet everywhere. And I would shake my fist and I would just say, like, come on, there's always going to be a place where internet goes soft, where it's not as fast, where it just be easier to say, oh, I'll download this, this, this, and this. And so when I'm in the car on the road to grandma's house, I can watch them instead of worrying about others. Sure, sure. Now, I remember hearing you make this argument against electricity back in the early 1900s, you know? There'll never be a place where there's no electricity, so you need to have hand cranks on everything, come on. Listen, when you're coming down to my doomsday prep shelter, then we'll see who's- I love it, that's probably true. 13 Cloverfield Lane. Microsoft CEO Sachin Adela announced Thursday morning that 11-year Microsoft veteran and COO Kevin Tumor will leave the company, oh, sorry, Turner, right? Turner, will become the CEO at Citadel Securities. Turner's job will be broken into five pieces. Turner had been a candidate to replace Steve Bommer as CEO, a spot that obviously went to Satya Mania. Now, interesting, Turner gets to say, it took five men to replace me. I was doing the job of five people. Well, there's a lady in there too. So, yeah, very interesting in many respects. The least controversial is Turner wanted to be CEO, they passed him over for the job. He was a good soldier, stuck around a CEO for a while, and now he's found an opportunity, and publicly, it's all amicable parting of ways. I've seen some scuttle, but maybe he was a little bit difficult to work with, et cetera. Yeah, a lot of chief executive types are. So, that doesn't surprise me that you're gonna have people saying that. But the fact that Sachin Adela has decided to just disperse his empire among five different people and not replace him with a new COO, is very intriguing to me. Is it a Hunger Games thing? Where he's like, all right, you five, let's see which one of you survives to seize the COO pick? Or is he just saying, I don't think we need a COO. Like, let's just not even have that anymore. Well, I think you've hit the two very interesting points of this. Number one, good soldier, Kevin, right? Like, that dude did not, he didn't storm out in a huff. He waited until he got his exact position. You know, if he was difficult to work with, that might have been part of the reason why he got fast over to Sachin Adela. I look at this from afar, without knowing much about the internal workings, and say, Sachin probably is somebody that saw some organizational problems with how decisions got made within Microsoft and said to himself, well, if when I take power, I want to remove some of these organizational problems. And if one of those organizational problems was somebody having too much power or being overloaded and not being able to pay the kind of attention amongst what Sachin Adela believes should each have their own little bosses for their victims that are paying more direct attention to them, then that makes sense to me. But of course, this is all just reading tea leaves in Kremlinology and figuring out whose portrait gets moved more to the right to see who's- Oh yeah, no, there's a couple of people in charge of sales, a couple of people in charge of ops, a couple of people in charge of financial teams, or actually one lady in charge of financial teams. So it is a bit of Kremlinology or Microsoftology or Satyology, Nadelology. Yeah, Rembendology. It's such a world, they just work at it. Making the Rounds is an unfortunately worded email from a Microsoft recruiter inviting people to an annual Silicon Valley party for interns called intern to a Palooza. Words like bae, gnomes, and dranks were written with seeming unfamiliarity with their colloquial usage. A Microsoft spokesperson told Gizmodo, the email was poorly worded and not in keeping with our values as a company. So all right, here's the only thing that I will defend in this letter, which I do feel needs to be mentioned. It starts off like- Yeah, which is better? Is it better for you, the man in his 30s to read this or me, the man in his late 40s to read this? Oh no, all right, here, you have to read it. You have to read it. That's high. All right, here we go.  The only thing I was gonna defend was that that's actually kind of clever, is that hey bae, hey bae intern, heart, like, you know, less than three. Hi, I am Kim, a Microsoft University recruiter. My crew is coming down from our HQ in Seattle to hang with you and the crowd of bae area interns at Interna Palooza on July 11th. So far it's not that bad. But more importantly, in all caps and green, we're throwing an exclusive after party the night of the event at our San Francisco office and you're invited. There will be hella noms, lots of drinks, the best beats, and just like last year, we're breaking out the Yammer beer pong tables because everyone remembers what Yammer is, right? And all caps in an orange, hell yes to getting lit on a Monday night. Man, club is going up on a Monday at the Microsoft Bay Area HQ. I mean, besides being first ballot straight to the Hall of Fame for hello, fellow kids, this is just, I mean, all right, so buy or sell on this narrative because this is something that I did see a lot in reading about this article. Is it fair to say that to lump this in with other awkward Microsoft gaps over the last year, including the stuff they did at the Game Developers Conference where they had a bunch of scantily clad women dancing around for what was an otherwise fairly industry party, the Tay AI debacle wherein there was the robot that couldn't stop saying racist stuff after it was compromised by a bunch of pranksters. Is it fair to lump this in and say, wow, Microsoft is really gaffin' it up these days? No, I don't think so. I mean, yes, when you put all those together, Microsoft is gaffin' it up, but consider how many people work there, how many things they create and organize and send out. I am not excusing them in any of these cases, but I don't think it's fair to say Microsoft is gaffy. I do think this was an example of an email that someone glanced at and didn't read all the way. That is how it seems to me, because the first paragraph's okay. The part where it says, Hellenom's lots of drinks easily changed to, there will be great food, drinks, the best beats, and all of a sudden, the gut of this is taken out. Hell yes, to getting lit on a Monday night is a little out of character, but plays on the Hellenom's lots of drinks to really give that, hey, fellow kid's tone to the whole thing. I just don't think it was properly proofread by somebody. Or, and this is, man, the internet and text in general is where context goes to die, because if somebody wrote that, that was between my age and your age or older, and they think it is the funniest thing they've ever wrote, and they send it over to their friends and say, oh my God, we should send this to the interns, it's so funny, we're so old and we're writing this, it's so hilarious, they send this out, and now all of a sudden it's like, oh my God, you're old, you're doing this, ironic, you're so out of it. Or what if it was actually well written in colloquial language, and then someone edited it down to the point where the little bits of language that are left in stick out like a sore throat. That's another scenario. What if it were written normally, and then they just change it to a different font, like wingings? Maybe it was written by the bot, by Tay. Yes, maybe it was, yeah, Tay and one of the dancing girls from the GDC party went out. I think we cracked it. Some great drinks and the best beats, the next thing you know, this pops out. Yeah. Audible launched a new service today called Channels, which includes news and podcasts from the likes of the New York Times, Wall Street Journal and The Onion, among others. But more interestingly, Dance Savage is a host of exclusive podcasts to their service. Channels are available to subscribers in Audible's audiobook plan or as a standalone service for $4.95 a month. Tom, this looks like Audible, which is now an Amazon company, taking a bit of a page from Amazon's Prime service and saying, hey, look, we just want people to subscribe here, let's make this as sweet as possible by creating other content, but instead of launching Audible exclusive books by way of authors, they're taking kind of an interesting route and saying, all right, well, what about podcasts? Something that will make you come back week after week after week. Dance Savage is about as big of a name as you're gonna get for something like that. Do you think this will pay off for Audible? Yeah, from that perspective, it's interesting. Audible is saying, hey, these are people who listen to audiobooks. They are listening to the spoken word and when their audiobook ends, they switch over to another app to listen to podcasts and things. Let's keep them in our ecosystem. So if you're already paying $14.95 a month or more, you get these podcasts. It's like free stuff. It is interesting to me that they're also trying out a $5 a month subscription to just get the podcasts. That is similar to Podiversity's business model where they say, hey, we'll bring people into our app and you pay a little bit and we split up the money amongst them. I don't know what the royalty situation is for podcasts involved in this. We're not involved with it. That's my bigger problem with this and Spotify and others is taking podcasts which have traditionally just been an open, like here are all the podcasts in the universe. iTunes has a very open way to get them in. Pocketcast has a very open cast, has a very open way. You can get into any of those and saying, actually, we're gonna curate.  Maybe that's what people want. I don't know. People want good content. If Dan Savage's show on exclusive to Audible is as good or appealing to Savage Lovecast listeners, then they might be more willing to jump over the fence and subscribe to Audible. I just only wish that Audible had maybe bought in some ads on podcasts sometimes within the last 10 years. So people do what it was. Yeah. About their service. Sure, sure. Finally, Mixed Martial Arts Promoter UFC will offer an ultra HD 4K stream of its Saturday pay-per-view event in Canada and the United States. The viewers will need a 2015 or 2016 4K Ultra HD TV and the UFC app and then they can pay the $60 for the HD stream and watch it in 4K. Or if you have 4K service from Direct TV and you have access to channel 106, you can pay Direct TV $65 and use whatever TV is already hooked up to your Direct TV. This is an interesting story for me because I cut the cord last week. Since we last talked, I don't know if you've noticed this about me, but I noticed you looked a little thinner in the cord area. Yeah, we cut the cord as far as cable. That is gone. We now have Sling. One of the things that I know I've talked a lot about Andrew Zarian of the guys from Queens Network, specifically when it comes to streaming WWE pay-per-views, is quality. They're just, it is not as good as the HD stream from your cable company if you are streaming from an online service. What is interesting to me is that UFC, which is going to debut this during their, probably what they hope to be, their biggest pay-per-view ever, UFC 200, wherein Brock Lesnar makes his triumphant return to the octagon. They want to put quality on the line for people who are buying this without a cable subscription and without a pay-per-view provider. This is going to be interesting, this is something that I'm curious to follow and any listeners who are going to buy this, I'm curious to see how this stream goes on Saturday because there still is this lingering problem with over the top services that, sure you get all the freedom, that's great. It's often a little cheaper on price, but you gotta kinda deal with a little bit of that crinkly and a little bit of that a re-resolution issue with stuff. It's not quite the easy hand on the tiller stream that you get from cable. And if I made this more confusing to simplify it, it's the UFC app on a Sony 4K TV or Direct TV's 4K service. Those are your two choices for this. Yeah. Thanks to everybody that participates in our subreddit. You can submit stories and vote on them at dailytechnewshow.reddit.com, TG Stellar did, Renegade UK did, another Jay Martin lost packet more. Get on over there to dailytechnewshow.reddit.com. That's a look at the top stories. All right, Pure Research Center, study on news attitudes and practices in the digital era, which they did a similar study a couple years ago, so they're doing some comparisons here. Find, generally, TV's still the most widely used place that people get their news. People like to watch television, but TV skews older and is dominant among people who prefer to watch, not read. That makes sense. 46% of people they surveyed prefer to watch their news, 35% prefer to read, and 17% prefer to listen. However, this is a very generational habit. Young people read less news than older people, which has traditionally been true for a long time, but they also get their news online much more frequently than older people. 50% of people 18 to 29 get their news online, whereas only 29% of people 50 to 64 get it online. 72% of the US adults get their news from phone in 2016 versus 54% in 2013, though most still get it from both desktop and mobile. That's interesting because mobile is where everybody does their social networking, and Facebook is the dominant social platform for news consumption. Social media garners the least trust, but it is the highest used among the people who are online and getting their news. They get their news from Facebook when they get it online, but only 4% of them have a lot of trust, and it's low engagement. Only 26% click often, 16% like often, and fewer comment or discuss. So when you look at this from the 10,000 foot view, Justin, yeah, you're seeing at the 65 plus range, people still read newspapers because that's the era they grew up in. God bless them. When you're in the 50 to 64 year old range, they still read some newspapers, but it's mostly TV because that's the era they grew up in. Get a rocket brain. When you're in that 30 to 49 year old range, there's some online, still mostly TV, very little reading newspapers. Young people, however, very much getting their news online and reading it online versus television and newspaper. So when you look at that spread, you're like, yeah, okay. People who grew up in the age of newspapers still read newspapers. People who grew up in the age of TV still read TV. People growing up right now in the age of online or doing online. What does that mean for TV and for newspapers? I think we all know the answer. Well, if you're looking at news, then you should not be shocked that when you watch 24 hour news channels, even the ones that are growing about how many people are watching them, all the ads are for a medical alert bracelets and a buying gold and being able to pre-play for your funeral plot. They know who they are talking to and they are an aging demographic. But what I find most interesting is this idea that are there consequences to us getting our news from social media? So let's take it as read that this trend continues and television will migrate to the internet, right? And social will continue to become a more dominant way that people share the news. I don't know that that's such a good idea. Now, granted, people don't trust the news they get on social networks and people generally, they don't trust the news they get from their family and friends very much either. But that means they're not trusting almost anything they read anymore and you are also risking the likelihood that you'll be living in a little bit of a bell jar and you'll only follow the people that will send you the news that you agree with. Yes, although I would argue with you that let's not be so quick to discount the fact that people don't trust the media that they read as a bad thing because I think you and I probably on this topic, the one thing that we probably can agree on is that people need to be more thoughtful with their intake of news that you should think about context. You should think about where you're getting stuff. You should think about whether or not that headline is misleading. You should understand that the sources for which you are reading probably have a bias if they only repeat the same kind of talking points over and over and over again and don't publish stories that contradict what they are saying. So I don't know if that's a bad thing. If more of that is happening, maybe that's a net positive. Also, I don't get my news from social media because I don't think I am going to get good exposure. I go and I seek out particular sources that I have curated myself and that I trust because what I see, when I see something even come across Twitter, I don't really use Facebook so that's probably a bad example for me, but on Twitter, I see things come across rare instances. Are they breaking news like unfortunately last night where yes, that is a source of news for me, but 99% of the time, what I'm seeing on there, I'm like, eh, is that for real? Is that overhyped? And I go to my own sources to verify it. I don't think most people do that though. Most people just look at a headline and start reacting from that. They don't even click. Wait a minute, hold on. People just read a headline? I know, right? Yeah. It's shocking. It's not like they ever did that in the grocery store line, I know. Yeah, I mean, so like, you know, this is new boss, same as the old boss, right? The only thing that's different is like, yes, now you can get mad at the columnist that politically disagrees with you of your choice as opposed to just the one that your newspaper decided to do. But you can also go find out what really happened. Yes. You can also take, you have an infinite number of sources. When you only had two newspapers, a television network, three television networks and a few radio stations, your sources were limited. Now, you can choose. You can take the responsibility to go find out, well, okay, what really happened? Where's a good source to get this? So wait a minute. Let me lay down my sword and shield here. I thought we were here for a fight. Like, are you on my side that this trend is not necessarily the end of the world? There's so many people, you know, I don't think the trend away from television, radio and print is the end of the world because online gives you more sources. I do think the trend of saying, I'm just gonna look at my Facebook feed or my Twitter feed to find out what's going on, is not enough. It is just, that is old boss, same as the new boss, new boss, same as the old, whatever you said. It's that again. I don't, I think maybe you're right that that's just a problem that's always existed and here it is in a new form, but I would plead with people, don't click the like button on the Cobra Eats a Lion video. Like, don't use your social network as a feed for news. Well, is there something inherently wrong with that? Why is that wrong? Is that wrong? I mean, because listen, Facebook, and Facebook to their credit, right, has tried to curate relationships with good news sources. I remember when they went to the Washington Post, the Washington Post made one of their first big presences on Facebook. They have even gone so far as to put money, give, put money in the pocket of news organizations, and listen, you can probably snicker at, you know, what we consider a news organization these days, but to make live video, to make video content so people can fill their feeds there and have this be a place where news is delivered to their users. Like, they have tried to cultivate this place and the fact that it's showing up in this pure research is validation for them, that they have tried to bring, you know, news outlets into Facebook. What is inherently wrong with, and I'll use an unfair example, what is inherently wrong with the Washington Post trying to garner as many likes as they can on their page so they can pop up more often in somebody's feed? Yeah, I think the problem that I have is you, again, you've taken one evil and replaced it with another, and evil's probably too strong of a word, but you've taken, we need to get eyeballs on TV, so we're gonna create the 24-hour news cycle and we're gonna have controversial head-to-head debates on things that are very simplistic and oversimplify the issues and now you've created a clickbait and SEO as the driving forces of news. How do we rise in the news algorithm? How do we gain the system? And I think we're still searching for the system that says, hey, what encourages people to actually take responsibility as readers for what news they consume rather than laying back and letting the networks or the search algorithm or the Facebook algorithm determine what it is they see? I guess I just have a hard time getting, thinking that this is in any way a material down step from where we had it. Like, yes, it's messier. Yes, it is easier for you to create your own echo chamber. Yes, you can have, I know we both personally have talked to each other about how frustrating it is when somebody comes out and says, well, everybody's talking about this on Twitter or Facebook and it's like, no, your sources that you have curated over time are all talking about this and many of them are feeding an echo chamber from each other, but all that being said, I don't have a problem with it just being the way, if that's what it takes for us to get more sources, for us to get more varied sources, then that's just gonna be what it is. It's a blessing and a curse, right? It makes it easier to lay back, but it also makes it easier to go find something. So it puts the burden squarely on the reader. I mean, you can throw stones at the media all day long and in some cases, you're very right to do so, but in the end, you actually do have the controls over which stuff you're going to go find and what you are going to support with your clicks and your eyeballs. I think the only thing that we can both agree on is multiple sources.  Maybe that's fake. Google's your friend, man. Go ahead and poke around a little bit. And pay attention to which stories you read that turn out to be, oh, that really wasn't true or they misled me with the headline. Stop reading them and pay attention to the sources who continually and maybe not without fail but continually strive to say, let me tell you what is actually going on. It's definitely one of the things I rely on. It's the reason that I have a very heavily curated RSS list for doing this show is so that I know like, okay, well, if they're saying it, it's probably true. I'm still gonna go see what a couple other people are saying about it. But I have a higher level of confidence than if it comes from Fly by Night blog over there, which I'm not Fly by Night blog that I don't know because that might just be an up-and-coming cool blog but Fly by Night blog that I've been burned by several times before because they don't do a very good job. Oh, Tom, you've just figured it out. R10 Cloverfield Lane. It is newspapers by gone era, TV on the way out. On the way up is the social networks but not for us. For us, with our carefully curated RSS feeds, we sit here and we feel that we have found our nirvana and we will cling to it no matter how many Google readers go down with the key to it. The key to it is always be open to the news sources. Don't let it stay. Yeah, always. Yeah. I've kicked people off my feed too that I used to trust. I'm like, name some names. Who have you kicked off? Digitimes. That's probably there. Shots fired. Digitimes. Sorry, Digitimes. You have great headlines and really interesting sources that say things that 50% of the time don't pan out. Oh, damn. It's just one of those things, you know? On blast. I'm just going to pour a little out for Digitimes. Pour a little out for the Digitimes. All right, let's get to our messages of the day. Bill and Huntsville Alabama shared a cool story. When we were talking about electronic games, it reminded him of a situation where he worked in the 1970s. Says, first of all, I found out very early that I'm not cut out to play games that require hand-eye coordination. But in 1975, I hired in as a programmer at a facility who was a major producer of point-of-sales terminals.  A small group decided they could make a clone of Pong. They designed the unit and were running it through the main production line of the facility. I don't know if they were doing it just for personal use or planning to sell it as a knockoff, but needless to say they were caught and everyone in the group was fired. These days, that company would have just hit it. What was this about yesterday? Huh? What was this about yesterday? We were just talking about the history of games with Scott Johnson. Oh, that's great. That's a fun little story. Yeah, it's a great story. And then, Charlene and a few others reminded us that Niantic, the makers of Pokemon Go, the new augmented reality Pokemon game, is also the company behind Ingress. Niantic actually is using locations that they seeded from Ingress locations. So if you're wondering, like, why does Pokemon Go have some of those weird locations? That would be why. Ingress, the game that I very reluctantly never got into, despite the fact that as a career traveler, I would have been an all-star at Ingress. I could have dominated. And to this day, it is maybe my greatest regret. Kids ask your parents. Very young parents, though. Thank you, Justin, Robert Young. What else you got going on? Oh, folks, do me a favor. And we got some great expansions. I know a lot of you all have heard of me talk about the contender a lot lately, or over the past year or so. Man, it is coming up on a year, since we launched it, actually. Go ahead and check it out. Thecondender.us, it is a way that you can, with your friends, stage a television-style presidential debate using real presidential quotes. You don't have to know about politics to get into it. All you have to do is know the concept of a televised presidential debate. It is fun for the whole family. And now we have our 2016 expansion. This is all the quotes from this election, all the Trumps, all the Clintons, all the Ted Cruz's, all the Marco Rubio's. Let me dispel with this fiction that this expansion is not awesome. Head on over there, thecondender.us, and buy the 2016 expansion right now. All your Lincoln chafee hopes and desires will be made true if you go ahead and buy it. He's in there. Thank you everybody for supporting the show. If you're willing to support us, you can head to dailytechnewshow.com slash support. Or if you wanna support us on an ongoing basis, you can get a co-executive producer title and business card. You can get access to our Analyst Slack, which has been hopping lately with lots of good conversations, extending the show. That's all found at patreon.com slash DTNS. Huge thanks to every single person already supporting the show. You guys are the best. If you just want the headlines sometimes, subscribe to our new show, Daily Tech Headlines, and get the tech news of the day in less than 10 minutes. Dailytechnewshow.com slash subscribe is the place where you can find the link or just search for Daily Tech Headlines in your podcast app of choice. Our email address is feedback at dailytechnewshow.com. You can give us a call, 51259 Daily. Catch the show live Monday through Friday, 4.30 p.m. Eastern at alphageekradio.com and diamondclub.tv. Visit our website, dailytechnewshow.com. Back tomorrow with Darren Kitchin and Len Peralta. Talk to you then. This show is part of the Frogpants Network. Get more at frogpants.com. Diamond Club, I hope you have enjoyed this program. But you're home. Yeah, and W. Scott is one points out dailytechheadlines.com. We'll take you to the Daily Tech News Show site category for the headline shows. Yeah. Yeah. OK, I got to run to the bathroom real quick. All right, fair enough. Hey there, Roger. I can't hear you again.  I don't know if that would fix it, though. I have a feeling it's the driver for that headset for some reason. Some reason I feel like it's the driver for your headset. I don't know why. Maybe, I don't know. What do we got? We got any good titles? What are the titles here? Fromer Glitch, question mark or hack. We have Avastee AVG. We have Koo, COO, Chief of Optional Operations. Hela Noms provided by Microsoft. A virus in your lights. Hela Dranking with Microsoft. Let me see. Where's the new stuff? First, Rise of the Planet of the Algorithm. Oh, extra, extra, extra, read all about it. Really, read it. Headline. People just read the headline. I don't know, it's pretty funny. You won't believe the headlines in our discussion section. That's a good one. I'll vote for that one. Microsoft says, hello, fellow teenagers. Greetings, my fellow fifth graders, fellow kids. I've heard people say my fellow kids are like kind of in a mocking tone. Mock, mock, mock. Google watches the Google watches. Prep and the prepper, we need Silicon Valley Authority. Blame tape. That one, Lincoln Shakespeare for the win. Microsoft Hunger Games, may the bits be ever in your favor? I still like you won't believe the headlines in our discussion section. Although I would make headlines and capitalize headlines and put it like, you won't believe the headlines in our discussion section. Where is that? Why can I not find it suddenly? It's right above headline. People just read the headline. Has one vote. Maybe I can't vote for it again. Oh, vote for it. It got voted up to three. Not enough democracy happening in there. Now, now. It's pretty long. All right, then just headlines. People just read the headlines. This is a good fallback. Where did that one go? Yeah, headline, colon. People just read the headlines. I don't know if you can do colon and titles. Yeah, you can. All right. I'm now going to drop the article, though, and make it headline. People just read headlines. OK. All righty, then. Thank you.  I don't know if we need to talk to Justin when he gets back about August. Yeah, we do. Such an accursed member of the group. Something happened. Today's show is 2804, right? Today's show, no, it's not. At least Scott has once said we're off on our numbers. Let me see. Let's see, then, 2801. Someone not make a 28 for all to. Oh, I know what I did. Oh, you didn't make a 2800. I didn't make a 2801. No, you did. I can see them, the tabs for the, oh, sorry. You know what, I'm looking at the actual shows on the website. What happened? We got off on our number, and oh, no. Tuesday's show was numbered incorrectly. I don't know how that happened, though. All right, I got to export first. Tom Merritt and Justin Robert Young. It wasn't today today. So this is actually 2803, right? If that is the case, that you skipped one, yes. Well, are you not seeing what I'm seeing? No, I see it, but then I kind of, there's no episode 2801 for July 5th. It's 2802. 2801. There's no 2800 in the doc. So wait, if there was no 2800 in the doc, then how did there be a 2800? I don't know, but it doesn't really matter what's in the doc. That's irrelevant. What's on the website is the actual correct. 2898, 998, 100, and then it should have been 01, then 02 yesterday, and 03 today. All right, that changed those. But the embedded shows will be off the file of the IDT tags. Yeah, there's not much you can do about that. Where are you changing it? I'm changing the older ones. Where, though? I'm starting with 2802. In the bug or in the doc? Oh, I'm doing it in the work. Wait, do you want me to do in the doc, or I'll do it in the doc? I'm just asking you where you're changing it. I'm changing it on the WordPress. Awesome. Thank you. The beats per minute for today's show is zero. Oh, look, Echo lets you pick Spotify or Pandora as your primary music source. This will get Eileen to stop being mad at Amazon Echo. Oh, wait, I always forget, because I have Apple Music, but Ashley has Spotify. Yeah, Eileen has Spotify. I have Google Music. I've got to keep Apple for all those fire exclusives.  I'm changing it in the doc now, just so that it. You know what, I just realized Peter wasn't on Sunday. Right, and I think that might have been what threw us off. Because I'm basing it on the calendar he shared with me. Yeah, but here's the weird thing. I always base the episode number in the blog on whatever's in the actual blog. That's my defense against it becoming a problem. It's like, well, if I always just add one to the previous episode, we shouldn't get off count even if we get off somewhere else. So I wasn't looking anywhere else. I just screwed it up. It's probably because you know what it is. It's probably because you confused it with the headline. I don't know. I don't even have a. Let's just call it human error and fix it. Yeah, it was me. I was being a human. I just want to try to stop myself from doing the same thing again, and I think I was just tired. Daily tech numbering show, yeah. So are you going to switch your Amazon Echo to be Ashley's Spotify and then screw up her Discover Weekly by listening to your own tunes? Yes. Sounds like a plan. Although I don't think she uses. She's not a gigantic music listener. I think she only subs this Spotify for the Twitch approved stuff. Because they have all that on playlists of things that you're allowed to play on your streams. People in the chat room are like, just move on. This is sausage getting made. Sausage. This is sausage. Sausages. No, I'm glad W. Scott has one. You pointed it out. Now we're up to speed. ID3 tags will be off for a few episodes, but that'll just be a thing that happens. Well, just for two episodes. These episode numbers really mean anything anyway. They're totally made up. Yeah. Eventually I'm going to restart it at one and see people know this. That would be amazing. Or we just jumped to 5,000. Well, isn't that what we used to when you number a show? The first number isn't always indicative of the number, but rather the season or the world. Maybe we'll do that. We'll start doing seasonal numbers. It'll be episode 1654, the 54th episode of 2016. We can do that. Or what is this, the fifth or fourth or fifth season, technically, of the show? The third. Third. So it would be 3,016. No, it'd be 3,016, just to give it a lot of headroom for growth. Yeah. That's smart. Ooh, there's a Mr. Robot promo on Facebook Live today that answers a question for us. Yeah, I've got to start watching that. I feel like that'll, god damn it, I've got to, what is the first season, 12 episodes? I think it's only 10, maybe. Yeah, maybe I just got to power through it. And that'll be Scott and I's, our new Watch the Thrones for Hotline Monday. There you go. Watch the Thrones. Actually, no way, it would just be 3. You only need 3 and then a number for the season and then 3 numbers after it. So 4, maybe 5 if you reach 10 seasons, unless there's more than 365 days in a year that I'm not aware of. Sometimes there's 366, calm times. When does Mr. Robot come back? Got to be soon, right? So, I think that's why they're doing these promos and stuff, but I can't remember what day. So update on the house next door. I don't know if some of you can hear hammering and sawing going on. This has been going on since I moved here. This is the fourth time they've remodeled this house. This time they're adding an extra story to it. An extra story, man. I don't know if that area has strict zoning laws about how much city permission you need. Yeah, I don't know either. But people tear down one-story homes and build three-story homes all the time in my neighborhood. That's kind of its thing. To tear down the bungalow or wreck the mansion? Totally. Dave's Paradise put up a McMansion. They're not McMansions, though. They don't all look the same. All right. Mansions. Just mansions. One of these days they're going to come out of their mansions and tell us to get out of their neighborhood. Hey, Justin. Yo. When are you out for DragonCon at August? I don't even know when that is anymore. That would probably be out... I don't know if we have flights. So it would probably be out flying Thursday. So September 1st? Yeah, let me get a... I haven't been to DragonCon in so long. It's pretty expensive from here. What was that? It's really expensive to get there and then stay. To go to DragonCon. It didn't used to be this pricey, but for some reasons... Is it? I don't know. I guess it's just been such a sunk cost for me for a while now. Why don't you just give the month and day... September 5th. So there's a Labor Day in there where we don't have to do a show. That'll actually play into all of that. So that Thursday. Labor Day is a Monday. So, yeah. September 5th. Probably fly on Thursday. If not fly on Wednesday overnight. That'd be out Friday. So you wouldn't be able to do that show September 1st? Yeah, I don't know. I mean, we don't have our flights. So if you definitely needed me, then I could be there. I guess it's probably time to start with those flights, huh? Yeah, probably. M-S-F-O. 2-A-T-L. I will fly. Did the wrong one. Let's try the 31st. Flying back the 5th. Okay. We are all ready... for you to download the show. So have at it, RSS people. Go! Go! Best of you watching. Thanks. We'll talk to you tomorrow. Goodbye. Oh man, what are you...


Creating is a way of life. My lifetime of drawing and painting has been strongly informed by visual reality, but also, and perhaps more importantly, my work represents a deep emotional response to highly personal subjects and the surrounding dynamics of light and space. This body of work represents several parallel projects focused on bridging the curious space between abstraction and life. From portraiture to pond life, from city streets to intimate gardens, it is my intention to evoke a feeling, not a certainty. I do not wish to copy nature, but rather to reveal the unknown. Using spontaneous line and heightened color, I explore the shapes and spaces of my subject. Inspired by feelings of power and satisfaction contained in the action of painting, I become increasingly aware that everything in and around me is made of stardust. As a working artist and art educator in the Midwest, I fuse delicate threads of memory with immediate exacting observations to create visual poetry about people and places important to me. The intense bright sky and rugged landscape of California permeate my thoughts. I find the power of place changing my perceptions and altering my palette. I journey as a painter under the clear bright California sky exploring paths to deeper understanding and communication using the language of art. Portraiture continues to be a main catalyst in my painting practice, but I also find it impossible to resist the peacefulness of a pond or the bustle of city streets or intricacies of garden life.  I work outside enjoying the intensity of the luminous sky. I have experimented with various oils and mediums finding that the dry California air is to be contended with. I work with a furious curiosity using an exacting process of appraisal and adjustment as the ephemeral light constantly changes. I prefer viewing my subject as I work but find that much of an image emerges from intuitive imagination and memory with the help from photographic records. My early childhood memories include the eyes of lifeless canvas strangers, dark and mysterious following my every move. Great important antique paintings of faces were displayed in elaborate gold frames on every wall of our family home. I grew up understanding that in my family portraits ruled. My art dealer father often surprisingly and unceremoniously removed one face only to replace it with another. Perhaps this explains my compelling need to study every face I encounter today. The countless portraits I produced as a child are long gone but my fascination with the significance of portraiture remains. I am still at it drawing and painting faces that I meet. While I search for personal meaning in the long tradition of portraiture I am determined to approach the subject with empathy striving always to illuminate the connection between viewer, subject and my artist self. I use the power and satisfaction contained in the action of painting to create honest studies revealing the brightness and mystery of every man. For 30 years my mark making has been concerned with sharing memories of significant moments that have the power to replenish and transform. The marks, their messages and the act of making them all play a part in my creative process. I seek to translate delicate threads of memory into a new reality making the unknowable dimensions of the subject felt. Light that lies across the planes of a face, shapes hovering above dark water. The memory of a sound, all to be shared in a visual conversation that informs us of our humanness. My effort at rendering the significance of a moment is a flash in the boundless universe. This importance lies in the sharing of a creative experience that further connects us as we reckon with eternity.


So with that, I'll pass over to Rory. Thanks, Porig, and thank you, Achil, as well, for coming here. These conversations in the IAEA are always an important moment. But I think today's one is particularly interesting, because it brings together different strands of relationships, discussions that sometimes happen in different silos. And I think it's fantastic, Achil. La Sada has come to give us that opportunity, a conversation where we can bring together development, humanitarian response, security, proximity, migration, and many other themes, including, I think, climate and other elements that are also part of the melange of issues, which the Sahel is struggling to deal with. And I think that we collectively, as EU member states, are also struggling to respond to. It's fantastic that we have a diplomat of the caliber of Achil La Sada, Fernandez, as the EU special representative for the Sahel. And when we say the EU special representative, that's sort of a distancing already. He's our special representative. He might not quite have as Irish accent perfected yet. But by the end of these couple of days, he'll have learned a few words like grand and a few things like that. And Achil has been doing this job for a while. So I think we learn a lot from what he says. He's been effectively a special representative for the Sahel since 2015, because before the EU appointed him, he was Spain's representative. And he brought to the task as well the experience of having been the Spanish ambassador in Kuwait, Nigeria, and Kabul. So he doesn't like easy cities. So we probably won't stay here with us for too long. We could do hardship here too, if you want. We'll bring you to a few places on the way to the airport. And just to prove that this is a theme that he really understands, Achil has also worked for the Spanish Foreign Ministry in Cuba with NATO, which must have been a real hardship post. The UN Geneva, which I think was probably or an or in Chile, and he started his career abroad in Ethiopia. And in between he had to go and live in Madrid, which I think you have our sympathies for that. The Sahel is a funny place if you're an Irish diplomat, because we're not properly present there, notwithstanding the government's commitment as manifest by the presence of soldiers there. First of all, it's part of the U-training mission, but also now as part of MINUSMA. And that's something that I think as a foreign ministry. We're very conscious of, and we know we need to respond. We do put money in as part of the collective response. And some of that money goes to support the work of very fine Irish NGOs across the G5 Sahel and across the whole Sahel, which of course goes from the Atlantic to the Indian Ocean. And it's an interesting, troubled, challenging, and brilliant region. And certainly in terms of the Francophone piece, we don't have a great story. I think in the Anglophone piece, we've been in the Sahel for a very long time. And I know people in this room cut their teeth in various Sudan's, probably lost a few teeth in the various Sudan's as well. You know, in Eritrea, but we have to do better in Francophone Africa, and we're very conscious of that. And we're grateful too for the Irish NGOs that are there. And why do we have to do better? I think partly it's because in our white paper that we did earlier this year, and thank you to those who gave us really good participation in that. You know, we recognize that the interconnection of the world and our place within that, we recognize that we have to deal with those furthest behind first. And I think we've evolving a language around global citizenry as well. And I think also increasingly conscious of proximity. The world is a smaller place than it used to be. And it's not far by sea from here to Senegal. It's not far from North Africa to the southern parts of Europe as well. And so we are interconnected. And this is a century where if we don't recognize properly those interconnections between Europe and Africa, the possibility that Africa has to leapfrog forward will be missed. There's a writer that I found when I was thinking about today called T.K. Nalaka, I know nothing about him. But he has a good quote, which I think is a nice way to end, which is, he said, quote, when any country in the Sahel sneezes, the rest of the region catches pneumonia. The men there would have clicked their tongues and roofly nodded their heads. That will lie, I don't know what that means, but maybe you can tell us. This was the truth. And I think it's that sense of when somewhere else that's not that far away, is in danger, we have to respond. Partly because it's the good thing to do as humans, but also because it's in our selfish interest. And that's why it's important that we support our special representative for the Sahel. But it's also really important that we hear from you so we understand what that support should be and we understand the challenges that you're trying to address on our behalf. So I'm looking forward greatly to hearing what you have to say to Sahel. Thank you very much. Yeah, first of all, thank you. Thank you, Rory, for these words. Thank you, the Institute also for inviting me. I feel very honored to be here really today. And I like the name of the Institute, which is International and European Affairs. I think it shows how Europe is in your heart and how Europe can be our house for all of us, our home for all of us. Thank you for also in this very prestigious place to give me the opportunity to talk about the Sahel that I know I'm talking to academics. Some of you are very knowledgeable about the situation and I have no doubt that many of the things I would say, you know them already. But the good thing of the Sahel also, the important thing of the Sahel that is there is a constant evolution in the Sahel. Actually as EU special representative, which is recorded and taken in the Lisbon Treaty in the Article 33, my mission mainly is to try to coordinate and to give a coherent approach of the EU to the Sahel in concrete and the others representative to the task or the mandate that they have on a specific subject. It's not easy because the EU also, as is different positions that we have the parliament, as you know, we have the council, we have the ES, we have the commission, but the most important and we have the member states, which are the, without the member states, we won't have the EU of course. Then the important thing is just to try to have a coherent approach and that's mainly the task of the EU special representative representative. I would like as I'm talking to academics, et cetera, I would like to talk about four different aspects or four different points because we are now at a critical moment. It comes very, it's a real good opportunity as a critical moment where one of the heart of my mandate, which is the peace process in Mali is as a sort of blockage at that moment and when on the other hand, we have these G5 which is taking more importance but with a lot of limitations as we're going to see. Then I would like first, and as I'm talking to academics to divide in four parts my intervention. The first one, and I think it's important, what is the Sahel? Because there are different concept of Sahel. The second one is what the EU is doing for the Sahel. The third one, I will talk about the new initiatives which are taking place today and finally I will talk about the principles and the challenges that we have ahead of us and that we have to confront in order to have a proper and well coordinated action. Then the first big question is the concept of Sahel. It's not only an academic question, it goes beyond that with no doubt. And I've developed a theory, which you can find some other, I distinguish three different Sahel. A geographic one, what I called an institutional one, and a third one which I called a geo-strategical one. First you know that the world Sahel in Arab means border, means the border, the limitation between one other. Yes, it's the limitation between the Saharan African and the green Africa, so to say, or the Sub-Saharan Africa. Is this French, is this element which is important to know, it's a limitation. There is a change between one part and the other. But then let's start with the first one, the geographical definition. It's very easy to say, and you can understand it very easily. It's this strip of land which has more or less 5,400 kilometers long from the Atlantic Sea to the Red Sea, and more or less 700, 500 kilometers large in all these areas. This goes through 11 countries, 11 countries which have more or less the same characteristic. And we have from the geographical point of view exactly the same elements. And it's very easy from the geographical point of view, the Sahel is very easy to understand. The second one or the second concept which I've called the institutional one is a bit different. First why institutional? I invented this name because there is an institution you all know about it, but it's not so well known in the public. It's the famous G5. The G5 which is composed by Mauritania, by Mali, by Volkina Faso, by Niger and by Chad, has been created by a sovereign decision of five heads of states, the five heads of state at that time who decided to create an organization because they thought that they have the same problem. And the first element which I want to say, they realized that the big problems of the big threats that they were facing were regional. Then if the threats are regional, the answer must be regional. That's why the G5 started by this proper will of these five heads of state. And they created an organization which a very simple structure, a presidency which is rotative. Now the presidency is taken by Volkina Faso. It will be taken very soon in February by Mauritania. They have a permanent secretariat with headquarters in Noixot with a very simple structure. A permanent secretary and if you visited the place is not really the big organization as you have been probably some of you in the EU which is even more impressive at the UN. The building of the EU is more impressive than the UN. Well no, if you go to the G5 you wouldn't find that. It's a very simple structure with little means and actually the European countries wanted to help the G5 from the beginning and that's one of the first contradiction that we have. We said we don't want to create a big structure to help you to create a big structure. We want something very simple that you can manage. The problem now is that they've taken more and more capacity and with this little structure that we have imposed more or less to them, there are some doubts that they are capable of facing really the situation. What we ask them to do, what we ask them to do, we'll come to that a bit later. But this organization with these simple structures as I said, now the permanent secretariat is headed by Maman Siddiqui, who is from Niger, a very, very well-known person in Africa and actually studied in Spain. I have somebody from Spain studied in Spain and it's also well formed. I speak with him in Spanish usually. We have then this very simple structure which is based on two elements, on two actions mainly, security and development. For in the security side, they decided to create a joint force. I was present when they decided to create this joint force. It was in Jamena in November 2015. When they say, I was at that moment with my Spanish hat actually, some days before I started as a youth, they decided that five heads of state went on a specific room, came out and said, we're going to create a joint force. We all said, all of us, all of us at that time, how are they going to create a joint force in the five poorest countries in the world? Is that possible? How are they going to manage to do that? It's something that we cannot imagine. We almost laugh at it, but at that moment, one person, and I think we must recognize that, and I wasn't in the EU at that moment. Federica Mogherini came out when this was announced and said, the EU is going to support this joint force with 50 million. It was an impact, it created an impact. Of course, the joint force had to wait almost one year, more than one year until they really decided to adopt the concept of operation and to adopt all the different instruments later. That was in February 2017. But they want to create the joint force. And they come with a second idea, not only security, but also in development. We want a Marshall plan for Africa and for the Sahel, for our organization. With some difficulties and some very doubtful proposals, for instance, to create Sahel airways, that we say, well, I mean, Sahel over a fast train from Noachok to Jamina, I mean. But they wanted really to create an infrastructure, to have a lot of infrastructure, and with the Marshall plan, and they would ask member states from the Europe, from the Western world to finance that. And that, and therefore we have the G5, and we'll talk again after about the G5 and what it entails. But the G5, little by little, although at the beginning, had a lot of difficulties to come out because they had a lot of enemies. Some organization didn't like it in Africa because they thought it will retain some of the health from the Western country, we'll go to them. And some other, for security reasons, were not either very comfortable with this idea because they thought that they will lose some influence. For instance, Algeria at the beginning, which is a main player in the region, and I work very closely with them, has never liked from the beginning the G5. Now, yes, now there is an adaptation from the moment that the UN has been really considering it as a proper organization, and it comes now in all the resolutions, and there is always a talk in the Secretary-Consult about the G5, about the future, and this structure and system. Then that's the second concept of the Sahel. This concept, what I call the institutional one, because of this institution, these five countries which compose the Sahel. But you will tell me the Sahel is more than that. There's not only five countries. And that's why I built this idea to talk about the geostrategical concept of the Sahel. The geostrategical concept take into account all the countries which have an impact and influence on the Sahel, the crisis and the organizations. And I've divided it in three circles. The first circle, of course, are the five countries of the G5s themselves. This is the main aspect, really the most important one. The second one, the crisis. Which crisis have an impact today on them? Have, and still have on the Sahel, the Libyan crisis? You cannot understand what happened in Mali if you don't take into consideration what happened in Libya. And actually, the Libyan crisis really allows in Mali, mainly, that the Tuareg rebellion was a success at the beginning. Because in Niger, on the other hand, the Niger authorities stopped the Tuaregs, take their arms away, but this wasn't done in Mali. That was one of the main problem. Then we have two crisis, mainly. The Libyan one and also the Nigerian one. The Nigerian created by Boko Haram. That's why now there is this idea in United Nations, in the EU also, to assimilate more and more Sahel and Lakshad Basin. You know that to face the crisis in Lakshad Basin, they created the joint task force, the multinational joint task force, MNGTF, to fight, composed by four countries, the three countries around the leg chart. The four, sorry, Cameroon, Chad, Niger and Nigeria, plus Benin, which participate on security questions with them. Four, these countries have created an army, a joint army which works more or less to fight Boko Haram, and they had some success. The Boko Haram crisis is now closely linked to the crisis in the Sahel. And we know by intelligence information that some in some of the camps of terrorist camps for training groups of Boko Haram have been working on Malian soil and vice versa. We know that by information. Then there is a link. There is an international, again, we talk about the regionalization and we talk later of the EU. There is also a regionalization of the terrorist actors in the ground. This is, I said, the second circle. These two big crisis which had a direct impact on the Sahel. And there is also what I said in the countries or organization. Countries which compose these third circles, Algeria, I said it before, Algeria is a fundamental actor. Algeria, I have constant talks either with the minister for the affairs of Algeria or with the authorities in Algeria. They are fundamental, but today Algeria is under a big internal problem as we all know. And that's why the situation may be as a problem to evolve. Algeria is with no doubt one. And Algeria, again, talking about Boko Haram is also a fundamental one. And Senegal, Senegal by itself, geographically speaking, is a Sahel in a country. But they are not included in the G5. They were not very happy with this idea. They thought that the G5 at the beginning was against them. But we had this argument to tell them. And I had this argument even to expose to them. Actually, the five countries that we're talking are weak in their institution, weak in the governance, poor without any problem or prospect. With a lot of problem to progress. Senegal, when I talk to them, Senegal, one of the only countries in Africa who never had a good data, a strong institution, developing very quickly, they have nothing to do with them. It's better that these five countries stick together and all the rest participate in this third circle. Then Senegal, of course, is another one. And now a new actor who wants to be more and more active and is Morocco. Of course, because his brother, Algeria, is very much involved. Morocco wants to be involved. And the problem between Morocco and Algeria is well known by all of you, make more difficult sometimes to have a proper action in the region. Nevertheless, the Maghreb dimension, which is present in the Maghreb, must not be forgotten and we have to work very closely also with the Moroccans. We are more and more present in the region through banking system, through the economy and also the influence himself of the king of Morocco over this region for centuries. Then I think with this, and when we see the countries, but they're not only countries which participate in the SIL. They're also organization in this third circle. And we have, of course, the African Union. The African Union has a special, a high representative in Mali for the peace process, which is former president of Burundi, Uyoya, the African Union is very active in all these, in all the elements in the Sahel and wants to be very active, although there's been, there was at the beginning, a sort of reticence, so to say, with the creation of the G5 because they didn't like it either. They prefer to use their own security instrument, but they realize that these five countries now is better to have them together in order that they can play together. There is echo was on the same problem that what happened before with the EU, they were not too happy with the creation of the G5, but nevertheless, now there's been a new evolution which I will talk later, which makes that they try to collaborate and cooperate very closely, and that's what us as European and as EU we are pushing forward. And of course, the EU, although out of the region, is also an important actor with the UN. This is, I think I wanted to see these three kinds of concepts which help us a little bit. Well, my mandate actually, the mandate approved by member states, is the third one, is your strategical one, because it makes me participate not only in the five countries, but all the surrounding countries in the Maghreb and with the international organizations, and also with the black chat basin which is strategically linked to the other one. Having seen that, I would like to now to define not only the geographical, institutional and geostatistical one, but what are the main challenges that this region is facing? I always say that unfortunately, the Sahel is a polygon of crisis. We find that all the crisis that we want, all the crisis that we want, we have a security crisis, we have a political crisis, we have an economic and development crisis, and all the elements can, and I will go quickly through them very, very quickly. Above all, we'll talk about the security one. Yes, there is a radicalization in the zone and now we are facing a terrible situation, excuse me, a terrible situation in which the insecurity is growing at a very fast speed, very fast unfortunately. We have the insecurity which started in the Mali. To understand the situation, we have to start from the Malian crisis which started in Mali, which is now more or less channel and I can answer many questions on the peace process in Mali, as I'm the mediator on behalf of the EU in the peace process, but it's the heart and the beginning of everything in the Sahel today of this insecurity. It started there in the north, now it's more or less channel, although the process is a bit blocked. We hope that we'll overcome the situation. It went down to the south and the Jihadist groups have been clever enough to mutate the threat which at the beginning was a pure threat Jihadist against the rest of the world, so to say, to take advantage of ancestral confrontations or clashes between farmers and herders, which are traditional in the region, between different community groups. I don't like to talk ethnic groups because they're also mixed together. That to talk ethnic groups would be maybe a mistake, but yes, community groups. It's better to say intercommunity clashes, take advantage of these clashes to create chaos among them and to take advantage of this situation. And this insecurity is going down from the north to the center of Mali, to the south of Mali, to the part of Burkina Faso, going down to Burkina Faso and even affecting now some of the western countries, of some of countries of western Africa, as Togo, as Benin, as even Ghana, in the northern part of Ghana. Then we see that there is this terrible danger which unfortunately can affect a lot of this country, and that's why the situation now is evolving very quickly. Then we have this security challenge which is there and it becomes more and more obvious and with a big need to act. But we have also a political challenge. A political challenge because there is, as I said, at the beginning, a lack of governance, problem of governance, problem of corruption in this country. There are weak countries with very weak institutions and we are on top of that in the political side with a peace process. I know that this word is very important also in Ireland, and with a peace process in Mali, which is, as I said before, unfortunately blocked. It's blocked because of the opposition of some of the movement, of the armed movement and the government to go ahead with the implementation, with the quick implementation of the agreement of Algiers, which was approved and ratified by all the parts of the agreement and also by the international community and among them by the European Union. It was, this agreement must be absolutely implemented and in all the talks, all the intervention, for instance, of Federica Morellini, of all the members of the international community, we urge, always, the different parts, the three parts we have signed the agreement, which is the government, la plateforme and in La SEMA, la coordination of the three parts, these two movements were fighting together, now they are at least around the table, to really implement the agreement. I can answer to question about the agreement, I can talk always about the agreement, also Frederic here has been followed that from the very beginning, but this is a bit of the key question, to have a solution. I always say the same sentence, we won't have peace in the Sahel if there is no peace in Mali, because the agreement is essential to the proper balance in the security sector. When they try me to define how we stand, I say there was a blockage, I always say also the same phrase, we don't go as fast as we hope, but not as slowly as we feared and with that, more or less, in a diplomatic way, we solve everything because there is no other way than to progress and to accept this, that the peace process goes ahead. There is, as I said, Le Comité de Suïd-la-Corps, this foreign committee which now is not meeting, I attend once a month with my colleague, Frédéric Mathieu, we attend once a month there and on behalf of the UAE, I try always to push all the elements of this agreement, let's do hope that we'll have one meeting as soon as possible because it's compulsory by the agreement itself, which has been recorded by the UN, to have one meeting of this committee of Suïd-la-Corps, this following committee of the agreement once a month. Let's see what is gonna happen because one other idea which must be very clear, there is no plan B and that's a message that we give to the parts. There is no plan B to the agreement. The agreement was negotiated in Algeria, was signed in two steps then in Mali and the international community really support this agreement, but that's another problem in the political aspect. But I said also it was the situation in the Sahel, we found that all the crisis, there is also a very deep and terrible economic crisis, a crisis of development. If you imagine that in the Sahel, in the sub-Saharan Africa, sorry, the rent, the income per capita is more or less $1,400. The countries in the Sahel, the only one who reaches this average more or less is Mauritania with $1,100. And then we go to a country like Niger who doesn't reach the 400 euros, $100. I think I heard today the figure and I was very impressed that here in Ireland you are over 70,000 of income per person. It's something very impressive. I mean, you see that's what I've heard today at least. But anyway, in Europe all the countries are above 30, 35,000, that's in Spain I think 36,000. All are above this figure. When we talk of 400 euros, you imagine the level of poverty that there is in a country like Niger is one. I always say I have five clients, which are these five countries of the G5 and unfortunately there are the five poorest countries in the world. But those are my clients and I have to support and we have all to support them. Then there is a problem of course of development and I won't go on too much because you are very clear. Another big element which helps us to understand what's happening in the Sahel is the demographic explosion. There is a proper demographic explosion. A country like Niger for instance, a woman has an average of more than 7.4 children per woman. That shows that if a woman has not children, the other one has to have at least 14 or 15. You imagine the incredible push that this can have and the impact that in 20 or 30 years this can have for Europe. That's why again I say the security of the Sahel is the security of Europe. Because this is happening in front of our eyes at a very quick speed. And I will talk about that with radicalization also. There is another problem linked to this one very closely, climatic change. It's very obvious if you go to the lake chat. I know that some people say that it's cyclic, the lake chat has been bigger, it's smaller, but you see very properly the diminution of the lake chat which is 10% of what it was in less than 60 years ago. It's been very quick. It's true now that apparently it's refilling a little bit. But nevertheless, these has created that there's less land, less, more people than more fight against herders, against farmers. There are more confrontation because of the climatic change. And there's one place in the Sahel and I wouldn't talk about the lake chat. In the rest, in the area of the Littaco Gourmet, in the place of the three borders between Niger, Chad, Niger, Burkina and Mali, in this area, the climatic change has a real strong impact because there are less land and they're fighting for the lands. They're fighting for their herds. They're fighting to till the land that doesn't exist and that doesn't exist anymore. This of course makes another crisis and which I know is very popular to talk about it, is the migration one. Of course, this demographic explosion, the less opportunity, less poor situation of this country makes that the one migrate. Young people want to migrate and there is an incredible strength of young people who want to go absolutely out because they don't feel that where they are, they have any opportunities ahead of them. These are more or less the characteristic of the Sahel, broadly speaking, with these three concepts and the main characteristics that they have. Well, you say that very well. This is what we ever had, but Ireland contributed very heavily to the EU, etc. What is the EU doing? What are we doing? Are we doing something to face that? Well, we must accept that the EU in this aspect saw what is going to happen and it was the first one in 2011 to adopt a strategy. A strategy which is very simple. It is based on one principle, no security without development, no development without security. Today now, this is widely accepted, but as I said before, I was in Afghanistan and there was a big difficulty so that military worked with NGOs. There were big difficulties to accept this concept because everyone wanted to be on the side. Nowadays, we realize that mainly in the Sahel, maybe in other parts we can discuss about it, but mainly in the Sahel, as in security, as it says, has grown up to big proportions, there cannot be development without security. No NGOs are going to go to places where the life at stake are at stake. Then therefore, there is no other way that to link both of them. And the EU strategy is axed towards five countries. You will not be surprised if you realize that the five countries of the strategy are the countries of the G5. They are the five countries which are received, actually we are received this strategy, but the strategy has been complemented by the integrated approach of the EU which taking consideration not only security, development, but also political question, humanitarian one and all the crisis that I've described. This is the integrated approach of the EU to tackle the problem of the Sahel. Well, it's very well to have a strategy, it's very well to have five countries to address too, but now we need something else. We need some action. And yes, there is a regional action plan, a regional action plan which was adopted in 2015 and which will be finishing in 2020 and we'll start, try to delimitate where were the main action that the EU had to do with the participation of member states. The importance of this regional action plan was not only that he established the priorities, but also that the regional action plan did, it tried to establish which responsibilities were for each one. That was what tried to do the regional action plan was to establish four priorities. The first one, you would understand, is for the problem I said before, I don't want to go on too much on that. The second one is preventing radicalization and this is very important and there are many programs to prevent radicalization. The third one is migration. We couldn't have that without migration and that's why the EU convened a meeting in La Valeta in which they approved a special fund for adopting in a quick manner programs to tackle the root causes of migration. But when we say root causes of migration, all we say is everything. Which are the root causes of migration? Security, poverty, education, development, it's almost everything but formation of youth, schooling, et cetera. In order to prevent or to stop these young people to go outside of Africa and to try to find in their own place what they need. This is the third priority and the fourth priority is rated of course to security, to border control and the fight against traffics which actually is something which is very difficult to do because if you look at the Sahel, you go back through history in the Sahel. It's an area of traffics. It has always been like that. I've been talking for instance in Agadez which is one of the city in the middle of Niger which received all the migration from the home of Africa and all the migration from Western Africa would join there and go up to Libya. I've been talking to a man who said, well, I'm a driver. Before I was driving tourist because it's an impressive area. I mean, if you've ever been to the Sahara and to these areas, it's really impressive. I find it really beautiful but there were a lot of tourists. There was a flight between Marseille and Agadez, direct flight. Bringing tourists now of course, no tourists are there to go in this place, you can imagine. And they said, I was driving tourists. No tourists, I'm driving what they put on my back. Drugs, arms and unfortunately also migrants, illegal migrants. Although the word illegal is a bit complicated to us but let's put migrants. And if the EU didn't tackle this problem, I'm sure we'll have many questions about La Valeta and about the trust fund. It's something that we had really to fight against because the origin, and I was saying that during the lunch actually, I think the origin of the trust fund was only to finance the regional action plan. But it came at a moment when we saw in the television these horrible images of young boys died in the beach or drowning in the Mediterranean Sea. And then they decided that this fund, which was to finance with little money, finance with less money than now, finance the regional action plan will be really towards migration. And we created this fund with mainly two elements to try to approve very quickly the project and this project might have an immediate impact on the population. This was the trust fund, which now almost, it was 1.5 billion and almost all the money has been spent on the trust fund. But let's see what happened. The new commission probably will be, I hope so, it will be maybe refunded. And the last one, as I said, the border control and the fight against traffic. This is the regional action plan which come to an end in 2020 will have to negotiate a new regional action plan. The advantage of the regional action plan is also that it contains not only what the EU is doing in the region, but also what other, what member states are doing in the region and it gives you a good picture of everything which is done in the region. Then you say, well, it's very well to have a strategy, to have a regional action plan and well, but how do you do that? And then, yes, the EU has two kinds of instruments, what I call institutional instrument and financial one. Institutional instruments, my office, my own office is one institutional instrument to put in order the regional action plan actually is taking my mandate to implement the regional action plan. The EU delegations which are on the ground and also on the wider scope, our CSDP mission, our common policy and security and security and defense mission on the ground. We have in the region three main missions. One for the training and council of the military in Mali of the military army. They have already trained more than more than 70% of the old Malian forces, which is really important. I was talking during the lunch also, the big problem is the follow up. That's quite difficult, but they're doing really an incredible job. And we have on the civil side for the training of judges, training of in human rights, question of gender, question of terrorism, all question on the civil side, security and police, we have what we call a cap and we have two in the region, one in Mali and one in Niger, and one in Mali and Yucat Niger. Nowadays, the EU is proceeding on what we call the regionalization of these missions. As we have seen that the terrorists have regionalized because they unite from Boko Haram to Akmi to Almorabitun or to now Alansur Al Islam, the new one which has happened or in all the other organizations that terrorist organization on the ground. We have tried to regionalize our mission and there is a process which is taking place today in the EU in order to have, to make that these missions can train not only the Malian forces but also the Malian of the G5. It's a process where we are working in it and I think it's in good way, but member states have to give their agreement to all what we're doing and there are some reticences also, not only from member state, but also from some countries like Mali that say no, UTM was created for me, wasn't created for the others. Then we have to change the mandate which is not easy in the EU procedure but we're working at that and that's from my point of view is the only solution. Then we have, as I said, my institution, my office, the EU delegation and the CSDP missions. We have the instrument institutional but we have also, we need money because without money of course we cannot do that. We have the financial means. Of course, you know that in the region, the EU through the participate more or less with 3.5 billion euros in the region and we, if we add up everything which is given by member state individually, we'll reach maybe up the quantity of eight billion. I know that one of the first question you will ask me with all this money, how come that the situation is degrading and I can answer before you ask me. Well, if we weren't doing that probably we wouldn't go worse but yes, you're right. We must find ways and we are working at that, ways and means in order to make that this help or this contribution is made more properly and more and better. Then we have as fund, as I said, the European Development Fund, the 11th one with 2,500 billion, 2,500 billion, 2.5 billion, excuse me, 2,500 billion would be a bit too much. 2,500 million for the five countries in what we call in these horrible acronyms that we invent the RIP and the NIP, the National Indicative Program in the regional indicative programs and for the region 1,100. This makes 3.5 as I said. We have on second hand the trust fund that I talked before with 1.84 the region, 1.5 billion for the region and we have another instrument that is the African Peace Facility because you know that the EU has a lot of difficulties as far as security and defense is concerned. The treaties stop us from making many actions. Then we created sometimes a special fund, the European Development, the European, the APF, the African Peace Facility, sorry, which helped to contribute through organization like the EU for the peace and security in the region and this is what has been used with 100 million so far and 138 million which will come hopefully next year for the joint force of the G5. Then the EU, as I said, has taken its action mainly in these two sectors. In the Security One, the joint force, Mogherini as I said at the beginning, announced immediately the 50 million, 50 million that have been added. We convened a conference in Brussels in January 2018 and a sum of all the donors and a sum of more than 400 millions were disposable for the joint forces. The problem that sometimes is difficult to know exactly how this quantity is spent because some countries said we could give that in training. It's difficult to say how much is the training. What they want and what they need is equipment with no doubt but we are limited in the class of equipment we can give. And also on the development side, I told you they wanted what they call the Marshall plant. 10 minutes. I have to finish up now. I have to finish up now. Yes, we can. Okay, then it's very quickly, I've finished in two minutes. Then we have in the development side, we have them to have their famous Marshall plant which have been reduced to a program, priority investment program that we are helping through an organization which is called Alliance Sahel which has been created by France and Germany and France and Germany with the participation of the UNDP, the World Bank and the African Bank of Development. This Alliance Sahel which has channeled really some project which have a direct impact on the situation and on the ground. Now we have new initiatives. We have initiatives for instance within the EU, a very strong partnership which is being established between the EU and the G5 which has started by Federica Mogherini and I know that it's going to be prolonged by Minister Borrell when he will come into office. This strategic partnership will be definitely described in February next year with all the elements on security and development. There is a new French and German initiative in the framework of the G5 called the P3S, another acronym, the partnership for the Sahel on security and stability which the EU supports, very strongly and now we are working into this problem. Then finally to finish with then, as I see that the time is coming to an end, some challenge and some ideas on how to go on for the future. There is no doubt that security, development, the political aspect are something that we have to fulfill but which principle must we apply to that? And I see fundamentally two, coordination and ownership. These are the two elements and a third one urgency but urgency is obvious after all that I said and now this situation stand by today. Coordination, yes we need coordination. You have seen lots of initiatives from ourself, from France, from even the Americans have their own initiative. We started with the first strategy. Today there are 17 strategy in the Sahel. Then there is a big problem of coordination and what is the way of coordinating them? There are institutions, there is the plan, the ministerial platform for the strategy in the Sahel which has a difficulty to coordinate. The EU and myself with my team, we organize once or twice a year coordination activities amongst the main actors among the special envoys in the Sahel. But the big need is a good coordination and that's one of the big challenge, one of the first big challenge that we have to face. And the second one is ownership. We will never succeed if there is not a perception of this country that they own their own destiny and that everything which is done is because that's what they need and not because we need it. Which is difficult because I said at the beginning their security is our security but the big challenge that we have and that's why it's so important to have this interlocution or these talks with them really to know what they need and ourself to adapt ourself to their situation. They need the presence of the state because one of the main problems is the lack of the presence of the state in this country. I will say this sentence also that the vacuum of the state is the oxygen of the terrorism. Yes, they need that but if we give them the means it means that they need not the one that we think they need or at least that they perceive that like that. As well as the security sector or in the development sector in the same way. And that's why the EU maintained this structural partnership because and I will finish with that with this sentence of Federica Mogherini which the idea of ownership that we are not working for Africa and for the Sahel. No, we are working or we must work with Africa and with the Sahel. Thank you very much for your attention.