One of my more embarrassing moments for my teenage years of which there are quite a few starts out with a crush I had on a girl. My friend who knew the girl and who knew me well enough to know that I would never make the first move arranged with the girl that, ui, Anton will be calling over the landline and then got me to call the girl.  In my defense, I meant it more like I would never impose myself talking on you but it came out to the girl more like I didn't want to be talking to her. Napilitan lang ako, which was the exact opposite of how I felt. So in short order, the girl told my friend that I don't think Anton is really into me and my friend called me all upset asking why I went and said a damn full thing like that. Mahirap talaga maging torpe. And this was way back in the day we were still using landlines. Since tech has improved so many things about our lives since then I wonder if it has also improved how to bridge that gap between this is a stranger I want to get to know more to this is someone I'm in a relationship with.  You know men were still expected to pursue women and women had to wait for men to ask them out and all of these things. So she really wanted to switch that on its head by encouraging women on Bumble to make the first move and start the conversation. Let's Lucille, Bumble's communication director for the Asia-Pacific region. Bumble is a dating app and what makes it stand out is that it shifts the power of saying yes to starting a conversation over to the girl. Guys can indicate women they would like to get to know better but a conversation can only start if the girl swipes right on the guy too. So swiping left is a no and swiping right is a yes and then you sort of go about your swiping journey and if someone also swipes right on you then you get matched and in a heterosexual connection between a man and a woman the woman speaks first. On the surface this approach liberates women. A lady's default answer to an advance is no a guy can only start conversing with her if she has swiped right on the guy also and she can't see which guys have swiped right on her. So an admirer is rejected without consequences without the lady being labeled difficult or uptight or as someone who sends mixed signals etc. But it's also very freeing for guys too. Since a consequence of rejection is very minor you just don't hear anything from the person you swiped right on and very private. You weren't turned down saying a noisy bar full of people who could see you getting rejected. Your ego doesn't take a hit. One of the biggest challenges with dating and especially online dating before Bumble was for heterosexual dating was like male aggression and really aggressive first messages very sexualized or very because like what is happening is that men are when they're sort of in that environment they're almost anticipating getting rejected so they are opening a conversation or like opening an interaction in this very aggressive overcompensating manner like dominating kind of way. And I think a lot of the psychology behind that is if I get rejected like I'm almost like playing a character and it's almost like not really me so that then I don't need to like feel that rejection. It wasn't me it was this other persona. Yeah exactly I think a lot of men have that persona in dating because they've been told over and over again that they have to be the aggressor they have to pursue women you know that it's this like you are the predator and the woman is the prey all this like really unhelpful social scripting that we receive. Successful men are like this and then yeah it's all that aggression. This is what a man looks like and he's aggressive and he goes after what he wants and he does all of this and it's like it's just ultimately not true. Now all of this sounds good in theory but does it work in real life? Bumble works really well because as a male it gives I swipe right on them it gives them the option to like me or not and it saves me time. I was actually advised by a good number of people that Bumble would be the option if you're looking for something more serious. And I actually it actually did turn out to be quite true. I did try Tinder but I did notice that whatever matches I have there it seems to see if they were more superficial in what it is they wanted. Let's just put it that way. Yeah Bumble always yielded better quality results. That was mine and Jerry she's based in the Philippines him in the States. They met online through Bumble during the pandemic and now they're engaged. And the low stakes approach of Bumble does seem to have helped the initial contact between them. I just randomly found on the internet and on Bumble and I swipe right and didn't take anything more. I never thought I'd hear from her. And I did. So I really wasn't thinking it through initially. It's quite a commute from the United States. Yes. If you're listening to this as a podcast you didn't see Maan in that last clip lean into Jerry as he discussed how the Philippines is just a little bit far from the States. There's clearly a lot of affection here a genuine connection which literally would not have happened if not for Bumble. The online space is an opportunity to meet people you never would have met otherwise. So a really interesting trend for 2024 is actually around sort of generational romances and people being more open to like age gap relationships and dating someone younger or older than them. And I think that is kind of a natural evolution of being able to access pools of people and assess your compatibility. Whereas when you go out with your friends from school or from uni you kind of stay in your very tight bubbles. And kind of one of the only places that you meet people of more varying ages from you is then in the workplace and that's not always an appropriate dating. Yeah the best place to look for a partner. To get in trouble. Yeah exactly. Whereas online dating platform is very different. That's what people are there for. And the good thing is that you can increase or decrease your age settings on Bumble and just have a look. And the people that you're seeing will are compatible with you're compatible with their age settings. So you're only seeing people that are also interested in dating someone your age. So it's a good way to kind of just like test the waters you know have some different conversations. But of course the online space has its own unique dangers as well. Scammers, toxic behavior unwanted pics of male organs they're called private parts for a reason guys. And so Bumble has invested heavily and worked hard to deal with all of that. To ensure that their users have a quality experience. The main concern from our audience is you know fake profiles and scam accounts. And we know that across all types of social media you know that's an issue online. And so we have built a number of features to protect our users against that. One is photo verification tools. So you can use our photo verification system that's powered by human moderation and AI.  It's actually you. Yeah. Yes. So that is um you know and we always say you know match with people that have verified their profile and if they haven't you know you can ask them to verify their profile you know before you start chatting or you can also filter so that you only see people with verified profiles. You know if that is a concern for you I would definitely recommend doing that. And we also have just launched recently on safer internet day a new feature called deception detector which is powered by AI to help detect spam and fraudulent accounts with I believe 99% accuracy which is really fantastic and that is helping us sort of add a sort of shield of protection for our users that removes a lot of scam accounts before they even have the chance to you know match with people and start talking. So that's really important feature for us and that's a that's a most recent development. So the system diligently weeds out undesirable accounts whether they are bots or toxic users but ensuring that both parties have good intentions is just the beginning of a relationship. The rest is of course up to the people involved and if you've ever had to meet someone IRL that you've only ever interacted with online yung first eyeball ninyo kung baga you know it can be a nerve-wracking experience. That's one thing about just meeting someone on the internet you know there's so many things that you miss out you don't know what a person tends to look like like from head down you don't know how tall they are you don't know their big feet you know things like that so so meeting each other the very first time when he landed in the airport you know you really get kabah you know there's nervousness and stuff well you landed like 430 in the morning yes yes you're disheveled when I landed I was like okay we vetted each other I looked her up on on the internet and I'm a teacher so it was easy to find me yeah you know so when I but when I landed in the Philippines the first time I'm like is there gonna be somebody waiting for me yeah yeah or if I just yeah you know it's 430 in the morning and and a relationship is a long-term thing you just don't get over all of your doubts after one meeting in real life so I think our first trip was either anilaw or tagaitay you know so I was driving and then we stopped in S-Lex you know at the gas stations and all so he went down to use the bathroom and then I also went and he started thinking when he was what were you thinking? I was thinking when I come out will she still be there? yeah yeah yeah because my passport she has everything that I own yeah this wallet his cell phone was in the car you know he didn't bring it to the bathroom so he had that moment what am I doing in this strange gas station outside of Manila? I don't know I'm in the middle of nowhere yes yes so you have those funny moments which you normally wouldn't have if you meet the conventional way but yeah but now we don't have those anymore after a year and a half Maan and Jerry did have some concerns unique to a relationship which started out online but as the relationship progressed many of their concerns now sound just like any other couples all long-term couples it seems regardless of how and where they met will end up dealing with something very low-tech paperwork because right now that's one of the biggest impediments that we have it's trying to understand the legal and tax implications on both sides you know how Philippine banks always send you that form and not the sign ask if you have yes yes if you send and you know right? so so those things have made it much more complex for us to move things forward on paper ultimately Bumble and other apps like it is a new way to do an old thing meeting people you might be interested in has always been difficult at least now there are more options available to do that you know there is absolutely you know nothing wrong with being introduced to people that you might be compatible with by your parents or by your family other family members or your friends you know that is how people met each other for centuries before dating apps came along but i think the role that apps like Bumble have to play is you know working in compliment to some of those more traditional practices because you know if you're going one by one to these like in-person meetings from within your sort of family circle there's only so many people that you can realistically meet and they might not all be compatible for you and there is on Bumble access on Bumble to a community of people in your area in your age range you know that you can filter for all sorts of different things so if you're thinking about you know efficiency and access to people it's vastly different and with that efficiency and scope of course comes data while we're all chasing after the same prize love a stable relationship a partner who thinks our quirks are charming instead of annoying the way we chase after that prize can differ greatly based on our backgrounds women in India send a lot more messages you know per match and that indicates that they women in India like to keep conversations on the app you know longer than in some other markets probably because they are you know have a higher standard of you know verifying someone and you know a different environment around safety so they want to make sure that they're keeping the conversation in the app for as long as possible and then like you said Singapore very small market so they are you know looking in a much sort of smaller tighter radius tighter radius exactly right and then in somewhere like the Philippines you have different considerations around filters for example like religion and like thinking about religion and education in both Singapore and Philippines is like quite more pronounced in comparison to a market like Australia you know people are really focused on education and religion as a measure of compatibility which is more elevated than what it is in some other countries but Filipino is also very romantic like in their own in their own way you know but you know they love love so there's also a lot more sort of general sort of enthusiasm I would guess for the process of dating Pinoy's do love love but I mean come on it just really warms the heart when you see two nice people end up together who doesn't get a little sappy over that I I feel the strong connection I mean I'm younger than you guys I'm sure you've had more experience but I feel I feel like this is a really nice pairing I can feel the the genuine affection and of course genuine affection is found in all healthy relationships not just romantic ones and tech which brings potential romantic partners together can also bring potential friends together we also have an app called bundle for friends that is about sort of platonic friend finding and that has been really popular in the Philippines as well and I think that's really great because a lot of people listening might have been like oh but you know I'm in a relationship or I'm not looking for that that relationship but like like we sort of just touched on earlier you know a romantic relationship is only one part of your life and friendship and friendship connection is really important as well and there's a lot of people I think that could do with you know a wider friendship circle and that's what Bumble for Friends is for which brings us back full circle to my earlier story I totally messed up with that girl but I was still grateful to my friend for trying to help me out that was more than 20 years ago but we are still friends to this day and we still communicate fairly regularly he has fortunately stopped chatting me up to girls something I'm sure my wife is thankful for this episode was released on February 14th Valentine's and whether you're celebrating alone in a pair or in a group I hope that your relationship is healthy and that it has genuine affection This is Tech Show but Friendly Hardware Sugar's podcast and I'm your host Anton who you're produced by Nana Nadal Our next episode explores the surprisingly gungho world of seniors learning about tech and that drops February 23 Paming saan may nagtatanong kumikilala ba kami ng computer shop na trusted yung hindi ka lolo kuhin actually meron kami full service PC store ang hardware sugar nagwabenta kami ng PC components nagbabenta rin kami ng fully assembled rigs we clean computers kasama na rin yung excellent table management namin and CPU cooler repasting sa cleaning we also clean and repaste GPUs na sa makati yung physical store namin and you can also buy from our site www.hwsugar.ph na 100% palaging up to date yung inventory dun kung instock yung item sa amin available yun sa site we also ship nationwide thanks for watching and maybe one of these days maghita tayo sa shop


This 10th year of Daily Tech News show is made possible by its listeners, thanks to all of you, including Scott Hepburn, Jeff Wilkes, Pele Glendale, and our lifetime supporter, that Charlie dude. On this episode of DTNS, Amazon wants you to scan your palm to pay for things in store more than ever. Netflix is entering quite the new era itself, and would Apple really pull iMessage out of the UK? This is the Daily Tech News for Thursday, July 20th, 2023. From Studio, it's very sweltering in here. I'm Sarah Lane. From the land that rocks, I'm Richard Raffalino. From Deep in the Heart of Texas, I'm Justin Robert Young. And I'm the show's producer, Roger Chen. We've got a great show. As I mentioned, we're going to talk about Amazon Palm scanning. We're going to talk about Apple and perhaps legal trouble on going, a lot of stuff with Netflix. But first, let's start with a quick heads. 9to5Mac reports that individual YouTube premium subscriptions are increasing $2 to $13.99 per month in the US for new and current customers, as seen at youtube.com slash premium. Was it really an announcement? But a YouTube spokesperson confirmed the price hike, saying that the new price reflects the value of the service. Worth noting, if you subscribe through iOS and the app, it's $18.99 per month. So you are paying a premium for doing that. Family premium plans increased to $22.99 per month last year, with an annual subscription now increasing $20 to $140 per year. YouTube is also raising music premium $1 to $10.99 per month. Existing subscribers will see their new pricing in the next billion cycle.  A bipartisan bill in Massachusetts could partially restrict use of facial recognition technology by police and law enforcement. The bill doesn't fully ban the use of the technology, but would limit its use to just state police rather than all law enforcement agencies. MIT Technology Review notes that Massachusetts has more municipal bans on technology than any other U.S. state, and it could serve as a bellwether for how sentiment on similar bills could go if it should pass. TSMC announced it will delay chip production at its Arizona plant because of an insufficient amount of skilled workers. TSMC makes chips for Apple, Qualcomm, and Nvidia, among others. Google has reportedly been shopping around a new AI tool designed to write news articles and to be used as a tool to help journalists. This is positioned to help reporters focus on more complicated tasks. And Gadget points out that of the sites that were already using generative AI to write articles, corrections have been issued for factual errors on pretty much a regular basis. We've got some sad news today. Kevin Mitnick has died of pancreatic cancer at age 59. Mitnick was well known as a hacker who served time in prison for stealing data files and credit card numbers and hacking government and university networks. After his release in 2000, he was prohibited from using the Internet until 2002. He then went on to become a computer consultant and speaker and in general, a white hat hacker helping other people understand the world of hacking in general. On a personal note, he was also a recurring guest and friend to many of us who worked on the screensavers at Tech TV back in the day. We will miss you, Kevin. All right. Let's talk a little bit more rich about what's going on in the UK. Yeah. So the UK government is looking to update its 2016 Investigatory Powers Act or IPA, sadly a non-delicious variety. Under the current law, the UK Home Office can demand technology companies disable security features before shipping them to consumers. But under the current law, there is an independent oversight process and companies can appeal prior to having to take any action. There is a proposed amendment out there for the IPA that would require companies to comply immediately. So kind of taking away that appeals process at least prior to shipping. Since these requests are not public, we don't really have a clear idea of how many times the government has used its powers under the IPA. We just know that they are out there. In response to the government's call for consultation on these amendments, so they put this out here, I think there was eight weeks for that, Apple has said these provisions could be used to force a company like Apple that would never build a backdoor to publicly withdraw critical security features from the UK market, depriving UK users of these protections.  Will Apple just take its privacy ball and go home? They're certainly going to posture as if they will until they're absolutely forced to. And I do think that they would probably do it for a period of time if it meant getting their way on this. Apple has built their brand on privacy because the way that they make their money is selling hardware. And there is nowhere that they believe it is more important, especially as we move forward in information services, that it is crystal clear between them and the consumer that they want to make absolutely 100% is that your data is protected, even if there is a very compelling political and governmental argument to have public safety be the cost. And so that's really what we're seeing here. The UK government wants to say, but we'll catch rapist murderers and thieves if Apple does this. And Apple says, if you don't relent, we will take away these services. And so it is up to the citizenry of the UK. And I think I know which way they're going to go to make the choice. Would you rather iMessage in FaceTime or would you rather the governments promise that there will be better security? And considering the fact that Apple makes more money and is probably more powerful than the UK government, I think that citizens in the UK will probably want their services more than they will want that promise for better public safety. Yeah, I mean, I try to think of Apple kind of taking the stance or the potential stance of like, we're not going to do this. So if we're forced to do this, we're just not going to play ball in the UK with some of these services that need to be an encrypted period. What's the alternative for the company to say, okay, well, just so you know, because your government is doing stuff that we as a company don't agree with.  That's that's very not Apple. I just can't really imagine a world where Apple has any other choice than to say, okay, you know, game of chicken here, you know, who and then I'm sorry to jump you here, Ridge, but the other version of this would be the government saying this is an unsafe technology and we are banning it. And that's like, that's how you know that the power dynamics have shifted. Because in a bygone era, that would have been the case, no matter how popular the technology company is, now the technology company is so popular, they can say, no, no, no, no, no, we'll leave. Yeah, and it's interesting to hear Apple's response in this basically saying like, we're not like this law essentially puts the UK in the driver's seat for setting our security policy for a global audience. There's also some like technical, you know, the considerations with this as well. But yeah, to your point, Justin, kind of being in the driver's seat. The other thing to keep in mind too, is that this isn't the only kind of front we're seeing in the UK in terms of, you know, kind of coming in for encrypted services, there's the proposed online safety bill that's been batted around now for quite some time that is more focused on child sexual abuse material. This is much more appointed to like fraud and general crime, less less targeted than that. But we've already seen meta and signal also saying like, we will just leave the market rather than comply with that. So it seems to be kind of the consensus of we just won't I'm now Apple will probably continue operating, but I don't know how they fence off their services, their encrypted services like that to not have to be liable under this law, at least, you know, that's uncharted territory for Apple for sure. Certainly is. And there's nobody would look at that as a permanent solution. Apple would look at it as a moment in which let's say the apocalypse happens and that's exactly what they're moving. They would understand and wait for someone else to say, okay, nevermind, this was a bad idea. Exactly. Well, they would understand that the voice of the people that would threaten the politicians that are making this decision would say otherwise. And then at that point, you back down the people that are pushing for this. All right. Well, speaking of big companies, Amazon says it's bringing its Amazon one Palm recognition technology to all of its 500 plus Whole Foods stores in the US. This tech started at Amazon's go cashier free stores, but you may have already experienced the technology. If you frequent one of the 200 Whole Foods stores, it's now live in its biometric technology that lets a user enter and pay for items by hovering that old palm over a scanner during checkout. As a shopper, you first have to connect your palm to a credit card. And then after that you can pay by hovering your hand over a kiosk. Yeah, I happen to be one of those people. There's a Whole Foods pretty close to me that has the biometric technology.  There was nobody behind me in line. You do have to do a little setup, but it's pretty quick. Even if there was somebody behind you or a line behind you, it doesn't last that long. So that was easy. I opted in about a month ago. In my case, I connected and credit card that I have through Amazon. So I'm getting cash back anyway. So it's like, I just get my broccoli, I scan my palm and I'm done. It has never been easier for me to be at a Whole Foods. Now, you might not have a Whole Foods near you or you might shop somewhere else. But I've had a pretty good experience with this. Amazon has also expanded Amazon One to some third party locales. I haven't tried out getting a beer at the Colorado Rocky Stadium, but you can. Or you can get breakfast at a Panera Cafe that has the biometric scanning also. But technology always has those critics who say this is problematic, might be a privacy issue. And I'm not saying that they're wrong. So let's talk a little bit about that. Some folks say this could potentially be used to track and target people in a different way than merely knowing where you might have scanned your credit card in the past because it's your actual body might be a protester or a person who is marginalized. Back in 2021, a law took effect in New York City requiring businesses to post conspicuous signs if those businesses were collecting customers biometric information. Now that would include fingerprints under this designation. Nan Amazon might need to face a proposed class action lawsuit saying that it has failed to inform customers at its go cashierless stores that it was indeed collecting their biometrics. Now Amazon says, listen, if we're scanning your palm and you opted in, we're not doing anything else and you don't have to do it. And only some go cashierless stores offer Amazon One palm scanning technology. In fact, the whole go experience is that you don't have to do anything.  The complaint seems to be more about how a customer would be tracked if they don't opt into the palm scan because the argument is, well, if you're walking into a store, there's some record of you being there. And that could be biometric information about your height or your weight, that sort of thing. So Justin, knowing what Amazon wants to do sounds like they're feeling pretty confident about the palm scanning. How do you feel about the backlash that it might entertain as a result? It's so funny that we're doing these first two stories back to back because in my mind, they're kind of the same story. These massive companies that are making so much money, they are putting the balance sheets of massive G8 countries to blush, have one thing that they are trying to prove to their customer base. You can trust us with your data if by some level you have an understanding of what we're going to do with it. With Apple, it's very simple.  That's how Apple's making money on me. Amazon has a more transactional relationship with people, and so people understand it, but they might not. And that's what you're seeing here, where it's like, well, what if a company really wants my palm data? What if a government really wants my palm data? Unlike an account, I can't make more of these. There's only one that is all we are given when we are born. And unless there is an elaborate surgery, you are not able to change it. When you get into some of these companies that are advertising based, Google, Meta, things get a little trickier, because at the end of the day, your data is their business. But let's get back to Amazon. Amazon is moving into a world where they are kind of hybrid. They do sell devices, you do have a relationship with them there.  But I don't think that they have the kind of customer reputation that they would like when it comes to stuff like this. And so that's why you're seeing the friction in my opinion. Yeah, see, from a from a risk proposition, just to your point, yeah, you only have one palm, you only have so many fingerprints that you can scan, right? Once those are, once those are, if you don't have trust in a company in the fears, once those are out there, you know, you're out of luck for lack of a better term. You also have that situation with social security numbers, right? And I think about this increasingly kind of being in the cybersecurity space. And the assumption is basically that at some point there was a very high likelihood that that stuff is going to get out there, not because Amazon necessarily is even going to have bad business practices with biometrics, which I don't even think they're collecting. I think they're using it for authentication. And then once it's authenticated locally, that is not passed on necessarily to a server kind of using a hash based system. So it's trust, but at a certain point, I, if I don't know, maybe this is just speaking from someone who is relatively informed on security issues, like go on have I been pwned and see what information of yours is out there, probably a certain number got out there at some point. And probably once you put your palm in somewhere or something like that, something tied back to that will get out there. And we live in a world where we cover data breaches that have hundreds of thousands of millions of social security numbers or similar IDs, passport information, like really sensitive information gets out there. And there's fraud out there, but also we can still exist in the world from a security perspective. I think Amazon is prepared for this. I don't know how you communicate that this might get out there, but it won't be the end of the world because it's already, we're already living in this, this hellscape anyway, as Amazon, that's the only thing. And that's the thing.  That's not what we're talking about. What we're talking about is the consumer relationship between Amazon and why you're getting the kind of friction that you're getting now. And no matter what, at the end of the day, there's a reason why when Apple debuted that Vision Plus, we have not seen days and days of news cycles about, about Apple scanning your retina, because Amazon has built that trust that, that is less of an issue than it would be if Meta, we're talking about, don't worry, unlock your device with our retina scan. Well, and, and also Amazon pointedly rolling this out with probably their most trusted or, or, or like most positive consumer brand that they have. Yes. What beanhole foods. Yeah. Yeah. Whole paycheck, right? But you pay, but you pay. That's why. I mean, don't give me, I love it there. There's a bar in the whole thing here. I mean, like, what's not to like. You love to say it. It's got everything you could ever want. But, but yeah, no, I, I, you know, there are a lot of ways where I could say, well, this could be good for privacy, right? Let's say my credit card gets scraped somewhere and somebody tries to, you know, act as me and let's say Palm scanning becomes more widespread, you know, it could be like, well, it's pretty obvious whoever that was wasn't her, you know, that kind of thing. There are, there are optimistic ways to think about this. There are also very, very pessimistic or worse ways to think about this sort of thing. I will say, just based on my, you know, again, only about a month long experience works real well if you're in a hurry. And, and I think that there are going to be a lot of customers who feel that way. We'll say before we move on that the first time I set up my palm, you know, the cat, the person working the register was just sort of amused by the whole thing. And the next couple of times I went in where I was like, you know, they went, oh, so yeah, we've had a lot of people being asking us about this and they're worried about it and this doesn't bother you. And I said, well, no, because I think I understand how it works. So no, it doesn't.  But yeah, to each their own. Well, thanks to everybody who became patrons.  But if you join our patron, Patreon, we sure are glad to have you. Many of you increased your pledges, got a lot of new pledges, because we were doing a round of support to bring Molly Wood on the show one Friday, every other month. We're still, we're still working towards the goal of getting Molly on the show one Friday every month, but we do need more patrons to do that. So if you're on the fence, you've been thinking about it, might be good timing for you. Do check out patreon.com slash DTNS and become a patron if you can. Thank you in advance. All right, Netflix had some quarterly earnings and boy, was there a lot to glean from them. The company saw its second straight quarter of subscriber growth up a 5.9 million worldwide to 238.4 million. This is significant. It is a huge, huge jump over analyst estimates of 1.7 million new subscribers. And that's not the only thing the company also announced. It's expanding its password sharing crackdown to almost all remaining markets. It hasn't been implemented in yet. India is the big one. In case you don't know anything about India, there's a lot of people there. It's a giant market. It won't launch the option to add an out of household account on there at a lower cost in those markets because the plans are already lower cost and I would probably estimate lower revenue for Netflix as well. Justin, I have to assume that not all new subscribers, very, very, very possible that just a lot of people were just like, I like Netflix. Finally, I'm going to sign up, but so many of these people have to have been bounced out of being a freebie from someone else's account, right? I'd be shocked if we considered, if we still see in the next few quarters this kind of growth, but it is a good sign for Netflix that the juice is worth a squeeze in terms of their password sharing crackdown. Yeah. What this strikes me as I think the big question when they implemented this was how many people would say, nah, it's not worth it. I was only getting it because my sibling had it or something like that and I'm not going to do it, but it turns out a lot of people get a lot of value from keeping a Netflix subscription, regardless of how much they watch. It definitely was more than analysts thought. I mean, that number is crazy. Almost 6 million. They can only pull that ripcord one time though. Netflix also confirmed it will stream a promotional event for the companies that drive to survive and full swing docuseries, which is featuring a live emphasis on live golf match in November featuring race car drivers and pro golfers. What's not to like? Co-CEO Ted Serandos didn't say that Netflix was going to get into the bidding war for live sports though. What he said and words chosen carefully was, quote, we think that we can have a really strong offering for sports fans at Netflix without having to be part of the difficulty of the economic model of live sports licensing. The difficulty of the economic model of live sports licensing is a very, very long way to say these things are expensive and they are all more expensive. Also, for anybody who tried to watch the love is blind finale, you understand that Netflix's live offerings are not exactly foolproof. So they do need to get better at that before they even think about bidding on anything. Right now, there are two very, very interesting things to play here. Number one, what we just talked about in terms of where Netflix is going to be in terms of bidders for live sports rights, because I do believe that a major American sports league is going to go to, if not a totally online digital situation. Sorry, I'm a less. I know you already did that. But one of the other ones are going to go to a partial or total online host. But then also for Netflix, the idea of celebrity golf, we just saw a NBC air a celebrity golf tournament. This is something that I do think is an emerging world where Netflix hopes to microwave a vertical for themselves. And I think it's interesting, like all like Netflix is taking the opposite approach here, what we usually see from sports content, right? It's like you have the main thing that everybody watches, which is the big game or whatever sports league it is. And then you do hard knocks off of it, right? And then you get a small sub sample of that, but that's useful for the diehard fan and stuff like that. And Netflix is saying, like, no, the actual, the competition is an offshoot of our media, our content, essentially. And I think it's an interesting move, especially seeing like F one, I know pro golf has a, I don't know, a bigger audience. Sure, it's on main, it's on broadcast television. So I'm assuming it has a much bigger audience. But like, especially like F one, something like that, where it's like in the US, that's a fairly niche market. I wonder if they also think we could build this up to be something because we have this content that people already like, we can tell a story with this, we know how to do that really well.  I like that, that, that switcheroo from what we usually see with sports content is interesting. I think it's kind of going against the grain. Well, I mean, they have two docu series, one about golf and one about race cars, and you can't make golfers drive race cars. So you're going to make the race car drivers go hand, but that's a whole different show. Oh, that's kind of like a segment in top gear. Netflix also said in response to writer and actor strikes that it'll have a cool $1.5 billion more in cash than it would have had for a total of $5 billion. This plus accelerating revenue from rising subscribers means Netflix hopes to start ticking up our cash spend on content. Again, in the third and fourth quarters, according to CFO Spencer Newman, who added, we want to do it responsibly. I'm assuming labor disputes would be resolved by then. And Sarandos also told analysts that Netflix does not find the prospect of licensing any of its own content to others too exciting. I would also think that it's not, you know, people aren't beating down Netflix's door just yet for things like that. Oh, oh, I would disagree. Really? Would you? I mean, well, well, it depends on how long this strike goes. They do not find it too exciting yet. If this strike reaches into October, November, let's say it reaches into October, I think somebody from a major network is going to ask whether or not for the first time ever stranger things can air on broadcast. I have to assume people and some of you might be among them involved in the strikes are somewhat nonplussed with the idea of Netflix saying, well, it turns out we've got more cash on reserve and we are ready to start ticking up our cash spend on content again, based on the bank error in our favor. It's not exactly what the company said, but, you know, this is it's sort of uncharted territory right now. No, no, no, that's them offering the carrot to make a deal, right? They're saying, Hey, we got all this money sitting here. If only we had someone to spend it on writers and actors may become and agree to our favorable terms and all this money could be all right. Well, one thing that's definitely ours is a quality email in our mail bag. What's in there, Sarah? Rich, I'm glad you asked Bruno wanted to add to Marty's initial thoughts. Marty had written in about the idea of chat GPT getting worse in Marty's experience and Bruno says, yeah, I too have experienced a seemingly worse name of chat GPT's results have switched to Google a few times just to find better answers. I'm a paying customer for chat GPT. I fully appreciate the likelihood that my expectations might be increasing rather than the results getting worse or, you know, some combination of both. Bruno had a couple of examples. The first one was picture me uploading a boring engineering standard to the ask your PDF plugin expecting to save some time. Instead, it played a round of hide and seek, not finding the information I asked for. And then cheeky Lee suggested that I find the same document. It was supposed to read. He says the second example is I was looking for the official picture size required for a tie like visa for Thailand. And it confidently gave me the wrong size picture that which is required for an American visa. Again, Google prevailed. So, yeah, depending on what you're using it for, mileage is varying. But yeah, if anybody else has either examples of chat GPT not working as described or working better than expected because it goes, do let us know because, you know, it really depends on how you're using it. And I think queries, not necessarily user error, but that has a lot to do with what you're getting back out. Also speaks that this is a competitive landscape, you know, open AI and Bing, you know, made all the headlines got out to a big lead. They have the name share, but turns out Google can develop things. I'm not saying it's a parody, but like there is a landscape where you can seem like effortlessly try it and see if it's better. Also, chat GPT doesn't have browsing currently. They mean like it is dumber in that you are not allowed to use their browsing feature. Google can still browse for things. And so big public service announcement, do not go to any large language model for factual information that you don't want to fact check that anyway, like just in general, never, not right now, not with browsing. Like I give you actually need to know something that you're going to depend on like getting a visa. Look it up on the official website. You know, if you, if you have feedback for us, do send it our way. We love your feedback. Feedback at daily technewshow.com is where to send that email. You know who I go to for all my factual information. Justin, Robert Young. Oh, man, really rich. It was seamless. I had to crow it out. So I know. I mean, that's how away, uh, Justin, thank you for being on the show, for bringing your expertise, the spicy hot takes as always and your keen wisdom. Where can people find you on the cyberspace? Less trustworthy than both Chad and Brad, in my opinion, is Justin Robert Young. But you can know a little more about a podcast I do called know a little more by heading on over to know a little more on the podcast player of your choice. Tom Merritt, who you might have heard of, brings you through topics that you may know, but could stand to know more about. And I got to tell you, we're working on the new season right now. And it's pretty, pretty good. I love it. I can't wait to listen. It's good stuff. Know a little more. Definitely. If you're not following it, uh, you even going back into the archives, uh, you could, you can know a little more about a lot of things. Just a reminder patrons, stick around for our extended show, Good Day Internet. We call it GDI, where we'll be talking about a new survey from JD Power. Now you say, oh, that sounds boring. No, it's not. It might indicate that we've reached a tipping point for on in car infotainment. Mm hmm. So don't mess it. Uh, but just a reminder, you can catch a show live Monday through Friday at 4pm Eastern, 200 UTC. And you can find out more at dailytechnewshow.com slash live. We're always on demand. We love to have you join us live at the camp. We'll be back tomorrow talking AI, affecting people's salaries with maybe Maroney joining us. Talk to them. This show is part of the Frog Pants Network. Get more at frogpants.com.