Katherine (0s): HI everyone. Welcome back to Reality 2.0, I'm Katherine Druckman and returning is Kyle Rankin, who is, as you know, one of our favorites. I say that to everyone. No, actually I don't. I think I only said that to you and Petros. True. Yeah, that's true. Yeah. So, so we have a few things on the agenda today. We're going to talk a little bit about application development and then we're going to get later. Katherine (41s): If you'll stick around to our new feature, we're going to call outrage of the week because there's always something. So, but before we get into that, let's, let's get kind of nerdy with the, the concept of fragmentation as it applies to software development. Many of our podcasts start by, well, Kyle wrote something interesting this week, Kyle (1m 2s): Preventing fragmentation with the Librium five. There you go. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, I was, I was sort of inspired to write that, write it because we continually get these questions about, well, how many apps do you have on the leap and five? And so we get those questions and then there's, I've noticed, you know, something about, if you something about creating a phone, that's completely different from what's out there is you get this, you see how entrenched certain perspectives are about smartphones and how people think of them as something other than a computer, just, and there's been like a decade of reinforcement of this, of the sense that a smart phone is a very special thing. Kyle (1m 44s): So, I mean, in application development is a big part of that. So I ended up writing this post that talked about why the other question we get is why didn't you just use Android or just use insert name of some other mobile Linuxy kind of operating system for the phone. And it all came down to fragmentation and something that I've, that if you're an application developer today and you're writing a program, you know, 20 years ago, what you had to do is think about, well, do I want my application to run on windows, Mac, or Linux, or what combination of those? And then depending on your decision, you would pick different frameworks, different languages, maybe, and each individual platform you had, the support basically made you had the fork, the code in many cases. Kyle (2m 31s): I mean, depending on what, what graphical libraries you picked, but these days it's way worse. Because with, with mobile devices, you've added a couple of extra platforms on top of those three. So now it's not just windows, Mac, or Linux, it's also Android or iOS. And so, and then, so what ends up happening is the developer will say, well, do I want to make a mobile application or do I want to make a desktop application? And then they'll start with that standpoint. And they, or they may say, well, I want to do all all of the above, but then there's a minimum of like five different platforms. They have to support them. And all of them are often in different languages, you know, different development, methodologies, different frameworks, different tools to test and build all of that stuff. Kyle (3m 16s): And one of the things that I, that I think has limited adoption of something other than Android and iOS as a mobile OOS or on like on mobile hardware is the fact that you are all of the other attempts haven't fixed the fragmentation problem. So someone will announce, well, we have a new phone, it's not Android or iOS. And all you have to do is take your existing application, import it to our, our new platform. So you're instantly in this uphill climb to do that. So we ended up when we were trying to, when we were deciding what we wanted to run on our phone, we decided, well, it makes the most sense to avoid fragmentation and have the same operating system that our laptop runs just instead of sort of making an applique, porting an application to the phone, let's just make the existing Linux desktop ecosystem as a whole portable to a small screen, which up to that point really wasn't there wasn't a whole lot. Kyle (4m 18s): I mean, there were certainly mobile only operating systems, but the problem for the most part was if you want it to run on one of them, you had to port your application over. So we didn't necessarily, we don't want to do that. What we wanted is to say, well, just take a desktop application that already exists. And if you can drag the corner over in, it fits on the screen, then you're done essentially. And you know, and your buttons are big enough that you can use a touch screen to interface with the program. And still as ma I mean, we've, we've done videos about this. We've talked about this a lot, but I it's. I think it's so entrenched in people's minds to think of, well, how many apps we need to port a bunch of apps over that? Kyle (4m 60s): I don't think it's still people completely grasp why it matters to them much to not have yet another platform that someone has to develop for. But instead just say, well, if you want to write a program that runs on this device, just write a Linux desktop program like you would for our laptop, but just make sure when you drag the corner over and make it smaller that it fits, you know? Yeah. Katherine (5m 24s): That's a mode that I think, you know, UX designers and stuff like that are used to anyway. So, I mean, it's, it's, it's a, it's such a familiar concept that it seems so obvious. And yet, and yet maybe hasn't quite been embraced for that type of application yet. Kyle (5m 43s): Phillip is dealing with it so far. So far. We once developers who understand, who get the concept of what we're trying to do, it's, that's one of the reasons I wrote the post is theirs is that there's still difficulty even among developers sometimes in getting them to understand no, this, you don't have to port an application to our platform. That the biggest problem that we have with, with existing applications is just if you make them small, they bleed off of the edge of the screen because they're not designed for such a small screen. They've only been designed to run on a desktop. It's exactly the same thing with a responsive web applications, you know, 10 years ago, if you tried the browse, the web on a phone's web browser, it was a really bad experience because every web designer designed a website for a, you know, a 10 24 by seven 68 screen. Kyle (6m 37s): And so you had the website bleeding off the side of your, of your phone and you had to do all this weird scrolling. And it's basically the same experience now on for the Linux desktop. But over the last couple of years, as people have started to realize, Oh, wait, it's not that big of a deal. You'd simply have to consider small form factors in your UI. Then we're starting to see more and more applications, not just ones that we've, you know, spearheaded and tried, tried to make adaptive, but in general, like a lot of general genoma applications, for instance, Nucleome applications are adding adaptive features. That's just sort of part of, part of designing the application. Kyle (7m 20s): So yeah, we're getting a lot of once people sort of understand the concept combined with the fact that we developed a library lip handy, that makes it easy to do it. Those two things combined made it where developers have. It's not, it's not a big leap to have to do it. You know, like there's, the tools are in place and people so far, like I said, have been responsive to it once, once they understand why it's different from, from other sort of mobile only platforms where, where you have to port something. Katherine (7m 53s): Yeah. So, I mean, so from my perspective, coming from a right web centric world, to me, I'm like, well, that's obvious. Like, why wouldn't you do that already? I didn't know that that was either, I didn't know that that was not a thing that everybody just did. Right. But yeah, it's interesting to think of that as, you know, sort of revolutionizing phone apps, mobile apps, but yeah, I mean, it's, it seems quite obvious. Kyle (8m 17s): Well, and what's interesting is because, I mean, so I would say that the current state of that ecosystem is similar to what, what websites were like maybe about five years ago, where we're starting to see applications that factor that in, but there's still a number that don't, but because of, because sort of responsive web design has already has had a headstart, what's interesting is browsing the web on the phone works really well because it says I'm a, I'm a mobile web browser. And so you get, you know, websites that work on the screen that, you know, adapt their widgets to be usable on a touch screen. And all of that, all of that stuff is sort of automatic on web browsing. Kyle (8m 57s): And it's just a matter, it's just that desktop application design. There hasn't been a focus on that because there's no other, there are no other platforms that have taken this paradigm, you know, like no one's developing windows applications necessarily to fit on a phone form factor, or definitely not Mackowitz applications. You know, like when the Mac was first, when the, when the iPhone was first released and it had no apps, you know, and then they started, they added, you know, there was some third party app stores and then Apple eventually did an app store. Then the big arms race was, well, how many apps do you have, you know, between them and Android. But the reason that that mattered was because maca Wes apps weren't compatible with the iPhone. Kyle (9m 38s): You know, if, if you could take every Mackowitz app and it just worked on the iPhone, you just had to go back behind the scenes, like a web designer and make it and like, make it fit. Then within a year or two, you would have seen like all of the existing Mac Mac applications start to show up on the iPhone is developers said, Oh, I want to have that experience. So I think it is more, Oh, sorry, Katherine (10m 1s): Which is what's happening now with the new M one process or the whole idea is that, you know, any Mac app can now be, or it rather, sorry, the other way around any iOS app is now, you know, a desktop app, which is interesting because it's sort of the opposite reality. Doc (10m 15s): I would imagine the touch screen is a, is a bit of a bit of a throw off in some cases, because there's behaviors that you have with a finger. You might not have it a mouse. I know on the iPhone, for example, you know, it depends on how far you press on it, whether it jiggles with the app jiggles, cause you're going to get rid of it or, or, you know, it gives you some other choice. I forget what, but, but I mentioned it, it's a D it's a doable thing. I mean, gradually this is getting normalized to some degree. I mean, Apple is already kind of made clear for a while that they're sort of, they're, they're normalizing on the phone. And, and basically what you're going to get on computers is going to be compatible or similar enough to what you have in the phones. Doc (10m 57s): I don't know if it's, I think it's probably still fragmented in certain other ways, but, but there's a sensibility there. I would think, you know, Kyle (11m 7s): Well, what they want is the same mentality. They want people to approach their laptops and desktops. Like they do the phone in terms of Apple's more centralized control of the platform, you know, like, right. You know, if you were to go back 10 years, you wouldn't, you would think it was unfair or unreasonable for them to say, well, if you want to have an application that runs on a Mac book, you need to get our express permission. First, no third parties are allowed to install an app on your Mac without permission. Right. But on an iPhone is just sort of accepted now that, well, yeah, you need to get Apple's approval for quote unquote security and privacy, you know, to, to run it. And, and that's the goal of on their side with convergence, it's, it's more about having the control aspect in the name of privacy security, but to have the control that people have accepted on the iPhone, be extended into them, the Mac, because there's, I mean, they're making a lot of money off of, of app store subscriptions and that sort of thing. Kyle (12m 5s): I mean, that's what led to the recent city, a lawsuit against them, right. Is the city was saying, well, you're making all this money off the app store that we're not that we were locked out of the market, you know, that we could be making some of that money now on with our third-party app store. Right. Yeah. Katherine (12m 21s): One of the things that I think is interesting is, so it seems like now, you know, it used to be that, you know, when smartphones and, and, and particularly the iPhone and iOS and Android phones came out, it was like, you're, you're carrying around a minified computer, right. It's your, it's the same as your computer. It's just minified. You can do all this cool stuff, but now it's the opposite. And now it's a laptop is now just a souped up phone. And, and it seems to me that what y'all are doing with the, you know, the Liebrum at purism is, is sort of getting ahead of that and just saying, well, why, why even pretend, just get the laptop out, you know, just plug your phone into a keyboard, you know, and a monitor and call it a day, which I think is kind of funny. Kyle (13m 4s): Yeah. I mean, the idea is to make, it's a, it's a computer, you know, it's a computer, it's one that fits in your pocket, but there's no reason that it, that it should be anything you should treat it as any different from any other computer you're used to. It just happens to have a, you know, it's a little touchscreen computer that doesn't happen to have a keyboard on it, you know, but other than that, it should, you should be able to do the same things on it, you know, restricted by whatever the, you know, resources are on it or whatever, but you should be able to do the same in the same kind of applications that you can on your laptop. I mean, as long as the resources can in can handle it, I don't see like, why, why shouldn't that be the case? You know, why, why should you have to the computer that's in my pocket needs a specific has all the software has to be written in a specific language using specific frameworks and has to get approval by this, by the hardware vendor, before it can show up, but on a laptop, I can write a software in, you know, a huge variety of different languages. Kyle (14m 2s): Whatever happens to suit me with all of these different frameworks. And I don't have to get someone's blessing to, to run the application on my laptop. You know, I mean, that's, now that's starting to go away on, on, you know, we talked about Mac books, but even on PCs, we're starting to see, you know, the same kind of approach because there's so much value in bringing the phone approach to laptops and desktop OSS. But yeah, so we took the opposite approach. We said, no, we'd like the freedom that you get with a desktop computer and that OSTP and writing software and whatever language you want. So just keep doing that and just make sure it fits on a small screen. Kyle (14m 42s): And you're in, you know, that it's easy. Katherine (14m 45s): And it's something that, that other companies are trying to do for a long time. I think like Samsung, I think it was that something that came, I had a whole bunch of like weird, totally not usable doc solutions, where you could pretend to use your, your Android phone or your Android tablet is more of a desktop experience, but it never really worked or any kind of demo I've ever seen him. It never really worked. It was sort of like, you could plug it into this clunky doc and then you could plug in a monitor and then you could kind of do some stuff, but it really wasn't very useful. And yeah, you just kind of out of the box by using, you know, a regular desktop Linux. Oh, S there you go. There's, it's kind of a no brainer. Kyle (15m 24s): Yeah. Like I call it their approach sort of, I call it convergence, just because it's, it's doing the opposite of what you want. What you want is a desktop computer that you can take with, you use it as a desktop computer with desktop applications when it's in desktop mode. And then when it's in phone mode, you know, use it, like use the same applications, but in some sort of phone form factor, but what those devices you were talking about ended up doing is the opposite. They took a phone with applications designed only for the phone, and then just made them bigger on a larger screen. And maybe you could see more of the app, but yeah, less usable because the developers never developed those applications with a desktop in mind at best. They thought maybe it would run on a tablet. Kyle (16m 6s): And so there's some notion of it running on a tablet if, if you have more screen real estate, but it's not really written like a desktop application, you know, most people wouldn't, don't really want to use their phone apps on a laptop necessarily. So, yeah, so they, they did the sort of the backwards approach that from what people want, because everyone, you know, for a long time, a lot of people have wanted a desktop computer that goes around with them. All of their files are with them, all their programs and settings and everything is the same. And then they can, it can be a desktop, or it can be a laptop, or it can be a phone or whatever it is based on what it's plugged into. Katherine (16m 41s): It's almost ridiculous. Yeah. I'm sorry. Go ahead. Go ahead, Catherine. I was just saying, it's almost ridiculous to me at this point that I can't just plug in my, if, if I were to have a fancy new iPhone, which I don't, but if I did, why shouldn't I just be able to plug it in? You know, it's a powerful device, it's it says a massive amount of computing power and yeah, it's almost that, that is my seal of approval. You're doing it right. Not that you needed me to tell you that anyway, go ahead, Doug. Kyle (17m 7s): So, so given that we all, most of us anyway, have a completely new phone in three years. I mean, I think the average life expectancy of, I just have so much, the life expectancy that the average ownership of a phone is like 18 months. People tend to get a new one in 18 months, probably give the, know that we, you know, the other one to their nephew or kid or something like that. So the, they last longer, but, but people tend to get new phones and they tend to have a lot of new capabilities. And, and I'm wondering if what you're doing with avoiding fragmentation at some point informs what we have five, 10, 10 years from now. Kyle (17m 48s): And I'm wondering if you sort of see that playing out. Doc (17m 50s): I mean, you know, as you start thinking, especially, and this is almost a different topic, but, you know, I was talking to some people recently who said that, you know, Microsoft actually doesn't care that much about windows anymore. They care a lot more about Linux and what they're doing in the backend of everything. And is it possible that they give up on windows, but that I bring that up more as a S as a flag, about to, to put on how kind of temporary everything is. So I'm wondering if, if you see that this is something that, Kyle (18m 22s): Yeah, I mean, so from my standpoint, the, one of the reasons that, that people cycle through phones so quickly is that there are two different perverse incentives that are kind of putting people on that treadmill. The first one is that cellular providers, at least in the U S tend to want to put people on a contract that's that has a span of two, maybe three years, usually about two years. And when it's time to, in the benefit of putting you on a contract, as a course, you, you're less likely to go over to a competitor while you're on that contract. Well, when it comes time to renew is the time that you might look around and say, well, Hey, maybe I should go with the competitor. Kyle (19m 3s): So they use a phone, they subsidize the cost of a phone, spread out over the term of your contract to sweeten the deal, right? They get you, you get a new phone and buy with, you know, $200 off or whatever it is. And, but they secretly kind of spread that across your monthly payments for two years. So, you know, they don't feel the difference, but you you're incentivized to get a new phone. The other thing that happens though, so they, you know, cellular providers have a perverse incentive to want you to buy a new phone every two years. But of course, hardware vendors do too. You know, they, they wanna sell you a phone every two years. So they, the way that they achieve that is they only provide a Wesson security updates for maybe two or three years. Kyle (19m 43s): If at all, you know, depending on the provider, Google has had huge problems with, you know, all of these third parties that create custom versions of Android and they never update them. So they've had to go through all of these engineering efforts to try to avoid just the fragmentation in the Android market, with all of these custom Androids that are out there. But even, even with Google, you know, a flagship Google phone, you will get, I think, two years of OSTP updates, three years of security updates. And then, then that's it. You know, so if you want to hear about security, you don't really, I mean, I phone is definitely different. They support their firm from a software standpoint, they support their hardware for a lot longer, but on the Android front, you basically have to be on a two to three-year cycle. Kyle (20m 24s): If you want to be able to get OSTP updates. And it also creates this other sort of the other incentive is it's almost like Androids the windows of mobile computing, where it gets sort of apps gets sort of slower. Th th there's this assumption that you're going to be on new hardware on flagship hardware every couple of years. So apps sort of get bigger in slower with each update. Dos kind of gets, I mean, I've noticed this because I happen to have a old nexus five X here that no longer is allowed to get updates, but I still get app updates. And it's amazing how much slower the hardware gets over time. It reminds me of the old windows Vista days where you would have a windows Vista laptop, and you would have someone come to you and say, wow, I had my, I bought my laptop two years ago, but I think it's time I need to buy a new one. Kyle (21m 12s): And he said, well, why is that? They said, well, look at it. It's so slow. And you realize that just because the software is so bloated and maybe they have some malware running behind the scenes and all this other stuff, and it was the kind of thing where you would take that hardware, install Linux on it. And it's almost like you had a new computer, you know, so, but our approach with our phone is to say that we just provide, we aim to avoid obsolescence with the phone. So we provide updates for life for it. So if you get the phone, then we will continue to support it with updates. There's, there's no perverse incentive and on our part to want to force you to upgrade. So we just, we're just going to provide Wes updates, security, updates, all of that for the life of the phone. Kyle (21m 55s): And as a result, you know, at least in our case, what I've noticed so far is someone who's had one of these for about some iteration of the phone for the last year is pretty much every month or two. I mean, we get updates every week, but every month or two, you know, there's enough of a cumulation of updates that the phone is actually faster than it was the month before, you know, and I suspect that's going to be like that for at least the next couple of years, because there's a lot of optimizations that we haven't even gotten to yet. So it's going to be one of those experiences where, you know, your phone is actually faster a year after you bought it, you know, instead of slower, that's really random, necessarily want people to throw them. Yeah. I mean, and it's also, I mean, it speaks to a certain, yeah, Doc (22m 37s): I, my experience with, you know, with the, the max stuff that I have, and also with phones, I mean, as it both with I-phones and with max, that old ones seems slow because they're old, but they really may not be. It's just that, you know, every new, every new upgrade brings more bloat or whatever else it might be. And, and also you have software that may work on the old machine, but it's really optimized for something new. And, and then, you know, then it runs and it runs really slow. That's interesting because I would think that would be another motivation to kind of adopt your approach. But I wondered to what extent Google, for example, kind of counts on you dumping that nexus five, three years from now, you know, you spent your $700 on it and too bad. Doc (23m 27s): It's not a, it's like a truly sunk cost. Cause the thing is just a brick after three years. Kyle (23m 34s): Yeah. I mean the goal, the goal, they have an incentive to sell you a new nexus or pixel phone. I mean, all, all the hardware vendors in general, you would, you would think that we would have an incentive to force you to do that too. It's falls counter to our ethics and our principles to do that. But you know, typically if you're selling hardware, you want to sell someone more hardware more frequently. And so you have an incentive to, for them to think that their, that their phone, their phone or their hardware is too slow and they need an update. Right? I mean, the other, the other way that you, that happens is, you know, the, the drive for thinness, both not just in phones, but in laptops also means that it's not as repairable. I mean, I, you know, there's, I fix it. Kyle (24m 15s): And, and other outlets that talk about the repairability of these devices, but if you have a ultra thin the way to achieve an ultra thin piece of hardware, what is to, you know, solder everything on the boards will solder Ram. So there's no replaceable Ram because that, that replaceable Ram slot adds some thickness to the board design, right? And certainly not removable batteries for the same reason. So you have everything sort of compact and non replaceable. So if you start having faults, I guess you could take it in somewhere and get it repaired, but it, and when you combine it with storage being the same way, what ends up happening for a lot of people at least is they are either incentivized to buy to max out their specs when they're buying either a phone or a laptop, because they know they can't upgrade after the fact, or they can't afford to do that at the time. Kyle (25m 4s): So they get the base model, but as time goes on, you know, they, they have to update, they have to buy new hardware prematurely because they can't update it. Otherwise, both, both again on the phone and on laptops, because it's, when, when it's thin or you have to make design decisions that, that, Katherine (25m 24s): So not to, you know, extend, not to overly plug a plug, the cool phone that you, that you work on. So if I, if I want one today, can I order one and get it pretty quickly? Or is it still one of those like waiting for a long time situation? Kyle (25m 41s): We're, we're still going through the backlog. I mean, you know, we've been developing Katherine (25m 44s): This for a can for a couple of years. Kyle (25m 46s): So, so yeah, we started shipping middle of last month. I want to say. And each week we're doing kind of like a, instead of just getting all the, all the phones at once and just start like chugging through them, what we've done is we're, we've sort of done this ramp up with like a just in time kind of thing. Cause it doesn't make a lot of sense to have, you know, giant piles of phones that you're not shipping for another reasons, just from a, a hardware assurance standpoint. Like imagine God forbid that there were some sort of hardware bug that we discovered two weeks in or something, you know, that, that hasn't happened of course. But imagine if it had, and we had huge stacks of these phones that all had had a problem, it would be a nightmare. Kyle (26m 28s): So this allows us because we know that we have, you know, we have shipping capacity in our, in our team is pushing them out. It's because this is the first time we've done it at such a scale. What we decided do is to have a just in time kind of approach where we get, we sort of just, we manufacture them in batches and based on a little based on more than we think we can ship in a given amount of time, you know, so you make a certain amount, we start going through those and then we make another, we then based on that informs how many we make next and go through those. And then we start ramping up until the point that we hit parody. So yeah, if you were to order one, now what we're saying is it'll probably be a few months before we get to your order because we have a backlog. Kyle (27m 14s): But what we've noticed in general is when we S when we announced that we've shipped the product, that's been pre-ordered, we ended up having this big inrush of people who were waiting, because, you know, you can imagine a lot of crowdfunding campaigns, people are wondering, is it, is the device actually going to be shipped ever, you know, is it going to be made general? So there's a lot of people that hold off on placing the order until it's actually been, the device has been made and started being shipped to backers. So that's something else we've noticed. So we're expecting, we're, we're expect we expected and have seen, you know, an influx of new orders. And so it basically depends on where you get in line on this new flood of orders when you'll get it. Kyle (27m 58s): But yeah, we're not, we, the most frequently asked questions these days about the phone is when do I get my phone? Katherine (28m 5s): Yeah. I, I believe that that's a good problem to have, I guess. I mean, it is interesting. Kyle (28m 9s): So I ended up, I ended up writing up a pretty, a pretty long blog post to sort of explain why we can't answer the question yet for some people. And when we can, essentially, it comes down to an equation of how many we're shipping a week and what our max capacity is to ship out per week. And then how many are left the ship, you know, where you are in line essentially. And now that we've started the ship, we think, you know, by the end of the year or so, we're probably have a good sense of what our throughput is. And at that point we can say, okay, well, if, if, you know, cause the first week you shipped something second week, you ship something, you're not going to get accurate numbers. Cause you're still getting the process down at scale and you find ways to, to improve your, your throughput and all of that. Kyle (28m 56s): But by the end of the year, we think we'll have enough good numbers that we will be able to predict from most people who are, who haven't, if you haven't gotten it yet, that is who's, whoever's left will be able to predict when you will get yours based on our throughput, I guess. So, yeah. Katherine (29m 13s): I kept thinking eventually I would, I would be able to order one and it would be a situation where I could just pick it up in person at some conference, but since conferences are never happening again, I guess I'll have to re have to rethink that whole thing. Kyle (29m 27s): Well, people used to agree that, you know, again, remember sports, we used to have those. Yeah. We were even thinking of having a booth at Def con this year, because we have some customers who would much prefer to pick up a device in person. So yeah, I mean, we wanted to do maybe a situation where people would pray in some conferences in the past, we've had a situation where you could pre-order, you could pay online, but then pick up in person that kind of thing. And we've thought about doing a booth like that, basically a Def con, but obviously it didn't happen this year, but, and I'm not sure it's too, it's obviously premature to know whether we would do it next year, but I could see that happening. I mean, I w I want to do that. Kyle (30m 8s): I completely understand we have, we have, we have a sort of a secured facility where we process these orders. And part of it is we don't want, you know, random people off the street, you know, knocking on the door and especially now with COVID, but we certainly have people that say, well, well, I'm nearby can't I just come and pick it up in person and get a laptop. I'm like, well, we just kind of don't want random strangers, you know, knocking on our door and having, you know, and it's like, it's kind of a security risk to have, you know, random people allowed in our secure facility, et cetera. Katherine (30m 41s): Right. You'll you'll thank us later. Yeah, exactly. Yeah. Oh, funny. Well, I hope that maybe I hope that I'll be able to pick up a Libra five at Def con I'm going to keep my fingers crossed on that, but I'm not going to hold my breath to be honest. I'm really not. Oh man. Anyway, so, so speaking of things that are negative, speaking of being sad about things, we can switch it and we can try and switch gears to being angry about things. I'll be fine. Let's do that. Let's try the new, yeah. The righteous indignation. Yeah. So outrage of the week. So, okay. So I have to kind of maybe even three, but really just two and one of them, one of them is kind of a humorous outrage, I would say. Katherine (31m 28s): And that is the Amazon halo wearable device because all of the coverage, even, and maybe even, especially in mainstream press outlets has been so bad. I mean, it's, you know, it's not just privacy advocates or, you know, geeks like us who are going really, who thought this was a good idea. The Washington post, which is as they even pointed out owned by Jeff Bezos is just tearing this thing apart. I mean, it's Oh yeah. Kyle (31m 60s): So the headline Amazon's new health band is the most invasive tech we've ever tested. And then the subhead is even better. It says the halo band asks you to strip down and strap on a microphone. So it can make 3d scans of your body fat and monitor your tone of voice after all that. It still isn't very helpful. I mean, it's more put down and on top of it, it has no Sr a leash, you know, it's kind of like the color you put on your wrist, you know, like you put on your dog and, but there's not even a thing that says if somebody finds you that to call somebody. I mean, it's just, it's nasty. Kyle (32m 40s): I Doc (32m 40s): Just wonder, you know, what there's some missing in Amazon's DNA or there's maybe some extra piece of DNA. That's just almost at odds with where it came from in the first place, which is, we're just going to be the best retailer and freight forwarder on earth. And we're really great at that, but they've gotten into advertising and they're, I mean, they're, by far much more, I would think much, probably much better at personalizing ads than Google or Facebook are because they have all your history of buying shit. And at the same time they're doing stuff like this and, and the ring and whatever else that they're doing, that that by default is, is kind of invasive. Doc (33m 23s): And, you know, so there's no privacy thing going on there at all. Katherine (33m 27s): How many weeks has it been since Amazon has shocked us with their, their latest offering? I mean, we were just talking about like the flying camera and I mean, that's a, that seems so ridiculous at the time, you know, and I'm, you know, I'm laughing right now because it was completely ridiculous. But now wearable that judges the tone of your voice and tells you you're being rude or emotional or half, I mean, w thought this crap up. It's so weird. I mean, Doc (33m 57s): Really, it really sounds like something that you would see in the Chinese market where it is sort of enforced societal norms where yeah, your tone of voice is you're not cheerful enough for your tone of voice is wrong. You know, you're not, you're not merging into society correctly. And that sort of thing, it's weird that you would see it in the U S market. You know, I, I guess I could see it being accepted. Yeah. Well, I mean it's, yeah, that shouldn't be like an RN D video that you watch to decide what to do next. Yeah. Yeah. Oh my God. I, I, they actually have a little visual here that shows, you know, whether you're, you're being surprised, astonished, annoyed, irritated, dismissive. Doc (34m 40s): What, what I mean, who wants to, who wants a computer to be, to, to be that judgmental about you? Oh my God. And then since they're in the advertising business, you wonder what else they're doing with this? Like, we're, we're going to target this to Grunenthal people, you know? I mean, Oh my God. Katherine (34m 57s): So that's the thing. Look, let's just say for the sake of argument that you find this, let's say, you know, it's entertaining or, you know, fun in some way to wear this device that will, you know, tell, you know, try to interpret your emotions. It's, you know, it's, it's a very advanced mood ring, fine fun and games, except that it's also gathering and storing all this data on you. I mean, obviously, and so like the, the, the, the picture that a company like Amazon can paint of an individual consumer is so accurate now. I mean, I don't know. Katherine (35m 38s): They, they do in fact know you better than, you know yourself and they did, they did that already. So this is just another layer on that. I mean, it's kind of mind boggling. Doc (35m 48s): I have never liked that thing was we know you better than, you know, yourself. I don't think any of these things actually do. And, and if they know you better only for their purposes as even more creepy, I, I mean, so I have, you know, for a variety of actually a doctor's recommendation, does I have a watch and I get no sense now, of course it's not reporting back to Apple. So it's, that's part of the deal. And does one of the things I like about it. Apple doesn't know anything about it, supposedly anyway, but there's plenty of intelligence in the watch. And, and also there's a sleep, sleep thing I use. And, and similarly, it gives me like the longest, you know, if I don't sleep quite right around sleep, as long as it was supposed to, it gives me an impossibly long list of things that I can tell him might have happened. Doc (36m 37s): You know, not one of them, I got up to pee. I'm not kidding. You know, I, you know, Katherine (36m 44s): Or poop in the desert last week, Doc (36m 48s): Did you know spouse moved in bed? I mean, there's just all kinds of weird stuff, but there's, but there's not the, like the one thing that's actually there and nor is the little algorithm, and they're guessing at this stuff, and I kind of don't want it to, you know, it's, I mean, it is interesting to see what my heart rate is most of the time it's and I can do an EKG and that's, that's helpful too. And it's good enough that when I went to my cardiologist in New York a few months ago, he said, leave this I'm to save. I'm going to save money because you do an EKG and then your insurance company, or you get pinged for like $300 or something like that. Is it skip it? What's your watch say, you know, Oh, this is good, you're fine. Doc (37m 29s): You know, it's like, wow, that's, that's good. And then we'll talk about something else, you know? So, you know, you're out of shape. You need to exercise some more, you know, whatever else it might be, but you kind of want that space for, you know, for informed judgment by other people or yourself, or, you know, but I mean, I know a few more things about myself because I have a bathroom scale and I have, and I have a watch, but, but I, I kind of don't want another party keeping track of that, unless it's just, there's the cloud road stored a whole bunch of stuff. That's that only I can get at that tells me some history or something, but the whole idea of being known by machines or having them understand you. Doc (38m 14s): I don't think they, I don't think they can. I don't think I haven't seen it yet. And we've talked about facial recognition before that the more accurate that gets, the more creepy it gets, you just don't want it, you know? And anyway, it's weird. It's just weird. Katherine (38m 31s): The, the level of, of a goal is limited to shopping. Probably they seem to know what I Doc (38m 36s): Want to buy. They do, man. I don't know that for me either. So I'm going to go to Amazon now. So I bought, I bought some crap for various things. So I'm looking right now, recommendations for you shop for gifts, electronic gifts, guys. Okay. I'm not kidding. Okay. Women's purses. That's one of the thing I haven't even looked at those. Okay. You know, headphones got them already, you know, beauty nap. What the hell is that animal crossing? I never bought any of those things. I don't even know what this is. This is, Oh, it's an episode. It's a, okay. It's a carrying case for Nintendo switch, which my grandson got like three years ago and every, he actually has that case. Doc (39m 16s): And I may have gotten it from, I it's like, it's not, I don't see anything that smart. I mean, here's something it should know by now. You know? I mean, if, if it was really smart, it would say, Hey, you do photography. Drones have gotten really good. You do a lot of aerial work. How about getting a drone? You know, here's your choice of drones. That would be, that would be insightful, you know, but I've never seen it bought Kyle (39m 41s): This. You should buy it again. You know, Doc (39m 44s): That's mostly what it is. And it's Kyle (39m 46s): The Nintendo switch case. You don't, you want to Nintendo switch cases. Cause isn't that helpful. Doc (39m 50s): Yeah. I mean, as I go further down here, there's a JBL flip phone, the galaxy, your buds, you know, a Polaroid at original Polaroid thing, you know, just lots and lots of I tell you what it is. I see lots and lots of 'em or there is finally as I go way down here, there is a, a drone, okay. Right next to the Legos, super Mario and above the slinging machine, official carpool karaoke microphone with a readout on it, which is just bizarre. And I wouldn't ever want, but it's, it's, it's like a lot of random stuff. That's as random as anything you find in the Sunday, newspapers supplement full of coupons. Doc (40m 31s): It's just, you know, it's stuff you bought and that stuff. And when you actually, this is a new thing with Amazon, a relatively new, if you go to look for something, it gives you all of the sponsored stuff upfront, meaning this is all the stuff that somebody paid them to, to put up top, which is like, okay, I'm going to skip over that. You know, I, I, you know, some of the, sometimes it's good. Sometimes it's not, but you know, at least, you know, they're paying to put it there, but it's like, you know, it's like, that's the thing Kyle (40m 60s): That was because they're paying because they're paying to put it there. The reason for things like this band on your arm that tells you your mood and tells you whether, whether you're fat or not. Well, it does two things. One, it tells, if it can scan your body shape, then it's going to help customize whatever clothing you might order on Amazon, which is a fit fit when you're buying clothing and you're not physically in person is a problem. And so that solves that. But your mood, you know, if you're a Mark from a marketing standpoint, that's one thing that you don't quite get from searches is what mood is someone in. And you know, that if depressed Doc (41m 34s): Versus angry versus happy there, they're going to have different spending patterns. And so you, as a, as an advertiser, you might say, I want you to show this particular, I want you to market this particular thing to this demographic when they're depressed. But when they feel good about themselves, I want you to market this other thing, you know? Yeah, yeah, yeah. It's it's I mean, who, who wants to be hacked? You know, who wants to be manipulated? I suppose some people do, but it's, that's part of what this is about. And, Katherine (42m 11s): Well, I do not want to be hacked, but I, they seem to be doing a pretty great job. It's really irritating. And now I'm kind of offended because it seems like they, they know me real well and nobody else, but I swear, I'm looking at Amazon right now and I want all of these things like hand sanitizer, cause they know I'm paranoid a coat I'm kind of cold right now. An airtight container for coffee that I definitely need. Oh, irritated. Doc (42m 34s): If it's the air escape. It's good. It's actually good. The air escape is good. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Katherine (42m 40s): Oh, that is exactly what I'm looking at right now. I'm not Doc (42m 43s): Joking. It's showing me that Katherine (42m 45s): It's showing me air escape, coffee thing, and then Oxo, good grips. And then something called Augie and something called something else. Doc (42m 53s): Yeah. The air escape is good. And I did to credit where due to Amazon, I ordered because we've now, now six of them to two for the New York apartment when for decaf and one for calf. And then some, for the apartment we have here and one for our main part of the house. And so, but one of them came without a lid and, and I contacted Amazon to mean it wasn't easy, but I did get a human being and they said, Oh no, no, no, we'll just, we'll just said, don't, don't send it back. We're just sending you a new one. We just send you another one. Don't worry about it. And they did, they sent me another one, you know, that had a lid. Doc (43m 34s): And that, that was good to them. You know? So, so a little hats off for that, I guess when you spend more on them than you spend any works, that may be Costco that's I guess they should. Katherine (43m 47s): So, so on that note, so, so there's another thing that's a little bit more serious and less ridiculous than a, than a a hundred dollar mood ring or whatever it is. And that is an article I think, Oh God, was it in gadget knows and, and go, hold on article, thank you. An article in Gizmodo about schools, us schools, having access to the same technology that federal law enforcement has for breaking into phones. And they use this technology to conduct unworn, warrantless searches of student phones. Katherine (44m 27s): And this is somehow okay. Except not with me, not in any way mean I, I find it shocking. Like I saw it pop up somewhere. I can't remember where, and my first thought was, thank God I don't have kids because I would definitely get into a big fight about this. Like this would end in some serious conflict if I ever were involved in something like this. But I mean, it's insane to me. I mean, the obvious answer to me, I guess, is that you definitely can never, ever send your kids to school with any kind of smartphone ever just that's, you know, number one just don't have it anywhere, you know, where these people can get to it because it's, I dunno, it's definitely, you're talking about the exact same, the exact same technology in depending apparently on, you know, which option they have or how much they've paid, you know, the company that provides this sort of thing. Katherine (45m 21s): They can either just have access to un-encrypted stuff and, and you know, which is probably everything on your average kid's smartphone, because maybe they don't think about it, except if they're using a newer Apple device, right. Or they can like fully break into everything, including, you know, they can get around passwords, they can get around encryption, they can get it right. Especially if you're using an older phone. So, you know, I find that really disturbing and we've talked many, many times about how intimate a, a mobile devices. It, it, you know, it, you carry it around everywhere. You know, you take pictures of everything with it. You communicate with everyone in your life on this device. You're probably, you know, up late doom scrolling and, you know, playing a Google doctor or Dr. Katherine (46m 6s): Google, you know, in the middle of the night, it knows everything that you're anxious about. It knows everything that you're curious about. It knows, you know, it knows everything. And, and yet somehow some, some school districts and in fact judges, apparently because these, these issues have gone to court, find it perfectly acceptable for a school to be able to hack into somebody whose device. So I, I find this really disturbing. I wonder, Kyle, if you could kind of maybe give us some insight about how, how potentially dangerous this is. Kyle (46m 40s): I mean, I've, I see this trend over and over again, where what will happen is someone will come up with a new invasive technology and it's sort of like boiling the frog kind of thing where you could not, you know, throw this against everybody. Like everyone would rise up and say, this is not okay. But so what you do instead is you start with people with the least possible agency. You can normally, if you have some sort of invasive privacy invasive tech, the first step is to either sell it for stopping terrorism or maybe pedophiles. And then after, after you get sort of a proof of concept there, then you have to expand. If you're selling a product, you need to expand your user base. Kyle (47m 21s): And so the next level of groups that don't have agency are kids in either high school or college and prisons. And so that's where you start seeing all of this facial recognition technology being spread, or, you know, applications you're forced to install on your phone that can track you if you're, if you're talking about colleges or in this case, you know, technology that was originally for law enforcement for terrorism, but has trickled down into local police departments that then trickles down into now school districts. And then eventually, you know, after you get a proof of concept where it's normalized among people in high school, then it just sort of goes for everybody, you know, then it's just sort of a par for the course, whatever the technology is. But yeah, the, I mean, the troubling thing in this case is, as you say, the phone is very, a very personal thing. Kyle (48m 7s): You know, almost in many cases, more personal than having someone at school, you know, even maybe even submit to like a strip search or something, because that's a one-time event as traumatic as that could be, but your phone has potentially the same content along with everything else. And that's the other thing I was wondering is how school districts handled the fact that if they are scanning, if they are capturing all the contents and texts and photos from a teenager's phone, there's a good chance that someone might have a nude photo of themselves or someone else on there that that would then constitute child pornography. So I'm not exactly sure how the school district gets around that. Katherine (48m 46s): Yeah. Certainly every school district is in possession of contraband. Yeah, exactly. It's I mean, the whole thing is ridiculous. It's it? I don't know. It's definitely, it is definitely not the same as a locker search or a backpack search or whatever sort of things they used to do to kids. But you know, something you, you just brought up actually, if terrorism is, let's say the first target for proof of concept on, you know, for invasive technology, it seems to me another thing that's happening is let's just label everyone as a terrorist because that seems to be happening too. And it's not just one, you know, one side of the political spectrum it's, you know, any entity on the left or right, is now considered well they're terrorists, but regardless, I mean, any political affiliation of any kind or any sort of, you know, you marched down the street and you're in the downtown of whatever city you're in and you could be labeled, labeled a terrorist, you know, and we know that that, that, that police are conducting invasive surveillance on protestors, even like totally benign protesters people, literally just walking down the street in support of some cause. Katherine (49m 55s): Well, that's something that's helpful. Kyle (49m 57s): Well, very sophisticated surveillance too. I mean like millet tradition, something that was again, piloted in the military for counter-terror terrorism in other countries where you'd have a drone that's flying around with us with a stingray monitoring all of the phones within a certain area. I mean, that's, that was used this year in protests to monitor who happened to be at, at a particular protest. But, well, yeah, I mean, that's the thing is if you start this technology, people accept will, I wouldn't like it if you did that to me, but I'm not going to speak up for this, this person who's just completely, you know, undesirable, like, no one's going to speak up for this other person because they're a terrorist or they're whatever, whatever the category is. Kyle (50m 40s): And so it's safe for you to do that, to them, whatever, whatever the thing is. And then it's either you redefine that term to then apply to a larger group of people. Or again, you just sort of trickle it down to the next group that doesn't have agency. So if it did, you know, if it's okay to, to put a, have a GPS monitor on someone, who's, who's a dangerous criminal. Okay. Well, most people won't, wouldn't add a lot of people wouldn't advocate against that, but then you sort of move it down to the next group and say, well, you know, if you want to be on this college campus, we need to be able to know where all the students in our campus are at all times. So you need to, if you're going to be at our college, you need to agree to be tracked at all times while you're on campus, you know, that sort of thing, Katherine (51m 22s): Or, you know, people being, being placed under effectively house arrest for quarantine. And regardless of how you feel about, you know, the public public health ramifications of people breaking quarantine, you know, I, I was frankly pretty disturbed by the fact that, that some judge and I can't remember where actually ordered somebody to wear an ankle bracelet, an ankle monitor to make sure they were staying home for however many days. I don't know. I think that might be a bridge too far. Kyle (51m 50s): Well, it's just, that's the thing with all of this technology is, I mean, we've, we've talked about this with privacy invading advertising technology, or, you know, things where you see this with Google these days, where as they start, there are things they will make little creeping steps, every one or two years toward a certain direction where they will do something. And everyone, everyone who sees the implications will say, okay, well this one thing you did right now, isn't as bad as if you did that plus this other thing, then they will say, well, yeah, well, we're not doing that other thing. We're explicitly not doing that. And then you wait a couple of years and then they kind of quietly do the other thing that then makes you know, that fits all the pieces together. A good example was sort of like the integration of DoubleClick when they acquired DoubleClick. Kyle (52m 33s): You know, everyone, that major outcry was well. But if you combine all of this DoubleClick data with all the other data that you already have about people, then it would create this. There's a lot of horrible privacy implications among other things with doing that. And at the time of the acquisition they have that go through. They said, well, yeah, we're not going to do that though. So it's not a problem. We'll never do that. Then you wait a couple of years and then it sort of quietly merged the two things. And then at that point it's, it's sort of a done deal. So there's not much you're going to say about it. I mean, that happens with a lot of different features. You know, you sort of slowly ease people into it. Katherine (53m 6s): Yeah. Well, I mean the same could be said for, for the Amazon halo device. We just talked about, you know, it, I guess to hear from me from here on out, anyone making a wearable, it can at least say, well, Oh no, we totally respect your privacy. We're not analyzing your, your, the tone of your voice. I mean, that's too far, but what we're doing, we're doing everything. So we're, we're, it's totally Fine. Kyle (53m 27s): Well, for example, you could say the same thing about, we can say, say, say the same thing, same thing in the conversations we've had about ring, for instance, you know, like you would say, well, or, or echo or any other sort of home device where you'd say, well, fortunately it's only on a loop for 30 seconds or whatever. So it's not recording everything I say right now, you know? And that's true until unless at some point they, someone decides, well, well now for this extra feature, we do need to actually do that. You know, whatever it is, or, you know, ring, you have to opt in for law enforcement to see what your ring is looking at. And everyone says, you know, people would say, well, I don't like that, but at least you have to opt in. Kyle (54m 8s): So that's something, but that's a preference that you could easily change at any point, you know, Katherine (54m 14s): And suddenly, you know, your local law enforcement has real-time access to live stream from your device anytime they want. Doc (54m 21s): Yeah. The weird thing for me is that almost nobody's worked on starting with giving us agency, you know, I mean, we should be able to say, here's privacy. Here's, here's what I've got. You can't see anything. You're not seeing anything we're doing. I mean, we have it with crypto, but only wizards know how to use crypto really. And, and, and I suppose people could get, you know, you can get a signal or one of the other being a relatively private chats and stuff like that. And those aren't that hard to use, but, but for just going about your life, we don't, we're not wearing, we're still not wearing clothes. Doc (55m 1s): We're still walking around naked, you know, and, and we rely on, on laws and other things to tell, to tell, you know, to tell those who could abuse her privacy, not to do that. And that's not good enough. You know, we haven't invented the things that keep, give us the privacy yet. Not for the most part, you know, cetera. Purism, I mean, I'm sure you get top of it, Amazon. I mean, I mean, imagine if Amazon were, we're like Apple on this thing, you know, I mean that, where, you know, what we, whenever you reveal to us, it's that that's yours. Primarily, if you give us permission, we'll make suggestions to you and stuff rather than let's start with, we're going to be as invasive as he possibly can, you know? Doc (55m 46s): And then back off when you guys freak out, but I'm not even sure that's going to happen, you know? Kyle (55m 51s): Well, I mean, that was a provision opt-in like, that was a provision in the California privacy law that ultimately passed, but it only passed after tech companies got the opt-in requirement struck from the privacy law, Doc (56m 8s): Right? Yeah. Yeah. It's, it's a thing, but mostly because it created more bureaucracy and because it still saw us as mere computer consumers, but there was the thing we could talk about it next time maybe, but the global privacy controls doing now that starts with the California law and, and the, the eff and Mozilla and a lot of other, but Dr. Cohen, some privacy oriented outfits and individuals, as well as some of the bigs spinning IAB is sounding not, not bad on it. So I don't know. I've just sat in on one meeting so far and, and I expected to be very cynical about it, but I'm not, not yet. Doc (56m 52s): So I'm a little blank, but could easily think of it as, do not attract with T E but it's going to take you to do not attract messages that a browser header that says globally, no, I'm BI I'm opted out. I do not want, you know, the opt in to be good to, to, you know, I have to send you the message that says I went in on that. Otherwise I'm out don't, don't, don't, don't screw with me. I don't like either of those actually opt in or opt out because it sort of assumes that all agency is still on the other side. I'm going to have to make a choice with every different site, whether to opt in or out rather than, you know, I seem to be walking around with clothing on, so you're not allowed to look at my naked body, everybody. Doc (57m 34s): That's my message to all of you. We can't do that. And we need to be able to do that well that, yeah, that's why my preference would be for the default to be, you have to default to, I'm not collecting any of your data. Your data is yours. I'm not allowed to do it. I'm only allowed to do it. If you expressly give me informed consent to do it. And then at that point I will do it, but you, but, but if I, if you do nothing, then I can't do it. I can't take any of your data. It's yours. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, it's one of the more quoted things that I've written in the last few years. And I think it was one of the things for Linux journal. It was actually, one of the things I wrote for Linux journal is I think the headline was, if your privacy is up to somebody else, you don't have any. Doc (58m 16s): And, but one of the lines in there was, you know, in the absence of a clear invitation or a court order, you know, looking at people without their, their, their permission is wrong on its face. You know, you're just not allowed to do that. You know, we have that in the physical world. We don't have it in the online world yet because it's early because whenever you, whenever you make a new world, then there's an attempt to that. The rules, somehow don't previous rules don't apply or don't map. Right. So there's, you know, if you're, if you were in the wild West, then there was, there was the normal rules, not in the wild West and apply until ultimately they did, but it lagged by a long time. Katherine (58m 58s): But I kind of feel like we are in the wild West. That's how I feel like when I, when I, when digitally, when, you know, when, when we get, you know, when we start talking about things like, you know, schools being allowed to quite literally digitally strip search your children, you know, people should be outraged by that, but yet they're not because misinformation campaign, who knows why, but, but I, I feel like we're definitely in the minority. I think that, you know, I don't think that your average parent is all that concerned with letting their kid have a smartphone at school. I just don't think it's on their radar to worry about this. And, and, and which is disturbing Kyle (59m 38s): Well, but that's also because your average parent given the preference, and many of them already do put spyware on their children's phones to track their children, right. Because they want to be able to see everything that their kid did. And if they were given the choice, they would want to have access to that software that the school board has school district has that allows them to get everything off of the phone, you know? So we have, so if, if we, as if your average parent is okay with it, then you're not going to have a lot of advocates for saying the school shouldn't be able to do the same thing. So we have to, you have to have a society that cares about that for, you know, you have to have people that see the implicate. I mean, it's not that people don't care. Kyle (1h 0m 18s): I keep, I keep saying, it's not that people don't care about privacy, as much as they don't understand the implications of what they're giving up, you know? And so I, you know, a lot of parents don't necessarily understand the implications of, of what it normalizes. If they're spying on their children all the time through these different devices, through, you know, spying apps on the phone or whatever it is. Katherine (1h 0m 43s): Yeah. I, I would just, you know, I would still fit. I mean, and I, I, I suspect you're absolutely correct that they just don't, they don't see the implications, but still it's as much as I find a parent spying on their children digitally a little bit unsettling, and I wouldn't be comfortable with it. I think that's still a completely different level. Like you, you've probably given your children a bath, but would you want some random stranger at their school doing the same? That's kind of how I feel about that. It's, it's like, it's a completely different, like a parent invading their children's privacy is okay. Katherine (1h 1m 23s): Reasonably acceptable to me at some level, but a stranger in a school doing the same is a whole different level to me. Anyway. I hope that that people will, will become more aware of things like that. I hope that they will either send their kids to school with a flip phone or not at all, or maybe a leave in five. Right. I mean, or I don't know. I mean, could they, could they have to leave in five? Maybe that's a question for a future podcast. So anyway, but yeah, don't, don't let your kids take smartphones to school, please. That's the moral of the Memorial of the podcast also. Good luck. We're in the wild West. Kyle (1h 2m 4s): The phones are part of their bodies now effectively. Yeah. Katherine (1h 2m 8s): Well, yeah, I think we can wrap up any final thoughts. Kyle (1h 2m 11s): There are no final thoughts. Katherine (1h 2m 13s): Nothing is ever final. There's always the next podcast. Maybe we'll see you next week and maybe you won't. Thanks for listening. And I hope you'll come back and join us whenever we come. .