I mean a lot of people have their dogs live outside that's that's not when I was growing up We we had a few dogs, but the dog that we had the longest Rosie.  She came inside sometimes, but I mean at night. She didn't stay indoors. Yeah She has a dog that doesn't want to come inside There's a dog down the street who's got a big yard, you know But it's like chain link so you can see in the yard and it's like a Akita or a real pretty dog and has a dog house always in there Just kind of chillin and I'm always in the morning sometimes when it's kind of chilly I'm like poor dog. Yeah, I'm like this is like a winter Alaska dog. Yeah Fine, it's not a Russian assassin. I don't know. I haven't asked it Though it doesn't seem to mine My sister's blue healer stays outside year-round even in the winter She's got a little Kennel for him on the front porch near the house So it's out of the wind and it's all you know full of like comfy mats and stuff so he can keep warm He doesn't not want to come in she made him come in during a tornado warning one time and he was not I mean the tornado warning was also, you know sirens are going off and it's windy And so he was he was freaking out about that too, but he just not want to be inside their house He's like no not for me. Thanks. I'll stay outside I'm an independent dog. Yeah Jack the dog. That's his name Jack Jack is a great pet. It would have been funnier if you said we had a cat named Jack the dog Well now I have to do that I Like it when pets have I mean both of my pets have human names What it's in Lucy, you know, and then there were Sam it's you know, it's their human names But some there are certain human names that are funny when they're pet names For example, I knew a guy who had a dog named Danny Mm-hmm, and it's such a dude name that like it was just it was just a funny name It was a brand but you just don't hear you don't you don't need a lot of dogs named Danny Marty Marty Or Marty right Ray Ray because she's named after the Star Wars character gets a lot of confusion Even people who know Star Wars is just not thinking about it. They like wait she cuz they're thinking are in my of course I'm ready. Um, I don't know what kind of dog.  We were walking around the lake at the same time And you know the dogs are sniffing and I was a what's your dog's name and he said Jennifer I Honestly laughed I was like, sorry. No, that's it's perfectly fine. I've just never met a It was a dog before I'm just wondering like would Corky fall into an animal name He's more of an animal name than a person name. I would think Corky feels like an animal name It's a it's a nickname. I would think more than There was Corky on Murphy Brown, right? I have a name set up to start the show Oh, no, it's too bad If if one of you would like to read line three today you get to read that name Let's see I'm happy to Scott unless you would like to either way. I'm so easy. It's it's painful Well, let's let's not hurt Scott All right, here we go in three two John Richardson has supported independent tech news directly for five years be like Joan become a DTNS member at patreon.com slash DTNS This is the daily tech news for Wednesday March 13th 2019 in Los Angeles. I'm Tom Merritt and from studio feline I'm Sarah Lane Beautiful now snowy again Salt Lake City. I'm Scott Johnson and from a dry and mildly sunny LA County area I'm the show's producer Roger. So yesterday we fixed all the problems with the World Wide Web Thanks to a little inspiration from Tim Berners-Lee and today We will fix all the problems with privacy and sharing your images for IBM No, we are we're gonna talk a little bit about IBM get some heat for What I think is just them using the Creative Commons license, but there's more to it than that Still, let's start with a few tech things you should know YouTube music YouTube music premium and YouTube premium have all launched in India Google Play music and Google Play movies Will also continue to operate in the country YouTube music is free and ad supported YouTube music premium will lose the ads and charge 99 rupees per month And the crowded music market there in India includes recently launched Spotify as well alongside market leaders like Gaina and Geo 7 among Amazon along with Amazon and Apple's Nice at the inside Xbox event Tuesday Microsoft demonstrated its project xCloud game streaming service for the first time long rumored lots of conversation Finally talked about it Microsoft showed for its a horizon for Streaming from an Azure data center to an Android device using the Xbox controller connected by Bluetooth Not as complicated as it sounds project XCloud will enter public trials sometimes later this year or sometime later this year Microsoft also officially released its wireless display app to stream PC games to the Xbox one and use the Xbox controller to play them Using Mira cast Google is expected to announce a new game streaming service at the game developers conference next week Everybody's getting into the pool. All right, so China morning post reports that the Fushan subway station in Shenzhen, China is demonstrating 5g technology Including the ability to use facial recognition to pay your fare Riders scan their face at a tablet size screen mounted at the entrance gate pronounced just a test although it will work if you register Your your face to your account. It'll it'll charge you Shenzhen metro However did not announce any plans for a wider rollout doesn't mean they won't but they didn't announce anything yet Don't forget first of all in China. Everybody uses mobile payments So this is like hey instead of having to use your phone at the train you could use your face it's even easier and a KFC in China introduced smile to pay at its Hongzhou restaurant back in January 2017 So even using facial recognition to pay is not that new in China All right, let's talk a little bit more about Some moves Google's making that might shed some light on their future plans Scott Well business insiders reporting that Google has moved a few dozen employees out of its laptop and tablet teams Several projects have supposedly been canceled Though the employees have been asked to find temporary new roles in the company Meaning Google Google may find sorry may be seeking more flexibility in their hardware roadmap Yeah, I whenever Google does this and they kind of go a little bit quiet on a Project internally or or a category of the market usually says one of two things to me either that is not Making the profit people had hoped in general or somebody else is dominating it and they would rather spend their time elsewhere So who knows with this? I gotta say it must be great to work at Google because usually this is something where it's like Okay, we're shuttering your department and you are getting severance and you no longer work here and Google's like Why don't you just find a temporary new role somewhere else in this company? I I have it on good authority that that that planet Google is called a bungee Like like a bungee cord where you just kind of you kind of jump to another role for a while And it does help them Not lay people off Sometimes people bungee and then land on the ground and they don't end up keeping a role and they leave the company But but it does allow people to try to find another role So I think Google is using that here to give themselves some flexibility to say Maybe they need to pair down their laptop and tablet efforts and focus on a couple And so they're like, well, we don't really need all you guys because you were working on 12 different products And we've picked the two we want to focus on but hang out for a while because we'll probably have more coming down the line It seems like a pretty smart way to do it to me Google has also expanded its list of available default search engines in the chromium 73 stable release while Google's own search still the the one that you get at install The alternatives have expanded to include privacy focused search engines like duck duck go in more than 60 markets worldwide Duck duck go was not previously an option in chromes defaults Q want you want was a quants was added as an option in finance but not in I'm sorry in France But not in Germany or in France France, which is also a financial center of sorts It's a matter of us today Yeah, so so before there's some other Chrome 73 features rolling out as well, but I love this Move by Google and I think it's based on public and governmental pressure that they're like, you know what? We should really clean this up and make sure at least the top four search engines in every market besides ourselves Are available as a default before someone forces us to do so Yeah, my feeling is the same and it's interesting because part of me wants to go. Uh, this is a very Magnanimous thing for Google to do and any time a company does this like Apple with their privacy Commitments and other companies do similar things to have Google do this. I go. Ah, good job guys You're thinking of us. You're taking care of us and you're giving us more options You're not trying to force us down your narrow path But then another part of me swings in and goes Well, yeah, but also they're kind of sandbagging here It's a little bit of a way for them and not not in a bad way Maybe this shows that that pressure can be good But this is them saying yeah, we get in some trouble sometimes even even when we don't intend to be why don't we get out in front of this and Be open and uh opportunistic as possible so that when the time comes for somebody to scrutinize us for some reason or another This isn't just added onto the pile of complaints. So It's fine with me either way. I just wish it was pure Nice move customer facing move by google and not the rest The other part of my brain that says we're just doing this so you can preemptively get out of trouble Although tom and roger you both use duck duck go. So this is something that you know, it's a nice feature for you So yeah, or something that you're already using I said duck duck go is my default search engine on mobile On on the safari browser on ios to be specific Uh as a way to just kind of vary it up so that all of my activity isn't being captured I still use google on the desktop and honestly I didn't ever look to see if duck duck go was available as a default which it wasn't until now But I wasn't really going to change it on the desktop Nice to know that it's there though, and I'll be honest using it on mobile It Never Causes a problem. I never go. Well, I guess I have to go to google to find this thing. I can always find what I'm looking for Yeah, I like it just for I don't know. I just like alternatives even if there are not alternatives. I don't use all the time I like that the that the market keeps having weird stuff like this happen Like I would have never suspected two three years ago if you said, hey, what if a privacy focused Search engine popped in out of nowhere. Do you think you'd get any traction? I probably said no It just seemed like it was too too saturated too much control by you know one big company and then a handful of others and I think it's great that duck duck is doing what it's doing I just have never used it until the last week or so I'm new I I said it to I said it to my default in the chrome for os 10 like you actually physically have to Add right hard it hard, but I've been using it because I just wanted to see because I mean google's default and everything I wanted to try a different search engine for the most 90 90 percent of the time it's fine It's the 10 percent that I actually switch over to google if I need to get more detail on a new story or something Before we wrap this up sarah tell us some of the other things that are coming to chrome 73 Yeah, chrome 73 is rolling out today for mac windows and linux with a slew of new features Including some people will be excited about dark mode. That's at least for mac os Although it's supposedly coming to windows soon plus better syncing and account sign-in features New developer support for hardware media keys and auto picture in picture Spotify has filed a complaint against apple with the european commission over app store rules Spotify claims that the apple app store limits choice and stifles innovation They say it's an abuse of market dominance and they want the european union to look into it The complaints center around the fact that apple requires app makers to collect payments through apple You can't provide an alternative source to collect the payments And of course the fact that apple takes 30 cut out of subscriptions At least in the first year and apple Doesn't take the cut of other purchases spotify particularly points to ride sharing services like uber or they're like Apple doesn't take a cut of the fares. Why are they taking a cut of our subscription for music? Spotify also wants apples own apps like apple music to have to abide by all the same rules as everyone else in the store And they want apple to stop controlling communications with users Now as a side note spotify has its own problems. Uh gimlet media company the podcasting company it acquired last month Has its employees, uh the podcasting part of the organization unionizing with the writer's guild of america So it's not like spotify is is not got its own negotiations with people upset with the way it does business But let's focus on this apple claim because this is huge Everyone has been wondering when apple would be taken to task for its app store policies And elizabeth warren didn't put this in her medium post last week, but she told the verge Yes, apple's app store policies definitely fall under what i want to investigate if i'm president So spotify is is bringing this to europe and europe is as we know, uh very friendly to these sorts of investigations Go ahead. I was just going to say I actually think spotify has a point here Um up to up till now. I've not been too bothered by as a consumer anyway bothered by the The profit split at apple it mirrors a lot of other profit splits out there But they're also seeing their own disruption Steam being one the epic store coming in with a better cut that sort of thing Um, and so it does seem to be coming up more and more like okay Well at this point when you have this kind of dominance, maybe there's something something has to shift around But the spotify complaint specifically just sounds Legit to me like there's there's some inconsistencies here If you're going to have a streaming music service, you're already dealing with the lowest margins out there when it comes to entertainment licensing And you have to come to this platform and cough up your subscription 30 for anyone who subscribes through the app The alternatives to go full amazon, but not everybody can do that And make everybody sub and pull things outside of the os And the fact that they've got their own competing music service in there where they don't have to pay themselves 70 cut and keep 30 like that's ridiculous to even talk about so I don't know. I I don't know what the answer is or I don't know how egregious it is at this point It just does start it's starting to feel a little frisky And I think apple's probably gonna have to respond in some in some major way I I don't know that this meets anti competitive Behavior anti competitive behavior is i'm abusing my market dominance to stop others from doing the same thing With android the dominant operating system and with uh android available to spotify to go be on I'm not sure you can make the argument that well apple is preventing Things from happening in the marketplace. They're certainly preventing things from happening on ios But that doesn't mean they're preventing things from happening in the marketplace There's plenty of innovation in the marketplace android is the dominant Operating system in the marketplace. So, you know the remedy for this should be uh, if people don't like it They don't have to develop for apple and they don't have to buy apple products And and that is a choice that most people make Maybe not so much on the developer side, but certainly on the consumer side most people don't choose ios so As as much as I agree with you in principle that I wish apple would treat subscription revenue in particular Uh as just a pastor rather than trying to take a cut of it because I do feel that that's you know Them sort of pushing their own interests. I don't know that it falls Under the need for a legal remedy. Yeah, but it's also If they're going to get any traction it's to do it with the eu And that's what they're doing. We'll see if that does anything, but um I always notice that these things always come up as complaints in the eu Uh and not here to start with and it's usually because the eu takes the same reason the patent Cases used to get filed in the eastern district of texas. I think that's going to stop now with new patent rules But you know, you you could always get a friendly ear there. Yeah Also an interesting comparison to make to uber, which is I mean Spotify and uber Sure, the people get paid on both sides, you know by a company, but uh, very apples and oranges You can even subscribe to lift an uber you can you can pay a monthly fee Same thing with postmates where you can pay a monthly fee, but apple doesn't take a cut of those. It's interesting Well, let's talk about twitter everyone loves twitter. I don't know. Maybe not Update to the twitter apple let you swipe left from the twitter timeline to access The camera functions. It gives you the immediate option to take a photo or loop up to two minutes of video It's interesting. They're looping that high now. It used to be only looping at six seconds or under A mini swipe takes you to the options to stream video or audio You can overlay a location hashtag and your usual tweet message and post immediately photos Also are larger in the twitter feed And appear before the text Um, a lot of changes and tweaks and stuff happening Over at twitter lately including some rumored stuff that some people are upset about but what do we think about these changes? Some people are always upset, so I guess that's not new Many people are upset. No, there's a twitter has been rolling out a lot of test features We talked about briefly yesterday that twt tr app for trying out features twitter's trying to be better about rolling out features faster I love this This is twitter saying we know photos are great on the internet Everybody loves seeing photos. We know we haven't been doing photos as well We're going to make it easier for you to take a photo or make a video or even stream live It's not even going to have the periscope branding on it. Even though we'll use periscopes infrastructure We're going to make it easy and we're going to make it look better in the timeline So then when you do post your photos and videos, uh, they they look cooler But we're not going to try to rip off spotify or i'm sorry snapchat or instagram stories Yeah, I want to dig deeper into this video or audio distinction Um, if they're if they really want to push that or not as a thing where streaming? Yeah, yeah, they've been trying to push streaming audio through periscope for a long time And I I kind of I mean I did a periscope the most recent periscope I did was a talk I gave at a school at a college talking about making content around video games And I really wanted people to see it But I couldn't hold my camera up like some goofball trying to do periscope So I just kind of parked it down next to my chair and had a look at the floor the whole time Uh, that would have been a nice time for just an audio option. So I actually really like that and I hope they You know, I hope that makes a bigger splash Also, I know it's a small thing and twitter's photos have gotten larger and larger over time I mean if you remember if you've been in twitter back in the day, you know, it used to just be a link And then it was a sort of a small photo in in the feed and now they seem pretty big to me now already But I guess they're getting bigger But to have that before whatever text is being tweeted along with the photo that sounds like who cares But it actually does sort of matter because you're you're the photo is now front and center It's what's grabbing you and then you go well, it's the caption which is very instagram-like Totally Uh, and just just very normal We're normally we're used to seeing a photo and then a caption below it Not a tweet and then a photo under it or not even a full photo, but like a part of a photo under How about some better compression? I just want to throw that out before we pass through this some better compression twitter It all looks like crap and garbage freaking better photo compression yeah Bloomberg reports that apple we're going back to apple now is still trying to finalize deals with movie and tv Companies to become part of its video streaming service expected to be announced on march 25th apple is supposedly talking with atnt cbs and lionsgate about adding services like hbo showtime And start to the service alongside apples owns or own originals the deals reportedly need to be reached by this friday Time is of the essence and while most are expected to be signed They still need to agree on things like marketing and promotion and user experience Netflix and hulu both not expected to be available through the new service But both are still available on the ios and tv os apps. Yeah, so we'll be talking about this a lot especially after march 25th, but uh This bloomberg report and mark german is one of the authors on this So I feel like it's pretty reliable makes me think that we have been thinking about the apple streaming service wrong That we've been thinking apple is going to have a bunch of originals in a netflix style service And it is not this makes me think what apple is going to do is push the simplification Hey, everybody you complain about the fact that you have too many services to keep track of Too many bills to subscribe to with all these various amounts. What if we made it simple? You you you could have somebody who's tracking what your subscriptions are Suggestings ones you might want to add Suggesting when it's time to cancel one because you're not using it and we'll make it all available through ios and tv os As well as a perk having some originals that you can't get anywhere else because we're the ones making it Uh, that feels like the push here. It's not going to be an apple streaming service with apple content It's going to be an apple consolidation service for your streaming at for your streaming content That apple will add some things to as a bonus for using their service I mean, I don't have a ton to add to this except to say when you mentioned it on our morning show this morning in brief It uh was the first time I'd heard this Talked about in this way and I think you're absolutely right. Otherwise. This is just another Sort of hey, we got the thing too and it took us forever But it's because it's better But really is it apple and why is it more expensive like all the dumb apple stuff that falls around it? Is it just a quick zero to 60 second? Uh attempt to catch up with netflix and everybody else Or is it something more than that? And I think you may have In my mind, you've dug up what what more it is. We'll find it on the 25th, but I really really like your theory Thank you. I'm glad you do. Uh, and actually if you want to hear me imitate what I think apple mind announced in apple Version of language. Uh, check out the morning stream because that's what I did It's really good. Yeah, there's something else Hey folks, if you want to get all the tech headlines each day in about five minutes Be sure to subscribe to daily tech headlines dot com. All right. Let's talk about mbc news reporting that ibm Was using and is using and has used images from flicker In order to train an ai on facial recognition Now this is being reported by mbc news as a privacy violation So let's talk about what's actually happening the photos that ibm are using were listed Under a creative commons license on flicker. Uh, this is something that used to be kind of front and center Now it's not the default you default to copyright protection now on flicker But I think for a while the default was creative commons I'm not sure could be wrong about that But a lot of people did it So a lot of people made their photos available on flicker under a creative commons license and ibm said, oh, okay This grants us wide rights to use the photos without having to ask specific permission So we will do that now ibm said it complied with privacy principles anyway And that the data set compiled data on measurements between facial features then discarded the images The actual images themselves are not stored nor are they part of the algorithm. In other words, they pull up the image They make a bunch of measurements like how far is the nose from the eyes and and and it's much more complex than that They store those measurements to help train the machine learning and then discard the image ibm also said individuals could opt out of the data set They're like even so even though we're not actually storing your image If you don't want us to use it If you want to withdraw that permission that you put on your creative commons license You can do that question is how do you figure out if you're in the data set? Well, mbc news has developed a tool to make it easy to check if your image was used Now folk I'll let scott and and sarah describe their reactions to this But I have a very specific reaction that I think Is very telling about how things have changed on the internet over the past 10 years Sarah you go first. I want to go. All right. Well, so as a flicker user And I I am currently a flicker user Paying for pro still because I have a lot of photos on there, but back in the day I was I was a very avid flicker uploader user I was I was I was in I was in the wheelhouse of flicker and I had Not all of them. Um, there were certain albums that that weren't but most of my photos were creative commons Because I kind of liked the idea of people being able to to to have a little bit more ability to to use them creatively and It was it was sort of the it was it was the way the community fell at the time again This is like 2007 2008 at its heyday So and I remember getting into kind of an argument with a photographer friend of mine Who was like, you know, you're screwing it up for the rest of us, you know We're trying to make money on this stuff You know, you just kind of letting people use your photos and those were the conversations We were having about creative comments at the time Now when you think about what IBM is doing It doesn't really bother me because The photos themselves are not being used in a way that I feel violently. It's my personal privacy However, I would be a little weirded out to know Uh that my photos specifically were being used and I it doesn't appear that they are because I tried this tool earlier today But if they were I would want to know that beforehand Rather than someone saying well, if you want to know if you're part of this experiment with AI Check out this tool. That's that's really my only gripe with this my take is I don't actually care if they use my photos at all. I don't find it All that big a deal they're up publicly anyway if these were non creative commons licensed things. Well, that's a different thing, but I think IBM is adherent to the creative commons As it currently is uh stands And I think that this is yet just what this is for me is yet another example of Not legislation but rules and guidelines that were made during a time where nobody knew we'd be Scouring millions of photos and using it for machine learning using it to understand this or that or build whatever Like we didn't know that all we knew was I took a thing. Maybe I'm a photographer Maybe an artist I put it up online and I said hey I would like this to be able to be used by other people and share it around But only under these restrictions therefore creative commons is great because it gives both them a chance to use it And create attribution and it gives me the exposure I want But also the protection I want for my own work and what's happened is we're now in a new place It's different now What you can do with these things is so much different than any of us thought of so I think it's probably just time to go reevaluate what creative commons is and kind of make adjustments as necessary Make it a more fluid set of guidelines that are agreed upon But like copyright law like a million other things that are sort of like this Um, they don't stick very long stuff changes and we have to approach it that way So that's my take off or take away is that this just needs to be talked about again I disagree with both of you. All right, great. Uh and more with scum than sarah Creative commons was exactly for this use and there are multiple versions of it that you can choose the rights Uh that you want to attach to your image And if this story comes out in 2008 NBC news is talking about how this crazy open license has a Unleashed innovation allowing IBM to create an artificial intelligence that can create facial recognition If we didn't have creative commons IBM would have had to go and get permission to use all these photos But because of the creative commons license, we've now unleashed innovation and creativity because that was the spirit in 2008 and 2009 The only thing that has changed is our attitude towards this So I don't think creative commons needs new licenses. They have a very Bullet-tested licensing system What has to happen is people need to realize that their decisions of 10 years ago still have impacts today Because I think when flicker was sort of encouraging you to do creative comments people didn't think Oh, I it could be used for anything. They thought oh, I'm sharing with other people like me Even though the creative commons license specifically Is created to do exactly that and there are versions of the license that will restrict what you can do with the images While still being able to share them There are things like calling for attribution or saying well, you can use mine But you can't share it with anybody else. You can only use it for your own purposes. I I think that Sarah's uh objection is is the natural one of like well, I wanted to share it with other people back then But I didn't realize it could be used for this I I think that's just a change in our attitudes though It's always been what the creative commons license was for was to say hey, let someone else use your Your image so that they can just go and do something unexpected with it and learn from it Well, we've also had a decade plus of of of you know warnings and and and potentially frightening stories about you know house how how How smart ai is getting and how humans need to be more and more wary of of of You know what where the robots going with all of this? So I think I think you make a really good point that back in the day if this would have been Explained to the public probably a lot more people would have been like wow pretty cool Because we've made such strides in the last 10 years. Yeah in in this uh In this arena and and and some of them trouble people Yeah, I would I would actually say just to I know we're almost out of time here But I just wanted to say this I actually agree with everything. Tom is saying 100 across the board No, you're supposed to argue with him. I went through but my only point is and I should have clarified this If people want this to change then they're gonna have to change it in other words if people are scared about this now You could change it So so what needs a flicker is at fault here, right flicker If anybody's at fault it's flicker for encouraging people to use creative commons without really educating them What the impact might be and flicker should make it really easy for you to mass You know unselect all your stuff and ibm is doing the right thing and saying hey, you don't want to be part of this database That's fine. Uh, but unfortunately, I I think it's the wrong attitude I think it shows that we are we're headed into the cycle of not sharing We're headed in the cycle of of building up walls and you can see that because the successful companies are the ones That have big walled gardens. We're just in that period of time, which is different than it was 10 years ago Yeah, I agree with that as well Thanks to everybody who participates in our sub reddit We hope you're still with us in 10 years submit stories and vote on them at daily tech news show reddit.com You guys on facebook you too stay put facebook.com slash groups slash daily tech news If facebook's still here at 10 years A lot of things can happen in 10 years. All right Let's talk out the mail back because email be here in 10 years. I could tell you that That's for sure. It is the cockroach of tech James had thoughts on tom's views around cambridge analytica and our overall discussion yesterday on tim burners lee and where the web is today James says I could not agree with tom more. In fact, I'd argue that facebook's mistake was much more mundane and commonplace one bad governance But the suggestion and I believe james is referring to my My suggestion on the show that the problem can be solved by improving search results at all bothers me It sides too closely to limiting the internet's unbound nature because it essentially argues that the problem here is Curatorship but user choice has long been the driving force of the online world Maybe less not more is the answer worked for wikipedia, didn't it? Hmm I'm not sure james that I said that the the answer is You know, let's let's figure out google search results but I did use that as an example of something that is being gamed and something that uh, create sort of You know a disenfranchised view of of of how the the internet is is and you know The smart people and the scammers can can can figure things out to to confuse and annoy the rest of us Yeah, just one just one one thing not a silver bullet to solve everything. Exactly. But thanks for the email james Thanks to everybody who emails us every day and thanks to scott johnson for being our co-host on this wonderful wednesday scott What's new with you? Well on this wonderful wednesday, uh, not a lot new but there is some stuff cooking So if you want to follow what I do get any of my shows Check out my my daily thoughts Check me out on twitter at scott johnson and my website is frog pants.com. So go there and check it out Tell me what you think we love getting new members And if you're not already a member of dTNS, uh, there are lots of cool perks for it For instance at the co-executive producer level right now you get a bonus show every month where sarah myself roger and often scott I think scott's going to join us this month look back at the dTNS lineups from five years ago And and look at all the interesting stories some of which seem like they could have come out of today Some of which are wildly different. It's it's a lot of fun And that just comes into your custom ad free rss feed that is created for every patron who joins us at patreon.com So go check it out patreon.com slash dTNS our email address is feedback at daily tech news show dot com Write us early and write us off on we're also live monday through friday at 4 30 p.m. Eastern 2030 utc Find out more at daily tech news show dot com slash live back with justin robber young tomorrow talk to you then This show is part of the frog pants network Get more at frog pants dot com Simon club hopes you have enjoyed this bro Oh finance fries my favorite finance fries There's two things going on here first. I need glasses Seconds my macbook backlight has failed. So i'm kind of right, of course It's as if i'm reading at dusk.  It's not quite like a kindle then though, right? Like it's a it's a It's not like good to eat paper. It's like trying to read with the brightness at 30 percent. Oh, that sucks I know so and trust me. I'm as mortified as possible the country of finance We we I was like I was like actually germany's really more of the financial capital I guess I guess Even Tom was like France Sarah I couldn't help it. I'm sorry And the thing is like I know I know what it is But you know, sometimes you get rolling and you're just I just saw finance And it was capitalized weirdly. All right, all right, we'll get your screen. It'll happen I'm actually I'm actually going in tomorrow. So Spotify calling the apple bad Creative commons created for what? I'll gladly sue you Tuesday for creative commons today. That's actually pretty good Creative commons sense That's even better. Yeah creative commons sense for ai is that's that's my favorite. I I could use it even without the ai yeah Yeah common sense I'm terribly explaining my point of view on that thing. It's just about the loud Like everything you said is spot-on I just you know what my thing boils down to it's If people want to change something they should change it And that's like the laziest and that was where I was going is like you already have control over this You didn't have to make your images available, but you did And I think just a lot of people didn't really think about it that way And sarah you you you basically gave that point of view of like hey I was cool sharing it with other people in 2008. I never really thought IBM would come along and use it But that is what that license was meant for. Yeah, the biggest the biggest problem here is NBC news I'll just say that like they're they're the ones that are taking this to this. Oh Yes, and they're not alone It's uh, yeah I'm not going to give NBC news a pass on that but also if it wasn't them it'd be somebody else. So yeah That is the time we live in well, you know, it's also one of those things where In some ways they are a reflection of the broader population and that no, they're not they're not as you know Familiar with Creative Commons license. They don't necessarily understand the implications of what it does I don't I don't buy that if you're a journalist you get you get familiar with it You dig in and learn about it before you make the make the story That's your responsibility I will agree with the Roger that they that seems like they're not taking that very seriously sometimes but I just don't think they have the history I think that's where Roger where you're right is they they don't have the perspective of I was around covering this You know when when Creative Commons was celebrated Uh, and and so I'm you know, I I don't realize that that's a change in attitude And I think I think that's an important part of this story is This is this is a sad This is a sad thing that people are mad about this because I really do think that if we didn't have as Sarah pointed out 10 years of AI scaremongering stories if we didn't have you know, the last couple years of Outrage culture, especially at privacy violations and actual real bad privacy violations and hacks Then I don't think this would work. Uh, the story would be you know, hey, check this out The idea of sharing images freely instead of copyright protecting everything by default has allowed for this great innovation Because there is no implication to what IBM is doing that is bad for you They're storing measurements that allow their algorithm to recognize new people They're not storing your images And I know I hit that point in the in the show, but that really needs repeating I think which is they aren't keeping pictures of you or the people you took pictures of They're using the data and then discarding the images And saying oh now we've taught this AI how to recognize people It's not a big bank of your photos sitting there Uh that someone could go in and look at Well Flicker is a big bank of your photos sitting there that someone could go in and look at Yeah, I was I was trying to become outraged earlier like can I get outraged about this like You know, is there an angle where it's like wait a second. Yeah, I I am kind of and the thing is it's like No, I I I'm not these are photos that people can look at on flicker So They're atoning for the sins of the perceived Uh privacy violations or even real ones. Yeah, they're voting for facebook having a breach and not telling anyone They're atoning for like it's almost like IBM they're giants So you have to hate them already and now they're doing a thing with your photos. Oh my gosh What can this mean like we're just we put ourselves in this weird corner now And it's bad Yeah, it's it reminds me of the old uh, the old arguments, uh, the news companies make about saying we we don't want Google indexing us in their search engine without permission and it's real easy to put a line in your robots dot txt file That says you can't index me and google respects that like you already have the power to stop them That's not really what you're mad about you're mad about the fact that google is not paying you Uh, and that's what that argument was really about here. It's the same thing you you have The ability to stop an IBM from using your picture Don't use a creative commons license or use a more restrictive one that wouldn't have allowed that Uh, it is the control was in your hands. People just didn't realize it, right? And I think that's that's where some of this, uh, does fall on flicker For not properly instructing people. Hey when you use a creative commons like you should know that means anybody That's either you're saying anybody can use your photo Are you you're super cool with that? But that would have sounded ridiculous in 2008 because in 2008 the idea was everything is protected Nobody can use my thing. How do I let other people use my thing? Oh creative commons license. That's great. That's awesome Yeah, and I don't want a poo poo on anybody who has the feeling like I don't know I don't know if I don't want people in 2019 to take my photos and make it part of their Uh, testing for AI or machine learning. I understand. I don't even I still don't really care And I don't either but I'm saying I'm all for it. I'm contributing to the advancement of science. I'm borderline flattered in fact Right. So what I'm saying is those people have they have the control.  So go take them down and take it off if that change the licenses Yeah, and flicker should make it easy for people to change the licenses now that this attitude has changed Right. That is that is something that that would be useful um You've noticed that you don't have a creative commons license attribution on instagram or facebook, right? Because They came along and developed these things after that attitude was already starting to change. So Um, it's sad to me. You should you should want this your eyes should be wide open But you should want to like hey, that's what this is about is is not over protecting things and allowing innovation to spring from them But but we're not in that headspace these days and also I think another part of it is something I talk about a lot Which is the fact that we've gone from the internet is a thing that a few geeks use Yeah, that was the 90s to the internet is a thing that a few of us enthusiasts use that was the 2000s to the internet is a thing Everybody uses right and the enthusiasts were like, oh, yeah creative commons. I get that. I know how it works facebook I know the risks. I know to watch out for and now that everybody uses it everybody is like, I didn't know those risks I don't know what creative commons is and then make any sense to me. Why would you do that? Right? They haven't learned those lessons. They haven't they haven't been that involved in it I'll heartily agree on that It's just a tool now The internet isn't special anymore.   Isn't it funny that that became a derogatory thing because you're like tools. That's how you build stuff Yeah, but then why is a tool kind of like a clown because you're a tool in someone else's hand to do their work You're not your own man. You're Okay, I see. So you're it's it's like saying a sheep almost. Yeah, you're just basically someone else's You're a pun If you're part of if you're on the if you're in the tool if you're part of the band tool Like 90s music, you're all right Then you should think about sobriety Sure all their videos were where people covered in ash and uh, they were always bald and naked. That's all I know about tool I uh, I that was the style of the time. Yeah, I I liked tool As was the style of the time I probably wasn't like I wasn't a big enough tool fan to go to a concert Like that probably would have been like a little too moshy for a little Little fan to own any of their music or listen to it, right? Oh I definitely did All my music came with a parental advisory. Yeah Isn't it funny to listen to some of that music with the parental advisory from the 90s and be like, oh, isn't that cute? I guess maybe they use the f word once For sticker I do remember I do remember though and this was I don't know. I was I mean I was I was not in high school yet when two life crew was you know I was And I mean and we won't we won't get into it, but I mean to this day.  There is a lot of that. It's watching some old british comedies and Those things are like stuff from the 70s.   No black face and british comedies. Oh, yeah. Yeah. In fact, there's a whole Oh, yeah, there's this episode of are you being served that I just watched it was all black face stuff Oh, no another one with this japanese guy that visited. I mean it was oh, yeah It was rough. I was like, what are we what are we doing? And then I realized well, it's not them that changed. It's me. I changed and so do the rest of the matter. That's good. Yeah Well, it's it's weird because you don't notice it because you have you tend to have a very Halcyon view of of certain elements when you're younger and then when you look back on it's like wait a minute that I don't think that that's cool Like I used to watch the dukes of hazard religiously because I love like oh Car chases the car jumps over and then I realized what's on top of the general Lee and that the car is called Yeah, like you don't you don't realize it What's on top of the general Lee and that it's called the general Lee and also by the way Like it didn't occur to me because I was in like grade school. It's like cool the car jumps over things I think you know drive around a tree and the you know Yep, boss hawks frustrated. Oh, what are these boys going to do this week? Yeah Well folks, uh, we'll talk about uh more offensive things next week The folks but uh, we have to go for now audio folks stick around. We'll try to be nicer We'll we'll have more uh examples. There's more to come or la or fewer More shock and outrage Less shock. I don't know But bye video folks. That was what I was trying to say. Goodbye. Goodbye


Thank you so much, Professor. I think this is extremely interesting and very topical. If you think about how to pair economics with practice to yesterday, I was in a meeting with the CEOs of the top banks here in Europe talking about the upcoming stress test. I think that the lessons that you give us and maybe also the lesson not to fall in the pitfall of hubris and thinking that we know more than we do, the way that we know to try to deal with this and it's very pragmatic and very down to earth, much more down to earth maybe than what you just explained to us, is that we say let's run this stress test, but as a supervisor let's not yet attach any abiting policy actions to it. So there's also a role in just making sure that people start thinking about it, that we unleash, if you like, the intellectual capacity that is there within these banks by just forcing them to start working on this. So maybe that is also a way to pair what I thought you said so very well in the beginning that we make sure that on the one hand we don't overestimate our capacity and our capabilities, but on the other hand we shouldn't fall into inaction because the gravity of the situation. I am looking around and see there's a chat function in which people can ask but there's also panelists and I know my fellow board member Philip is here and I'm sure that that wonderful mind of his has been triggered by what you have said. So while people are maybe trying the chat function to see whether maybe Philip or maybe one of the other people in the room that I can see here want to kick off the discussion. Let me just say one thing that I can understand that there may well be gains in just getting financial sectors to be thinking more about climate change and the stress test puts it on the radar screen in ways that perhaps wasn't so white. You can certainly see potential virtue there, but it'd be nice if the stress tests are going to continue going forward to start thinking through some of these more dynamic and probabilistic issues. That's very clear and I think that is the way forward. Now don't be shy. Maybe another thing that occurred to me about who am I here to be your principal discussant that shouldn't be the case. Do you mind? I don't know whether anybody told you, but I'm only trained as a lawyer and lawyers look at this from a precautionary principle kind of way of thinking that that might be that there's even a preponderance of likely acceptable outcomes, but if there are certain outcomes that are just not acceptable it means one needs to act. Do you think there is a risk of central bank that did so? I think we completely accept and then we are completely in agreement, which is putting a last slide in terms of governments having to take the lead here, but do you nevertheless that having been said think there's a risk of central banks falling short of what they should be doing in the period to come? Yes, that's an interesting question. I don't see that at the moment as the problem. I'm a little bit more concerned that central banks expose themselves into setting up public expectations that they can do more than they really can accomplish, which I think is important. Central banks have in many places established rather government agencies, good reputations and it's being somewhat politically independent and being more reliable policymakers and I just want to be good not to kind of lose that credibility. Right. Thank you. I actually do have a question now in the other chat, which apparently also functions. It's by Wolfgang Lemke and I guess it's the functions that I have to read it to you because there is no possibility for Wolfgang to speak to himself. How to pick the right social discount factors? What is the damage slash risk of taking the wrong one? Yeah, so discounting here is a little bit careful about how we what we mean exactly by the discount factor. If we're just thinking about social cash flows and there's no single discount factor because given the uncertainty, the way we have to discount depends on is what you have to do is the Kathy discount and discount different futures differently. And that's, you know, that's a whole nature that that's a whole lesson coming out of financial economics that carries over to social evaluation. On the other hand, if you're going to imagine there's some notion in those are for kind of so-called marginal valuations or there is some notion of discounting that shows up in terms of trying to devise social preferences. How much should I care about that? How much I should care about the future versus now? And in our own calculations, we end up using a very low discount rate, but that but that but not for particularly good reasons. That's part of the statement of social preferences. So there's both there's what shows up in the type of probabilistic discounting we're doing is it depends on how a purse you are to the uncertainty. How much you weight these eventually bad outcome throughout your best guesses versus the more pure form of discounting about how important you're going to treat future generations well on what to current ones. And they're both important. And I can show you their consequences. But I know as I can't tell you what those what the social discount rate should be. That's a that's a decision that's that's not part of that's not part of a rule of a scientific input here. That's that's a statement for for policymaker preferences. Right, I have so people are warming up here. And I have another question by Michael Bauer, who says the social cost of carbon estimates are illuminating, but also very sensitive to the ambiguity aversion parameter. How can we settle on a best gas social cost of carbon that counts for ambiguity aversion? Yeah. So let me try to qualify the question a little bit because I'm not quite sure we're using best guess in the same sense that I use it in the talk here. There is an important question about how do we think about the ambiguity aversion. And so the the type of approach that appeals to me and appeals to us comes out of a literature called robust Bayesian methods whereby we have subjective uncertainty. You can do some type of calculations about so called constrained or penalized worst case calculations. One has to bound the amounts of worse. How concerned you are about those worst cases that's you know those parameters I was talking about are basically penalizing those. Those inputs are not so useful. But what are useful are those implied distributions. And so that's those I think are revealing. We can tell you for different choices of bounds or or say panelizations, here's here's what you're guarding against. And then and then you can look at that and say does that look crazy when I'm guarding against or does that look like perfectly reasonable thing I'm guarding against. And so those are the type of those are the ways I think are most useful to think about this. What to kind of figure out the resulting uncertainties and motor that that come out of this that are that are most concerning and making sure those are not too extreme. So those calculations come out routinely for us. Thank you. I am just looking at this. There's two chess functions. So I have to make sure that I don't forget anyone. I saw another question, but it's gone now and give me one second. Here it is. It's Mikhele Lentzwa, who says the following or who asks the following. Actually, how likely is it that we don't have to worry about the worst case scenario for climate change and we can adopt instead policies which are optimal under well specified probability distributions for different scenarios. Could you read the first part of that again? I want to make sure. Yeah, yeah, I understand. How likely is it that we don't have to worry about the worst case scenario for climate change and we can adopt instead policies which are optimal under well specified probability distributions for different scenarios. Yeah. So now we need to find out what exactly we mean by the so-called worst case. So the way that our analysis works is that we cannot let all possible outcomes take place or that the decision making outcomes will be degenerate and not very interesting. And so now the important part of the question is how much do you want to bound or how much do you want to penalize the search for potential mis-specifications or reweighting of the different probabilities and alike. And those are very key parameters in your calculations and they are what governs kind of aversion to one-serge me. So when you say how likely it is, we can come out of our calculations and we can show you, we can compare both what the best guess probabilities outcomes are as well as the worst case ones. And of course, the ambiguity tells us that I can't tell you the answer to that question, but you can inspect that and see whether you find the worst case one to be far too extreme to be guardian against. So a danger in any type of worst case calculations is you put too much on the table and you end up saying, well, I'm not going to get up in the morning because if I walk across the street, I might get hit by a car or something. There has to be some bounds or limits to this so you just don't get sensible answers. All right. Thank you. That is clear. Are there any other questions anywhere among the audience, the panelists, the room of eminent experts of ECB colleagues who I see there in the screen? Yes, I see here an other question coming in. This is Daniel Kopp. As one example of central bank action, your most recent paper makes reference to a publication from ECB staff. You argue that it is only in a second best world without carbon taxation, where actions such as tilting of purchases is needed to improve social welfare. Are we not in this world? We are most definitely in that world. So now, so it says given we're in this world, how much you want central banks to be filling in gaps of stuff that would be better done by some other portion of government? And that's a very, obviously, a very interesting question, a very important question. The more you push towards the central bank trying to do second best fixes for what should be done elsewhere, the more you're going to push central banks into the political realm more and more. And then the question, then that opens the door as to what's the political mandate for these type of actions. There's sometimes reasons where we assign decision-making power to one entity versus another one, and how far do you want to push central banks in terms of that political realm? I think for different countries or different regions that answer that may be very different. But I think the more you're going to push that direction, the more you're going to open the door towards the door towards broiling central bank policy into the political realm, and that's a potential cost for it. But I agree that, I would certainly not argue that our current approach is hardly optimal. The point I was trying to make there is if you ask me who has the most potent leverage right now for taking action, I should remember it comes from the fiscal side, and I should continue to put pressure on the fiscal side of this to be taking important actions. All right, thank you. I mean here I think I can also myself underline how important it is that central banks remain within their mandate. Legal mandates of central banks differ from one jurisdiction to the other. So I also agree with you that some will have a little bit more leeway than others. Here's an interesting question, maybe you know beyond the boundaries of today's discussion, on the question whether if politicians have actually marked a certain line and they have agreed to a binding pairs agreement. If they actually have a policy in place or at least shown the way, and if certain of the actions of central banks actually run counter to that whether we are not placing ourselves in kind of like in a reverse way on the chairs of policymakers, so we're not going to sit on their chair to make a climate policy, but by pursuing our own policies we make their policies less effective. And so that is a question that also needs to be considered, I think. Yeah, if there is no more questions, and I'm just going to pause for a couple of seconds here. But if there are not, then I think that that I will just, you know, take a minute to really thank you, Professor Hansen. I think this was a most stimulating discussion. I will give you the last word anyway, but I want to celebrate the fact that issues of climate change have really now landed in the core of what central banking is. This is no longer some kind of fringe activity. The best and the brightest within the central banks around the world are now engaging with Nobel Prize winners to get this right. And we know how difficult this is. And on a meta level maybe you have shown us once more to be aware of the uncertainties, the risks, the all the things that we don't know on the one hand and the need to find a way forward. All actors, all public actors in society, private access in society. By the way, I think that when people think about central banks, the other function that many central banks of course have is the supervision of commercial banks. And I think that the effect that we can have as an institution on this whole issue of climate change might in the end be even more effective on the supervisory side than it is actually on the on the central bank side. So maybe there's also something, and by the way there's lots of uncertainties there as well, but maybe that is a field that we should focus on in the future even a little more. But with that, I want to thank you, thank you greatly. And if there's anything that you would like to leave us with as last thoughts, the floor is... So let me just amplify on the last point. I do think on the supervisory role that's a very interesting challenge going forward. And I'm just going to go back to this comment I tried to make during my talk and just kind of emphasize that to be effective supervisors it would be good to think hard about a common way to confront measuring exposures to climate change uncertain. And so the regulator and regulator are really on the same page there. And given these uncertainties are different, given our amount of historical evidence about these uncertainties are quite limited, I think there's lots of scope there for for taking hard collectively and how to do that in a meaningful way. Very well, well thanks a lot for your time. Great, greatly appreciated. Thank you. Thank you. Bye bye.


Stop working around the distractions of home and coffee shops and join the Code & Supply Co-working space today. Code & Supply's shared workspace is built for people just like you that are working for remote companies, running their own businesses, or freelancing. Rent a desk in our wonderful and walkable East Liberty location with no long-term commitments. Mention this ad and get a 10% discount on your first month of co-working at Code & Supply.


This is getting idiotic and we need some stability at this time. The largest issue I have with this other than the sheer incompetence and other failings that Congress is now having on behalf of the American people is the fact that now we just are trying to scramble to get the best of what's around. That because it took forever, because there was an explosion essentially and civic discord there on the hill because everyone has been wasting time and wasting our money this entire time. Now just give us someone please just just fill the position. So we are now settling for something that should have actually taken robust thought and the way in of constituents. It should actually be held by the best person for the job and instead we are being woefully inadequately disserved yet again because they couldn't get their act together. We don't have time for this. Can I add one quick thing what makes zero sense Don Bacon voting for McCarthy yesterday and today Jordan was Kevin McCarthy's right hand. He was his lieutenant. If you like McCarthy, you like Jordan.  That scathing commentary that you just listened to about Republicans came from Fox News of all places and as you can tell they are very much fed up with the whole speaker debacle. Now at the time that they were having that conversation it became clear to them that Jim Jordan was not going to have enough votes to become speaker again and Fox hosts have made it abundantly clear that they are sick and tired of the bullshit and they wanted to stop but since it's not stopping their frustration is spilling over into their commentary. Now in case you missed it yesterday Fox host Brian Kilmeade's reaction to Don Bacon voting against Jordan was caught on hot mic and here's what he said. McCarthy dumbass yeah so this is the second day in a row that Don Bacon has been named dropped by Fox News hosts now in an episode of his radio show Kilmeade addressed this hot mic moment and he expressed even more frustration at the situation when he referenced his comment there dumbass so I was on set about numbered we were taking the vote live and this guy votes Congressman Bacon doesn't vote for Jim Jordan and it just made after the two weeks to think about where Republicans were at we watched him get lose 20 but that was the first I did not know my why my mic was open but next thing you know by the time I walk upstairs out outnumbered my seventh hour of broadcasting my last words were dumbass those were the words that were being carried everywhere was like wow your mic was open your mic was on my mic was over six hours and 58 minutes nobody cared what I said but I say one word on an off mic moment and everyone's like wow can't believe you said that you know was no one's really upset that I said it no one said I'm wrong that I said it I am flab I am stunned I've never seen somebody commit political suicide group of people commit suicide political suicide like this and they have to two weeks of therapy people going home on their own and coming back they're still doing the same thing yeah so needless to say the claws are out for Don Bacon but we'll talk about why he's still not supporting Jim Jordan in a moment but first I want to talk about the actual vote because Jim Jordan ended up faring worse this time than he did in the first round with Washington Post reporter Mariana Sotomayor explaining he was only able to flip two Republicans to his corner over the last 24 hours but he lost four more during that time frame as well with 22 colleagues voting against him in other words it is not looking good for Jim Jordan currently so I'll tell you what the plan is going forward but first I do want to issue some clarifications about my video from yesterday so we watched this video of Republican Ken Buck explaining why he voted for Tom Emmer instead of Jim Jordan I guess my first question is do you really want Tom Emmer to be speaker no I don't I don't like Tom Emmer I figured this would be the worst job in America Mike Rowe would not want to do this for his TV show so if you watched my video from yesterday you'll know that I enjoyed that clip specifically because of how petty Ken Buck was being however after I filmed that segment he took to Twitter to clarify that he was only joking and Tom Emmer is actually his friend now for some reason I didn't pick up on his sarcasm even if it seems obvious in retrospect that he was just playfully hazing his friend but I just I didn't detect it and additionally we talked about Mike Rogers aka two pay guy who said there was nothing that Jordan could do to get his support as speaker of the house and I used that quote to demonstrate how vociferous opposition to Jim Jordan was but it turns out Mike Rogers ended up voting for Jim Jordan after all something that I completely missed and didn't think to look at so major thanks to YouTube commenter Jay Boy who pointed this out and provided viewers with some much needed clarification sometimes it's difficult to get the most up-to-date information when the situation is so volatile and these videos go up hours after something takes place but I always try my very best to be as accurate as possible and whenever I fail in that regard I do my best to correct the record so I do apologize for inadvertently misleading viewers in that regard but with that out of the way the question is what's the plan for Republicans going forward well it is difficult to say but one of the options as discussed yesterday which has not changed to my knowledge at the time that I record this is to enhance the power of McHenry temporarily and it seems like that idea is still being circulated however Jim Jordan himself came out strongly against it What do you think of these calls to introduce a resolution to empower McHenry to be the speaker pro tem on a permanent basis would you support that I don't think that's the right way to go I think we should get a Republican speaker I got 90% of the Republicans in the Congress who supported me would that help buy you more time no I mean I think we should get a Republican speaker I've been very clear about that I think that's where the conference is that's what our rules suggest so let's get a Republican speaker and get about the people's business I got to be his opposition to this plan is not surprising at all to me because he benefits from the pressure that Republicans are feeling to settle for him right now so it wouldn't buy him more time it buy his opponents more time to come up with someone else who they'd rather support but if Republicans were to opt for this option one conservative commentator on CNN explained in a very colorful way how this entire debacle would have been for nothing this was said in between the first and second vote but nonetheless here's what he said but the obvious road that all of us are seeing which is at this point Jim Jordan doesn't look like he's going to be speaker and that perhaps the guy who actually has the gavel temporarily Patrick McHenry should have it can you can you talk about that and why that isn't happening like this if that seems to be where this is headed well it's not in their nature and I say there it's not in the nature of the the conservative wing of the conference to give up you know their whole brand is let's fight let's fight about everything and even when we've gotten fewer votes let's keep fighting and and keep trying to to deny the reality and what you wind up with is just another episode of monkeys getting amorous with football starring the house Republicans and until you get tired of that show you know which is I think coming soon based on what I'm hearing you're going to have to continue to go through this chaos this Patrick McHenry business is fascinating he is one of McCarthy's top guys helped him get the speakership and if this whole thing winds up with him as being named assistant to the regional manager whatever title they're going to give him here which is not in the Constitution this will be like the biggest circle jerk of the history of circles or jerks I mean I mean to have McCarthy's guy back in as a temporary speaker and and if you're a conservative and you have followed Jim Jordan you follow these guys and you and you want them to be right remember you're the mark here there was no plan they had no plan they threw McCarthy overboard without any plan whatsoever of what to do next he's right they ousted McCarthy before even trying to build a consensus for any alternative and they crossed their fingers hoping that their number one choice Jim Jordan would become speaker yesterday Matt Gaetz arrogantly tweeted a picture of him and Jordan saying speaker Jordan Dave but after two failed votes it looks more likely that that's not going to happen but he's continuing to dig his heels in retweeting Dan Bishop who argues the proposal to empower the speaker pro tem is not significantly different than electing speaker Hakeem Jeffries it is coalition government between the democrats and the republican big spenders and it makes sense that they think this because again McHenry is McCarthy's guy and their opposition to McCarthy has not gone away so when you consider their position and the position of the republicans on the other side who vehemently opposed Jim Jordan it looks like an impossible situation for republicans to overcome with no end in sight there just doesn't seem to be a republican who can act as the consensus candidate so at the end one side's gonna win and the other side is going to lose and at the end of the day some republicans are going to be disillusioned with the end result whenever we see that so it's a very bad situation currently but yesterday we did talk about Jim Jordan's pressure tactics and how they rubbed some republicans the wrong way but i do want to dive a little bit deeper into that because Don Bacon told political reporter Olivia Bevers that it was so bad that his wife received threatening text from Jordan's team with one anonymous sender writing why is your husband causing chaos by not supporting Jim Jordan i thought he was a team player now she responded by asking who is this oh now you have nothing to say they responded again saying your husband will not hold any political office ever again what a disappointment and failure he is she responded to that saying he has more courage than you you won't put your name to your statements now in another anonymous text message she received the sender says talk to your husband tell him to step up and be a leader and help the republican party get a speaker there's too much going on in the world for all this going on in the republican party you guys take five steps forward and then turn around and take 20 steps backwards no wonder our party always ends up getting screwed over yeah so when the spouses of GOP lawmakers are receiving creepy anonymous text messages threatening the careers of their spouse and on top of that you have Sean Hannity personally emailing GOP holdouts to strong arm them into supporting Jordan it's really easy to see why this pressure campaign backfired Jim Jordan pissed off a lot of republicans rubbed a lot of people the wrong way and i don't think that he's going to gain support after pissing off so many people but on the opposite side the people who are enthusiastically supporting Jim Jordan are doing so because he is the most extreme house speaker ever and if they don't take up this opportunity to elect a far right insurrectionist fascist then they might not ever get it again and Jim Jordan is willing to do things that are incredibly unpopular that other republican speakers would not do in fact i'll let republican Tom Cole tell you why he's enthusiastically supporting Jim Jordan but unlike any other speaker we've had he's had the courage to talk about a long-term plan and to get at the real drivers of debt and we all know what they are we all know it's social security we all know it's medicare we all know it's medicaid no president of either side has been willing to deal with this no speaker of either side has been willing to deal with this my friend our former colleague John Delaney and I offered a plan i still file it every year John's not here anymore to go back and do in 1983 what we did then and address social security we never can get any help this is the guy that wants to create a debt commission a bipartisan debt commission and get at the roots of our spending problem that takes courage it is very bold of him to just admit on national television in front of everyone that he is supporting Jim Jordan specifically because Jim Jordan unlike other republicans is willing to cut social security medicare and medicaid a service that i'm assuming many of the GOP's constituents rely on since they're older so they're gonna rely on that so you're saying you want to fuck over your own base which is why you're supporting Jim Jordan it's wild that they admit things like this so obviously the party is still in shambles and chaos continues to unfold but while all of this happens while the shit show continues to get worse in the background you have the kevin McCarthy still unbelievably trying to scapegoat democrats for all of this chaos and so what i see though is there's no chance in the world that democrats can ever say again that they put people before politics they made a political decision to try to bring chaos to shut down a branch of government and that's wrong yes unreal now that is not the first time that he has blamed democrats for this and it probably won't be the last but it makes him look so unserious when everyone can see with their own two eyes what's going on the chaos is still being driven by republicans they still don't have a speaker so to say that democrats are responsible is so cartoonishly comical at this point that it's shocking to me that he still continues to say this with a straight face so i hope that he keeps making that point because i think that he is going to look like such a clown like it's not going to come off as genuine to the american people and i hope that he doesn't realize that he's hurting himself by saying this because he should continue to say this so at this point though everything is up in the air we really don't know what's going to happen going forward and i'm not sure if a third vote is even coming soon but politico is reporting that detractors of jim jordan are actually expecting him to fare even worse if there's a third vote with an anonymous house member expecting him to lose 10 to 15 more votes in a third round which could be the last nail in his coffin so if there is going to be a third vote it'd be wise for him to not rush it but either way there's still no end in sight all of this chaos is going to continue the shit show will go on and i'm glad because this story is continuing to entertain me and i think that during these really dark times that we're in entertainment is something that is important so so long as republicans continue to act like buffoons i will continue to talk about them because i think that we need some comic relief in this time so uh thanks republicans i'll continue to broadcast your stupidity for everyone to see


Strategic Cybersecurity Module 4, The Bureaucracy of Cyber Conflict. Once you have completed the readings, lecture, activity, and assessment, you will be able to describe how President Ronald Reagan was alerted to the problem of cybersecurity. Welcome to Strategic Cybersecurity Module 4. Although many might believe that cyber espionage is a recent issue, the fact is that nation states have been using cyber espionage for decades to steal secrets from one another. In fact, the first act of nation state espionage is believed to have occurred 50 years ago in 1967 when East German spies hacked into computers operated by an IBM subsidiary in West Germany. The intrusion was so worrisome that it prompted the U.S. House of Representatives to hold three days of hearings on the risk of computer espionage. Historically, one of the biggest issues with cybersecurity and thus cyber conflict is that politicians and other national security leaders may not take it seriously, particularly if they do not understand the technology. By the early 1980s, both the U.S. military and many corporations in the country were using computer technology on an increasing level to support their operations. The U.S. Department of Defense's strategic command was relying heavily on computers for its nuclear weapons mission, specifically with regard to operating advanced guidance systems and potentially tracking incoming enemy missiles. Computers were still expensive mainframe systems and few government officials, including senior policy makers, were at all familiar with them. Hollywood was left to introduce the potential uses and vulnerabilities of the new technology to the public and even to the Oval Office. In 1983, President Ronald Reagan viewed the motion picture war games about a young hacker who accesses a military supercomputer and nearly begins a war. Though the hacker initially believes that he is playing a benign computer game, the supercomputer is, in fact, part of a nuclear weapons control system and a situation erupts that nearly results in World War III. After viewing the movie, President Reagan asked an advisor to research whether such a scenario could actually occur. Months later, a senior military advisor reported to Reagan that many of our important military computer systems did indeed lack sufficient protections. By the beginning of the first Gulf War in January 1991, computers were ubiquitous in all aspects of U.S. military operations. Computer supported smart bombs, satellite communications, advanced avionics, and sophisticated target tracking systems were all on full display during that war and initiated net-centric warfare. Net-centric warfare essentially refers to the ability to network sensors and communication systems so that situational awareness of military commanders and other strategic decision-makers is enhanced. Robust situational awareness helps commanders increase targeting precision and improve the military's overall unity of effort. Both China and Russia were caught off guard by the United States' sophisticated computer-enabled military operations and were awed by our quick victory over Iraq. China in particular was especially concerned with the United States' new ability to wage high-tech war, particularly because China's military relied on more primitive technology, similar to Iraq's. As a result, both China and Russia initiated long-range strategic development programs to upgrade their military capabilities with the goal of creating their own net-centric militaries. Even as it ramped up technologies, however, China believed that the United States had become over-reliant on technology and began research on how to asymmetrically exploit and disrupt this over-reliance. Since the first Gulf War, many of our adversaries have exponentially increased both offensive and defensive cyber capabilities. The United States' advantage in technology over the last three decades has rapidly diminished, and we now struggle to out-innovate our foes. As with most new weapons, however, each country is still trying to figure out how to deter others from using cyber weapons. For instance, the use of nuclear weapons changed the way that military strategists war-gamed, culminating in deterrence doctrines like mutually assured destruction. And the use of cyber weapons has forced strategists to go back to the drawing board to develop similar types of deterrence theories. Still, at the dawn of the cyber age, we lack any system of cyber deterrence similar to that of nuclear weapons use. Simply consider the Russian interference in the 2016 US presidential election. The US Intelligence Communities Report, background to assessing Russian activities and intentions in recent US elections, noted that the purpose of Russian interference was to, quote, undermine public faith in the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency, end quote, among other things. Russia deliberately attacked the very fabric of American society in hopes of sowing chaos and ultimately weakening the geopolitical power of the United States. How does one deter this type of interference from a nation-state rival like Russia? We could use a tit-for-tat approach, similar to that used in the era of Cold War espionage. And consider how best to deter the actions of North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, who ordered an attack on Sony Pictures as revenge for release of the motion picture The Interview, which painted North Korea's leadership in an unfavorable light. Much like the nuclear weapons paradigm, these questions of deterrence in cyberspace will eventually be worked out. One positive development for the United States, however, is that our country was relatively quick to recognize the need for an organizational backbone to facilitate the development of both offensive and defensive cyber operations. For example, by the time of the Kosovo war in the late 1990s, the US military had the capability to use computer technologies to disrupt enemy operations and, in fact, use this capability to disrupt the Serbian Integrated Air Defensive Systems, or IADS. Soon after the war's end, the US military formed the Joint Task Force Computer Network Operations, or JTF-CNO, to better coordinate the types of offensive computer operations the United States had conducted against Serbia. Eventually, the JTF-CNO morphed into an organization called the Joint Task Force, Global Network Operations, co-located with the National Security Agency headquarters, and became the precursor to today's US Cyber Command. Quiz question one. What movie was President Ronald Reagan watching when he asked his advisors to look into the security of the networks controlling the nation's nuclear arsenal? A. Kramer vs. Kramer. B. Dr. Strangelove. C. Wargames. D. The Day After. The answer is C. Wargames. Quiz question two. According to the article, Cyber Security, a prehistory, which of the following is not a purpose of Reagan's National Security Decision Directive 145? N. S. D. D. 145. A. The directive helped secure the information systems of the federal government. B. The directive made NSA responsible for setting standards of all government telecommunication systems. C. The directive gave the president the final authority to launch nuclear weapons. D. The directive gave NSA the mission of conducting security research on government telecommunication systems. The answer is C. The directive gave the president the final authority to launch nuclear weapons. Quiz question three. True or false? The first known incidents of cyber espionage occurred in 1967 when a computer operated by an IBM subsidiary in West Germany was hacked. The answer is true. The activity for this module asks that you consider your own career or current job and reflect on how computer technology has affected it compared to 30 or 40 years ago. Did the type of work you do or what is created as a result of computer technology in your work even exist three or four decades ago? How do you think your job may change over the next few decades? Will your job exist or could it be automated due to innovations in artificial intelligence?


Everybody Matt here for late in sports cards ripping two boxes for Noah F We have one box of 2021 Panini Chronicles football hobby one box of 2022 Panini National Treasures football hobby The these are for Noah F. Good luck Noah Start off the 21 Chronicles silhouette rookie Jersey Otto to 99 Josh Palmer More than Timmy, how's it going? 78 of 99 Trey Lance rookie If a Frank's Najee Harris, that's a magnitude rookie to 99 Rondale and Zach Wilson magnitude Kyle Pitts score rookie silver T-Law Etn and Rashad Bateman prison black rookie red as to 99 Jamar Chase prison black rookie Justin Fields Morning Chris. Yeah, man on a great weekend. How's yours? Thank you Zach Wilson Great iron Kings rookie Otto to 199 Chuba hover 141 of 199 Callan Mond Davis Mills There's Mond and Kyle Pitts clear vision. That is rookie patch to 25 Kyle Trask Timeless treasures. What do you think these trash end up? Buck starter Quentin Nelson 399 Bateman I'm starting to think Baker's role might be to just bounce from one team to the next and Like not be their regular starter. I just like fill in light a little spark under the team Yeah, I like I'd like to see him have a good career Trey Lance Najee Harris And this is to 99 Kyle Pitts rookie gridiron Kings Bonta Smith dynegon and Magnitude Barry Kenry Jalen waddle rookie flux silver Williams and waddle Patrick Sir tan Bonta Smith and Rashad Bateman All right, here we go 22 national treasures football hobby Good luck. Let's see a big hit in here for you It's treasured rookies to 99 trail on Berks. It's a nice looking cards And Eddie George, this is to 20 tremendous treasures jumbo patch to 25 cam acres It's a dual Jersey to 99 to Bonta Smith Sunday treasures That's what they call Dylan and myself Round here at LSE the Sunday treasures Jumbo patch to 25 Mike jisiki nice three-color patch on that Jersey to 49 Aaron Rodgers the future rookie Otto 7 of 25 Christian Watson nice on card rookie Otto There you go nice one Noah this is Jersey Otto 12 of 99 Billy Sims The Lions original BS 20 of GBS of GBS 20 This is rookie patch Otto to 99 Jalen Taubert 85 of 99 this is true RPA 71 of 99 Kenneth Walker's two true RPAs in the box nice Kenneth Walker. I'm hoping he has a big season Hoping to get him in like the fourth round There you go solid box for you know that'll do it for your box. All right appreciate it Noah We'll get these right out to you


Listen, one thing about me, I'm gonna tell everyone this. If you're trying, I will help you, but you gotta be trying. I'm not helping people who are asking me questions about things that we already teach. Yes, on YouTube, that's fine. But if you're gonna be successful at this thing, you have to put in forth the effort. It was funny because I was actually, I was listening to something right before we jumped on, and the person said, says, people emulate the end result, not the process. And I think that's very important, is that no one wants to go through the process.