It seems to me like everyone is interested in the Kardashian-Jenner clan and their lifestyles, even if we don't want to admit it. The family is made up of mega stars and they're living the dream, so it makes sense that we're all curious. You guys also seem to like the Kardashian-Jenner videos, so on that note we're going to be looking at one of the other sisters' homes, Kendall. Kendall Jenner, like Kylie, is one of the youngest in the family and she's only 23 at the time of this video. She's a reality TV star, influencer, and supermodel who has 115 million followers on Instagram at the time of this recording. Forbes also crowned her the world's highest paid model back in 2017, not too surprising. She might be young but like the rest of the family, Kendall is doing well. Her net worth is assumed to be over 18 million, so she's definitely set. Although she isn't in the public eye as much as some of her sisters, it's what makes her a bit different and I kinda like that about Kendall. The Kardashian-Jenner clan has purchased up a ton of real estate in an area of Calabasas called Hidden Hills. It's been basically deemed a real estate compound for the family since Kim and Kanye have their gargantuan mansion here, Kylie has her mansion there as well as a few more homes, and Mama Bear Chris has her house there too. Khloe and Kourtney also have their homes beside them and Rob was living in one of Kylie's properties there but I'm not sure if he still is. Point being is that Kendall seems to be the only family member who doesn't live or have a home in the Hidden Hills. Maybe she likes to distance herself a little bit from some of the drama or there were just no houses left there that she liked. Hey guys it's Kara and we've been trying something a little different here on this channel. Today we're going to be taking a look at Kendall Jenner's eight and a half million dollar mansion in Beverly Hills and see what her place is like. We'll also look at where she used to live before she bought this spot and see how she upgraded. Her place isn't as weird as her sister Kim's, that's for sure, but her house does have something to do with Charlie Sheen which you'll find out a little bit after. If you like this idea I'll make more house tour vids. We also did one on Kylie Jenner's beautiful main mansion in the Hidden Hills area as well as Kim and Kanye's empty looking 22 million dollar fortress and we'll have links to those at the end of this video. I've also been reading all your comments and I'm going to be responding to some at the end of this video. I need you to let me know who to do next in the comments down below and whose home you'd like to see. I'm thinking at this point we're going to have to do Khloe Kardashian's house next. Let's start with a recap of where Kendall used to live before we look at her current mansion because she did move quite a bit. Back in 2016 Kendall did an interview with Fogue and it took place in her family home. At the time Kendall already lived on her own but she's never really given a home tour aside from her closet space. So Kendall actually moved out when she was only 19 and started her solo living in an LA condo. She bought it for 1.3 million in the Wilshire building that's located in the Westwood area of LA. Apparently a trendy spot. It was 2068 square feet with high ceilings, a bunch of windows, two beds and 2.5 bathrooms. Yes it was expensive and gorgeous but when we know what this family is capable of that is super small even for a teen. Kendall's condo had a great kitchen, living room, office and more as well as a clean and modern design. I know any Jenner sister can do better than that though. Kendall's main complaint was the lack of closet space. She said, it's hard at my condo because I don't have enough closet space. I also have a rack of clothes. It's so messy. I hate it. I feel that girl really but I can't upgrade mine like she did. I think my main complaint would actually be the monthly owner fees here for the condo which were over 3,500 US dollars a month at the time. Yikes. Either way Kendall moved on from this condo after about two years and made a nice upgrade. She purchased what was previously John Krasinski and Emily Blunt's house for 6.5 million located close to the sunset strip in Hollywood. This home was just slightly bigger with 4,800 square feet, three stories, six bedrooms and five bathrooms. Kendall's second home also had a rooftop pool, a massive walk-in closet to satisfy her needs, a three car garage and gorgeous floor-to-ceiling windows all over the house. The glass wall on the first floor in the living room opened up to a pool and outdoor patio that made it perfect for entertaining guests. Unfortunately, despite the fact that Kendall's home was highly secure and a negated community, she managed to get broken into only about a month into living at her new spot. Apparently, $200,000 worth of jewelry was stolen too. When TMZ reported on the incident, Kendall fought back saying that them releasing her address is the reason for all of this happening. She has a point. This isn't the only time this has happened to Kendall. She said that even in her old condo, she got robbed before stating, I got robbed. I had stalkers that literally broke in while I was home. It happened one too many times and I just felt trapped. So it was on to her current home. Now let's finally look at where Kendall's living now. This mansion is located in Mall Hall in Estates where she's neighbors with stars like DJ Khaled and Christina Aguilera. It's also supposed to be more secure here than her last place. So if you're wondering what this place has to do with Charlie Sheen, he was actually the previous owner. But Kendall obviously had to make the home her own and spent about a year doing renovations. Houses in this area usually go for the high multimillion dollar price range so it seems like it was in Kendall's ballpark. She spent 8.55 million on this spot. Considering Kendall's privacy issues in the past, she is far less open about her home than her sisters are. Her address is not accessible and even pictures of the interior of her home are hard to come by. Kendall's home is 6,625 square feet and has five beds, eight baths and all the fixing on the properties as well, including the large backyard, pool, tennis court, fire pit and a playground. I'm not sure exactly what the star has changed since she moved in, but I'm assuming she kept the pool.  From some of the listing photos, you can tell that it's a Spanish style mansion and the interior before was pretty homey. Seems there was a lot of wooden accents and Buddha decor. I think that since Kendall did her renovations, she made the home sleeker and more elegant to match her style. From the few times that Kendall or her family members did post her house, we can see the fresh design, like when Courtney took to IG showing it off. I'm not sure what's going on there but we can see a bit of Kendall's living room. She actually kept the same fireplaces before but changed the floors here. Compared to before, you might think that now it's a different house, but you can also see the same arches present in Kendall's pics. It just looks less cluttered and dated than it did on the listing photos. Some other features inside the home include a large dining room, an office, a gorgeous marble kitchen, multiple living areas and even a movie theater. Since Kendall occupied the place, the dining room now has a large wooden table, wicker seats, a gold accent lamp and vintage photos on the wall. The interior colors are also much more neutral. I heard that Charlie Sheen also had his home movie theater decked out in a cheesy and outdated design with a lot of red interior. I'm just gonna assume Kendall switched that up too. It's pretty lame that Kendall hasn't shown off her house more but given her situation, it makes sense. She has done a closet tour in the past but I'm not sure if that was at her current home. I think it was before she moved in. These are from recent years, but they're so good. This one's actually one of my favorites. Oh my God, this is like a workout. These jeans I stole. Don't tell anyone. I'm a photo shoot.  I have no doubt her closet in the current home is even better if that's the case. Oh, and she showed us a photo of her pantry. Really exciting, Kendall. Actually, it's so organized so I personally do find that really, really exciting. To be honest, I kind of liked a lot of the previous interior even though there was a lot of drapery and excessive decorations in some areas. The wooden beams throughout the high ceilings looked really nice so I wonder if she kept those accents. And if you were wondering where Kendall lived while this rental was going down since it took about a year, I know that one place she shacked up was this house in the Beverly Hills Grove area of LA that was 25K a month. For 25K, it better be something special.  You slept with someone else? We were all... Anyways, maybe they were sharing rent. This house was 4,052 square feet, two stories and super modern. It was a pretty open concept on the main floor and hosted five bedrooms and six bathrooms. The master suite has a terrace too and it overlooks the pool and spa. Although Kendall is probably living her best single life now in her official mansion, I'm sure the two enjoyed their summer in this 25,000 rental, that's for sure. So these days, Kendall is all set up in her mall hall in Estates Mansion and from the digging I did, I would say she's safe from any future stalkers or robbers considering her address isn't out there for the public unlike some of her sisters. I'm definitely disappointed that the star hasn't shared much of her beautiful home but you can get a pretty good idea about Kendall's tastes. I'm sure that part of the reason she didn't get a house in the Hidden Hills like the rest of the Kardashian-Jenner clan is to keep some independence and privacy which seems like it's working. Kendall doesn't need to show off or flaunt her house for us to know that it's epic. The lot on her current house was already so nice when she purchased. There was so much greenery creating a gorgeous landscape and peaceful vibe that's probably hard to come by in the heart of LA. And yeah, Kendall definitely changed the place a lot since Charlie Sheen lived there. So until Kendall opens up for a house tour we'll just have to respect her privacy. You would have better luck heading to the Hidden Hills and stalking the rest of the family if that's what you're into. Okay guys, so I'm gonna read out some of your comments from our other vids. First of all, I feel like a lot of you guys loved our Kylie Jenner house tour so I'm glad, but I also see you haters out there. Some of you are really mean, but that's okay. Onto the positive. On our Kim K house tour vid, Catherine Hall said, thank you for doing Kim K. I know people are fed up with the fan but I can't get enough. Glad you liked it Catherine, I agree. They're always fun to talk about and see what crazy things the fam is up to so you're not alone. On the same video, Ashita Rout also commented, whoa, love this series. Thank you Ashita, appreciate the support and stay tuned. Let us know whose houses you would wanna see. And Gwen Lucene commented asking why we're giving up Kim and Kanye's address. It's all over the internet already and the house is so guarded and has such a massive property it would be impossible to get close to it anyways. So I'm sure Kim isn't too concerned. We also got some requests for Rihanna's house, Khloe Kardashian's house and a few more so I'm gonna be working on those too. All right guys, that's all I could find about Kendall's Mulholland estate mansion. I think the most interesting thing I learned is that she's like the only one of the family who isn't living in the Hidden Hills. All this time I thought she lived there too with the rest of them. I was wrong. Even though we don't know as much about Kendall's house as her sisters, I look forward to seeing what you guys think of it or if there's anything I missed. Which one of Kendall's homes did you like the best? Whose house do you like the best so far? Kendall's, Kylie's or Kim's? I feel like if I could see more of Kendall's I would like hers best since I love the Spanish style and the property. Let me know in the comments. Also let me know some other celebrity houses you'd like to see. I'll see you next week with some new videos. Bye.


Hey guys, what's up? Welcome to my channel. So for today's video, I am so excited. I'm going to be talking about the Natasha Denona Love Palette and the Natasha Denona Love Glow Cheek Palette. So if you are interested in seeing how I got this look and my thoughts and experiences with these two products, then just keep watching. Guys, know that when these products came out, I had to pick them up. You guys were tagging me, you were asking me if I was purchasing them. Of course I was. I purchased these from Beautylish. I just find that they have really fast shipping for me and really great customer service. So that is why I chose to purchase these off of Beautylish. So Natasha came out with kind of a Valentine's Day collection. So of course it included an eyeshadow palette, her Love Glow Cheek Palette, and also there are three lip glosses, two kind of more nudy lip glosses, and then a really pretty duo chrome coral gloss. I did not pick up any of the glosses just because I was already spending so much money. And the glosses were the least exciting part for me. However, you are able to purchase a whole bundle called the Love Story Collection on Beautylish for $198. If you are interested in that whole collection or you can purchase these two in a bundle for $120 or of course individually. So we're going to start off by covering the eyeshadow palette first and foremost, and then I'll put a time stamp for when we cover the cheek palette. Or of course you can stay around for the whole video if you are interested in both of these products. Let's talk about the Love Palette. So this guy is $65. It is the same packaging and size as the previously released Sunrise Palette. And of course this is more Valentine's themed, so you have 15 kind of more pinky romantic Valentine's Day themed eyeshadows. So the packaging of this is, it is a hard palette, just like that Sunrise palette, except it's a really pretty pink, which I love pinks. So as you can see, so I'm very excited about that. And then the back it has these holes, which means you can stick a needle or something through to pop the eyeshadow palettes out. If you're somebody who likes to rearrange shadows or put them in a Z palette, I'm not like that. I just, I pay a lot of money. So I like to have the actual palette it came in and then you get a nice big mirror, feels very sturdy, very great packaging. So again, like I said, you get 15 eyeshadows on the inside. And so this palette is limited edition. What limited edition means? Nobody knows, nobody specifies. They just see how well this sells inside what they want to do with it, most likely. So this says fall over heels for this limited edition collection of pink, mauve, and purple eyeshadows. This palette will be available, I believe February 6 in stores, but you can currently purchase it at select retailers online. Beauty Lish is also great because you can do flexible payments. So you can get it for two payments of $32.50, which is a lot more palatable than $65. So I always recommend Beauty Lish. So this palette features 15 brand new shades of Nostalgia signature eyeshadow formula and romantic pinks, mauves, purples, corals, and burgundies. So in here, my interpretation of the formulas is that there are seven powder mattes. You get two cream powder formulas, which I believe she reformulated. These should be two of her more new formulas, which I'm not too crazy about this formula. But you'll see that in my demo. You have four shimmer shades and two duo chrome glitter type of shades. Now the duo chrome glitter formula in this palette is super good. In the past, she's created these duo chrome glitter tabber kind of formulas where they get hard pan. There's just not much to it. I really do like the two that she has put into this palette. They are pigmented. They are not quite as pigmented on the eyelid as they look when you swatch them because they can get a little bit chunky, especially this lighter shade here. My recommendation would be to put it over either a glitter glue or to have a base color underneath. But I think they really are gorgeous. They don't feel like they're going to get hard pan and they're super stunning. So I actually do quite like the duo chrome colors in this palette. Overall, swatching wise, everything I've swatched really stunning. Everything felt very smooth. The only color that I noticed any kind of problems with is heart right here, which is the red shade. I don't know if it's gonna... Yeah, so as you can see, it's just a little bit more sheer. That was a terrible swatch though. It actually does swatch better than that. It's just a little bit more sheer than I would normally hope for. But other than that, that was the only problems that I had swatching wise. And then another color I want to point out before I get into the demo is this color blind right here. It's super duper insane. It's one of those really wet, creamy formulas that swatches all the way down your arms. So definitely look forward to trying out this shade when you get it. It's amazing. Overall, first impressions as far as opening up the palette, swatching it, wearing it around a little bit. Very good. It seems like a very consistent palette for her. I'm going to get into the demo so you can kind of see these colors in action. So for the tutorial portion, I did want to show you a lot of the different shadows. So there is kind of a lot of like eye shadow vomit where I just kind of layer a bunch of colors. So just be prepared for that. But this is a look that we are working with. So the first shade I'm taking is first right here. This we're going to use to set underneath the brow. It's kind of a light peachy pink shade. So it does lay down some color, as you can see. We're going to start a gradient. So we're going to start off with Valentine right here. And this is going to be our transition color. So that's going to be blended everywhere. As you can see, it's a very nice light pink. It shows up a little bit deeper on my skin tone than it looks in the pan. We're going to take some of intense and here begins the deepening aspect. So I'm going to start it off in the outer corner and then blend whatever is left in towards my inner corner. We're going to take some of sole right here. This color is a little bit brighter than it looks in the pan, but still continues the gradient effect. I wanted to play with heart because it did not swatch the best. So I wanted to see application. I'm just kind of running this along my lid. It's not the most pigmented shade in the world. And I feel like you're going to get the best from it, you sparingly, not necessarily to get this bright red kind of look. To start adding the purple element, we're going to take trust right here. This is not my favorite plum shadow. I feel like I've had others that have just been a little bit better, pigmented wise, blendability wise. Still is very nice. And if you use a very light, soft hand, you can pack and blend. So it most definitely is a completely workable shadow. I just wanted to note that it's not the best plum I've ever worked with, but it most definitely gets the job done and it's not bad. So I'm really working on kind of expanding and extending my eye with that and then slowly building in the plum aspect into this look. And then also whatever's left over on this brush, I'm going to run it down here. Just a little bit to create a purple underlay to the color we're going to put on top. Next, we're going to take commitment right here. So commitment is her cream powder formula. I really don't like the shade personally. I find it to be a bit chunky and difficult to blend on my eye. So that's why I'm using a light hand to just kind of rest it on my eye and then work it. But I find this color to be difficult to work with. I'm not the biggest fan of this formula. I'm going to use the purple brush to blend it out and I get a lot of fallout from that color as well. And black fallout is very dangerous. Next, I'm taking Dream, which is the purple cream to powder formula. So same formula as commitment, but I think this is a little bit better just because it's not as dark. So I don't really need to blend it out as much as I would a dark shade. But as you can see, packing it on with my finger, it's not extremely pigmented. I think it's a really nice, soft, pretty purple. But I just think it's swatch more pigmented than it applies to the lid. But it does add that really pretty matte element to this look. As you know, though, we don't just do matte. So I'm taking Puppy Love. The shade is actually called Pure Love. Literally don't know where Puppy Love came from, but that would be a cute name now. Right here, which is one of the duo chrome glittery shades. And this is so stunning. It really looks even more glittery when you put it onto the lid. I think that this would really stand out more if you use it wet or on top of a glitter glue. But that's just kind of what that looks like everywhere. I think it looks really good on top of that purple. There's a second kind of duo chrome lid color right here. This is giving and I'm putting that right on top. So this kind of brightens everything. That's what I mean by I like put shadow just everywhere. But that's what these lid toppers are for. Absolutely stunning. I'm using blind right here. Blind might be the best color in this palette because its swatch is so stunning. It is so blinding all over the lid and it's also a really great inner corner color. And then finally, the last shade I'm taking is Heartbeat. So I'm taking it on this really precise refer brush. And I'm just running this along my lower lash line to add some warmth to the look. And that's why I layered down that purple before so that it would peek through this red. Alright so I'm going to do liner and lashes and I'll be back. So with lashes and everything here of course is the final look. Now overall what I would say about this palette is I'm very impressed. Natasha does seem to be getting more and more consistent with her releases. There was a time where there was a little bit of inconsistency within the palettes. But I'm very very happy with this palette. The only formula I'm not too in love with are the cream to powder formulas. She keeps trying to do it and she keeps reformulating it and I still really don't like them. Especially with this black shade it's just pointless for me to have a really dark shade that you're going to have to blend when the formula doesn't blend the greatest. In the more neutral tones of the cream to powder formula it is better. But with shades that you really need to manipulate and blend and layer definitely I just don't like it for that and dream you saw an application. It was just a weak shadow. It swatched beautifully but I just think putting it all over the lid was weak. There were some comparisons between this palette and the lila palette which is her other kind of purple pink palette. But as you can see I just they're very very different. I think that the love palette is much more bright whereas the lila palette is much more muted. It's much more taupey gray more cool toned. You're getting more warmth from this palette. You're getting more taupey grayness from this palette. And there really are not any similar shades within the two palettes. So if you were curious about that they are not the same. But overall I am very impressed with these shadows. The shimmers in here are incredible as expected. Normally from Natasha Denona. No weird hard pan is showing up in this palette yet. And I think she did a really good job with this palette. I'm very impressed. I think it's a beautiful gift for Valentine's Day if you're looking for a gift for somebody. So I'm really enjoying this palette. I'm very impressed with it. And I am looking forward to continue playing with it. So let's move on over to the cheek love glow palette here. I have to admit I was a little bit more excited for this than I was the eyeshadow palette just because I love these cheek products that she comes out with. And the packaging of this already you can tell is spectacular. So around this time last year the bloom palette came out. And this was the first of its kind. And then later on in the year she came out with a tan bronze and glow. So so excited to see this third one. So this is $55. The packaging on this guy is incredible. So the whole basis of this palette is being able to customize your glow. So customize perfect flush glow with this palette. It's limited edition. It features blush and highlighter in cream and powder finishes to mix match and layer in my demo. I will show you kind of how I chose to use this palette and experiment. Essentially you're supposed to be able to layer to mix and match however you want to use it. So let's take a step back and talk about the packaging. So it's the same size as the original two except this one has this amazing glitter running through it. And I am so here for it. This is the best packaging ever.  The best part you have this guy to cover the cream products though there actually is only one cream product in here. So you're getting a glow cream base which is a rosy red with a metallic finish. A super glow which is a peachy pink with gold reflex and a duo chrome finish. A diamond powder which is a hot pink with rose gold reflex and a duo chrome finish. And then a glow impact powder which is a cool champagne with a metallic finish. That's the major details about this palette. So I'm just going to go straight into the demo because that is where we're going to get into the nitty gritty of this product. Okay so I definitely decided I wanted to do the love glow and cheek palette in a live demo since there's a lot of different things to play with, a lot of different things to experiment with. As far as how this compares to the Bloom palette, we have some different formulas, some different textures in here. You know how Natasha loves playing with new formulas. So prior to filming this video, I watched the video that I made on the Bloom palette just to see how I preferred application-wise, things like that. And the only formula that is the same between the two is the glow cream base. And the glow cream base in the Bloom palette is much more sheer and light. And I used it as a base for my highlighter. So that's the glow cream base in the Bloom and here is the one in the Love, which feels a little bit stickier but I don't know if that has to do with just the fact that glow cream base in the Bloom palette is a year old at this point so it might have dried out a little bit. But as you can see, the glow cream base in the Love palette is deeper, so I can't really use that as a highlighting base on my skin tone. Other than that, all of the formulas in here, this is the Bloom palette, are different than the formulas in the Love palette. The tan palette, which I do have the bronzer on my face right now, but that's it. These are much more close as far as what they contain. The only difference is the blush and bronzer powder is in here and in here you have a diamond powder instead. But both have the glow cream base, the superglow and the glow impact powder. I love how the cream products have this to protect it. There's a really great touch that Natasha has done with these palettes. So formulation-wise, the tan is actually closer to this palette. And we're going to start off with the only cream product in this one, which is the superglow cream base. So I'm actually just going to use the end of my Beauty Blender and I have no powder products on my face, by the way, with the exception of my bronzer. And I did set my under eyes, but I have the Giorgio Armani Illuminous Silk underneath and using a sponge. Oh my goodness. That's beautiful. So on me, this definitely is a cream blush and I could leave the house with just this. So this is the only cream formula in here. So you definitely want to use this first. Is that's not stunning? Do I need to get closer for you to see? That's stunning. Great for every day. It doesn't feel too sticky on my face. Very interesting. One thing that I was disappointed by is that this didn't have the cream blush formula that the Blooming Glow had because I loved this formula. You can actually use the cream glow base as a cream blush. If you are fair like myself, but I still would have liked the actual cream blush because it's a creamed powder formula. Here's where it's going to get a little bit confusing as to how I want to use the Diamond Glow powder. This is a very hard pressed formula. You're not getting too much fall-up. But as you can see, super glittery. This is something I would love on my eyelids, not too sure about my cheeks. And then we have the Super Glow, which again, like do you really want this much glow on your cheeks? Obviously, today I do. So I think I'm going to put this on as my blush on top of the cream blush. And then we'll kind of bridge this between the blush and the highlighter. So my cheeks are going to be very glowy today. And of course, this palette is made for layering, but you don't have to layer everything. But for the sake of this video, I'm going to take my refer number 4 cheek brush. I'm going to lightly pat this on top. Now, of course, my cheeks are going to be way more intense than right now than I would actually wear them out in public. Okay, so for a white washing, that just looks super healthy. Okay, so on this cheek, I actually did go a little bit harder with that Super Glow product.  And then for this cheek, I just kind of dipped in and put it right on. So my cheek has a lot more glow to it. But the color is actually quite pretty. I think if you have a lot of texture or pores, you definitely want to tap it off. Because I can see my pores, I can see a little bit of that gold glitter. I don't think it's unflattering by any means, but if your cheek is your problem area, definitely go light-handed. This whole palette is just going to give you a really super glowy, shiny cheek. On deep skin tones, this is a beautiful highlighter kind of color. So let's move on to this diamond powder. This is the one item that I'm just not sure about. I think if I use this blinged brush, like angled brush, this to particles and glitter would get everywhere, but we're going to just try it. So this is from blinged brushes. This is their F4. So instantly there's just like glitter on my face, which I expected, but... So this is the blinged brushes F17. I've been using this for more precise highlighter application. So we're going to dip it into here to see if we can kind of... I mean, it's... It's her diamond formula, which is in the original Big Face palette, and it creates like this really pretty glittery highlight on the face. It's not depositing too much of the pinkness. So if I look straight, you really can't see too much of a cast. I think if you have like a medium or deep skin tone, you're really going to appreciate this and it'll look better on you than it does me, but I'm just not loving this kind of formula for my face. Like this is something like a really pretty lid topper. On my face, it's just very glittery at it. Maybe if I use my finger also, the pink would come through. I don't know. It's kind of just like a face glitter topper. I don't know if I'm into that. So I'm going to try from my Morphe brush, the glow impact powder. I really like the glow impact powders. I had this formula before. It's like that Gillet formula where there's no fallout. We're just going to put it. Ooh, this is stunning. This is really smooth on the skin, really blends in, really gives you a glow. Okay, this way more than the diamond to glow powder. Very interesting. That's really pretty. So like definitely this cheek is like so much. This cheek looks super healthy, super pretty. I really like that. I'm going to try just to even everything out. We're just going to put some of this glitteriness on top. More so to even everything out, not necessarily because I like how it looks. So the thing with this palette is you can use it however you want, layer it however you want. I personally wish instead of the diamond powder, she would have put like an actual cream blush shade or something with a little bit more impact. That's not as shiny or glittery. And I think I would love this even more. But I love in particular how this cheek looks. That's my demo. I'm just going to get into my final thoughts now. As you can see from the demo, there can be a bit of a learning curve with this palette, especially if you've never used anything like this. So I don't think it's a perfect palette, but I think it is really nice. Every product in here is really great quality. It's just not necessarily how I personally would have laid everything out. Though I do really like this diamond powder and I think it's a really fun formula. I just don't really like it in here. It's just too much as far as glitter and shine goes. I think having more of a flat cream blush would have really completed this palette. This is just too glittery for my personal preferences, but some of you might really like it. I wish at least it would be a bit more pigmented to show up on the face as well because I'm really only getting glitter from this. And that I already know from the other diamond powders that I do have experience with. That's just how the nature of this product goes. But from swatching this did look more pigmented. No, but other than that, I think these products are really great in formulation. The glow cream base, I think it's such a healthy looking cream blush on more fair skin tones. If you are more in the medium to deep skin tone range, this is just going to be a great base to have the powder stick to to really make everything more vibrant, whether that be as what you choose as a blush base or a highlight base. It still is really great. The super glow formula. I mean, it is a bit too shiny for me personally. It just, it's a lot of shine on the cheek. I do think it is really pretty though. It's not for everybody, but it is very pretty. The glow impact powder stunning highlight. I think it's going to flatter a lot of different skin tones as well. And the formulation is incredible. It's just that diamond powder that I'm not here for. But I think if you purchase this palette just to kind of get the most use out of it, I would use this all over the lid because it is stunning nonetheless. So you guys, that is all I have for today's video. I hope you guys enjoyed it and I hope you found it helpful. Let me know your thoughts on these products. Did you pick them up? I think this collection was going to make a really great Valentine's Day gift for somebody or for yourself. Came out with some good quality products, so I'm very happy with them. So thank you guys so much for watching this video. I hope you found it helpful. If you are not yet subscribed to my channel, make sure you take the time to do so. And of course, like this video and hit the bell so you can be notified of every video that I upload. And yeah, that's all I have. Thank you guys so much for watching. I will see you guys in the next one. Bye guys. Have a good day.


Daily Tech News show is made possible by its listeners, thanks to all of you, including Brad, Kevin, and Paul Teeson. Coming up on DTNS, Scott Johnson tells us how the very small, very simple Playdate console is being received. Hint, well. Plus, generating energy from the night sky, and Netflix is forced to about face on just about everything it believes in. This is the Daily Tech News for Wednesday, April 20th, 2022 in Los Angeles. I'm John Merritt. And from Studio Redwood, I'm Sarah Lane. In Salt Lake City, I'm Scott Johnson. And on the show is producer Roger Chan. Now, see, here in the United States, the way we backwards-ly write dates, it is 420. Ah, 420. If only there was some significance. I feel like there was, but I can't remember. What was I going to do? Oh, let's start with a few tech things we should know. Google's AMP was supposed to make pages load faster, but a lot of folks see it as Google cutting out publishers. So, the makers of the Brave browser announced a new feature called D-AMP, which will automatically take users to the original page for any link to Google's accelerated mobile pages framework. Brave rewrites links and URLs when possible to avoid visiting AMP pages. Otherwise, it redirects users away from AMP pages before the page is rendered. Duck.go also announced it will direct users to original publishers' web pages instead of AMP versions on its apps and extensions. Google's Project Zero security team detected and reported 58 zero-day vulnerabilities in use in the wild in 2021. That's more than double its previous record from 2015. Project Zero team believed this large uptick was due to increased disclosures of vulnerabilities by software makers rather than actual increased usage by threat actors. So, this is good news. They're catching more of them. It didn't mean there were more of them. That makes sense. We're starting to descend a bit from the heights of tech sales during the pandemic. Candeless estimates that the worldwide smartphone shipments fell 11% on the year in Q1. Samsung remained at the top as a shipping brand growing its market share 2% on the year to 24%. Apple also stayed put at number two with market share up to 18%. Xiaomi, Oppo, and Vivo rounded out the top five, even as each saw declining market share on the year. Okta released a report on the breach it experienced back in January saying a threat actor got control of one engineer's workstation at the support firm Cytel, as we previously suspected, for 25 minutes on January 21. That was it. During that time, the threat actor accessed two customers' accounts. It viewed some information but did not perform any configuration changes. It did not do any password or MFA resets. It did not impersonate customer support. It also could not authenticate to any Okta accounts. Okta had previously said that the upper limit was 366 customers that they could have possibly accessed. But after the investigation, the actual number it did was two. The open source social network Mastodon released its first official client for Android on the Google Play Store, although there are numerous third party clients already available. Mastodon launched an iOS client back in July of last year. Alright, let's talk about Netflix. If you get the extended show from Patreon, you already know, because we talked about it yesterday, that Netflix reported overall it lost 200,000 subscribers in Q4. It had expected to gain 2.51 million. That's quite a difference. It actually gained 1.1 million subscribers in Asia Pacific, and then it lost 700,000 because it terminated service in Russia. And the rest of the difference is made up by a loss of 600,000 subscribers in Canada and the US. Netflix says it now expects to lose 2 million more subscribers this quarter. This is the first decline in subscribers in more than a decade for Netflix, and the knee-jerk analysis might be to blame the price increase. They have increased prices in North America and the UK. Netflix acknowledges that did have an effect, but keep in mind, Netflix earnings were $3.53 a share, beating expectations of $2.91. So their idea that revenue would increase even if subscribers stalled proved true. The other effect on subscribers is competition. Netflix acknowledged that. People have choices now. Lots of them. They're very good choices. But Netflix definitely had responses. Perhaps panic might be too strong a word, but the company has flipped its position on multiple issues, including password sharing, advertising, and maybe even live sports. Stick with me. Netflix said it estimates about 100 million users share passwords. First time they've shared a number. When the past co-CEO Reed Hastings has said that password sharing was something you have to learn to live with, didn't seem that upset about it, was very gentle about it. Now, he says, quote, when we were growing fast, it wasn't a high priority to work on, and now we're working super hard on it. You may recall that in Chile, Costa Rica, and Peru, Netflix has been testing a way of messaging people who share passwords and asking, not forcing them to pay. Netflix says it will take what it learns from those tests, and now it's going to expand it worldwide in a year or so. First time they've committed to that. Netflix also did a total about face on ads. Hastings said, I've been against the complexity of advertising, but now he is, quote, quite open to offering even lower prices with advertising as a consumer choice. He says they're going to begin looking into how to do that over the next year or two. Don't expect it right away. Netflix has the advantage of a huge subscriber base and previous collaborations with brands on marketing. They have some relationships with Coca-Cola and that, but they don't have an ad model yet or infrastructure for serving ads, and the market is crowded. Peacock, Paramount Plus, HBO Max, Hulu, Disney Plus, they're all about to pitch advertisers at up fronts in the next month or so. And don't forget the fast services like Tubi and Pluto. And if that wasn't enough, the fact that Netflix is finally going to consider using ads, Netflix also softened its stance on live sports. Usually it's a flat no when asked about it, but co-CEO Ted Serendot said, I'm not saying that we'll never do sports, but we'll have to see a path to growing a big revenue stream and a great profit stream with it. That's similar to what they used to say about advertising. Well, we're not saying we'll never do it, but now they're saying that about sports. Deadline even notes that Hastings told German newspaper Der Spiegel that it might consider buying the rights to F1 if it could get enough control, although Serendot's emphasized that sports adjacent programming, like the Formula One Drive to Survive docuseries, is still the focus. Sarah, they're just throwing everything against the wall, aren't they? Yeah, I know it's disappointing for any company, but certainly Netflix, which has more competition than ever, to say, well, we thought we were going to gain over two million new subscribers, and instead we didn't lose that amount, but we certainly lost several hundred thousand. And I know Russia plays into this on one hand, but seeing the numbers decline in US and Canada, that's been something that Netflix has been grappling with, but it had been growing in other markets. So quarterly results more or less played out the way that the company wanted it to. The password sharing thing, I mean, password sharing, I don't really know why the company had this stance of like, eh, it's just part of life. I mean, maybe just growing as quickly as they were growing for so long and getting so many new subscribers and enjoying their original content, which brought in new subscribers was just enough to kind of go like, we don't have time for this right now. I'm sure the concept of password sharing was never a non-issue, just something that wasn't a huge priority because you got to figure out the infrastructure on the inside to crack down on this sort of thing. No other companies do it, so there's that. But yeah, I think the live sports is interesting. That could certainly give Netflix an advantage going forward. I think the fact that advertising is an option for the company, but it might take them upwards of two years to implement that, is not going to help their next couple of quarters. And this following quarter coming up sounds like it's going to be a doozy as well. So I've got a notion that may be purely a notion and nothing else. I have no evidence to support what I'm about to say. Sometimes a great notion. Sometimes. Who knows what could spring from this amazing notion? So everybody at home, take note. Here's what I think may have happened. I think when Netflix staked their claim early in this market and became the de facto sort of name you associated with streaming, that gave them a wide berth for a long time and didn't really make much of a noise if you were going to try to compete against them. You sort of came and you went or you came and existed, but not much happened. Even the likes of Amazon with Prime Video, I think it came. They duplicated a lot of the features Netflix did. Like it's bingeable. We mostly give you programming that's all at once. And then you watch it all at once with a few exceptions. Like in a lot of ways, it's a very comparable system minus the fact that you get it with your overall Prime membership every year, or at least initially, and I can get it individually. The point is like that came, did its thing. Other little ones came along. CBS All Access popped up. And I feel like Netflix just kind of went, well, look at these guys. They're kind of poking at us, but it didn't make any big deal. We're not really feeling threatened by any of this. And then it feels like very quickly and all at once almost, pandemic played a part in this. But all of these services like Disney Plus and HBO Max, I mean, I think they even discounted HBO prior to this because they thought they were confusing. It's like, you've got go. You've got now, what are you even HBO? Like it was confusing to me as a user of HBO. So I imagine Netflix just didn't see it as a serious threat. And I think that's changed and it changed quickly. And the likes of Paramount Plus, which is what CBS All Access used to be, other services that are just kind of chipping away at them, Peacock and others. I think it kind of caught them off guard just a tiny bit. And at the same time, they decided to raise prices during an inflationary time that's, that's notably inflationary, which is what inflation is raising prices. Exactly. So, you know, double-edged sword. You're kind of adding it. It's just kind of a kind of bad timing. So that, I think that confluence of events is a little bit, they're usually prepared for this sort of stuff. And I feel like it caught them a little off guard in the larger sense. I, you know, now that you've said this, it really crystallizes to me that I don't think Netflix was wrong. They didn't think password sharing was a big problem. They really thought that password sharing eventually caused people to become subscribers. They had the data on that. So I think they were going very slowly of like, okay, when we get to market saturation, maybe we can do some gentle things to nudge people out of password sharing to increase subscribers. But we don't want to push it because there is a discovery aspect of this. We don't want to kill. They've said that and I believe them. I think it's the current unusual climate that has caused Netflix to be wrong for the first time in a decade. It is inflation, which nobody expected.  The pandemic messing with the economy and supply lines, the war in Ukraine, all of that has changed everything so much that Netflix's previous projections just don't hold anymore because all of the assumptions have changed. So with competition, with people concerned about spending money, with people concerned about the future, they're being pickier about what they spend their money on. And like you say, when there's inflation, that means you have to raise prices. But when you raise prices during inflation, that means people are less likely to want to spend money because of inflation. It's a, you know, it's a never ending circle. So I really think that Netflix wasn't wrong. It's just that the conditions have changed drastically, which is why we're seeing them drastically change their response to them. Agreed. Well, on raising prices for, you know, might get you through a quarter, right? As far as, you know, profit margin goes, but you also lose subscribers that way, and it's not sustainable. Well, maybe the other way it can go is you lose your subscribers right up front who are price sensitive, but then if you keep making money off that, you don't lose more because you haven't raised prices again. Right. Well, one of the challenges of relying on solar energy is that the earth revolves. You might not know this, but it does. It's what? That means our star is not always visible. In fact, half of it isn't at any given moment. Some people refer to this as nighttime or darkness. Some scientists at Stanford University figured they could do something about this, and then they did, and they published the results in the Applied Physics Letters Journal. That tip to Andrew Block over at CNET where we first saw this report it. You might guess, okay, they figured out how to use more distant stars beyond the sun's light to generate energy, but that's not actually what they did. They took advantage of something called radiative cooling. So at night, without our star warming us, objects radiate heat into the sky and off into space. That radiation can cause an object to become cooler than the air around it, and then that difference in temperature can be used to generate a small amount of electricity. Electrical engineering professor Shang Hui-Fan and team modified a solar panel to incorporate a thermoelectric generator to take advantage of radiative cooling during the night. They were able to generate 50 milliwatts per square meter. That's an order of magnitude above previous reported experiments and even adds a little power during the day when the solar panel is also generating normal solar energy. It is a lot less than the 200,000 milliwatts a solar panel would generally create during a given day, but it could be enough to charge batteries or operate nighttime lighting, power sensors, things like that. Of course, they'll keep working on the design to see how much more juice they can squeeze out of it. Do we find this to be practical? It's probably not going to be practical. Probably not, right? The consensus is like, this may not be practical. They might not make it out of the lab, but man, I hope they figure out how to get over that hump and make it practical. Maybe practicality in this case be defined as something like long-term power storage that's just always on a trickle that is either for emergency reasons, I can think of industrial applications. Well, the practicality is about whether you can at scale cost-effectively create the adaptation to the solar panels, I guess. Yeah, good point. I think there's a future where in a home, like not even talking to industrial use here, in a home, you could have some sort of trickle-charged backup that's just always going and you don't count on it for things like, well, we need power right now. It's not like that. But if the power went out, you would have this stored up because for the last 90 days, it's been trickle-charging on the night vibes and now you suddenly got enough power to generate electricity for the next week or something while there's some major outage. Things like that, that seems more possible in the practicality department than say, hey, I'm going to charge my car here or my phone will always be feeding off of this. Like, I don't think we're talking about that stuff yet. Yeah, they're going to have to get it above 50 milliwatts. They're going to have to make it easy to implement and that is the biggest practicality problem is it's not, doesn't look like from what the people who know this are saying. They had a guy from the University of Sydney quoted in that CNET article saying like, yeah, they can do it, but it's harder than it's worth at 50 milliwatts. So maybe they can make it easier. Maybe they can get it well above 50 milliwatts because I do love that idea of like just a little bit of energy could keep a sensor going. Keep a battery trickle charged. Even if it's just like solar lights in your yard, it wouldn't have to be solar. They could be night charged instead. Yeah. There's some cool ideas here. And 50 milliwatts as small as it is is way bigger than anybody's been able to use to get thermoelectric power to work. So that's pretty good too. Yeah. It's an advancement at the very least.  And there are, you know, there are other ways to harness electricity, it turns out. And solar does work when it's cloudy. I know because I have solar panels up there. It just doesn't work as well, but it doesn't. Yeah. It works still. And if you are like, man, I wish I could talk to y'all on Twitter or Instagram about this, you can follow us at DTNS Show on Twitter or on Instagram, DTNSPIX, P-I-X. Go follow us. We're there. Despite the ongoing rumble that the days of consoles are numbered, the number of handheld consoles seem to be proliferating. You got the Steam Deck. You got the analog pocket. They both have their dedicated fans that make the hardware difficult to update if you want one. One is a powerful Nintendo Switch like handheld, the Steam Deck. The other is a retro vintage emulator, that analog pocket, really cool. Another entrant in the retro category is the crank. Well, it's not crank powered, but the console with a crank, Playdate, which just began shipping for $180 from Panic, the makers of Untitled Goose Game and Firewatch. It's tiny, 76 by 74 by 9 millimeters with a 400 by 241 bit black and white display. No backlight. Yes, one bit. Has Wi-Fi. A USB-C port. It's one bit. It's got a USB-C port.  The crank comes as a control. It comes in yellow or yellow. Scott has ordered one, but like many folks, isn't getting it for a while, which means he hasn't put his hands on it, but you've been devouring the information about this and we got all the reviews on Monday, had a chance to look those over. On paper, this may look like something that should not be as popular as it is, but are the reviews good, Scott? So far, yeah. Honestly, I was a little unsure how it would be received. There's been a ton of delays, first of all, with this thing. I want to say they announced it way back in, what was it, 2018? Maybe? It was a while ago. So they've been working on this thing for a long time. The initial impression was, oh, you'll be able to charge it by cranking it. Not true. It doesn't work that way, but it does charge nicely. So here's the thing. Most people say it's really sturdy, that it seems like it's made well with one exception. Every review I've read said the crank seems a little flimsy. I'm not really surprised by that, because it's kind of small. It's going to be flimsy by pure physics, I think. There's maybe ways they could beef that up. But anyway, it uses a control mechanism. There are different ways. I've seen this thing work. There are games where you're meant to run back and forth using the crank. And since it's sort of an analog device, you can move forward and back at different speeds and this sort of thing. I think the biggest strength is, at least the initial library launch, which is being all published by Panic, the developer of both the device and software developers in their own right, as you mentioned. Pretty good batch. Everybody seems pretty happy with that. But there's a lot of questions about what else is coming down the road? Will there be another big push of a bunch of titles at once? Or will we get a slow trickle-in effect from different devs? And will developers and even just hobbyists start making stuff you can side load onto the thing? The good news is you can right out of the box. There's no need to jailbreak this thing or do any kind of weird DRM stuff. It just works that way. I happen to know there's a project where somebody is trying to build a Game Boy Original monochrome Game Boy emulator into this device so that you can play old ROMs of that. Legality aside, it's an interesting technology feed if they pull that off. But I think it's different here though because there's tons of this stuff available. As you mentioned, the Switch is a big deal and is a railway success and it has been since 2017. The Steam Deck, while early, people are pretty excited about it. But these are higher-to-higher-end devices that are designed to play everything from AAA titles down to Indies.  There are other competitors in that market that are making similar devices. And again, it feels like they're less hobby and more mainstream. This is a weird little niche because the thing is tiny, no backlight, super retro-looking. I think this is perfectly timed for a bit of a retro revolution. There are a lot of gamers and a lot of people who want to be playing what they used to play. And seeing this on my own retro video game show, tons and tons of people getting interested in homebrew methods of playing old retro games. And this, while not a retro device, per se, is clearly aimed at that market. Here's your one-bit no-color screen. It doesn't have a backlight. It's very small. It plays simple gameplay, but sometimes simple gameplay are the best mechanics and we miss that sort of thing. We're kind of tired of the huge stories. We want just does something play well. I think this plays into that. And I also think the developer just has a ton of good will behind them. They're a developer of very popular games. You mentioned Firewatch, an incredible first-person exploration game, untitled Goose games, and then same little thing. They even make an FTP client for Mac called... Oh, shoot, I forgot the name of the thing. Have it right here. Why don't I know the name of this? Anyway, oh, Transmit, which I've used for years. A very odd company. They make all these crazy things. And I think that's part of the charm here, is this small thing. It's not some massive developer making it. It's not some big company, electronics company. It's this little thing that you can carry around. It's affordable. It's neat. Is it going to turn the world on its end? No, but I think there's room for a device like this. Why do you think there's a... You put it as a retro revolution going on in gaming. I mean, I know when it comes to fashion, everything old gets new again. That the nostalgia factor obviously plays into it. But what is it about gaming that makes people so eager to have something that might be a little simple, might be a little flimsy, kind of looks old on purpose, and gives you the opportunity to go back into the library? I think you kind of nailed it with the closed thing. It may not be as cyclical though. I think what it comes down to with gamers is they remember game experiences, devices of a certain era because that was an important era to them. Maybe they were kids then, or they were in high school, or that's when they discovered video games or whatever it may be. So the sights and sounds of those eras just resonate with them and stay with them, even if they keep up and they're really into the latest and greatest. There's still this desire to feel what you feel again playing Zelda for the first time or whatever the game may be. And again, this device is not coming out with a bunch of old games on it. It's just presenting a bunch of new games in the old fashioned way. And I think that in itself is a hook because it says, well, these aren't just retro. These are new and retro. Like we're appealing to both your sensibilities of wanting to play something new, but also we want to do it in a presentation and in a tone that you're... Yeah. Like putting out a black and white new film. Exactly. It's exactly that. So to sum it up, I just think that they were smart to know that this would hit those sweet spots for people. I think the reviews are finally nice to see though that it looks like they accomplished their goal. What people do from here forward going to be really interesting. It'll either kind of go a little flat or the indie community is going to go nuts with it and we're going to be flooded with really rad cool little experiences that we wouldn't have had in any other way. So I am voting for option two personally. Well, if you haven't heard of a company called The Air Company, it sells vodka, hand sanitizer, perfume, and you might say, it's kind of interesting for one company. Here's the twist. As the company name implies, these are created out of air, creating pure ethanol with the only inputs being CO2, water, and solar energy. A lot of solar on the show today. Back in 2019, The Air Company launched the world's first alcoholic beverage made directly from carbon dioxide called Air Vodka. But it's water. It's not just air. During the pandemic, the company used all this access to alcohol to start making hand sanitizer. Remember when hand sanitizer was almost impossible to find? Worked out well for them. Now the company creates what it describes as carbon negative alcohols and consumer products simply from again CO2. With a goal to directly reverse carbon levels using conversation conversion technology. Now this is somewhat of a PR spin, but if you're trying to clean up the planet and you are able to do that and you also give people vodka, a lot of people are going to be pretty happy with you. A new factory that the company is building will house newly designed commercial scale carbon utilization systems that's dedicated to increasing the production of CO2 derived ethanol and sustainable fuels. Yeah. I would like to see some numbers on how much electricity is used to make this versus how much CO2 is removed to make it. But I found an article from the Brookhaven National Lab actually a press release from them from back in September. And I imagine what they're doing is something similar to what Brookhaven has been doing, which is depositing tiny amounts of copper cesium onto a surface of zinc oxide and that catalyzes the conversion of CO2 to ethanol. Sounds like the air company is trying to commercialize that. And if you're actually taking more CO2 out of the air than you're generating by the electricity you use then yes, everybody drink more. We can reduce the CO2 in the atmosphere. Yay. I love the idea that this, I love the idea that the part of the industry that made a lot of money early in the pandemic because we didn't know how COVID was transferred so much. They made a lot of money on hand sanitizer and it turned out it wasn't as important because it's an airborne virus and blah, blah, blah. The same thing wasn't as needed. So I like when I hear that these guys are like, all right, we're going to do something that might have a nice impact over here. I don't know why, just for me that takes them out of jail a little bit. Not that they were in big trouble, but you know what I mean? Just as much. Yeah. Also, hand sanitizer is still useful. I know it's totally useful. Don't get me wrong. But there was a time there when there was a scarcity. Don't drink hand sanitizer. Yeah, don't do that. Don't do that. All right, let's check out the mailbag. Let's do it. Frank heard our story about the exploding kittens at Netflix TV show and video game tie-in. This reminded Frank of a show and game that was released on the sci-fi channel back in 2013 called Defiance alongside an MMO of the same name. Frank says, my issue with the show game tie-in concept is I'd be in a world where I'm caught up in events rather than helping shape them. There's always been a drawback with MMOs for this reason for me and for a TV show to try and draw in more players or vice versa wasn't a big selling point. What has drawn me to video games is my ability to shape the events in the game versus being swept up on them. That feeling you get when you accomplish something and the engagement from the TV show to the audience is especially gratifying. Defiance developed a system where events on the show would impact the game, placing the player in a reactive position, which was cool, but not particularly satisfying. Frank says, I don't expect a game like Exploding Kittens to be as ambitious as Defiance was, but I feel as though the takeaway that Netflix could learn is that people like to have a piece of the action. What I'd like to see is myself making a kitten explode. Frank says, I don't even really know if that's what happens on the game, but let's just say that happens and feel the impact of that Exploding Kitten on the TV show. Not necessarily a shout out to the gamer, but more knowing that what I do in the game affects the games on the show. Like I choose your own adventure game. Interesting. Yeah, there's some big differences here. I played Defiance and I watched the show when it was on and the promise there was bigger than they delivered. It was a really cool promise, but they didn't quite get it. And the idea was that things that were happening in the game were going to affect plot points in the show. And they did, but they just weren't significant. There were things that happened in the show that definitely affected the world as well. And it was okay. And it was actually a pretty cool game. I think it just didn't, you know, it never got the legs that it wanted neither did the show. In fact, I think the game ran a little longer than the show did, which was also a little bit weird. But in this case, you're talking about a card game and you're talking about cute little fuzzy characters created by the artist behind the oatmeal, which is a very, very popular web comic. And I think that that stuff can kind of separately survive on its own. Think of it a little bit like Arcane and League of Legends. Arcane is based on that world, but that world and Arcane don't really need each other to function. So I do think there's plenty of room for other ways to do this. They don't all have to, you know, dive into each other's realms back and forth. The way that Defiance did as cool as that idea was, I don't know that that's necessary for it. What if Netflix had to choose your own adventure version of the exploding kitties games that knew what you had done in the game because it's all Netflix on the back end? I mean, that would be rad. And I think we're getting there. We're getting to a place where this stuff is going to happen in some other, you know, other form. And, you know, it's not that different than when lost out of website somewhere that you could go to and read stuff or even Severance has a whole thing and an audio book and all this other stuff. That kind of connected tissue is really fun, especially when you're talking about genre TV. But in video game to TV, TV to video game, can't quite figure out how to bridge that. But I'm not saying we won't. I just think it's, we're a little ways off. The biggest difference is Defiance was set in a St. Louis that had mountains and exploding kittens is not. Right. Nor does St. Louis have mountains. They got them cool arches though. A little artistic license happening here. Well, thanks, Frank. Thanks, Frank, for the thoughtful email. Thanks to everybody who sends us emails. Keep it coming. Feedback at DailyTechNewShow.com. Also, thanks to you, Scott Johnson, for being with us today. What has been happening, my man? Well, there's a lot going on. I figured since we talked about that play date, it's a perfect time to recommend my show, which deals with retro gaming. And we're probably going to talk a lot about that device once I get mine over there as well. But the show is called Play Retro. And it's exactly what you think it is. We spent our entire last episode talking about the weird transition from 2D to 3D when console mascots were trying to make that jump. And most of them failed. A couple of them succeeded wildly, mostly Mario 64. But it was a rough time. And we looked at the history of that and found it fascinating. I think you might as well. So check it out, frogpants.com. Play Retro or just get it wherever you get your podcast. Just search for Play Retro and check the show out. See what you think. Also want to extend a special thanks to Arnab, who's one of our top lifetime supporters for DTNS. Thank you for all the years of support. Arnab. I realize the past two days I've asked people to become new subscribers, and instead we went down by one. So today, don't become a new subscriber at patreon.com slash DTNS. That's reverse psychology at its best. Wink, e-face. There's a longer version of the show called Good Day Internet, available at patreon.com slash DTNS. We roll right into it after this show. But we are live here on DTNS Monday through Friday, 4 p.m. Eastern, 200 UTC. Find out more at dailytechnusho.com slash live. And we're back tomorrow with Len Peralta and Alice Sheridan. Talk to you then. This show is part of the Frog Pants Network. Get more at frogpants.com. Club hopes you have enjoyed this program.