35 Burst results for "Darpa"
The Internet Destroyed the Left's Control of the Media
"The Internet destroyed the left They have never been the same The Internet's about as we know it it's about 30 years old As we know it it was going around through darpa and college for a while before the colleges and universities But as we know it 30 years old probably less as we know it The modern Internet email and everything we see where you can just kind of jump on It's about 30 years old This destroyed the left All of a sudden the information ecosystem They controlled with monarchical tyrannical oligarchical rule depending on what angle you're viewing it from All of a sudden information was available to anyone just by loading a web page Remember that AOL sound Jim Remember that You set the dial Like actually dial through your phone line The younger folks listening to my show I'm honored you're here I really have a nice kind of young demo for our show which is helpful in this business I don't think you understand how hard in the past it was to get information you have right now at your fingertips You know everybody laughs in a lot of these short websites reels and tiktoks have a mess in and of itself and you can actually learn a lot on the Internet
"darpa" Discussed on What Bitcoin Did
"More secure. But there's an argument it's becomes less scalable on the base chain. It is. That is true. But so how do you layer is this only a blockchain and because the second layer of the lightning network isn't really a blockchain, it's something built on top of the blockchain. It's not part of the problem. This is so important. This is so important. So for any blockchain to be successful, it has to really focus on decentralization and security. It has to solve scalability at high level. But where I'm going with this is could it have gone for somebody else and solved decentralization at high level? Could it have confiscated in decentralization assault security at high level? Or does it have to solve decentralization and security at the base change? At the base chain, if you want to change money and you want to, it has to solve decentralization security. Otherwise, everything relies on institutions that you trust. They get co opted by money. It has to. That's what it's such a different, that's why it's so unique and time in history. Because every single, when we read history books, when we read about when money dies, when we read all of these, they're flawed because we never had a system that was decentralized and secure at the base. We always relied on system that we trusted who was in power. And they abused the trust. First time in history. And so if that is true, and people should do their own work with it, it's true, but it can't be broken. It can not be broken. And I explore deeper why it can't be broken in that article. Now, now it looks like instead of what people are comparing it as they're comparing it as an asset or something like that or a monetary monetary premium in there to comparing it to gold. And other things. And I think it's suffices that test. It's a better form of gold. But now what's happened on top of that through layered, like the Internet is built in layers. You don't know what TCP IP is. Nobody thinks about when they're sending their email that the base layer or TCP IP was invented in the late 60s by darpa. And if the base layer failed, everything fails. We still use that system today. And the layer has to be hardened.
"darpa" Discussed on AI Today Podcast: Artificial Intelligence Insights, Experts, and Opinion
"You can say, why did you do that? What was the reason by which you did that? Now, of course, kids can't always tell you the reason why they did something. They just felt like demanding it or something happened. But maybe there was a reason there. Maybe there was a bug on the picture and they decided to use a stick to knock it off and in the process wasn't really the best idea. They enact the picture off the wall, right? But that would be an explanation. And so an explanation AI is, can the model tell you how it arrived at a very particular prediction in conclusion, giving some very specific data. You gave me this pixel as grid of pixels image and I told you there was a cat. I'm going to tell you exactly how I came to that conclusion. That would be an explanation. And we'll talk a little bit about this, but the defense advanced research project agency darpa has been working on explainable AI called XAI for neural nets for a while and they talk about the define it in that as like an explainable model is a method or technique, which is able to peer into the black box, make it not a black box and understand exactly how that model works. And people have been working on that research and we'll spend a little bit of time talking about methods that people are trying to work for these complicated neural net systems. Now, if we can't get a specific explanation as to why one particular piece of data resulted in one particular outcome from that machine learning model can at least interpret it. Can I know what things may have influenced, like if I may not know the exact reasons for that particular thing, I might know what the key factors were or the decision making things that say I maybe waited this more than that. Maybe this particular piece of this image or this piece of data was more important than others. And so interpretability is the degree to which a human can understand the cost. The more like cause and effect, it might say, well, I may not necessarily understand the specific reasons, but I do know that if I have these particular elements in the data, I will get these kind of results from the system. For example, if I'm taking satellite imagery and I'm trying to detect houses, if I have a lot of cloud cover, I might know that the impact of clouds has an impact on the accuracy of the model. I may not be able to tell you exactly how the model is working, but I could tell you what those impacts are. And sort of the last sort of idea here is this idea of a root cause analysis, a failure analysis, that's because if I know if the model is not working and I know how it's not working, then I can fix it, right? If I don't know exactly how the model is working, then I can't really fix that I have
"darpa" Discussed on The Stuttering John Podcast
"Come on, John, you know this stuff is worthless, right? It's just a piece of cloth. But if I give this to the maitre D to 90s happy, or if I give this to the bell hobbies happy, why? Because you can give it to somebody else. This is a technology we trust it. Yes. And we're using it to transfer value between each other. So it was always a Bitcoin's worthless Bitcoin's worthless, is this is not worthless? If you trust it, and it becomes a trusted ledger in the society, then Bitcoin is safer than this because we're printing this. We're making this. Okay, so Bitcoin, they're not making it anymore. But how about the other? Bitcoin is immutable. How about the other NFTs? The other ones. Like Ethereum and those? Yeah. Well, NFT is a different ball game. NFTs are more like non fungible tokens at the art world and things like that. I don't own those. I don't really have an opinion. Ethereum I like. Ethereum. So with vitalik basically said, is, okay, I get Bitcoin, but Bitcoin is an older tech, let me create a newer tech that has the ability to put a layer on it of a smart contract. So now that we can do contracts back and forth with each other. And I think he, I think he's onto something. I think he created something transformative. So Ethereum, the problem with Ethereum is there something called gas fees or the transaction fees and they're very high. Yeah. And so you have to figure out a way to lower that and he's doing that. He's coming up with some innovative ways to lower the Ethereum gas fees. But you're going to be sitting here ten years from now and the use cases for the blockchain are going to have proliferated. You know, you could make, you could make over the Internet. In 1985, a phone call. You could have made one. We did have darpa had created the Internet and you could make a call over it. But you couldn't make the volume of calls that were now making. You didn't have enough pipes and plumbing, right? Imagine if I sat here with you, we were doing your podcast in 1998. And let's say we had the possibility to be able to do this, which of course we couldn't in 1998, but we had this big fat box TV. And we were dialing into the Internet. You were hearing the burying and the whirring of the modem and it was taking 35 seconds to land or AOL
"darpa" Discussed on NPR's Business Story of the Day
"Com. Cryptocurrencies are having a bad year. The price of Bitcoin has slid almost 70% since its peak last November, while some of the more innovative versions of virtual money have tanked altogether. Now there's a new reason for worry. A government commissioned report comes out today, which raises questions about the technology behind cryptocurrencies and how secure it is from tampering. NPR's Martin costy reports. Cryptocurrency is more than just an investment. It's an ideology. It's the belief that nobody should be in charge of how money works. No company, no Central Bank, no government. Here's the MC warming up the crowd at the Bitcoin 2022 conference in Miami back in April. Two, three, freedom. Again, freedom. One more time. The freedom is built on decentralization. You see, what you need to understand about cryptocurrencies is that the transactions who bought a Bitcoin who sold one, all of that is tracked on blockchains. And those are just ledgers, publicly visible lists of transactions replicated on computers around the world. Two decentralized for anybody to tamper with, in theory, it's been taken for granted that blockchains are immutable and decentralized because the community says so. That's Dan Guido, CEO of trail of bits, a software security research and development firm that just released a new report about this. The paper asks a fundamental question. Are there certain parties that control overwhelming percentages of the network? And the answer is overwhelmingly, yes. The report focuses on places on these blockchain networks where the traffic has become concentrated, like traffic bottlenecked on a freeway. And it shows how someone could use those bottlenecks to take over the blockchain process, say to stop someone from getting paid or just to make an asset disappear. This is usually called a 51% attack because you're trying to take over most of the network. But Guido's team has found that you'd really need only 49% and because of those bottlenecks, sometimes even less. Let's say somebody with great top down control of the Internet in their country starts to interfere with that network, we can actually start bringing that 49% down to 40% to 35% and these sorts of margins of safety get whittled away. He could see a scenario in which say Russia used this approach to block crypto donations to Ukraine. And that's where we start to see the strategic importance of all this and why this report was commissioned by the defense advanced research projects agency known as darpa. So one of the missions for darpa is preventing technological surprise. Josh Barron is a program manager with the agency. He says the report gathers in one place existing research into the vulnerabilities, and he says some of the details are quote eyebrow raising. So for example, the idea that 21% of Bitcoin nodes are running an old version of the Bitcoin core client. That's known to be vulnerable. Just to explain that for a second, what he's talking about there is that 21% of those Bitcoin nodes are running software with a known flaw so they can all be hacked the same way. So you're already worried about 51%. And now I'm telling you that 21% are just out there for the taking as it were. That's not great. He sees this report as a guide for fixing vulnerabilities as blockchain networks become more important. But the government isn't going to impose those fixes because it can't. Crypto is decentralized. You need a consensus in that loose community of people who help to run these networks. And right now, this centralization doesn't seem to be much of a concern. Big crypto company, such as coinbase, are more focused right now on the volatility of prices. They declined to comment about the report to NPR. But at a smaller Bitcoin services company called swan dot com, cofounder Jan pritzker called these dangers theoretical. If this kind of attack is possible, why hasn't it happened? So I think the proof is in the pudding a little bit. And the real world conditions, these things don't happen. Let's go agrees with the report on one point. There is more centralization in some of the newer forms of cryptocurrency, especially those that use a different kind of blockchain system called proof of stake, which uses less power. He's confident in the older, more energy intensive system used by Bitcoin. Whatever you do in the short run to damage Bitcoin, like let's say you were actually able to stop Bitcoin from producing blocks for even a day. If you end that attack, Bitcoin will go back to normal. And then all of you have done it, you've just proven that it's impossible to attack. This comes down to a debate over whether people investing say they're a retirement funds should consider cryptocurrencies to be a proven technology. At trail of bits, Dan Guido says he's not anti blockchain. He thinks they have a lot of promise, but to him, this kind of virtual money is still a prototype. Everybody needs to know what they're buying, what they're buying into. What they're going to trust. And there's a lot here that you should not trust. At least not today. Martin costi and PR news. I'm Gregory Warner, hosted the.
"darpa" Discussed on Practical AI: Machine Learning & Data Science
"But building multimodal models that can ground our ideas or our perception of these ideas in these sort of multiple modalities to increase robustness and flexibility, especially if we're using these on a variety of downstream tasks. I feel like I said a lot there. I don't know if any of that came true. If I'm understanding you correctly, correct me if I'm not, but you're basically saying having that diversity to achieve what the model is representing. So the representation is built on diversity, gives it that robustness. It gives it that ability to recognize all the things that that representation might take the form of. Is that a good way of summarizing? Yeah, yeah. So I looked up a few things here in terms of this idea of grounded. I like the description from actually from darpa, which I know you're a fan of. But they talk about the explosive growth of language models and all this stuff, and they say, you know, ML suffers from a need to train on large amounts of annotated data and then they talk about this sort of project that they're talking about, which is related to grounding aims to enable computers to acquire language in a manner similar to how children do. Because children acquire language based on their perception of oral and visual information, not just textual information. It's not just like you teach a child to read based on just text apart from audio and visual. So it's a sort of broader way of thinking about how you teach a certain learning how we teach our models the information that they need to know, which is actually encoded in multiple modalities. And it might not always be like audio and video, maybe it's related to physics about how the world works or something like that..
Did Hillary Clinton Spy on Trump While He Was in Office?
"Came out in this court filing is John Durham revealed that Hillary Clinton and her campaign continued a surveillance project while Donald Trump was president. That's right, president of the United States. Now you might ask how that would be possible. Well, Hillary Clinton went and found a group of tech workers, we suspect these tech workers work for Georgia Tech. They are Internet service providing tech geniuses. You could say. Hillary Clinton hired them and basically knew that they had backend government access. So these tech workers worked for darpa, which is the defense research agency. So basically, they were able to track Internet activity and maybe know more, but we know at least Internet activity of what was happening in the EOP. Now the EOP is the executive office of the president. So Hillary Clinton, according to this filing, hired tech workers outside vendors, who then came through. And were monitoring what websites The White House was visiting. Your government. So these tech executives had government access and exploited it for money and for espionage. This is total and complete domestic espionage using their access to spy on a sitting president of the United States.
James O'Keefe Tells Us About Himself and His New Book 'American Muckraker'
"To get someone whom I have admired for a long time, a young man named James O'Keefe, you may know him from project veritas, extraordinary citizen journalism, James O'Keefe, my friend, a joy to see you and to have you on the program and congratulations on the book, American muckraker. Thank you, Eric. I'm excited to talk to you about philosophy and ethics and all these themes that are inherent in this. All that highbrow garbage, I don't you know I've moved on. I became a Trump supporter. I kicked all that intellectual, you know, gravity to the curb. Now I'm just a man of the people. In all seriousness, we have a lot to talk about. But I want for people tuning into this program who maybe haven't followed you, you haven't published a book before. So I'm excited because I want people to know you and I want people to buy your book. It's called American muckraker, tongue in cheek. But just tell us a little bit about yourself for people who aren't familiar with James O'Keeffe. Well, I haven't published a book like this before. I am a journalist. I've been doing this for about almost 1819 years since I was in college and I run an organization called project veritas Latin for truth. And we go undercover, we expose what's going on. We believe that the media is broken and I think what motivates people like me and the people I work with is a sense of justice. Maybe you could call it a justice complex that things out there are not what they seem and rarely as they ought to be. And reality is not really described accurately by journalists. In fact, media organizations seem to be in harmony with the people they're supposed to be investigating as evidenced by this recent thing that happened with me with the FBI and The New York Times and Pfizer, pharmaceutical. So we, the outsiders need to do something about it, our tagline is be brave, do something. We do a combination of undercover work and whistleblowing, take people from the inside and give them cameras to expose what's going on. Most recently last week we did a story on darpa, the Defense Department had documents, literally Pentagon papers, showing that Anthony Fauci may have lied under oath. So this is what we do. We've been doing it for a while and this book is about the struggle to sacrifice the ethics the privacy of the deception. Everything inherent in this form of journalism which used to happen a 150 years ago, and now it seems to have gone the way the dinosaurs. Well,
Project Veritas Founder James O'Keefe on EcoHealth, DARPA and Fauci Lying Under Oath
"James, I want to ask you, you also exposed this story. I think last week, doctor Robert Malone and Naomi wolf say that this is bigger than The Pentagon papers. So it's potentially civilizational altering stuff. The story has multiple parts, one with darpa, and then one with potential suppression of early treatments. There's a mention of the trusted truth initiative. James, can you kind of update our audience on this story? So these were documents that, again, were transmitted to us from a source. I wonder if the FBI will raid me again that you're starting to certainly sense a pattern here. It's absurd. I won't tell you who the source is, but we received documents from inside the Department of Defense, specifically darpa, defense advanced research projects agency in Arlington, Virginia, which is a division of the Department of Defense, and these documents were authored by a major in the United States Marine Corps who was a fellow at darpa. So effectively they're sort of Pentagon papers that we've broken last week. And the documents state that eco health alliance, this group approached darpa in the Department of Defense for a gain of function research on COVID born coronaviruses in March of 2018. The Defense Department rejected this proposal on the grounds it was too risky. It was too dangerous. So our department defense thought, no, now that we can't proceed with this research for obvious reasons, it was lead to, I don't know, a pandemic or something. And then the Marine Corps major writes in this document, but Anthony Fauci, as head of naid, a proceeded with this research. So the Marine Corps statements, obviously a credible source here inside darpa, would seem to indicate that Doctor Fauci live under oath. Now Charlie, we break the documents and the very next morning Fauci is being questioned by senator Marshall and Fauci does address project veritas mentions us by name, authenticates the documents, but calls into question the credibility of this report and the Marine Corps guy who wrote it. And I believe Fauci is playing semantic games because obviously there were two separate proposals here. Fauci didn't see the precise identical proposal that eco health alliance approached darpa with, it was a different one, but fascinating stuff. And I think that there'll be more whistleblowers and documents coming out as a result of this exposure.
Dr. Pierre Kory and Dr. Chris Martenson on Ivermectin and a Potential Cover-Up
"We now know from a document from project veritas that major Joe Murphy and the darpa document page four wrote that Ivermectin works throughout all phases of the illness because it both inhibits viral replication and modulates the immune response, things that you've been talking about. This document was hidden in a secret folder. Does that make either of you think that they've known that Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine works this entire time from the top levels and are we witnessing a cover up? Well, we know that hydroxychloroquine is actually in an NIH paper around original SAAR. So classic SARS comes out in 2002 and three. By 2005, there was a paper out from NIH researchers saying hydroxychloroquine is an effective potent inhibitor of this, at least in an in vitro setting and also a mouse model, I believe. So they knew that. They knew that early on. And if you look at the so I call the, you know, this repurposed drug war. So this PR campaign on Ivermectin, the war and I have met in 2021. If, you know, the fact that they waged that war in 2020 through these fraudulent research studies fraudulent papers mentions the YouTube you could talk about. That can be explained by the fact infectious best explained by the fact they knew it
Someone Must Be Held Accountable for America's Coronavirus Deaths
"Nothing is to be preferred before justice. Socrates famously said, which, in some ways, was ironic a man who was wrongly killed because he was trying to educate the youth about justice. A crime has been committed. A crime against humanity over 850,900 thousand people have died. Because of the Chinese Fauci coronavirus, not to mention the multi $1 trillion wealth transfer and the complete changing of our civilization as we know it. And someone or some group or some people must be held accountable for that. And that person who has been the architect the designer behind all of this is on Capitol Hill today. Now Anthony Fauci did a very poor job ending the virus, but he did a great job starting it because he was the one behind the gain of function research. And bob shell knew documents from project veritas run by my friend James O'Keefe show that there was a pitch that was done to darpa, which is an organization run by the Department of Defense to fund potential projects. It was called project defuse. Done by the eco health alliance by doctor Peter Daszak. We've talked about dasik before. This was all about trying to fund gain of function research in Mainland China. It mentions Yunnan China and it says that bat SARS CoV-2 viruses exist that can infect human cells, produce SARS like illness and humanized mice, and are not affected by monoclonal or vaccine treatment. Peter Daszak continued by saying this is back in 2018, new bombshell documents. Bat SARS CoV-2 host jump into the human populations is frequent. These viruses therefore are clear and present danger to U.S. defense forces in the region and global health security. So here was a little bit of a pitch. Basically, Peter Daszak was saying, hey, if you don't give my company $14.2 million to go to China or go somewhere to develop this gain of function research, then China might use this sort of virus against
"darpa" Discussed on The Propaganda Report
"I mean there's there's a lot of other stuff going on but just for simplicity of this Explanation labor costs reflect the supply of labor versus the demand of labor. So if the supply is low and demand is high. The price of labor is going to go up and that's going to promote the use of technology and at but as i also as technology makes the costs of products go down. The actual price of labor can go down because the cost of living goes down and they don't need as much. That's what would happen if you didn't have inflation. So inflation fiat currencies printed to absorb all of that surplus on behalf of the governments of labor. Doesn't actually get it. That's what the defeats sticky wages where we're labor would actually capture some of that added productivity but in any case as these equations are made labor prices adjust and it's not systemic. It's not across the board and a lot of times you'll just labor can slowly move into other areas of it's really not needed but a lot of times labor costs go down and that pushes back against tech. So looking she shall find. I thought the government subsidizing research and technology so often helps lower the cost of capital in new tech radically and at once which will push labor out artificially it's not organic. And lo and behold i find straight out of darpa the open manufacturing program and i wrote i looked into this just three d. printing which is what these houses are and Read the whole thing. It's just a one long quote. The of manufacturing program is fundamentally about capturing and understanding of physics and processes of parameters of novel production concept so we can predict How the finished products will perform dopers defense. Science office program manager said he said here. Here's the money. The reliability and run to run variability of new manufacturing techniques are always uncertain at first and as a result we qualify these materials and processes using a blunt and repetitive test. And retest approach that is inevitably expensive and time consuming which ultimately undermines incentives for innovation. So they go in there with these massive testing which would have been part of the costs of evaluating implementing these tack and deliberately so that they can usher in these innovations as at lower costs than what happened in the free market. And that's how these these technologies then get. They may appear to be introduced by private companies and they are but they piggyback on this stuff. Which is our tax money Undermining our wages and our job. So i am organically at works in a free market. It works but this is just another form of fascism. In my opinion the expediting of these developments of people replacing the robotic technologies. I saw a couple of stories yesterday about. Mcdonald's is going to be doing experiments where they're trying to completely automate their drive through. Just get rid of the first. They came from the waitresses. Yeah the waitress yes. So they'll do. The ipads truckers have very high salaries. Right now because of a lot of rules that have reduced the number of truckers and how many hours chuckles will work. But in my opinion eventually. That's just gonna be used for as an excuse for replacing them with driverless trucks which is used as an excuse to implement driverless infrastructure. I mean this stuff is all has nothing to do with racism or vaccines. It has to do with their It's it's not just the metaverse as being a virtual world. They're changing maybe they're changing the actual world in these ways to interact better with the metaverse. I mean that's what rose acquire us to say like they need regular modular Interoperable like plug in even the buildings and everything needs.
"darpa" Discussed on The Glenn Beck Program
"Scientists planning to release corona virus particles into a cave bats But i'm not and the only reason why not is because i'm working on a show. That's coming out in october and i knew this particular piece of this About two weeks ago and couldn't get the couldn't get the evidence To it was Safely let's put it that way. They planned to create a merrick virus genetically enhanced to infect humans more easily now. This is eighteen months before the first cove in nineteen case appears researchers had submitted plans to release skin. Penetrating nanoparticles and aerosols can containing novel ca merrick spike proteins of bad corona viruses into cave bats in china. Okay all right okay. Well that kind of explains why. We think this might be aerosol. And if it is aerosol that means that space doesn't matter time matters. It doesn't matter if you're six feet away. What matters is how long. How long has it been since somebody else who might have had it. Been in the area. If it's aerosol which by the way. I don't believe i don't believe nature creates their saul. It's just hanging in the air for a long period of time. That's why you could get it and space six feet apart doesn't mean it doesn't make any difference at all doesn't make any difference. How long has it been since that has been exposed in this area so anyway. These scientists eighteen months before they They went to darpa the defense advanced research projects agency. You know darpa and they said hey. We'd like to do this experiment. And we'd like your funding in your help and darpa looked at it went. I don't think so darpa. I think that's where most of our biggest brains are hanging out. And they said no that's when she decides to get involved It is You're going to be won't be shocked But you will be horrified at the truth about the corona virus..
"darpa" Discussed on Automated
"It's the potential is that we are in one of these moments ago right so this is like the basis of urban the next here at the university. Organised this idea of like well this. These enormous shifts are happening. We have the opportunity to help shape. These things out. What it requires is a whole lot of understanding. What's going on and some foresight forethought into what might be happening. And how you might be shifting. So i see like. We had a very similar moment at where. We're the decision that we're making today. The things that were tested. Anything i think about today. The ways that governments are structuring structuring. The deployment of these technologies could You know shape the future for years decades. You know to calm. And so that that i feel like we're in a similar type moment i think that's Maybe a perfect way for the kind of the audience to understand that. Yeah there is large possibly momentous event. That's going to be happening over the next couple of decades and his conversations like that. I think maybe can trigger some people to either take action or or even start thinking about some of these things that are that will will be getting into so. I have talked about autonomous vehicles on the podcast a couple of times already. I've mentioned the the darpa challenge in two thousand four. But i think you also. You definitely know kind of the timeline. That autonomous vehicles have had. So if you could just spell that out for us because maybe the entire audience doesn't necessarily know like where these These kind of important points. When it comes to autonomous vehicles have actually happened yet. well so i mean like the dump. towns was the kind of the first Realm or pass intellect lasted really is. This possible is doable. And then You know more recently. There's been a huge innovations happening. That are part of cars everywhere right so i assume the familiar. There's these five levels of automation that people talk about Level three is what we're at right now which is a whole lot of like driver assist cruise control All these types of things and cars everywhere and you know if the increased safety and That's pretty pretty pretty. Well understood the big pushes that are happening. Or what's coming Which is level. Four level five and level. Four is that m you can drive Or natanz vehicle can drive itself without the need of someone intervening right. Which is you know what a lot of babies r right now is. Actually that there's a safety take over but the idea that they could do that without someone intervening in specific situations. And what do we mean by specific situation. So you know on freeways on maybe most roads in the city but not all residents. Maybe they can't deal with like really complicated intersections and maybe they can't deal with rural roads like unpaved areas right so that's four and then lower fives that can go anywhere anywhere And my guess is level. Five is might never happen in in fact. It's not that important that it happens level fours of the really big kind of turning point.
Biden's DARPA Will Accomplish Nothing With Red Tape Everywhere
"To this from Biden. Now cut one go. Something called DARPA, The Defense Advanced Research Project agency. Set up exclusively in the Defense Department. Good Lord to seek out the cutting edge research projects. That enhance our national security. An outfit that came up With the Internet GPS And a lot of still think a lot of things. My proposal. We do a similar thing. Now let's slow down. We needed DARPA, Ladies and gentlemen, because the private sector is not in charge of national security. The private sector is not in charge of national security. That is a Responsibility. One of the specific responsibilities of the federal government. Go ahead. I propose we spent $6.5 million now, where's that figure come from nowhere. Billions and billions and hundreds of billions and trillions and This is this is Like like a nightmare. What's going on here? Go ahead. Similar agency within the national shoot of health. The NIH called Advanced Research Project Agency are put H. Dark. They come up with these names. Arpaio age Sounds cool. Go ahead. Help speed Cutting edge research. How to detect Treat and cure diseases like Alzheimer's diabetes and cancer. Let let Let's stop here a second. The government has spent trillions of dollars. Addressing all these issues and their horrific issues, they really are. And if they want to partner with the private sector the way Operation Warp speed did and so forth and fine, but you're now going to nationalize.
"darpa" Discussed on In the News with Mike Dakkak
"Be your way of purchasing things. This would be a way of preventing people from travelling or working going to school unless you had this for our own protection for the good of the whole right and people say that would not happen will yes. It's happening right now in africa. The bill gates foundation and mastercard are using technology on the poor people of africa. Right now. this is awful. Everybody needs to know this. They have no idea what's happening to them. I know they're not telling them exactly what they're doing. And so this is their trial run. They're doing it on the poor people. They're probably doing an india. But i know for sure. They're doing africa and people need to re wake up. What's happening around the world because it'll come here to our doorstep really fast so they're already starting at which patent about the zero six zero six zero six. So it holds your. Id it holds your vaccination record your medical record but it also has those little biosensor. Sensors were accumulating data from your body and then it can be sent off to the cloud. another thing that can be used for as scary but it is true it can actually be used for an on demand drug delivery system so instead of you taking your tablet by mouth you can actually send a light or a frequency into your skin like maybe scannings something your phone over or some other device and they would give it a message a code to start making drug inside your body or a vaccine. You would make your own drug. You'd make your own vaccine. You'd have all the building blocks inside of you. Is that not a credible. So who controls that controls. That i don't think you control it. Something else is controlling. That would if you are not being a good person in society Would you be sent a sedative. Anti-psychotic what would happen and who who's in charge anymore. They even told us the i would be. The central server would be making determinations with this many people involved. We really need to wake up to this and stand up and say no to these vaccines because there's zero data on their safety. Okay let's put it that way and also know that we need to start speaking up for our rights and general no censorship and not being. Locked down the mass. These are against all scientific Protocols all the good science says we shouldn't be doing this. So why are we doing this. It's not about science anymore. It's about control not science anymore. It's about control this. Is you know the whole the whole. This is the bottom line of the situation. This is the whole kitchen caboodle when she says. I don't think you control it. Someone else's controlling it. Anybody who thinks that they can trust this technology and this kind of capability.
"darpa" Discussed on In the News with Mike Dakkak
"I don't everybody back with you with today's update. You know there are so many things going on with these these vaccines you have. The whole m are a thing which it this code. That's injected into your body that programs your cells to perform certain functions specifically to produce certain proteins in your body. Every function in. Your body is carried out using proteins. So if your body needs to fight off a certain disease it instructs your body to produce turn proteins that allows it to fight officer disease and so this r. A is a way to program your body to do whatever the heck the people programming it wanted to do. And so they say were programming it to get rid of covid but we don't really know what their programming into do at all a part and parcel with that is this development of this super secret kind of advanced tech substance called hydrogel which you've probably heard spoken about In the course in throughout the conversation with these vaccines so this this hydrogel thing it's got two parts to it. One is a three millimeter string. Who's the materials made out of polymer chains. it's Kind of like the same material as contact lenses almost as well as other implants and the second part is an an electronic component and that electronic component is attached to the skin on the outside in the sense light through the skin. Now the three millimeter string of the contact lens material is specifically engineered the and it sends a fluorescence of the body when it begins when the body begins to fight an infection among other things. The part that's on. The outside of the body is an electronic component and its attached to the skin and it picks up that fluorescent signal and generates another signal that the wearer then can transmit to a doctor or to a website. So it's kind of like you're you're walking around with a constant blood lab attached to your skin and in your body so one part is on the inside of your body and the second part is on the outside of your body that picks up the signal that the part inside your body sends out and the part on the outside. Your body picks up that signal. Then transmits it to wherever.
"darpa" Discussed on The Last American Vagabond
"We switch over to vaccine bass boards. Because that's just a coincidence because in two thousand eighteen clearly they knew they would have the perfect opportunity to push in vaccine passports. Would nobody wanted before that because cova because they of course that just makes sense. They would know that that far out right look at where starts and look at where the plant is. This is not. This is the kind of stuff that we have to acknowledge to understand what's really happening. What's really going on transforming the public health system. The idea is this. One paragraph will say it all to you the health protection capabilities of public health england. And the nhs test just test and trace so contact tracing surveillance tracking will combine so your public health system's gonna combined with a track and trace enforcement arm into a new uk health security agency. You see that correctly a security agency so now you k. h. s. a. will bring together or national public health science and responsible capabilities response capabilities to protect against infectious disease and external help threat held threats in bad times and good what that boils down to medical police that his medical enforcement. That is what that is contact. Tracers combining it out security agency. They're going to be following up on. Leave this investigation. This is a medical police force. This is what is leading towards. That's why these chips will be very relevant. What and you know what this will ultimately lead to medical criminals. People that don't want to take part. If you've got nepalese love it's just it completely stands to reason that they'll be criminals in the end the end of that equation. So who becomes the criminals. Those that do not vaccinate those trick separate or allow themselves to be contact tracing the rest of their lives. That's what this will be so just take a moment to recognize the media is perpetuating this illusion so it all falls into place now bringing that over to the vaccine part of this or if technically the first part of the vaccine but more specifically about how the more. The gas lighting is continuing. This huge study. Won't technically i guess it is both because this is a really big study. This shouldn't be undermined because this is what this is showing. You should be alarming and this is exactly why argue is being ignored or dismissed or misrepresented or even altered. Oh dear some people are going to enjoy hearing this news study finds co variance effects vaccinated people more than unvaccinated people. What are you know. Take a look at that guy. will you take. Here's here's the archived. Version study finds berry defects vaccine individuals. More than unbox eight. Who are you know. it's pretty big deal. That's from israeli. Study okay well. Guess what. I found out when i went to go look at this when i was investigating it..
"darpa" Discussed on The Last American Vagabond
"When we talk about microchips darpa and the connection to the technocratic rise cove nineteen seen agenda we get we get framed as saying bill gates is gonna use microchips to take over the world. Die even say anything about that. Let's see this is how the this is what. This is a straw man argument. They attack what they claim. You're trying to say and pretend. Like the debunks. Mike research and studies and scientific information but says to dr fauci blocking natural cures. Oh i dunno. You mean like vitamin d vitamin c. Which they've clearly the department of justice said you can't use this. Even though even though fao g and self said he was prescribed vitamin or give vitamin d to his patients in the of covid nineteen as all the stuff is easy to look up if he said he would do it he would give. Vitamin d was patient in in in the context of covid nineteen. And that's a no brainer. Because vitamin d is rally been shown to increase your immune system. It's a no brainer. So even if somebody wants to market it literally for covid nineteen. That's still not wrong and vowed. She says he will do it too. Then we don't for six months and suddenly it's fake news to act like vitamin d can help. How does that even make sense. Only if you're in the middle of a massive psycho psychological operation or sign up. I had to mix both how anti baxter's are already italy theories but cova day t- vaccine before even exists right. You mean that thing that you've had the discussion have been working on since sars and before clearly it's already been there. Pentagon scientists reveal microchip that sent his co. Nineteen in your body before you show symptoms filtered extracts blood so for from april twenty twenty two april twenty twenty one were yes can re conspiracy theory becomes conspiracy fact. Isn't that funny. And the only difference is how they frame what we were actually saying to make it look ridiculous then they frame this a very serious way actually completely scientific that is gas lighting. That is the mainstream media doing its role which miss information thank you brought for doing that. I thought that was a very clearly. They've got a good response and people care about this people know and they see that's why they're so desperate to censor people like us.
"darpa" Discussed on The Last American Vagabond
"Minimally invasive literally under the skin talked about the refused the by For future bio implantable sensor the one that they've this has been the point from the very beginning and recognize the person that we're talking about in. This clip is matt hepburn. That's who this is right there. That's the very person that whitney said. It was one of the most alarming examples of the people on operation warp speed. Remember we talked about this. And the very beginning of operation warp speed. When whitney and i had these discussions that we talked about the fact monsef salau we now now longer part of it because of some very quiet sexual problems that nobody seemed to talk about very telling but some people was all the talk. He was all about bio electric medicine bio implantable. 's nanno implant in injectable gels all the darpa pentagon stuff that we're now hearing about so matt hepburn these people that had their entire careers focused on exactly this kind of technology and then broke off and joined a vaccine program. Sure that makes a lot of sense and now matt suddenly promoting a bio implantable chip to predict covid nineteen. Now let's pretend like it makes no sense whatsoever to eventually. Have these things come together. I mean this is. What's so fundamentally ridiculous is. Were talking about things that obviously make sense if it wasn't about vaccines as a political talking point and we were just talking about something that we were already injecting for the purpose to nineteen or whatever we're talking about and then we accomplish something that goes. Hey this is an injectable too and this helps you fight against the next time. Why don't we put it in the thing injecting now and then all of a sudden you're able to predict i mean this is a no brainer now was happening. I don i would argue. No just because. I don't see the example of that and if i have evidence reported but as possible of course it is they can do right now for all we know but just simply arguing the possibility of something like that is why we get deemed fake news. Because we're willing to entertain real obvious possibilities. Think about that. Also remember that our government is a minute to testing on us in biological all torts all sorts of different things over two hundred and thirty nine times. They've admitted to doing so operation. Sea spray. I always point out one. That's very obvious. And very publicized. People died they tested on you without your knowledge. Both pretend like that would never happen today as they start an entire country in yemen for geopolitical goals but going forward darpa has also created a filter which can remove covid virus from the blood when attached to dialysis which just went very odd.
"darpa" Discussed on The Last American Vagabond
"But any case microsoft is the one i'm interested in. Here's the last point. I broke the pelosi microsoft story sitting on a toilet at work that is to say i take more productive black bowel movements for the family friendly show than a lot of journalists entire workweek. And he's not wrong now. I'm not very familiar with robbie at all really but the point is is the idea that this person or anybody online. The point is these are publicly available. The fact that he's able to scoop well-known generous at prominent outlets on public disclosure stories meaning therefore invited to see makes him feel that there's only five people out there doing what he's doing he's any slope slept in in brooklyn. Who is now. I'm not even the point is credit where credit is due. But i'm not familiar with his work. So the reality is just simply pointing out that the the people like people independent media are are doing the actual work and finding these things and being disparaged by the mainstream in their little clique elitist groups. They patted on the head by the people in charge and they feel like they're doing the right thing. This is what mainstream media is today. Eventually this is going to flip heart. We already have a lot of independent media. Who desperately want to be mainstream media. And they're gonna just become the problem where they already really are to be honest. Now there's a lot of that out there and there's you probably know exactly who. I'm talking about a lot of them. This is what the real the the real journalists out there should be doing. This is what the mainstream media should be doing if they were real journalist. But they're not which we know about though not hard to see. Thank you robby for breaking the story. I think this is an important one. And i didn't. I don't know this part of the story with somebody down here says crystal ball from the hill you going to rectify this. Give proper credit now. This surprise me at all now. I haven't i haven't verified what he's saying there but doesn't it wouldn't surprise me at all. If people in the mainstream media and yes crystal ball is in the mainstream media would share this talk about it make it their story and not even think twice about giving credit to people in the media now bringing this over into the microchip discussion which microsoft seems a perfect. Segue into this. This is a real story that is really happening. That has been called fake. I mean look if you right now went on twitter. And i love making this point because it's this very real just like i stated this about vaccine passports even i i swear to. I bet you right now. There's people that are still acting like that's based on on on twitter. But in any case you could talk about microchips and covid nineteen in just simply just put microchip covid nineteen and just tweet. That people laugh at you. You're such a stupid conspiracy theorist this is while the pentagon scientists have revealed a microchip that senses kobe. Nineteen in your body before you show symptoms any filter that extracts the virus from blood. Good times. 'cause you know that the the idea that they're gonna just extract your. I mean this weird scenario. We're talking about darpa. The pentagon the very people that are working on the nanotechnology discussion. The people that are working on the smart dust things that have been they've had since do thousand four that were eight and eight of the eighth is of a grain of.
Facebook, Twitter, Google CEOs Testify Before Congress
"Big Tech testifies before Congress Today, CBS is Stacey Lynn. With more you'll get grilled by lawmakers about their role in promoting extremism and misinformation. They're expected to defend the accusations that they failed to do their part. Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg is expected to voice Support for updates to a law that protects them from being held liable for what users post soon. DARPA China from Google intends to talk about harming free expression and Twitter's Jack Dorsey will acknowledge they need to do something about the public's mistrust in social media
Gene Editing and Recovery from Radiation
"Welcome to the talking biotech podcast. Weekly podcast about agriculture medicine with an emphasis on biotechnology and the good things we can do for people and the planet names kevin volta. I'm a professor and a podcast host. Who cares about science communication mostly around the area of biotechnology. So today we wanted to talk about something interesting. Radiation and radiation has many places in biology. Of course our resistance to it. The problems that can be caused from it as well as its use as a therapeutic agent used to induce genetic variability when we do plant breeding but has some deleterious downsides and they've represented barriers both for remediation of radioactive. Waste as well as if there's issues with the side effects of radiation therapies for cancer. So i was excited to learn about some work. That's happening. The innovative genomics institute out at the university of california berkeley. There's work that's gone. Underway under darpa funding to attempt to use gene editing to solve some of the problems associated with radiation exposure. Mostly in acute radiation sickness. and so. today we're going to talk to dr feodor urnov. He's a professor in molecular and cell biology department at the university of california berkeley as well as the director for translation technology at the innovative genomics institute associated with berkeley. So welcome to the podcast. Dr urnov thank you for having. This is really a pleasure. I was really excited to read about this. Because it seems like such a cool project that's long overdue and i can certainly understand arpaio's interest in this. I tried to frame a little bit of the problem ahead of time. But could you give me a better explanation of. What is the problem with acute radiation sickness. And where do we see it across. The bay from the berkeley campus is one of the best if not the best teaching hospital in america. Ucsf in the chair of radiation oncology. Dr mary fung has told me how frustrating it is to have. Her patients succumb to cancer of the abdomen and of the pelvis. Oh things like pancreatic liver you. Try a variant. Despite the fact that she has a powerful weapon to pure those cure is a big word and the weapon is radiation as you pointed out as all technologies radiation has had a positive side in the negative side the negative side. Of course we think about weapons. We think about radiation disasters such as mobile in in the ussr. Where i went grow was born and raised three mile island Shema but then on the positive side radiation is used to determine how our teeth are doing or our lungs are doing which is particularly timely given. What's happening right now. In our nation and has also a really really powerful medicine to cure cancer. The reason it's not more widely available is what's technically known as dose limiting city and in english. That means you cannot give enough of the cure before it side effects overpower its benefits. So in dr funk's practice the physician. So i'm regurgitating. What i learned from her and other had the honor to collaborate with. She has a patient with a with a major cancer of the abdomen. Or or the pelvic area she can irradiate the tumor and eradicated. The patients do not recover because tissues that are inevitably also effective so the gut and the bone. Marrow where are aquatic stem cells live are irreversibly damaged by the radiation itself. So the patients Die off either lethal diarrhea which cannot be stopped using anything
"darpa" Discussed on The Last American Vagabond
"This is genetic engineering through horizontal transfer as opposed to vertical inheritance. Interesting is the context of the stated aims of the darker program. It is our opinions you. The scientists that the knowledge to be gained from this program appears to be very limited in its capacity to enhance. Us agriculture or respond the national emergencies in either short or long. Basically saying we know. That's not what this is really for. Furthermore because that's by the way they're they've stated that in their interviews another discussions but it says. Furthermore there has been an absence of adequate discussion regarding the major practical and regulatory impediments toward realizing the project agricultural benefit projected agricultural benefits as a result. The program may be widely perceived as an effort to develop biological agents for hostile purposes and their means of delivery which if true would constitute a breach of the biological weapons convention. Gee i wonder why. They didn't go find right like the government is going to go. Yeah you got us. You got us. We're making bombs and weapons and stuff. Yeah right this got ignored. It got stepped on because the media is a feckless. Bunch of that is only doing what they're told. And i want to include this for you to read because this is one of the more recent ones what he wrote. In january thirtieth. That's gene editing. And bioweapons recent darpa. Experiments raise concerns amid coronavirus outbreak. Exactly this is the key tying in what we just discussed into literally where we are now in the reality is that very much does overlap talking about the the insects animals and how they can be carriers and vectors for their delivery systems. Which is what that really was turning entities. You know whether it's insect and animal or person into a carrier a vector for your biological weapon. I hope you'll take the time to read this because there's a lot of information to get into but we will jump to the next topic here in regard to the cases and something very.
"darpa" Discussed on The Last American Vagabond
"Even expert circles. This was three years ago. Nothing happened no one cared went on absolutely he added a despite the stated aims of the program it will be far more straightforward using the technology as a biological weapon than for a route a routine to suggested by darpa meaning that even the experts are going. Obviously that's not what that's four and does anybody. Is anybody. look at the history of this government. are we really pretending. Like war is not their primary focus quote. It is very much easier to kill or sterilize a plant. Using gene editing than it is to make urbicide or insect resistant experiments are reportedly already underway. Yep exactly three years later. Who knows what happened. Well here is The first time. It looks like it's gonna freeze on me the first time. Hopefully it doesn't take much longer this thing. Let's see that's interesting. Well interestingly enough. While we're waiting i think this this we're talking about something okay. There we go really quick. We're talking about something. That definitely i really want you to think of the overlap here. In regard to the vaccine right technology were talking about and how that ties in with all of these things we're dealing with. I mean this is. We're talking about something that is so far removed from the idea of these vaccines. That just makes you wonder whether or not all of this stuff is leading towards this direction and has been for years for decades and and how many times have we been tested on. They've admitted to two hundred thirty nine times. That's just people both abroad in the end. The united states. So why would we quibble or balk at the idea that they wouldn't be happening now. It doesn't mean that every single person in every aspect is involved. It means that there's people some level who have manipulated the most people but this is an article from Two thousand eighteen. October fifth same thing. Scientists accused darpa genetically modifying insects for bioweapon to spread agricultural viruses. Or the argument is of course to destroy crops in iran. let's say iran is already accused of doing and everyone laughs and goes years such a conspiracy is even though they've literally built what they claim they're doing. How damas that when you think about it right or the idea that iran says israel's using you know weather modification to stop the rain and people go. You're so stupid us down conspiracy and then we realized they literally have a program. That can actually do that. You know it's funny. How quick people are to ignore the facts when they have been told. Something's fake news. But that is where we are that this these are the scientists that are speaking out about this. Actually i wanted to show you this one. I here's the scientists. The article way that include speaking out in here. But here's what the actual document is. This is where this is from science. mag dot org agricultural research or a new bio weapon system right and this is crazy how this can be put out and gets attacked ignored bait and despite every reason to be concerned about this. Here's what it says. This is just a summary. You can read all for yourself. Agricultural genetic technologies now again agricultural here but remembering your mind and make it about humans.
"darpa" Discussed on The Last American Vagabond
"Fifth two thousand eighteen. Us military plans to spread viruses using insects could create new class of biological weapon Gas i completely agree insects. And this is the insect ally program that we've already talked about that. Whitney's written about that. I've talked about and i've written about in fact. Insects could be turned into a new class of biological weapon using new. Us military plans experts have warned. The insect allies program aims to use bugs to disperse genetically modified viruses into or wherever else. They wanted to use them. Remember all the genetically modified mosquitoes that were released all over and actually right before this all started and afterward as well. yeah. I do and it's interesting. This is something that seems to have a very clear tien now again. This is just a thought experiment but the realize that they're working literally bugs. That can dispersed genetically modified viruses. I just find that. We know that people like lebron. These people are working on virus mimicking technology. Guys there's something around all of this our governments and us not just the. Us are clearly driving something here. That is far more nefarious than we can get. Our hands are rapper. Minds around such action will have profound consequences and could pose a major threat to global by. Maybe that's what we're seeing now. According to the team that includes specialist scientists and lawyers right. this was back in two thousand eighteen. Seventeen they were sounding the alarm they were these scientists that were stepping up and saying guys. This is going to kill us. This is a huge biosecurity threat and our government is making weapons and nobody wanted to hear them. It says the This seemingly inoffensive goal has been slammed by these scientists who say the plan is simply dangerous. And then it's insects. Loaded with synthetic viruses will be difficult to control. Yeah that's good. The good guess send viruses given that darpa is a military agency with imperial college. Seems to have a two point five million dollar contract with we find it surprising that the obvious and concerning dual use aspects of this research have received so little attention. This is the lawyer university of freyberg. Freiburg speaking with the independent. I mean ask yourself why in the world is wouldn't get talked about. Where's the media the supposed journalists. They're supposed to be what they don't tell you this stuff because they're told not to because they're not actually journalists doctor. I read an expert in genetically modified insects at the max planck institute for evolutionary. Biology said that there has been hardly any debate about the technology and the program remains largely unknown..
The History of the Internet
"To begin with we as a species. We've been trying to categorize an attain all the knowledge. We haven't to a database of sorts for a very long time right so for example in seventeen twenty. Eight ephraim champions globe maker publishes the cyclopes or a universal dictionary of arts and sciences. It is the earliest attempt to link by association all the articles in an encyclopedia or more generally all the components of human knowledge. He wrote in his preface quote this. We endeavored to attain by considering the several matters. E topics not only absolutely and independently as to what they are in themselves but also relatively or as they respect each other. So we've been thinking about like how to how to access knowledge how to obtain information and organize it in in a in a way so that more people can access it quicker classic enlightenment. Classic enlightenment am my right So in one thousand. Nine hundred belgian lawyers and bibliographer paul outlet and on revilla contain proposed a central repository for the world's knowledge organized by the universal decimal classification. It was called the mondays And it would eventually house. More than fifteen million index cards one hundred thousand files and millions of images and in nineteen thirty four outlet further advanced his vision for the radiated library in which people worldwide will place telephone calls to his quote mechanical collective brain. And we'll get back information as tv signals. So this was a theory. This is something that they thought could get off the ground then in nineteen thirty six h. g. wells first predicts what's called the world brain He wrote the whole human memory can be and probably short time. We'll be made accessible to every individual time is close at hand when any student in any part of the world will be able to sit with his projector in his own study at his or her convenience to examine any book. any document in an exact replica. Study accurate it's pretty accurate so the world brain was to be a central repository of the world's knowledge organized by complex taxonomy invented by wells. So clearly there has been a precedent for desiring this kind of thing. So the concept of data communication or transmitting data between two different places through an electromagnetic medium such as radio or an electric wire predates the introduction of the first computers right. Such communication systems were typically limited to point to point communication between two end devices. Like semaphore lines are telegraph systems and telex machines so these can be considered early precursors to this kind of communication and the telegraph in the late. Nineteenth century was the first fully digital communication system. So that's just cool trivia fact it been a deeply so up until about nineteen sixty computers were huge unwieldy and self contained. You could use them as a tool. But you couldn't necessarily make them talk to each other or transmit information across any distances using them but there were a bunch of people working towards making that happen so a man named christopher stray cheesy who became the oxford university is first professor of computation filed a patent application for time sharing in february of nineteen fifty nine in june that year. He gave a paper called time sharing enlarge fast computers at the unesco information processing conference in paris where he passed the concept onto to lick lighter of mit like lighter vice president at both derek and newman inc and they discuss a computer network in his january. Nineteen sixty paper called man computer symbiosis so a quote from that is a network of computers connected to one another by wideband communication lines which provide the functions of present day libraries together with anticipated advances in information storage. And retrieval and other symbiotic functions. So super like great reading. You know just like pull it up right. Now read it. Yeah take it to the beach. You know something really exciting. So paul baran then publishes reliable digital communications systems using unreliable network repeater nodes the first of a series of papers that proposed the designed for distributed networks using packet switching. And we'll talk about that for a second. Method used to this day to transmit information over the internet and then a little later. Donald davies the. Uk's national physical laboratory or n. P. l. independently developed the same idea. So there's a little bit of like linear here So while baron used the term message blocks for his units of communication davies. Use the term packets so i was like what the hell is packet. Switching so packet switching is essentially and i. I used the the metaphor of of charlie and the chocolate factory. Ok you know mike. Tv how said the tv you're broken up into little pieces gets reassembled on the other side. That's basically what packet switching is with. Data the pieces get sent over in smaller pieces because they can travel over greater distances being smaller and then they get reassembled on the other side so that's packet switching s perfect. I'm gonna get a lot of emails. Okay so. Jc are lick lighter so jc are lick lighter. He was known as either. Jc are like friends. Call them lick several shame. I guess it's shorter than say j. C. r. guess so or just like yourself jim anyway He became the director of the newly-established information processing techniques office. Or the ipo within the us. Defense department's advanced research projects agency or darpa. So then robert. Taylor becomes the director of the information processing techniques office. Pto in nineteen sixty six and he intended to realize lighters idea of an interconnected networking system so he proposes to his boss the arpanet so the advanced research projects agency net which is a network that would connect the different projects that arpaio was sponsoring so a way to like keep everything together and at the time each project has its own specialized terminal and unique set of user commands so in order to talk to each terminal you had to physically go to the computer terminal that only spoke to that individual one so he was like what if we just had one computer that connected to everything and that was arpanet basically bam bam so there were like great. I love this. So they awarded. Arba awarded the contract to build this network to bolt beranek and newman or bbn technologies. And they're involved in the early stages of the internet in a major way and so all mentioned them like a bunch of times so the first arpanet link was established between the university of california los angeles and the stanford research institute at twenty to thirty hours on october. Twenty ninth nineteen. Sixty-nine the first message was the word log in that's boring. I know it's super boring computer guys. I was necessary to jump. It wasn't the first text message. Merry christmas oh. I don't know maybe it was being at least that s something. Yeah or what. Does it come here. I need you. That's the one for the telephone log in. Yeah right fine. at least it's easy to remember. Yeah i message sent over. The internet is the message lock-in so sent over arpanet between the network node at ucla and a second one at sri. So leonard kline rock of ucla said at the ucla and they typed in the l. and asked sri by phone if they received it got the l. Came the voice reply. Ucla typed in the. Oh asked if they got it and received got the oh. ucla then typed in the g. And the darn system crashed boy the beginning on the second attempt. It worked fine so by the end of that year. Four host computers connected together in the initial arpanet so this was like the beginning of of the end. Basically
Social media CEOs to face grilling from Republican senators
"The top executives from Facebook Twitter and Google have been summoned to testify before a congressional committee today about alleged political bias some lawmakers on the Senate commerce committee think the big social media giants are suppressing conservative religious and anti abortion views on their platforms the allegations increase this month after the New York Post published an unverified story about Joe Biden and his son's business activities which most other media outlets did not so after being threatened with subpoenas mark Zuckerberg Jack Dorsey and Google soon DARPA chai will be grilled about what they post and what they suppress senators will also explore proposals to revise legal protections for online speech which critics say allows social media platforms to avoid having to filter out questionable content Jackie Quinn Washington
Whats Next for the U.S. Air Forces Next Generation Air Dominance Program
"I'm wondering if you can kind of go back and tell us what is next generation air dominance, and where did that program emerged from? How did we get from nowhere to a demonstrator because didn't just happen like that. Well, it it. It seemed to I. Mean You know when? Roper is Dr over the essence secretary of the Air Force Brat Position Technology Logistics. Announced very abruptly yesterday during his speech that this flight demonstrator had flown I. think that everybody by surprise I wasn't expecting that kind of announcement during his speech today and It's exciting I mean I. I can't be as as an aviation aerospace journalist with an interest in military aviation I mean this that's the that's as good as it gets a secret of flight demonstrator for new fighter that you. You hear about the first time it's confirmed that there's nothing more exciting except for actually seeing it, which I hope we see when they but it turns out. I. Mean there there is a paper trail there's a, there's a little breadcrumbs that have been sprinkled. Along the path of public comments, I air force leaders over the past couple years leading to this, and some of them have only become sensible in retrospect now that we know that this thing really does exist. But in some ways are actually quite explicit and I think I'd point initially to an exchange ahead with journal Goldfine who just retired a month ago but a year ago at the same event even though it wasn't virtual at the time, it was in Bersin. Gerald goldfine chief of staff had a press conference I was asking about next generation air dominance in my big question was about the propulsion side of it congress at the time was was expressing quite a bit of frustration with the air force because it's been billions of dollars on adapted cycle propulsion, and there was no publicly available roadmap to use it, and so they're saying. Why are you still asking for this money? We have no place to put it. You know. So tell us where you're going to put A. I, put that question to many explain what you know. It's it's bit difficult because there's a live classification while tennis and so there's only so much. We can say they said L. L. Region his exact quote he said he's here's our. Strategy. We have five key technologies that were investing in that we don't intend to have all come together on a single. To be able to do the mission. In the future, we expect these technologies to be adaptable to existing platforms, and we expect these technologies to come forward into a family. I, know use family assistance a lot but really, and truly that's the next generation dominance. So as a so our intent is to keep these joint technologies moving aggressively and have them come together. They will all mature in accelerate at different paces as they become ready. You'll see US adapting them on existing platforms, sensors, and weapons, and also looking at new platforms sensors. So that was what he said and then I I didn't understand what really what he was getting out. I just didn't he didn't answer my question. So I repeated my question. What is the you know? When are we going to see a roadmap for adaptive cycle propulsion? And he his answer was there has to be a test article to be able to take some of those technologies to mature. That's probably about as far as I can go in quote right so what he was saying they're in retrospect is we have five technologies. We're GONNA put on in Gad. He didn't say but sounds like adaptive cycle propulsion is one of them and You know they need a test article, a flight test demonstrator in other words. To validate the majority of the technologies in-flight. So. That was almost as explicit as the air force has been about that. But really there was a time when. The Department of Defense was even more explicit about the the plans to actually use flight demonstrators for next generation are dominant and it goes back Congressional testimony in twenty sixteen at the time Frank Kendall who was the Under Secretary of defense for Acquisition and technology a acquisition technology in the justice. It has written testimony. included this written test, the House of Representatives. twenty. This was actually in calendar year twenty fourteen and it was going to launch a program in. Fiscal year. Twenty fifty. and. It was the aerospace innovation initiative that would be managed by the defensive ends. agency Darpa. Anna says the A I- Aerospace Innovation Initiative includes a new program to demonstrate advanced aircraft technologies in explains. As, well, as the ongoing previously mentioned advanced engine technology, which is adapted cycle. A. I is goals include strengthening. The critically important design teams in the defense industrial base reducing lead. Time. For Feature Systems the explains will not be engineering. Development Prototypes for have residual operational capabilities. The results successful the development and demonstration explain program will inform future aircraft acquisitions. So that gives you a sort of the background on how these. flight demonstrators came into existence and what their purpose walls. We know from Rocha's comments that the flight demonstrator that he's referring to be called a full-scale flight demonstrator so as a subscale or Even, a large aircraft that is meant to extrapolate the flying qualities of even of an even larger aircraft. So You know but there's still a lot we we don't know about it but that's generally the gist of how we got
A Look at Bird Strike Countermeasures
"Obviously, bird strikes against you feel like this is an issue but it is right and these things especially. If. It's like a goose I mean, that's a I don't know what twelve pound object getting hit by something going for and miles per hour. Well, what what is, what is the damage like here and how do they? What is the technology keeping US safe from safe from these bird menaces it really is testing. That's what it is and designing for the regulatory requirements. So the regulatory criminal for aircraft for twenty five aircraft which are trying to transport category or. Larger business jets is a four pound bird I think is going at VC So that's a pretty fast speed. I'm electrical guy not a structural person but. Those tests are super destructive, and if you ever, you can go online and go on Youtube and see bird strike tests I've seen the other crazy it as look like they become liquid hitting these. Oh Yeah. Everything becomes at that speed is so much energy. Being dispersed in such a short span of time that biscuit the turn Jello. And it Kinda. It kinda it absorbs into the structure in which is running into, and then there's really no way. Today we actually have some competition ways to predict the amount of damage that recur, but we still do testing. So it's sort of a computational I look, and then we followed up with some validation testing. But as we have done that the last several years, we kinda get more and more. So the computational side. But? It's very easy to see aircraft that was struck by birds and the level of damage because it usually is not just one bird usually they're flying into a grouping birds. So birds hit windshields knows Rome spurts, wings, Burns, hidden vertical stabilisers, or horizontal stabilisers. burs being adjusted into engines are a huge problem because you can. On a wing, you can penetrate that leading edge and get into the thing. They got a fuel got fuel coming out right on an engine. It's going to go through that engine and you can lose or maybe maybe worn more than one bird typically but you can lose that particular engine and just like you're talking about with sully where they had birds go in and both engines in Las both engines so. It's. It's a really serious thing in if around airports that have bird probes and it tends to be at least in our part of the World Canadian geese that migrate want to hang out at the end of the runway. You'll see things like these noise canons, propane cannons at fire off once a minute to encourage the burs lands somewhere else because at a Canadian geese is bigger than a four. Pampered. Right So if you hit something that's obviously hopefully, you're catching it closer to the crown where you're going to get slower speed. So the energy last but the amount of damage that can occur bird impact is substantial substantial to the point where now we do a lot of testing to make sure that the bird can't bring down an airplane but still in the sully situation burs going both engine just really not much you're gonna be able to do their. The FAA puts up notices about where birds are. Philadelphia had a problem for a while. So yeah, it's it's really really serious, but it happens pretty often a lot more. It happens more often than lightning strikes in my opinion early, the damage more visible the lightning strikes because it is a debt left somewhere. On, the aircraft when shield knows radio. All over all over well so these engines are pulling in so much air and creating so much thrust. Create like vortex where a is more likely to go into the engineer or not really so much everything's happening. So fast I, mean you can kind of suck it in if it's if it's not directly in that lie in that line it can definitely could pull it in just grab. Yeah. It can kind of graphics. They do have some Massar but it's the engines pulling so much air sucking so much Erin to it it's it's like a vacuum just going to say anything it's around it into it So the engine manufacturers, Ge's Pratt and Whitney's the. Royce look at that as part of the one of their certification task is to validate what has a bird. Goes to the engine because what you don't. WanNa do is. Start loosening the heavy rotating parts of the rotors. Rhoda per situation. So not knowing you lose a bird, but then he got this flying grenade of an engine blowing holes in the wing and the fuselage and tail, and all this other stuff causes other problems. So it's it's a really serious certification thing but when we don't think about that much. I don't think of all the years I don't think about an aircraft has actually struck a bird I've seen damage from it but close but I don't think I've been an airplanes actually struck a bird. Have you ever been an airplane? That's? Not. What it now now makes me very nervous. So. Limited have my eye out for these birds album. I worry about it with a Canadian geese are or this large flocks in occasionally see it editor ports as you drive into an airport like There's a large flock of whatever geese hanging out down here. That probably smarter hope not taking off in that direction today.
The U.S. Hypersonics Program Matures
"We're here because really in the span of a couple of weeks, our knowledge of the US hypersonic weapons program is significantly expanded and a lot of these disparate pieces that we have been tracking are falling into place. Steve. been at the forefront of reporting a lot of these developments. Can you summarize the highlights for us? Right well, just to kind of give you a a an update Eh cross the entire spectrum because it's a huge portfolio. So let's go back to March that was the last flight test hypersonic flight tests that the DOD has has carried out with that was with the blog zero common hypersonic lied body. That's the glide body that's going to be the front end for the army's long range hypersonic weapon and the Navy's intermediate range, conventional prom strike, which is summering launch missile. That was a successful flight test It was later described by president trump as a as the super duper missile We were trying to figure out what that was, but that according to CNN's reporting. That's that's what he was referring to. At the time. The Air Force meanwhile has got a couple of different programs. Ongoing one is the AGM one, eighty, three A. Rapid Response Weapon Lockheed Martin design for for both the front front end and the integration, and they did a captive carry flight tests that would appear to be pretty successful just a couple of weeks ago and they are moving that into flight test with the FRONTON actually incorporating the design from the tactical boost glide program from Darpa that was supposed to be an independent separate. Well, not quite there. They are linked that was supposed to be a separate flight test program that they've now folded that into the aero vehicle design and will continue testing that through era there. was also on the Hawk programs. That's the next set of flight tests that are supposed to be happening That's hypersonic everything weapon concepts which is basically a scream jet powered cruise missile There's a Lockheed version and Raytheon version We know back in May that the Lockheed attempted to do a captive carry test with their version of the Hawk missile but there was some kind of failure during the flight test We still don't know exactly what it, what it was but it appeared to be somewhat damaging and but since then we hit me for nothing about. where. They're going with that except for the fact that the Air Force a few weeks ago, launched a follow on program to develop an operational prototype. Jet Powered cruise missile that you know would be a follow on to the the program But in the competition Air Force basically selected three companies a couple of weeks ago to form the competitive field for the follow on Hawk missile and those three companies are Lockheed Raytheon and Boeing. Which of course, the interesting part there is Boeing locking Raytheon are heavily involved in the Arrow Program and the TV g program and Hawk program, but Boeing has been shut out. So this gives them a chance to come back into the hypersonic Arena for at one point buying of course, was the sort of champion in especially in the air breathing propulsion space with the x fifty one program, and if you go way back I'm sure guy could could chime in on on these programs would be like the space shuttle and fifteen with Boeing's legacy companies so. That kind of brings us up to speed with where we are right now.
Grilled by Lawmakers, Big Tech Turns Up the Gaslight
"Everything all week just to give you the top five stories, and this week we're going to kick it off with the four major tech CEOs appearing before Congress. And as I looked at it, and as I watched the bits and pieces of it, it started to remind me of something, and I thought, What was that? What is that? I looked up in Webster's dictionary online, the definition of gas lighting. You know what that means? Gas lighting. It's a form of psychological manipulation. Distorting the truth. To confuse aren't still doubt is the official definition until the other person questions reality. Because there they were Amazon's Jeff because those apples Tim Cook, Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg and Google soon DARPA Che telling Congress why they shouldn't be broken up where they should be regulated. So America's CEO censors who for years have spied on all of us in a cellar data, and you tell this to be true, But Jeff Bezos actually said the on ly things People trust more than amazon dot com. Is their personal position and the U. S military, really. He's got AA lot of high hopes and not very humble opinion of himself, which I said that users clearly don't want to be tracked by those little bits of code called cookies, but Wait a minute. Didn't last year he have a speech where he defended them. Yes, he did. As a matter of fact, As for Tim Cook, he only got 30 questions compared to 60. The other Fab forgot. I guess they all like their iPhones there on the hill. And then there's Mark Zuckerberg, who argue that Facebook is not a monopoly, even though members of Congress Reference 2012 when Facebook bread they comprise 95% of all social media. And that's also right around the time that they purchased Instagram, which Zuckerberg considered a threat. He also did not remember paying teens to spy on them through Facebook research that app Which wasn't even two years ago. Maybe Mark needs little protection, don't you think? Well, the problem with these hearings is that the tech leaders or tech prose, and the folks at the hearing's not so much. One guy actually asked a question Mark Zuckerberg because he thought that Facebook on Twitter Goessling at its best, folks. Alright, Number
Big tech CEOs testify before Congress
"So, this hearing just going to say it, it was six hours of chaos. So. So many things like individual moments of pure chaos happened this hearing. But because every member of Congress was only given five minutes to ask the questions in and they moved on, no one could process the moments of cash. So here are some things that happened during this hearing. Jeff. bezos just started eating nuts on his call. That was just a thing that you started snacking for the first ninety minutes. It appears that basis had tech issues was operating in some kind of delay. So we didn't hear from him. They just answer any questions and they'd take a ten minute break Jeff. bezos could fix his computer. Amazing. Jim Jordan, who McKenna pointed out. On the show last week is always sort of chaos element. Try to talk over several members of Congress got yelled to put his mass back on floated. Just elaborate conspiracy theories. was when I say was chaos I. Don't know if there's any other way to describe it. I. Think that led a lot of people to think the hearing itself didn't accomplish its goals, but I think in many ways it did. But Kennedy you WanNa Kinda go through what the committee was trying to accomplish the themes they were pointed at in. How hearing played out, right. So okay. First off. Harkening back to last week I mentioned Jim. Jordan's mountain dew obsession. Definitely drink a handful those throughout the hearing I took notes in screen shots. So, I, called it. But regardless of their pores soda choices, there were a lot of lawmakers who definitely did their homework and I think that was really apparent throughout the entire hearing and when I look at. The picture that they tried to paint I think that became really clear in chairman Sicily's opening statements. So this is the guy who liked. And spearheaded the entire investigation from the beginning, and in those opening statements, he pointed out that yeah Apple Amazon Google facebook. There are different in a lot of ways and they exhibit anticompetitive behaviors potentially allegedly and a lot of different ways. But what they tried to pull together and was a story, and it's really hard to tell a story and five minute fragments. But what happened yesterday was Sicily. Ni, and a lot of the Democrats on the Committee wanted to point out that these companies they become bottlenecks for distribution whether that's information or just like APP stores marketplace's they control what gets distributed in how what was really key to the investigation was how? How they survey competitors. If you have so much control dominance over a market or a specific part of the tech industry, you have a lot of insight into your competitors and you can do a lot of dangerous things with that, and then lastly, after that dominance has gained, it's how they abuse it. Right? How they abuse it to make harder for small businesses in competitors and I think that's exactly what Cellini pointed out in the beginning and I think they did a poor job that storytelling throughout the process. But I think that's also our job. Right is to pull that evidence together and tell that story for them in a way that isn't like. Yes, no yelling at CEOS and like stopping them and I think by getting that in the evidentiary record doing all this questioning, I think they really did achieve their goal in the end. Yeah. I mean, I think the thing that happened sort of next to the hearing was that they released a bunch of documents from these one point, three, million documents of clutch. Over the past year, they released pretty targeted selection documents for every company showing some of this stuff, Casey, I wrote a story about. facebook. INSTAGRAM. My I'm going to frame this email or mark Zuckerberg. Literally one sentence, no period. The Andrew says I need to figure out. I'M GONNA buy instagram like I would love to just be in a place were sending that email like super casually like I got this thing to figure out and it's not like am I gonNa buy the model of the car. It's like instagram. I've been thinking of the text messages where so and so says that Mark Zuckerberg's didn't go destroy mode on instagram ever since they got that up. Case she this to Kevin and right that text was. Yes. Well, it was Kevin. System was talking to an investor and Kevin said to the investor. If we don't sell well, mark, go into destroy mode on us and the investor side probably. Of course, stray casual. So there's just a lot of documents and I think one of the functions of hearing was to get those documents into the official congressional record to make the CEO's account for them. That did not seem very successful to me. Is like a takeaway people should have from this hearing, right? No. I think a lot of people that go into these hearings are expecting like these big Gotcha moments and expecting like a lot of news and all this stuff. But it really, it wasn't oversight hearing. You know it wasn't. They didn't come. They came at this like in a report last earlier this week that they came out at as investigators. They didn't come at it to make a big show horse and pony show out of it, and yet I think the CEO's didn't. The record well enough to the extent that they could have. But there was definitely, I was expecting them to do a lot less evasion and I expected a lot less room probation with the documents, but it's just the process of a Congressional hearing. It's. It's hard to do that in a congressional hearing. But if you put those documents out there, you get the CEO's on the record a little bit who does excite this excites the FTC. J, and that's who can take this next and then it's also congress. You know they can't break up a tech company, but they can regulate going forward and it's those three key themes that I pointed out earlier that they could regulate. You know what I mean. They could legislate to forbid companies from surveying competitors and things like that, and that's where this goes. So the format of the hearing, every member and five minute chunks, it seemed very clear that the Democrats had some sort of coordinated evidentiary strategy, they would start and. And they would say, I, want to read this email to you. What did you mean by this email and then Jeff bezos would say something like I have. No idea is on works. I. Was real pattern that developed was basis really not doing or claiming he definitely knows claiming not really no way Wayne is under the thing they did or they would ask sooner Pichai about the very granular add deal google made by an ad product, and soon I, would say I'll get back to you, which is basically all responses. So the Democrats seemed like they were coordinated to move through their documents. The Republicans seem to be doing something else that also seem coordinated intentional, but what was their focus because that seemed clear split my takeaway from Jim Jordan who? We got into earlier, he he was interviewing. As if they were all Jack Dorsey. And as we talked about like, yeah, he invited Jack Dorsey to testify, but he doesn't sit on the antidote subcommittees. Anything. He says, it just doesn't matter. So it sounded to me as if he prepared questions Jack Dorsey and then it was like, oh, he's not coming I'll ask Tim Cook the same questions. Another completely crazy moment that happened just seen by and five minute chunks is that. Represented Sensenbrenner from Wisconsin Dear Sweet Wisconsin. Definitely. Asked Mark Zuckerberg why the Donald Junior was banned from twitter and mark. Zuckerberg was happening on twitter facebook and there was just like a moment of confused silence, and then he tried to move on and that just sort of floated by in the river of chaos to tell you how much chaos there was kneeling. When you started to tell that story, I thought you were going to tell the story about when Jim Jordan asked him cook if the famous one, thousand, nine, hundred, four, Apple Super Bowl, AD was actually about twenty twenty cancel culture, which is another thing that really happened. I think that's out of context. He didn't ask him. He said clearly, this is. That's definitely what Steve Jobs was thinking IBM is canceled culture and Apple's going to break it with hammer and Jeff. Bezos said that social media is a nuance destruction machine and all this crazy stuff from that. It was a wild will that that particular question when Jim Jordan asked, do you support the cancel culture mov, you could see the CEOS like. 'cause they went in order. He asks them all in order. So First Tim Cook just like basically muttered nothing. Here's like I don't. I support speech whatever. The iphone a keyboard like that was his answer. Sooner per child also, just like muttered, right? He's like Google has always supported free expression Zuckerberg like saw the opportunity and took it and the forces of liberalism I rising I, and then basis was like I cannot. I cannot do in like went for it, and that was just totally insane moment. But it also seems like the Republicans were intentional to try to create their own moments where they were yelling at CEOS about bias on platforms is obviously something cover a. At. You were paying a lot of attention that case you're paying a lot of attention to it. Do you think that was effective in creating because you know there's like a parallel conservative Universe Jim? Jordan was on Tucker. Carlson. Last night like was that effective or d think that the CEO's were able to sort of tamp down on interesting the Tucker Carlson pointed out that Google and other companies are all big donors to Jim Jordan another folks. So that is a weird side, but I think it was actually besides the moment where they mixed up twitter with facebook I. Think this was much more effective off. Off Topic yelling about technology than we usually see like are genuinely issues that like they are upset about that, they could point to largely around like cove nineteen misinformation and they could at least like pick those topics and stick to them rather than kind of asking vague questions about like, why is my phone listening to me? Well, they're definitely asked questions about why are my campaign emails getting filtered by G mail? Yes. I should. I should mention that they have really and they have all of these cases where they ask about extremely specific one off incidents that anyone who has used social media knows happens constantly. And, then turn them into a sinister pattern. But I think they managed to come off as sounding more like they understood what they were talking about the unusual. I think that was a real theme of the hearing, Casey. What did you think of this sort of bias side show that occurred? Well, I mean the the idea that conservative voices are being suppressed is foundational to the conservative movement and is behind the rise of conservative talk radio. It was behind the rise of Fox News. Now that social media exists, we have seen it in this new form, but it is sort of being presented as extra, sinister and worthy of. Some sort of legislative intervention what frustrates me about it is that much more than newspapers or or cable news like Mark Zuckerberg Dorsey. These people benefit hugely from having all possible voices on their platform. None of them is incentivized to drive conservatives off their platform. What they are incentivized to do is have rules that make the place safe and welcoming. So that people want to hang out there and so to the extent that there are issues on the platform, they've largely come because these platforms have rules. And you know you would think that a bunch of free marketeers would realize that the alternative to the system that they're so mad about would be creating a new system, but they don't seem at all interested in doing that. So I just sort of dismissed all of them as charlatans I actually thought it was interesting that the opposite track came up, which was the Stop Hey for profit campaign I kind of wasn't expecting that. The representative Raskin I believe asked facebook. Basically, why aren't you kicking more hate speech off. I forget who else asked like look is the point that you're so big. You don't care about advertiser boycotts I. Mean, you know it will here. Here is a fact that the number one complaint that facebook gets from its users, the thing that users. About. FACEBOOK is that it removes too much content and so if you're running the place, you do have to take these complaints seriously in a way. Right? It might not be you know that you shadow band conservative whatever that even means on social network in twenty twenty. But the fact that you're removing content is really upsetting people. So you can't dismiss that idea entirely, but I still don't feel like we're having that intellectually honest conversation about it. So this was definitely I feel like you can connect the you control distribution. We're GONNA show the abuses of power narrative. We got other. Democrats. With the you control distribution. You're banning conservatives right like I. Think what's Sensenbrenner Again, cups and conservatives are consumers to is that people don't realize that like fifty percent of the population in many ways. But facebook has like famous conservatives working its highest levels Kevin. We last week, we're talking about Kevin Roose keeps sharing the list. List of the most engaged content from crowd tangle. It's all conservative content, and that's so problematic for facebook that they're. They're pushing back with other metrics and graphs of their own, making the facts just aren't there, but it doesn't seem to be convincing. Brett Kevin is being asked to recuse himself from facebook case because he's like best friends with facebook I, AP I wrote a column almost two years ago. Now, arguing that conservatives were trying to redefine. Any conservative identified person having any unwanted outcome on a social network, right? So bias is your name was higher than mine in search results. Bias is used suggested that I follow a Democrat and not a Republican right, and if you take action on your policies that apply to everyone against me a conservative that is biased against conservatives, right. So and by the way I have to say this has been hugely successful because we've talked about it. How many minutes now and the longer that these discussions. Discussions. Go on. They just sort of refi people's minds. The idea that there really is a vast conspiracy to silence conservative speech because he's networks are so big millions of conservatives are having experiences like this every day, and now there is an ideology that is basically a religion for them to attach to, which is although Silicon Valley liberals are out to get. Reason I wanted to talk about the conservative side show, which in many ways was a circus is it feels like the notion that we should be punitive to the companies or mad at the company's. Bipartisan, right we were. We were not looking at a hearing where the Democrats were on the attack. Republicans are saying we love. Apple. We're looking at hearing where they were. Everyone was mad. There are a couple of exceptions to that. There were a couple of I think sensenbrenner and a few other folks were like look we want to be clear. Big is not bad. We just WANNA make sure we're not punishing you for your success, but you were like almost entirely, right? Yeah. I. Mean I. think that's it's important to. To capture that mood like Jeff Bezos Mark Zuckerberg, Tim, Cook soon. Darpa, try they usually get to finish whatever sentence they start saying. Right. They're not used to being interrupted. Their thoughts are usually like you know they get to live in complete sentences and people take them seriously here in five in intervals, they were interrupted almost every time they started speaking to be told that they were wrong that they were filibuster at one point Sicily said stop thinking is for the questions. We can just assume they're all good questions. They. Were getting yelled at and they're going yell that about a variety of things that were pretty specific. So you kind of in your kind of structure here. The first one was controlling distribution. What did you hear as a hearing went on the indicated to that? The committee had a case here? I think the apple's APP store is one thing you know charging thirty percent cuts on certain things is just controlling an APP store. It's the same thing with Amazon's marketplace. They can inherently in control what gets placed and what gets sold and you know if they want to play with search results on Amazon, they can do that, and then on facebook and Google, it's not just like products and software that's information. And it could be information when it's like Google. Google. Stealing yelps, texture views right in putting those in its little info boxes in search queries in facebook if facebook is just like an. Mation, distribution platform and. It can decide Algorithm Mickley. Knowingly. What people get to see this bution was very keen to the committee's hearing yesterday and they pointed out different aspects in which you know each company exhibited that kind of behavior. So the one that will you bring up apple? We wrote about this, say there's much emails. Apples document production is just one hundred and thirty pages of unrelated emails and whatever order see it's like scan through it. So there's a lot of little stories in there. There's one about right to repair and apple realizing it needed to repair. By watching PR people operate by reading their emails journalists. Very entertaining. They're like we had a break like here's our strategy. Here's we're GONNA. That's all in there. You can look at it, but there's a lot about the APP store itself and how they're going to use the mechanics of the APP store to control their platform, and it started at the beginning like the first emails in this production from twenty, ten there. From Phil, Schiller Steve Jobs saying, are we GONNA? Let Amazon Sell Books in the kindle store. Store, it felt like I saw an Amazon ad was hard to watch this hard to watch this ad where a person's reading a book on an iphone in the kindle APP in the pick up an android phone keep reading. He's like literally like it was hard to watch like Schiller's at home like pain what a customer is having an experience that good it really just. Heart and so he's like it was hard to watch. You fours Steve Jobs. They're like we gotta shut it down jobs is the bookstore will be the only bookstore on the APP. Store. That's the way it's going to be everyone's gotta used to it. We know that restricting payments will hurt other things, but that's what we're doing and they started there in two thousand ten and they pulled it out, and then that ladders up into everything that we've seen with, hey, ladders up into the analysis group showing up to. Apple, can pay them to say that there's independent study has revealed. Everybody has a thirty percent cut. It has landed up into Tim Cook, forwarding. He gets a letters from developers that are in this direction. It's like apples breaking my heart and he just like Ford's it. Tim, Cook forwards that email to filter credit eighty, just as thoughts like amazing like they are constantly thinking about the APP store as a mechanism of control for the platform in the leverage and other deals. So the other one was apple is this Amazon one which I have very mixed feelings on saying that this is bad or legal I'm curious for all of your thoughts famously. Did, not have the prime video APP on the Apple TV and all these other places apple, Amazon came to a deal. There's an entire presentation in this production like the slide deck of how the deal is going to work. Apple got to be the preferred seller of its own product. So third parties cancel. Apple. Products, Amazon pages, they got. They have a custom by flow. They've custom product pages, all the stuff in return. Amazon got a lower commission on the APP store and gets to Selatan products which no. No like you can rent a movie from the Amazon APP on the Apple TV, no one else gets to it in one world. This is just pure platform collision, right? Apple cut VIP deal for big companies because it wanted something and you could say this is legal in another world. It's like this is how deals work apple something valuable. Amazon s something valuable and they came to a conclusion wherever made more money and quite frankly the consumer experience platform has got better. How do you read that? Casey? That is good and fair analysis of it. I. Think I did read slightly more scandalous. Tones into it in part because apple would never acknowledge that some developers are more important to it than others even though if you assume that that's true, I think maybe one of the things that's frustrating about it is there is no transparency accountability around which developers get sweetheart deals is that once you hit a certain threshold of revenue will cut your price. Why couldn't they extend that deal to everyone right? Or is it just if we withhold something that seems particularly valuable, we can eventually drag you to the table. Table, which is sort of what seems like happened here. I think in all cases, what I'm always looking for is the accountability, right like and some sense of of equitable treatment of developers and I understand the guys are always going to get the best treatment, but it can that be publicly visible. Can it be acknowledged and there'd be routes for others to achieve that same level of success and treatment, and that I'll just seems missing here. Did you buy Tim Co? He said it twice. It was obviously A. Glimmer, of sympathy for all four CEOS. There is a lot of reporting that they had spent months preparing for this hearing like being grilled there, they'd hire outside law firms. They. Practiced they all clearly had soundbites memorized in none of them. Got To say him because it kept getting interrupted. Tim Cook had this one where he is like if we're the gatekeepers, the gates are open wider than ever. We've gone from five hundred. APPS to one point seven, he said like. A whole speech. and. The thing is there's fierce competition for developers. They don't like our store can do for android the windows. For xbox and PS. Four. Which I was like the idea that adobe is going to be like we don't want to be on the IPAD. Here's PS. Four Photoshop is insanity to me. I'm going to build a spreadsheet. APP. For the five. That's how frustrated with Tim Cook. To that ring. True to you I. Mean, there's no, it does not ring true. There is a, there is a duopoly. In the United States when it comes to smartphones, iphones have majority share in the United States and you can't say, well, you know there's there's a rogue fork of android in Malaysia that you could go develop for if you really wanted to and have that come across as a credible argument to Americans. Right it is. Natural for any monopolist to spend most of its time, arguing that it is much smaller and much less consequential as as you think it is and they're essentially always asking you to ignore what is in front of your face, which is that they are the giant. They are in control. What they say goes, and it doesn't matter which small businesses get hurt along the. The. Way I would point out that the contact and we're gonNA talk about earnings eventually. But the context for that is apple had its biggest third quarter ever this month, their revenues went up eleven percent year over year, they're making obviously making billions of dollars in their services revenue, which is a lot of the narrative around the APP stores increasing that services line. Also went up. I think it was thirteen billion. So you're right. They're very big in their earnings the day after the hearing did nothing. To reduce that impression. I want to switch to Amazon a little bit McKenna. You really focused Amazon was basis first time up there. They came at him a lot about marketplace. How did you think that went I think it went pretty good. I. Think. John Paul specifically was just like killer her questions with breakout star. Yeah. She was just like killer and she's the representative for. SEATTLE. So this is where Amazon is right. So she just like killed it and. And I think there were a couple of instances in the documents and in questioning yesterday that really pulled important things out there was like testimony from one bookseller who was like, yeah. We just can't sell a category of books and we don't know why Amazon doesn't let us do that just like testimony like that or even when it comes to like acquisitions, the ring acquisition especially, I wrote about that today through the documents and how. They said, this is for market position. This is a for technology, your talent or anything. We just bought this and that's something that base said again, yesterday he was just very clear. It's like, yeah, we do buy things market position, which is like so insane just here like the richest person in the world. But like, yeah, we're buying market position. It's just what happens. That's another one I have mixed feelings right, and by the way, people should read McKenna story because those documents have just a very funny breakdown like the pros and cons of buying. Buying ring in many of the cons like what if this turns into nest, which if you're just the verge cast listeners like it's just like the Keyword Bingo, but it's fine to say, we're buying market position like this isn't the best product out there, but it's the category of video. doorbells is not huge, right? So to by the the market leader in video doorbells is maybe the most rational use of the money. What is the problem that you think the committee was trying to show an address sense of we're just going to market position. Pointing out, they can just do whatever they want and how casual it is, and there really isn't. It's really funny to read an email like that, and we could buy it or we could just copy it or are. We could just watch. You know that was one of the emails that base from someone. Those are just three options you know and it's like just pick and choose you know. Pointed out like a lot. Just that email itself really pointed out just how easy it is for them. They used a lot of that time history to talk about copycat behaviors and to talk about just like you know buying up competitors and it just seeing that all in one little e mail having to do with the ring was like really i. think it was really kind of I opening and especially like useful for the committee. So Amazon got hit a lot for the data collection side of it of copying competitors. bezos did not seem to have great answers there. Right. So that's the. The thing they got in trouble with this. There is that Wall Street. Journal article from like April where employees were literally like, yeah. We dip into data and we use that to guide our own private label products and everybody was like Whoa and Amazon basins. Yesterday said, well, we do have a policy that bans that but giant pointed out yesterday. It's like, okay. So what's your enforcement look like you can have the policy, but like if you don't enforce it, then it's like meaningless. And then yesterday I. Think Paul was like, can you give me a yes or no answer? Do you dip into data and he's like I can't I can't give you. Yes or no, and we're just like we're looking into it. The story had anonymous sources. So that isn't very helpful to us. You know what I mean. So that was one of the main things and that Wall Street Journal article and I think it's the same kind of examples in the committee's documents. They point out specific examples like car trunk, organizers of all things. It's like weird little products like Amazon's like this is a little hot. Maybe we should do that. So I, I think. I, think they made a good case yesterday. Yesterday on that. Yeah. I mean bezos brought up that Wall Street Journal, Article himself twice, and he was like, well, your policy against it. But I can't guarantee never happened. Then there is a strange just didn't come across clear I. Think I know what the committee was trying to get at their like US aggregate seller data when there's only three sellers and then only to sellers? Yes, I. Think what they're getting at is when you're down to the aggregate data of two companies, you heard effectively looking at individual data. What is the problem? They're like the I get what you're doing. You're just reducing the denominator to get to one, but like it, why is that particular problem? Right? Well, none of these. Dipping into individual seller data and looking at aggregate data. That's not a legal. There is no law. This is all voluntary of Amazon. So they have a voluntary policy where like we can't do individual seller data, but they say nothing against aggregate and aggregate what you're getting at eight. Here you is. Does the same thing if it's just like some goofy little product they. They bring up pop stock. It's all the time before pop tops in a moment. Right? There's only like one pop. So company like you know pop soggy, it was kind of an innovative product. It's like well, if there's only two of them and use the aggregate data, you you you have everything you need to know you know about that product line looking aggregate. If that's what you decide to qualify as do you as you're looking through the other Amazon documents and other stuff. So anything jump out at you is something the committee was trying to prove or get at. The questioning seemed very focused on. Like are you using the state at a copy products? Are you buying things? You shouldn't buy. There's one question which I did not understand why came up about DMC. Take downs on twitch and Jeff as just had this look of panic in his eyes. He's like I don't know man I bought Wedge because my kids want to. Do something like that was like the side show stuff, but the real focus here, it just seemed like it was definitely in the marketplace, right? Amazon, everyone came at Amazon for the marketplace. That's what everybody knows him as like they have all these little sides. They got rain. They got Alexa Alexa was one thing too. That was kind of interesting. It's like. Are you buying things like ring to put Alexa into and dislike expand your like Titan Ism as like an Internet Internet connected home. Thing and make that more closed off and walled gardening. That was one thing. But no, it was just focusing on how much power they have to kind of change. What happens in the marketplace to kind of decide what companies in what products are able to come up on the first page of results. You know that's also something that they dug into Google and in something that one of those like themes that kind of ties everything together. We should say they all spend a lot of time talking about counterfeit goods, and why is it Amazon removed? Fake stuff from the platform and how much is it profiting off of you know selling pick rolexes? Is it surprising? The whole foods didn't show up at all they're. Like that is a really massive thing. Amazon owns that. Is it moving into a huge new product category? I think whole foods is not an online marketplace, which was the title of the hearing, not that that restricted anybody from doing anything except that, one of the things Amazon says is we have lots of competition from offline marketplaces, right? Brought up kroger a lot I mean, this is the case he's point. They all made. It seem like they were beset at any moment. They could be crushed by the likes of stop and Shop Right? Like I think the point though was really on the. Digital. Experience Consumers have and like I, don't know Ho-. Foods fits. Into that narrative, especially, because it is itself not dominant like they bought it because you needed to grow in their. Good at that at my question for you on the Amazon stuff was when you think about, we talk about two thirty a lot right like you and I in particular spent a lot time to thirty, which regulates with the platform can do with content. There's not really an equivalent of two thirty for goods on store. Right like there's some case is out there saying like you're liable for what what happens on your online store page, but Amazon doesn't have that like second order of like Messi nece around it that twitter and facebook to with two thirty, I. Mean, it gets invoked a lot for marketplace's, but it's way messier. Well, I just wanted to like this question at counterfeits question about ranking the store like they are even more free than any twitter is to to sort tweets algorithm. Algorithm clear to modern like it just their store. Do you think that they're like that Algorithm transparency? Your wire things ranked. Did you catch a sense that that's where the regulation is GonNa go. So much of the conversation around Amazon really felt like it was individuals sellers being wronged for reasons of Amazon being unresponsive or stealing. It's data. So I don't know it didn't. It didn't seem like a really big focus of the hearing, but it is a huge deal. Yeah. The, digital marketplace frame of this, which is where we have talked to. Cellini. That's where he's going right like facebook and Google very digital. They have like they don't do physical goods. Really. Apple is the APP store. It's all digital goods. Amazon is the one where it's. Front to a lot of physical things, and that is the only place where I can see this regulation needing to make some sort of like major meaningful distinction in I. Didn't see it in the hearing, but I was curious of you caught a glimmer of it. I'm not positive that they have to make a huge distinction there like depending on what they come up with because. So much of this is about their companies and whatever product they produced. The issue is more or less whether or not they're being surveilled and unfairly by targeted and crushed by that data surveillance. All right. We have gone for forty minutes. We should take a quick break. I said I wasn't going to go by company and it happens. So we should come back and talk with facebook Ango. We'll be right back. This is advertiser content. When I say utopia what comes to mind. Birds Chirping lush natural beauty dialed up and vibrant technicolor. Is it within reach. Your world world. World. explained. You are an essential part of the perfect social body. Every Body Matt Place. Everybody happy now while the peacock original series, brave new world takes place in a scientific futuristic utopia. A concept is nothing new Sir Thomas more. I introduced the theory five hundred years ago. But we keep looking for that community identity stability of aldous Huxley's Utopia and not finding it Americans are the unhappiest they've been in decades, and we're increasingly lonely whereas in a utopia. Everyone belongs to everyone else. In nineteen forty-three, the psychologist Abraham. maslow's developed a theory of Utopia. One that allows total self determination in basic terms. maslow's theory says that in Utopia, we decide for ourselves, what we need and how we're GONNA get it in Huxley's Utopia citizens always get what they want and don't want what they can't get. Sounds. Pretty good. Right. Then why can't we make it happen? For a Utopian Society the work we might need to disband some of the things we hold dearest marriage government privacy individualism even family. See for yourself. If a Utopian world is as perfect as it seems watch brave new world now streaming only on peacock. These are really difficult crazy stressful times, and if you're trying to sort of cope, it could be helpful to find something that gets beyond like doom scrolling and like obsessive worried. But digs into what is really going on underneath the surface, and that's what the weeds is all about I. Matthew Yglesias. Weeds podcast here on the box meeting podcast network. This is podcast for people who really want to understand the policy debates and policy issues that shaping our world. We've seen now more than ever like how relevant policy is to our actual lives, but so much in the news isn't focused on really understanding and explaining detail way if that sounds good to you, join us for the weeds, every Tuesday and Friday to find out what's going on why matters and what we can do about it. You could download the weeds on apple spotify or wherever else you get your podcasts. Tracy. When it comes to facebook I turn to you. FACEBOOK is patience consumer of startups as what we've learned. Yeah. But you said something to me yesterday was interesting, which is everyone else's problems are forward looking and it feels like facebook's problems are actually in the past break for people explain what you mean. Yeah. So when Congress is looking at any trust with respect to these four companies for three of them, it's It's sort of about the marketplaces that their operating right now with facebook, the question is much more about should we have allowed it to buy serum? Should we have allowed it to buy WHATSAPP and most of the antitrust conversation that was around facebook yesterday was all about that. What did Mark Zuckerberg know about Instagram, and when did he know it? We wrote a story based on some documents that the house released yesterday. In which facebook has clearly identified instagram as a competitor. In at least some ways and wants to go after it and knock it off the table, and so that's kind of where the focuses their facebook and Burke did get a lot of other questions yesterday, but it tended to be much more about content moderation and things that don't have a lot to do with antitrust. So there was weird section where they asked the face. Face Research APP in the novel, Vpn? Any kind of got lost well, explain what happened and I'm curious reactions. Yeah. So facebook has a bunch of nifty tech tools to figure out what's trending which APPs or the kids using, and so that can essentially have an early warning system if it needs to consider acquiring something or more likely in these days, go out clone it. and. So Zuckerberg was asked about the way that the company uses these systems and if they are anti competitive I, think you know traditional antitrust law probably would not say copying an APP feature is anti competitive, but could lobby written in the future about it shirt I. Think the one that caught me was I mean, this is what I'm. McKenna's points from earlier is like one of the themes here is, are you so dominant that you can collect data that's unfair and then use that to crush or killer competitors, and definitely bought the Inaba VPN to do it. That's true. Now, when I've asked executives at facebook about this, what they'll say is they don't get surprised anymore. When you have three point, one billion people using your apps around the world. You know what links they're sharing, you know what they're talking about. And so you're not going to need some kind of specialized tool to know that WHATSAPP is really taking off. Right. So they would argue that, yes, these tools were useful to them, but you know at their scale, they know what's popular now, which doesn't really seem like addresses, the problem is reached. The fact that we're so big that we're all knowing is maybe not the defense that they sometimes presented as so here's what I didn't get. I thought, Zuckerberg I want to the instagram. What's about who's issues, but on the facebook research front, the data front, they him about this APP facebook research, which you were giving to teens. They were deploying with an enterprise certificate that story broke apple revoke the certificate, and all of facebook's internal APPs went dark, and this is a scandal story after story about it, they went on for two days. So I can I, don't recall that APP? Just how he you know, he remembers the day that all facebook's internal APPS went down and people couldn't go to the cafeteria. I would agree I found that answer. Extremely, ed? Persuasive. that. Do you think that was like actually strategic for him to be like, I, don't know and then come back later and correct the record I do remember when that happened I. Mean. I really don't know I mean also you know during a six hour hearing, it's also possible that you just you get flustered or you miss here something or or something because. Yeah. As as you say, I'm sure he remembers the day that apple turned off their internal APPS I mean. Honestly. Seems like an opportunity to talk about apple's market power, and the fact that you know a day of work canceled at facebook because apple got mad. But I think most of the CEO's didn't go into yesterday a wanted to pick fights with each other. It was kind of sad that they didn't. I was Kinda hoping that Tim Cook take a shot at soccer burger. Point that the other two APP platforms I was expecting it. It was there. It was. There was all there. So cellini ended and he ended the whole meeting with closing statement. He said, some of these companies didn't get broken out. They all need to get regulated in the off too much power that some of them I. don't these breaking up apple. What sort of break. Right like. The division get sent into the corner thing about what it's done. Right. Does should spin out the finder team I've always wanted to. A clean is always that they want to. They want the APP store to be separate from the IPHONE. Basically, that's the thing I always hear. Can't break I. Think you can write some strong regulations but not playing you're on store, right. But like Elizabeth Warren's point was it's cleaner if it's two companies, but it's still a gigantic remedy that I don't think there's a lot of like like consumer or public opinion is going to walk into an Apple Cup I think you'll radio at marketplace. It seems very clear that we says some of them she broken up he is talking about facebook. I have a twenty percent conference level. He might be talking with Google and Youtube as well. But if he's going to say some of the need to get broken up like it's facebook, did you hear anything yesterday that supported that conclusion or Saudi stocks I? MEAN HE I don't remember which Republican it was, but he was like the Obama FTC looked at this and they said it was minding love. Obama. Right. Like. Why would we go back in time to relook at I? Mean, there is a belief and I mean. Somebody who thinks there could be a lot of benefit in instagram and WHATSAPP being different companies from facebook. And the reason you ask. So many questions about that acquisition as you're making the case that it never should have been approved in the first place, and so now you need to remedy it. So that was actually like the entire thrust of the argument against facebook yesterday. I think, you could probably make just as good a case that Amazon after spin out aws, but lawmakers chose not to make that case. Yeah. I think that also gets into. Politics of the acquisition of the time. To his credit is like nobody knew instagram would actually be a success like we made it a success. It didn't happen by itself. I, don't know if the lawmakers. By award, these guys said, but I don't know that he actually made that case very persuasively. and. Who knows I mean? That's like anything could have happened. Right? Cram could've stayed independent and rapidly grown and overtaken facebook like that's something that could have happened. It could have kind settled into a middle zone like snapchat or twitter seems more likely to me although I think probably would have been bigger than those two but. You're never going to know I mean it is true that facebook gave Mike and Kevin it instagram enormous resources. A lot of the reasons why Mike and Kevin sold was because running tiny startup that's blowing up is absolutely exhausting Mike. Krieger. was dragging his laptop all around San. Francisco. Because the servers were melting at all times of the day whenever Justin Bieber. Posted like the site stopped working and they really we need help. Finding a person who can quickly fix this? So we don't have to like that is the reason that they were entertaining these offers and wanted to sell it. So that is also thing that happened. Do you think that that same kind of argument or approach can apply to what's up? What's up basically did not come up yesterday and all the focus on Instagram, but that's the other one, right? Yeah, and we know weirdly a lot less about that acquisition I. Think it's because people in America just have so much less love for what's APP generally. That, it's never seemed as important. What happened to WHATSAPP as what happens to instagram even though WHATSAPP, is used, you know way more, it probably has way more engagement even than instagram does so I don't know why that didn't come up as often. We know there was a competitive bidding war for that as well. Goule. Wanted it as well. You know Mark Zuckerberg made them an offer, they can't refuse. Do you think everyday Google's we should've spent more money on what's whatsapp like this could have been solved. Should have, but Google has been placed under an ancient curse that prevents them from ever making the right decision about any social product. So it was doomed never to happen. It's fun looking through the documents and watching them casually say they should buy facebook dot com. Yeah, that. Point. That is how they talk like the window into these executives just casually being like we should just this thing or maybe not, or we should just copied ourselves and kill it before it gets any traction like it's repeated over and over again last facebook question. This one is like harder to parse because I. There's a chance, it's October is just joking around but. But. He's in many of these emails. He's like the thing about startups, as you can always buy them, which I think the committee thinks is a smoking gun, right? Like facebook's entire plan is to buy the competition to get the data from wherever they get it to say, oh, man, this apps popping, we just buy it and kill it before it competes with us. I. Think he actually said at one point. That's a joke. Yes, he did and I believe that you know it was two thousand, twelve, right? He was probably still in his mid twenties. At that point, the company was a lot smaller like people were joking around like there's more loose talk when companies are younger and I do think. It was it was part of that. I think the more interesting question becomes. Let's say facebook is telling the truth about everything. Let's say they thought it was going to be a successful acquisition, but they never knew it was gonna big as it became today and they invested in it and it got super big. Okay. Well, now, it's as big as it is. Should they be allowed to keep? Keep it or should they be forced to spend it out and if you're GONNA force them to spin it out. What's the argument that you'RE GONNA. Make about why one question that I have a lot is clearly the referral they're gonNa make, and it seems like if you don't have some other reason, we've heard hints that there's some other reason, the FTC scrutinize this that will eventually be revealed. But what you're saying is the antitrust standard at the time, the Consumer Hartman stand, which is still our standard. Says, you have to prove prices will go up both products for free. You're screwed. Right? There's nothing to review because you're not gonNA prove prove that free products are gonNA get more expensive. I think it's pretty unfair if you change the standard and you go back in time and say you missed that standard. So I think there has to be something else there. Well, what was the standard by which at and T. was broken up? Right? Like presumably at and T. didn't used to be that big, and then it just got really big and then they broke it up at least. That's the thumbnail understanding I have of that break-up. Well, yeah. But then reformed itself. Right. But because of lax antitrust regulation, right? Like it wasn't a naturally occurring phenomenon that all those APPS got back to the other or was that just sort of like inattention to capitalism It's like in the seventies and eighties. This is Tim moves book the cursive bigness in the seventies and eighties Robert Bork I can't talk about Robert on this podcast. Are we doing this right now. Robert was very influential judge Appellate Judge Federal Appellate? Judge. And basically moved the antitrust law to the consumer harm standard as part of a movement called and economics. A whole thing Robert. Bork. Mostly famous because he was not appointed. He was nominated Supreme Court by Reagan but they leaked video tape rental history, and then he didn't get nominated and that is where the expression getting bork's comes from. This is all true Netflix's still has to abide by videotape data privacy act is a whole. This is all true when facebook and Netflix had some partners, Nansen? Partnership. To. Automatically share your net flicks, watch history to facebook. They're like pending the change of this law which we are working on Robert Bork. He haunts us all. I'm sorry, I can't believe this much. Yeah I. think that's just like the law changed in the in the seventies and eighties, the standard change. The conversation right now is a very much about changing it back months and months ago, pre pandemic, we had an economist from I. Think it was Nyu Thomas Philippon came on the show, and he was like look you have this natural ab test going on in the world where the European Union when it formed was like, how do we get an economy like America's? So, we'll just take their competition policies pretty good, and at the same time we changed consumer harm standard. So everything you're seeing the EU is basically our old competition antitrust standard in. You can see how active they are in everything. Here's a new consumer welfare standard. Whether you believe, this is actually a functional Ab test given. The state of both governments is up for debate, but that was his point I thought. It was spare can say.
Tech giants Facebook, Google, Apple and Amazon to face Congress
"Is happening because there is a recognition across government that these four very powerful and very important companies to the economy had become so dominant that they are harming consumers and harming competition. So Congress has summoned the CEOs of the corporations. Jeff Bezos of Amazon, Tim Cook of Apple, Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook and soon DARPA Chai of Google to ask them and interrogate them on their business practices and find out if these Internet giants that have become in many ways. The new trusts of our economy. If they are harming consumers in competition.
Big Tech CEOs Testimony Before Congress
"Today was the day as I record these words the big tech CEO's are still testifying before Congress. So I'm going to have to do a summary of what I've seen just in the first couple of hours or so and leave some of the juicier question and answer back and forth for tomorrow. I up a note on the format that we've been seeing. Yes. All of the CEOS were testifying remotely. They were using Cisco Webex as the video conferencing tool and it seemed to work fairly well at least right until this very moment as I turned off the stream to go into the booth to record this, they took a ten minute recess because apparently one of the witnesses. was having an issue with their stream or feed, and I'm wondering if it might have been Jeff Bezos because at least thus far were almost an hour and a half into the testimony and he hadn't been asked a single question. Anyway back to the whole idea of testifying remotely if I were going to do one of those rate, my video call backgrounds reports. Bezos look like he was in some sort of executive boardroom, lots of tasteful Chomsky's behind him. Look like he was in a conference room at a high end law firm I couldn't tell what Zuckerberg was sitting in front of it looked like closed vertical blinds almost like I don't know some sort of like a bunker like if you're battening down your house for a Hurricane Tim, Cook was in front of some sort of tasteful plant trough though he was clearly working off an ipad pro. Let's start off with what the Fab four had to say in their opening statements. Amazon's Jeff bezos underscored Amazon's job creation, its investments in social causes and its role in supporting small and medium-sized businesses. And made the case that Hey Amazon is just a tiny competitor in a huge global market quote. The global retail market we compete in is strikingly large and extraordinarily competitive Amazon accounts for less than one percent of the thousand five, trillion dollar global retail market and less than four percent of retail in the US unlike industries that are winner take all there's room in retail for many winners for example. More than eighty retailers in the US. Alone earn over one billion dollars in annual revenue like any retailer we know that the success of our store depends entirely on customer satisfaction with their experience in our store every day Amazon competes against large established players like target Costco Kroger and of course, Walmart a company more than twice Amazon size, and while we have always focused on producing a great customer experience. For retail sales done primarily online sales initiated online are now in even larger Growth Area for other stores Walmart's online sales grew seventy four percent in the first quarter and customers are increasingly flocking disservices invented by other stores. Amazon still can't match at the scale of other large companies like curbside pickup and in store returns and quote alphabets. Soon, Darpa, Chai, said that Google also operates in a highly competitive. Market and that it's free products benefit the average American quote. A competitive digital ad marketplace gives publishers, advertisers, and therefore consumers an enormous amount of choice pichai stated, for example, competition and ads from twitter instagram comcast and others has helped lower online advertising costs by forty percent over the last ten years with these savings pass down to consumers through lower prices in areas like travel and real estate Google faces strong. For search queries for many businesses that are experts in those areas. Today's competitive landscape looks nothing like I. Did five years ago let alone twenty one years ago when Google launched its first product Google search people have more ways to search for information than ever before and quote. Tim Cook of Apple said that the APP store has opened the gate wider for software developers. Also, apple doesn't have dominant market share quote as much as we believe, the iphone provides the best user experience. We know it is far from the only choice available to consumers Cook said after beginning with five hundred APPs today the APP store hosts more than one point seven, million, only sixty of which are apple software. Clearly, if apple is a gatekeeper, what we have done is open the gate wider we want to get every APP we can on the store, not keep them off and quote. And facebook's mark. Zuckerberg said well, but he said a thousand times before that facebook knows it has more work to do on things like fighting misinformation and that you know companies aren't bad simply because they're big. And he took pains to point out that facebook is an American success story quote although people around the world use our products. FACEBOOK is a proudly American company. He said, we believe in Values Democracy Competition Inclusion and free expression that the American economy was built on many other tech companies share these values, but there's no guarantee our values will win out for example China. Is Building its own version of the Internet focused on very different ideas and they are exporting their vision to other countries as Congress and other stakeholders. Consider how antitrust laws support competition in the US. I believe it's important to maintain the core values of openness and fairness that have made America's digital economy, a force for empowerment and opportunity here and around the world and quote. In his opening remarks, the chairman of the Committee David. Sy-. Selena Rhode. Island. Laid out three areas of inquiry that the was scheduled to delve into at least in questioning from the Democratic Congress folk more on that in A. Quitting CNBC, each platform allegedly serves as a quote bottleneck for a key channel of distribution and quote the platforms allegedly used their control over digital infrastructure to Sir Vail other companies, their growth business activity, and whether they might pose a competitive threat and use that information to maintain their own power and third the platforms allegedly abused their control over current technologies to extend their power through tactics like self referencing their own products. Quote. Prior to the cove nineteen pandemic, these corporations already stood out as titans in our economy. Silly said in the wake of Covid nineteen however, they are likely to emerge stronger and more powerful than ever before, and he concluded by saying quote, our founders would not bow before a king nor should we bow before the emperor's of the online economy and quote? But as I say, while this was labelled as an anticompetitive antitrust inquiry, it seems like the Republican Congress folk were primarily interested in probing alleged bias against conservative users. In fact, Jim Jordan. One of the ranking Republican representatives spent most of his opening remarks railing against. which if that continues would basically be exactly what all of the CEOS in the talking head boxes would be hoping for right lots of distraction and no real spotlight on them. In fact, a lot of the most heated questions directed at a company that's not even present. We'll see if that continues but I have to say straight off Chairman Sicily and was very specific targeted sharp questions. He kept interrupting folks when they started to stray into doublespeak and the very nature of the questions from him and others at least so far. This wasn't like previous congressional hearings we've covered where the congress folk didn't seem to even understand the businesses they were investigating, and maybe that was because I don't know if you saw the woman sitting very prominently very obviously behind Mr. Cecil lean. Let me let the Washington Post fill you in on who that was quote as a twenty eight year old law student Lena Con penned a twenty four thousand word article for Yale Law Journal titled Amazon's antitrust. Paradox. The article described how US antitrust law isn't equipped to deal with tech giants such as Amazon. Even as the company has made itself as essential to commerce in the twenty first century in the way that railroads and telephone systems had in the previous century con now works as counsel for the antitrust subcommittee she has worked with Sylvain to develop his case against the tech giants including Amazon and quote. As I said, the questioning is continuing as I speak these words in fact I just heard that they came back from their recess. The whole thing did kick off hour late only getting started at one PM, eastern? So I don't think it'll be done before for five PM at least. So again, I'll put together a summary of all of the juicy exchanges happening now for tomorrow.