transcript

Speaker 1:
[00:00] Support for the show comes from Odoo. Running a business takes everything you've got, and a lot of the tools out there that are supposed to make your life easier just aren't great at talking to each other, and that means you end up having to toggle between a dozen different apps and services just to keep the lights on. Enough of that, now there's Odoo, the all-in-one, fully integrated platform that might help you actually get it all done. Thousands of businesses have made the switch, so why not you? Try Odoo for free at odoo.com. That's odoo.com. Support for the show comes from Retool. Too many companies run critical operations on duct-taped spreadsheets, Slack workflows, and whatever else they could cobble together, not because they want to, but because building internal tools means weeks of waiting on someone else's backlog. That's where Retool comes in. Build custom internal tools just by describing what you need. Prompt something like, build me a revenue dashboard for our Salesforce data, and Retool actually builds it on your company's data in your cloud with enterprise security built in. Go to retool.com/waveform. We all need to retool how we build software. Support for the show comes from Framer. So the reason you create a website is so that your business can thrive, but some websites just don't look the part. Framer can help with that. Framer is the enterprise-grade, no-code website builder used by teams at companies like Perplexity and Miro to move faster. With real-time collaboration and robust CMS with everything you need for great SEO, not to mention advanced analytics that include integrated A-B testing, your designers and marketers are empowered to build and maximize your.com from day one. So whether you want to launch a new site or test a few landing pages or migrate your fold.com, Framer has programs for startups, scale-ups and large enterprises to make going from idea to live site as easy and fast as possible. Learn how you can get more out of your.com from a Framer specialist or get started building for free today at framer.com/wave for 30% off a Framer Pro annual plan. That's framer.com/wave for 30% off. framer.com/wave. Rules and restrictions may apply. Support for the show comes from Zapier. When it comes to bringing AI into your workflows, there's no shortage of hype, but turning that hype into something real and actionable starts with the right tools. Zapier is here to help. Zapier turns strategy into execution, so you're not just talking about AI, you're delivering on it. With its AI orchestration platform, you can bring AI into any workflow and focus more on what really matters to your company. You can even connect top AI models, including ChachiBT and Claude, to whatever tools your team already uses, so you can incorporate AI exactly where you need it. That can be workflows, an autonomous agent, a customer chatbot, or whatever else. You can orchestrate it all with Zapier, letting you do more with your time. And it's designed for everyone, not just tech experts. According to data from Zapier, teams have already automated over 300 million AI tasks using the platform. So join the millions of businesses transforming how they work with Zapier and AI. Get started for free by visiting zapier.com/wave. That's zapier.com/wave. Support for the show comes from Odoo. Running a business takes everything you've got, and a lot of the tools out there that are supposed to make your life easier just aren't great at talking to each other, and that means you end up having to toggle between a dozen different apps and services just to keep the lights on. Enough of that, now there's Odoo, the all-in-one, fully integrated platform that might help you actually get it all done. Thousands of businesses have made the switch, so why not you? Try Odoo for free at odoo.com. That's odoo.com. No more doc for me. Wow. It's committing to it. I'm committing. I like that. I don't click on those things. I just do command space. I'm going to do that too. I'm going to hide my doc. Is this something we can all agree on?

Speaker 2:
[04:09] I'm a RayCast guy.

Speaker 3:
[04:10] I can't.

Speaker 2:
[04:11] The real end to this whole debate is, everyone has way too many tabs open and just do whatever you want.

Speaker 1:
[04:16] Not end.

Speaker 2:
[04:16] I thought it was fun.

Speaker 1:
[04:17] Yeah, that's the whole reason I liked Arc in the first place, because I have way too many tabs open and it closes them for me.

Speaker 3:
[04:22] You don't want Arc, you want an AI browser by Atlassian.

Speaker 1:
[04:32] Yo, what is up, people of the internet? Welcome back to another episode of the Waveform Podcast. We're your hosts, I'm Marques.

Speaker 2:
[04:36] I'm Andrew.

Speaker 1:
[04:37] And I'm David. This week, we've got NASA coming back from the moon, sick. Chrome adding vertical tabs, which we can talk about if they're actually better. Or not. What? Samsung messages shutting down, Anthropic Project Glasswing, and how ANC to headphones is causing potential safety issues, and how a car company's trying to fix that. And we'll end it all with Andrew's whoop rant part two.

Speaker 2:
[05:02] I also put and like four times in there, so it just sounded like you did a really run on sentence. That's my fault.

Speaker 1:
[05:07] Hey, it's the intro. It's got to be a run on. But first, did they even test this?

Speaker 2:
[05:12] I have a really fast one. No one's on Pixel right now, right? So none of you have experienced this.

Speaker 4:
[05:17] I have moved on to greener pastures. Nah.

Speaker 2:
[05:21] Mine's greener. Mine's greener for sure. It's a bit yellower. The new flashlight quick setting is driving me insane. This only happens in Google quick settings and only if it is the 2x1 tile width. So pressing the button, if you press just the little tiny circle of the flashlight icon, it turns the flashlight on. But if you press the whole thing, the setting comes up, which is flashlight strength, which I think is a good setting.

Speaker 1:
[05:50] And it turned on.

Speaker 2:
[05:51] It turns it on, but then you can either press turn off or done, and it stays on. I think the more specific adjustments should be the little button and the big button should just be on and off. Every time I turn this on, I get a menu setting, and I hate it. And I think if you want to be specific, that should be the smaller touch real estate. 100%. OK, thank you. I wonder if anyone else is having it. Everyone I've asked to test this presses the little button. And I'm like, am I insane?

Speaker 1:
[06:22] I mean, that's fair. But regardless, like a bigger touch target should be the more common.

Speaker 2:
[06:25] The more general thing. Yeah. OK, thank you.

Speaker 1:
[06:27] That reminds me of OK, one on the dynamic island on the iPhone. I think I say this in the review. Are you back on the air? I'm on the air. I just I'm using another camera phone with like an incredible camera. So let me try to use the air.

Speaker 2:
[06:40] That was a fair question. You sounded a little offended by him asking. Oh, no. I mean, I think that was a totally fair question.

Speaker 1:
[06:45] This is the first time I've stuck to the air for more than two days. I want to try the air, but I don't want to spend $1,000 to try the air.

Speaker 2:
[06:51] Yeah.

Speaker 1:
[06:51] Yeah. It's the only black phone they sell. So fair. So the dynamic island when you're playing media, you can either long press it, which brings up the little pop up, or you can tap it, which brings up the whole app. I think I felt since the beginning that that should be the other way around. I should tap it to show the controls or I should long press it to dive in to the app.

Speaker 2:
[07:11] I, yeah, that sounds exactly the same. The things that can happen accidentally should be the less annoying things that happen. So tapping both of those should just be the really quick thing that happens, where the more intentional version of it should be the more granular.

Speaker 1:
[07:30] Kind of related to that, you know how pulling down on the iPhone on the left brings up like one menu setting and bringing down the one on the right brings out the quick settings? On the left is notifications, on the right is quick settings, yeah. Yeah, that's annoying because to get to notifications is really hard, especially on the Macs. Like, I can almost never do it. And it makes sense to want to get to quick settings quicker, but I can almost never get to the...

Speaker 2:
[07:53] What do you think you go into more, settings or notifications?

Speaker 1:
[07:57] Quick settings because if I want to do notifications, I just lock my phone and then swipe up.

Speaker 2:
[08:01] Oh, interesting.

Speaker 5:
[08:02] That's funny, that is faster.

Speaker 1:
[08:03] That's actually my tick. Lock, swipe up. Yeah, when I'm anxious and I don't know what to do and I'm just unlocking my phone, I'm like, notification, notification. Your unlock number must be crazy high. Dude.

Speaker 2:
[08:14] Do they track that?

Speaker 1:
[08:15] They probably do. We should all look at that at some point.

Speaker 4:
[08:18] Your phone can track it. You can see it.

Speaker 2:
[08:19] I didn't know that.

Speaker 4:
[08:20] Digital well-being or I forget what it's called on iPhone.

Speaker 2:
[08:23] Is that on Android?

Speaker 1:
[08:23] It's called the same thing.

Speaker 4:
[08:24] It's called the same thing, digital well-being?

Speaker 1:
[08:26] Oh, on... Oh, no, it's called like screen time. Screen time. Yes. Which, by the way, I looked at my screen time a lot this week and it was not good. I was monitoring the situation.

Speaker 3:
[08:37] Are you on iPhone?

Speaker 1:
[08:38] Yeah.

Speaker 3:
[08:38] Did you turn off joint device screen time? Because by default, it sums every device that's signed into your iCloud account.

Speaker 1:
[08:45] Oh, really?

Speaker 3:
[08:46] Yeah. I used to be like, how do I have 18 hours of screen time? And then I realized, oh, it has my entire workday. Oh, what? I usually have my devices.

Speaker 1:
[08:55] And that doesn't actually track if you're looking at it.

Speaker 3:
[08:57] No. So if you have like jolt of caffeine or something on it, you can have 24 hours of screen time.

Speaker 1:
[09:05] Oh, wow. OK. That's good to know.

Speaker 3:
[09:07] Maybe they turn up. This was like as of a year and a half ago.

Speaker 1:
[09:11] Yeah. Anyway, that was a good one, Andrew. I agree with you that the bigger touch target should be the more common use case.

Speaker 4:
[09:17] Although, if I can quickly be the...

Speaker 2:
[09:22] He just agreed with me.

Speaker 4:
[09:24] I feel like the reason why the more complicated thing is the tap is because they measure time it takes to do something, and that's what they're optimizing for.

Speaker 2:
[09:35] I'll fully admit that the reason they did that is probably based on the literal statistics that they have on the phone. I just think those stats are wrong.

Speaker 1:
[09:44] Yeah, but feelings don't care about your facts, Andrew.

Speaker 5:
[09:47] Come on.

Speaker 1:
[09:48] All right.

Speaker 2:
[09:50] Let's talk about it.

Speaker 1:
[09:50] Let's talk about this week. Rockets. NASA sent people around the moon. Around the moon.

Speaker 2:
[09:57] I don't think I can name all the planets.

Speaker 1:
[09:59] Is the moon a planet, Andrew? It's very specifically worded. There are so many interesting things about this, and I just figured we could just pop through some of the most fascinating ones. First of all, the Artemis 2 mission is what it's called. These four astronauts went, they launched, they slung shot around Earth. They then flew a quarter million miles to the moon, slung shot around the dark side of the moon, and then came back to Earth. And I think by the time you listen to this on Friday, that's when they splash down in the ocean. So, like a week long mission, and about 45 minutes of that was spent behind the moon, which is the farthest any humans have ever been from Earth. Pretty sick. Which is so cool. They took some incredible photos from back there, and they also sent them back to Earth for us to look at before they even got back here. And the photos are incredible, and I have so many thoughts. Okay, first thing we started seeing is, this is, I guess, the first mission where the astronauts were allowed to bring personal devices into space, meaning their iPhones and Android phones. And so we did get images from their smartphones as well sent back, and that's awesome. That's really interesting. Probably some of the best moon photos any phone has ever taken, because they're super close to it. We all like to think we can take moon photos from our phone.

Speaker 2:
[11:12] But the Earth photo was the one that was popping off on Twitter, which was very funny.

Speaker 1:
[11:19] They looked great. They took photos out the window of their space shuttle, and you could see Earthrise. As they got further and further from Earth, the Earth got smaller and smaller, and then they got closer and closer to the moon, and the moon got bigger and bigger until they slung shot around the moon. I had to Google this. They went within 5,000 miles of the moon's surface to do that gravity slingshot, so they were really close. I mean, in the scale of the universe. They went 250,000 miles, and then they got within 5,000 miles of the moon. I think that's pretty cool. Compared to the biggest possible thing we can measure, they were pretty close. Yeah, it was pretty interesting. Does anyone have any thoughts on the shot on iPhone photos that we got from Artemis? I thought they were pretty cool. I have some thoughts. I thought they might end up as a billboard pretty quickly. Some people had stakes against that. They were like, let it just happen organically.

Speaker 2:
[12:12] I'm fine with that.

Speaker 1:
[12:13] It's fine if it's never a billboard. But also, missed opportunity from Samsung, because Samsung gallops. I saw some funny memes. Because you know the photos where they took the photo of the moon in the foreground and then Earth was in the background, which is the opposite of what we usually see. There was a really funny meme where the moon was in the foreground and then the background was a moon.

Speaker 3:
[12:30] It's a shot on iPhone.

Speaker 1:
[12:32] I mean, shot at Samsung.

Speaker 2:
[12:33] I was like, I saw a bunch of those, if Samsung took this. I saw people complaining like, wow, it's a real shame they didn't use a Samsung for this photo with a zoom. It's like, you're in space.

Speaker 1:
[12:43] You're literally one of the moon.

Speaker 2:
[12:45] Why do you need? You don't need the zoom. You're in space. This is literally the opposite. Also, it was the iPhone's selfie camera.

Speaker 1:
[12:51] It was really a selfie camera. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, okay, I might get canceled for this.

Speaker 2:
[12:56] Do it.

Speaker 1:
[12:56] But I...

Speaker 2:
[12:57] Maybe not. I'm just kidding.

Speaker 1:
[12:59] No, I just don't think it's people like, wow, it's insane that this is the selfie camera. And I was like, well, yeah.

Speaker 2:
[13:05] I thought it was cool.

Speaker 1:
[13:06] If you took... Yeah, it is cool. But it's like, yeah, it's the selfie camera. I mean, you can do photos with the selfie camera. Like, what's so insane about that?

Speaker 2:
[13:15] I guess it's like, I think more so is that this photo itself is incredible because it's earth and we just don't see it. It really has nothing to do with the camera. Any phone could have basically taken that photo up.

Speaker 1:
[13:25] It's just the perspective. It's not even so much about the phone that's taking it. It's that we have all these... Like when you open your phone camera roll and you see the photos you took and that's your perspective from the last couple of days and you know what a photo from your phone usually looks like. It's just crazy to think that their camera roll, they open it up and it's a photo looking down on Earth from 250,000 miles away and a shot of the moon, which is somehow right next to them. That's just such a crazy thing to imagine. And it kind of humanizes it or puts it in a perspective for us to appreciate that that's really how it looks to them sitting looking out that window. Yeah, pretty crazy stuff.

Speaker 2:
[14:06] It'll be funny in like 20 years when they're scrolling really far back in their gallery one day and they're like, Memories.

Speaker 4:
[14:12] Oh, oh yeah.

Speaker 2:
[14:13] Did this happen six years ago, just like, the Earth?

Speaker 3:
[14:16] Six years ago today.

Speaker 6:
[14:17] Yeah, what is the AI gonna say?

Speaker 1:
[14:19] Like, it'll show you your lunch or your dog and it'll be like, you on the moon. Does it know that they were on the moon? Like, what is it gonna say?

Speaker 4:
[14:26] You know how you can track your location in Google Maps, like going back all the way? I wonder what happens.

Speaker 1:
[14:31] Yeah, what is their find?

Speaker 2:
[14:31] Fog of World would have went crazy. Fog of World is like, where did you go?

Speaker 1:
[14:36] Yeah. Yeah. You have people's pins on Find My. Where do you think those pins went?

Speaker 4:
[14:41] It's just off the grid, literally.

Speaker 5:
[14:44] Yeah.

Speaker 1:
[14:44] Can I do a little camera breakdown of all the cameras we used on this?

Speaker 5:
[14:47] Yes.

Speaker 1:
[14:48] Okay. So a lot of people were confused why they were using the Nikon D5, which is a camera that came out in 2016. And I've been screaming about this for years. And this is actually like finally starting to get better. So the reason they used the Nikon D5 is because of the very large pixel pitch. That's the size of the pixel on the sensor. If you have a bigger pixel pitch, you get more light per pixel, which means lower noise. And for space photography, that's very important because most of the background is black. Not a lot of light. Yeah. Some people were asking, why did they shoot with the Hasselblad? The Hasselblad is 100 megapixels. But each one of those pixels is tiny. Very tiny. Yeah. So 6.4 is very big. And like 10 years ago, it was more common to have a bigger pixel. It's only 20 megapixel camera, you know, which is fine. Like, that's still a lot of resolution for like, if you want to use it as a desktop wallpaper or something like that. It looks very DSLR-y. They did also use a Nikon Z9, which is Nikon's flagship camera that's out right now. That has a pixel pitch of 4.35 micrometers, so it's a little bit smaller, so very good. 45.7 megapixels. Obviously, they're going to want to be able to zoom in on some of these pictures. They used a GoPro Hero 4 Black, which I saw some really cool photos of. They did make that an Instagram post. Yeah, in the Instagram post.

Speaker 2:
[16:03] That's like seven or eight years old at this point. We're on Hero 11 or 12 or something, I think.

Speaker 1:
[16:09] Yeah, I was kind of curious why they did that. It might have been a similar thing with the bigger pixel pitch. I didn't actually look at what that pixel pitch was. I think what happens is these programs take so many years to build that they're not using typically state of the art. Like when they build this Artemis II thing, they're using the 2019, 2020 cameras when they start building it. So even though there's newer cameras available today, that's the stuff that they started with. It seems like that would be the easiest thing to just switch out, though. They're probably similar resolution, but like computers and dimensions and stuff, they just lock that stuff in.

Speaker 3:
[16:43] It's the same reason the software used to record the podcast, the stuff called Wildtracks, and we're generally like six or seven versions behind the most recent version, because, God forbid, we just can't validate every single aspect. If we use one too many threads and it interacts with the lighting software weird and it crashes or you lose an episode, I'd much rather miss a few features and know it works.

Speaker 1:
[17:09] Don't test in production.

Speaker 3:
[17:10] And that's on a podcast, like picture it in space.

Speaker 1:
[17:14] Yes.

Speaker 3:
[17:14] There's no Best Buy in space.

Speaker 1:
[17:16] If anything, GoPro really should have done the marketing campaign, because they're like a dying company.

Speaker 2:
[17:22] Way more up there.

Speaker 4:
[17:23] I don't know if they're allowed yet. I saw someone say, because NASA is like government funded and everything, you would have to reach out to the individual astronaut and ask them for their permission.

Speaker 1:
[17:35] There was a lot of misinformation online, people were saying, oh, Apple probably paid for it. And like, no, there was actually confirmation that none of these companies paid to have their devices.

Speaker 2:
[17:45] It's wild to think that when you just look at like these astronauts are from the US and what the US. iPhone market share is, it's really easy to deduce that they probably have an iPhone.

Speaker 1:
[17:53] And also, by the way, everyone's like, why Nikon? Why not Canon? Nikon was the first ever camera in space. And the reason that happened was because one of the astronauts just happened to be a photographer and he bought an Nikon before he went up into space and he just took some pictures. And that was before Hasselblad, that's before Hasselblad started making their custom Hasselblad cameras for space, which they left some of those cameras on the moon, which they should have just retrieved them, because they've been there since 1969 or whatever. Oh, the cameras are still on the moon. Yeah, the cameras are still on the moon. They just took the film backs, because they needed as little weight possible to be able to get back.

Speaker 5:
[18:29] Space litter.

Speaker 1:
[18:31] We should go retrieve those. Next week, yes, we have the iPhone 17 Pro Max for the candid photos of the moon through the window, which I think was very sick. Those are fun. They're just very sick. They're very cool. They had 80 to 400 millimeter lenses for close-up shots of the moon. Those shots look insane. Yeah. I mean, we get the most detail we've ever seen of the moon. I think my favorite shots are the ones that are wide angle through the window of the spacecraft, so you can see the window frame and then you see what they see outside the window frame. Yeah. It's hard to picture what it would be like to be on the spacecraft, but those are the shots that help me best understand what they're seeing. Yeah. It's crazy. Yeah. And then overall, there were 28 cameras placed inside and outside the spacecraft, which is very cool. If you go to the NASA website, they've been uploading all of these basically in real time, with a slight delay at the speed of light. But they're really cool. If you download the original images, you can get all the metadata for it. And these are very good OLED wallpapers. And I don't think that they're going to be OLED, you know, right as you download them. But if you take them into Photoshop and you lower the black point to zero, then they'll become OLED. They'll look incredible. So yeah, I'm definitely planning on using one of these as a wallpaper for sure. My favorite photo that I've linked in the doc, which is the second link there, it's on Flickr, is the eclipse that they saw. So when they flew around to the dark side of the moon, there was a brief moment where the sun was behind the moon and the side of the moon was being lit up by a reflection of the earth. So they had the rarest solar eclipse of all time. Nobody other than these four people have ever seen this perspective of a solar eclipse. And they took a photo of the moon, which is just this ball floating in space in front of them, on a Z9. It's like a two-second exposure. And it's just the trippiest. I can't believe it's a real photo. It's insane. And then all of the background, you see all these stars and planets lined up and galaxies in the background behind them. Incredible wallpaper material. One of my favorite photos I've ever seen, for sure. Yeah. No, it's absolutely gorgeous.

Speaker 4:
[20:35] It's already the wallpaper on my phone.

Speaker 1:
[20:36] The glow in the back.

Speaker 4:
[20:37] It's so good.

Speaker 1:
[20:37] It's awesome. Yeah. One more thing that a lot of people were curious about, they did live stream a lot of this. I remember watching the launch on NASA's YouTube channel on last Wednesday, there was like 2.8 million concurrent viewers, which is pretty sick. What a lot of people don't know is they kept streaming for a week and showing the perspective of the astronauts as they got closer to the moon and farther from the Earth. And you might be wondering how they did that because there's no internet in space. Yeah. They just were sending information directly back to, I think there's a series of three satellites on Earth where at least one of them is always pointing towards the moon, or one of them is always pointing towards the spacecraft no matter where they were in orbit. So they were always able to send data back to Earth. And that's how we have this little super low res, but effectively live stream of the astronauts. And it's one light second away tops. So it's not that much of a delay as they send that information. Yeah. Pretty cool. Pretty awesome.

Speaker 2:
[21:34] Crazy they could live stream this whole thing, yet Netflix constantly can't get Love is Blind reunion streamed properly on time.

Speaker 4:
[21:41] There's more demand for that, Andrew.

Speaker 2:
[21:43] For Love is Blind? Yeah. Yeah, I know.

Speaker 1:
[21:46] Yeah.

Speaker 2:
[21:47] So they get it right.

Speaker 1:
[21:48] Yeah. If you want to go see those photos, downloads of pictures, go to the NASA website. We could link that in the show notes to make it easier. Speaking of, I really don't know how to make this transition.

Speaker 2:
[21:57] Things that don't exist.

Speaker 1:
[21:58] Things that don't exist.

Speaker 6:
[22:01] We can joke.

Speaker 2:
[22:02] Saying allegedly every time you guys have talked about.

Speaker 1:
[22:05] We can joke about that.

Speaker 2:
[22:06] I don't even want to put it in.

Speaker 1:
[22:08] I will say that this is real.

Speaker 5:
[22:10] Stop.

Speaker 2:
[22:11] Don't put it in. The moon is real.

Speaker 1:
[22:15] There is a moment, there is a thing happening on social media where there is way more conspiracy theory content. Yeah. Because I don't even know how to talk about it. It's just like obviously bait and it's engagement bait, but it's also like there's never been so much of it and it's never been so easy for dumb people to see it and probably just jump right along and believe it.

Speaker 2:
[22:36] Or, like you said, it's like that and rage bait where people want to feel smart by saying no, you're wrong and stupid, which is engagement. It makes that person money.

Speaker 5:
[22:46] Yeah.

Speaker 1:
[22:47] So don't engage. Don't engage. See the rage bait. Just keep scrolling.

Speaker 5:
[22:51] Yeah.

Speaker 1:
[22:51] That's how you win.

Speaker 3:
[22:52] Dude, this question, what was the first camera in space?

Speaker 5:
[22:55] Yeah.

Speaker 1:
[22:55] Okay.

Speaker 3:
[22:56] It's so interesting because it begs the question, what is space? And also what is a camera?

Speaker 1:
[23:02] Yeah.

Speaker 3:
[23:03] This is like bonus episode gold, right? Yeah.

Speaker 1:
[23:05] Maybe we should do that. I know that NASA has been licensing or been using Nikon cameras since like 1971 or something.

Speaker 3:
[23:13] 1971, yeah. Yeah.

Speaker 1:
[23:14] I knew that.

Speaker 3:
[23:15] There's some interesting.

Speaker 1:
[23:16] Officially.

Speaker 3:
[23:16] There's some interesting stuff in here.

Speaker 1:
[23:18] Yeah. The original moonrise photo was at Hasselblad, right?

Speaker 3:
[23:21] Hasselblad was the first camera that NASA was like, we're going to work with a camera company and make a space camera. Yeah. John Glenn went to a drug store and bought a Minolta that he had modified by NASA to be able to hit with a space suit.

Speaker 1:
[23:34] Yeah.

Speaker 3:
[23:35] But then in 61, like a year, a few months before that, a cosmonaut brought a 16-millimeter camera, like a Soviet 16-millimeter camera. But then also, it seems like there were submissions with automated TV cameras out. There's some interesting. I think we should dive deeper into this.

Speaker 1:
[23:53] Yeah. So Hasselblad made special versions of the Hasselblad 500 series cameras that basically are a pump action because the astronauts wear spacesuits. When you, the regular Hasselblad 500 CM has like a small little shutter button that is like very hard to, even with your regular finger, it kind of like pricks your finger a little bit. Not actually like through your finger, but it's like kind of hard to use. Anyway, they made it a pump action. And then there's only three distant settings. There's close, medium and far. I, they made a replica series 20 years later. They made a replica series of those cameras that they made a thousand of, which I own one of them, because I'm crazy. And they made these special backs that could fit like way more film than most cameras. But I should have brought that in. Maybe I'll bring it in next week and I can show you guys, it's pretty cool. Speaking of, did they have really cool things? Yeah, I guess, I don't know, yeah. They did a really cool thing. Better than what I had.

Speaker 3:
[24:45] Speaking of roles of something.

Speaker 5:
[24:47] Roles of, good call.

Speaker 1:
[24:49] They weren't really roles, they were kind of sheets. We did get to see Zach from JerryRigEverything do a teardown of a phone that never shipped because it's LG's rollable phone. Fun fact, there's one in the mail here now.

Speaker 2:
[25:03] What? Oh, like we got it. I know it's on the way.

Speaker 1:
[25:06] I have my sources.

Speaker 4:
[25:07] This is breaking news to us in the studio.

Speaker 1:
[25:10] Yeah, that's every week. So LG died in 2021 is when they shut down their smartphone division. They stopped making phones. Yeah, 2021. I believe that's right.

Speaker 3:
[25:23] And so that's like it's a crazy way to say you murdered them.

Speaker 1:
[25:27] No, I was going to say the last two phones, actually, the last two phones that they shipped before they died was the V60 and the LG Wing. And I had a lot of nice things to say about the LG Wing, as insane as that phone was. It's crazy. But here's the thing about phones like the LG Wing, no one else would try that.

Speaker 5:
[25:44] Yeah.

Speaker 1:
[25:44] And that's why we love LG. Yeah. And that's why they're dead.

Speaker 5:
[25:47] Yeah.

Speaker 1:
[25:47] So, look, they also had a phone in the works that was like a rollable phone that went from a five and a half inch phone and then kind of unrolled, motorized, like a parchment to an eight inch phone.

Speaker 2:
[25:58] Yeah.

Speaker 1:
[25:59] We could have had it all rolling in the deep. Yeah.

Speaker 5:
[26:04] That's a...

Speaker 2:
[26:05] Is that street light?

Speaker 5:
[26:08] Yeah.

Speaker 1:
[26:09] Anyway, yeah, so Zach got his hands on one, we will as well soon, and he immediately did a teardown, which is so his style. And you can see how over-engineered this thing is. There's two motors. It's really cool. There's two motors, there's this metal track inside, there's three spring-loaded arms, the whole thing plays, it doesn't play a sound, it makes noise as it opens. And since it makes so much noise, they play like a musical chime to sort of try to... Cover it up.

Speaker 6:
[26:33] Yes, how loud that is.

Speaker 1:
[26:35] So it's really, it's quite a piece of engineering, just like the wing was, it's insane, and it never shipped. We don't know what they would have charged for it, what they would have called it, how they would have marketed it, but I do plan on trying to use it. I'm excited to get that. I'm not seeing the video, but I am terrified at what that's gonna be like when he takes the knife to the screen.

Speaker 2:
[26:56] Oh no, he doesn't do it.

Speaker 1:
[26:56] He didn't do it in that video. But thank God.

Speaker 2:
[26:58] There's still time.

Speaker 1:
[26:59] Yeah, there's still time, he could do that. But I suspect a phone like this would not be very durable. It would not hold water and dust out very well. It has a soft outer screen totally exposed all the time.

Speaker 2:
[27:11] No, that's what was really cool about it, is when it folds into the back, there's an exterior glass screen that it folds underneath on the backside. And then so on the back, it's not the soft touch screen. I guess you're saying the front of it is the soft touch all the time. But the back works when it's not unrolled as a back screen, which is really cool. I actually like the way they engineered this thing was really impressive and probably would have been better, made more sense than the LG Wing. It kind of was like, remember the Xiaomi concept that was like, we said like 200% screen to body ratio. It basically had a screen covering 60% of the back of it because it rolled around the backside. But the internals are really cool. The way kind of those spring loaded arms are actually pushing the whole battery and internal module with the screen. There's some cool stuff. Definitely go check out his video. But yeah, he doesn't destroy it. He just actually uses it and takes it apart. It's the most careful I've ever seen Zach be. There's a point where he's like, I am shaking, opening this right now. And it's really funny to watch just for that.

Speaker 1:
[28:15] That's not the type of vibe you want for a phone that you use every single day. It's like a relic. It's like you don't want to do any damage to it. It'll be interesting to see when we get it here if like using it in real life. Because the front screen is soft and it's never really protected as you use the phone. So there's no way it's as durable as a regular phone. Yeah, no. But I do like that sort of half screen on the back that he just uses to see his calendar and stuff like that. I think that that's pretty smart. Viewfinder for the camera. Dang. I would buy this.

Speaker 2:
[28:43] It's cool. You should definitely go watch that. And I'm excited to see this thing.

Speaker 1:
[28:46] Yeah. Speaking of alternate form factors. And never getting shipped. I guess it was shipped. Well, this might ship. This probably will ship. iPhone Fold. Actually, this entire week there's been articles both about how the folding iPhone is maybe delayed and not gonna ship in 2026. And then maybe it's actually not so delayed and it is gonna ship in 2026.

Speaker 2:
[29:07] And both of those articles were posted from the same website on the same day. Which is why, the only reason I added this, I think it's so funny that Mac Rumors had an article called Foldable iPhone Engineering Delays Could Push Launch to 2027. And also iPhone Fold expected to launch on time in September despite delay rumors.

Speaker 1:
[29:23] So is this what hedging your bet looks like in real time? This is crazy. It's nothing ever happens theorem.

Speaker 2:
[29:30] Basically, both of these articles were just two different sources saying what they think is going to happen. One's German, one's a Japanese newspaper, I believe. I cannot pronounce the name of who wrote the article. But the one thing I did find interesting in terms of what they seem to agree on is while this is most likely going to be announced at the same time as the iPhone 18, even if it's quote unquote on time, it probably will not be delivered the same time as the iPhone 18. So I have no idea if this is going to be 2026. I think we will see the announcement in 2026. There's a chance this could be 2027.

Speaker 1:
[30:08] Yeah, it wouldn't be the first time we've seen a staggered release of the phones. I don't know if you remember the Mini and the Plus when they came out. But that was only a month later. It was only a month later.

Speaker 4:
[30:18] Wasn't the iPhone 10 also a little after the iPhone 18?

Speaker 1:
[30:20] True, exactly.

Speaker 2:
[30:21] 10 was after. Mini and that was COVID. That was like three, though, wasn't it? It was like a couple. There's three different dates of...

Speaker 1:
[30:29] I'm not gonna remember the exact order, but it was something like the Mini and the Pro Max came out after the regular and the Plus, or something like that, like a month and a half later. Which was easier to make videos about because they were staggered and separated.

Speaker 2:
[30:44] That was great, actually.

Speaker 1:
[30:45] Do we want to take bets on this?

Speaker 2:
[30:47] We already did.

Speaker 1:
[30:48] Did we?

Speaker 2:
[30:49] We've definitely taken bets on if iPhone Fold is coming out this year.

Speaker 1:
[30:53] Yeah, but we got new information. So do you think that it will be announced and then come out later, like in 2027, or do you think it will be announced and come out in 2026? I would not be shocked at all if we got this big fancy folding iPhone Ultra and they said coming early next year or coming in December.

Speaker 2:
[31:09] You think they said that in September?

Speaker 1:
[31:10] Maybe not early, maybe December or something like that. I could easily see it being a staggered release to build some hype.

Speaker 2:
[31:15] That's a really staggered release. How far away can it be to still be considered a staggered release? That's my question.

Speaker 1:
[31:22] Typically, when they release a new iPhone, it comes out like, what, two, three weeks later? My take is that if you announce something and then you wait too long, people stop caring. Google has this problem with the Pixel. Every time Google has launched a Pixel Fold, it's come out a couple months later and people just forget. Also, Sony.

Speaker 2:
[31:39] Every Sony phone ever. Sony, yeah.

Speaker 1:
[31:40] Sony freaking announces them in September and they always come out in December and then no one buys it. Shocker. Bro, they're proud of that, too. I remember I talked about some of the Sony stuff. It was like 10 months later they came out with the phone. And then they finally made huge strides and they were like, Marques, we came out with the phone only three months after we announced it. Which is a big improvement, but it's still way too long. Just wait till it's done and ready to ship and then show it off and then ship it. Anyway, that's another story.

Speaker 2:
[32:09] Every company that's ever existed.

Speaker 1:
[32:11] But yeah, I think it would probably make sense as like a month and a half staggered, here comes the ultra type of thing. I could see it.

Speaker 4:
[32:20] I got a hot take. We're gonna see this at DubDub.

Speaker 1:
[32:24] See it? No shot.

Speaker 4:
[32:25] I think they're... Well, no, your whole showing it off, like with folding iPhone, be like coming later this... I think that's gonna happen at DubDub, like we did with the Vision Pro. And then the phone itself will come out this year, but later. That's possible.

Speaker 1:
[32:37] I have a... I'm so torn on this. I love that take because part of me is like zero percent no shot that happens. DubDub is for development and it's for software and any sort of hardware announcement overshadows all the stuff they want to show, like iOS 28. But on the other hand, the times that they do show new hardware, it's specifically exciting to developers and things like the Mac Pro, which people could get excited to develop on, Vision Pro, which people could get excited to develop for, and folding phone. You know, if you're making apps, you kind of want to start thinking about how to optimize your app for different screen sizes. So maybe it does make sense to do that? Unless, unless they basically just make it so it's automatic and it basically becomes an iPad. I mean, that's the thing they'll do for sure. That's going to be their strength is like, you add one line of code and now it's a mate. Like you can make an iPad app by clicking one button basically. Yeah. But maybe you want to have some special, you know, animation for the unfolding or something. I don't know.

Speaker 2:
[33:35] I think it makes sense like that. I just think DubDub this year is going to be too much worrying about having to re-announce Siri 2.0.

Speaker 4:
[33:43] That's why I think they're going to do it.

Speaker 1:
[33:44] To cover that up.

Speaker 4:
[33:45] Yeah. It'll be like, look at the excitement of the folding phone. Forget about liquid ass.

Speaker 2:
[33:50] But that's going to look so bad if it's like, we have to re-announce the thing that's two years late and here's the thing that might be late again.

Speaker 1:
[33:57] I think they could spin it. Because you know what's starting to happen?

Speaker 2:
[33:59] Pretend anything's going to happen.

Speaker 1:
[34:01] Well, the thing that the take I've seen more and more online is that Apple being late to AI has actually been the best version of AI, which is, you know, all these phones are just shoving AI down our throats and Apple's kind of not doing that so much and that's refreshing. We appreciate it. It's also because they stick to what they're good at, which is good hardware. It's also because Apple didn't really spend billions of dollars investing in this kind of stuff and now that AI is becoming so commodified, they kind of have like their pick of the litter on what they want to utilize, right? So they picked Gemini because they had all these options. They didn't have all those options when ChatGBT in the iPhone got announced. That was like kind of the only thing that they could do. And now it's like this awkward like middle child that's like in the iPhone in a weird way. And they're probably going to get rid of that.

Speaker 2:
[34:46] And it's nice that they can do it. But it's also really funny knowing that they tried and that was not the original plan and that they failed.

Speaker 1:
[34:54] But they failed upwards. Yeah.

Speaker 2:
[34:56] They got very lucky on that.

Speaker 4:
[34:57] They're going to fail.

Speaker 1:
[34:58] And their stock is the only one that has not been impacted by the AI stuff. Yeah. You think of Apple as this huge tech company and if AI is the next big, huge tech, then they must be a player in that space. But they're not a player in every space. They don't make everything. So search engine, they don't make. They borrow the best one and show it to their users as a default. You mean it's not released. Well, yeah. They definitely make. They're not a public competitor in that space. And I think that that's kind of ending up true of AI where, okay, there's all these models, there's all these advanced development. They tried to jump in, it didn't really work, but they still, their bread and butter is still the device that you use to do the AI stuff on. People are clamoring to buy Mac studios that finally have enough VRAM. If you could tether three of them together with Thunderbolt, you can have a machine that runs OpenClaw and everything's local. Like that's, people are buying Apple hardware still. And that's probably gonna continue to be true. Yeah, and I think ultimately they're realizing that people use different AIs for different use cases. And so they just want to be the main thing that runs the thing. They don't want to be choosing what you use with it. Like Apple Intelligence, at the end of the day, is just an extension of things that the phone could basically already do. And so that doesn't need to be the thing that does everything. Like you're gonna use Claude on your phone, you're gonna use Gemini on your phone, you're gonna use OpenAI, Chopped GPT on your phone, if that's the service that you use. And so, Google obviously has both and makes it, but at the end of the day, that could be a negative for them, because if Google's trying to force you to use Gemini, and then things work better with Gemini than they do with, say, Claude, and you're like a Claude power user, you might be more incentivized to use the iPhone that gives you more of a choice to use what AI you want to use. Yeah.

Speaker 4:
[36:45] There is no world in which that happens. There's no way that Google, the open one, would be more closed down with which AI you can use.

Speaker 1:
[36:54] It would be closed, but Gemini is so imbedded in Android.

Speaker 4:
[36:59] Gemini will always have its Android tie, and its inherent abilities to do more, but they're not going to actively make you not use Gemini.

Speaker 1:
[37:11] No, I know that. But it would be annoying if you're doing various things on your phone and it's prompting you to use Gemini. It's actively trying to move you towards a Gemini subscription.

Speaker 4:
[37:22] Yeah, but right now I could just change it to Claude in the settings.

Speaker 1:
[37:26] Change what to Claude?

Speaker 4:
[37:27] My assistant.

Speaker 1:
[37:28] I think that's probably what people are going to want from their phone is the well-integrated thing, which is why it felt like it made sense for Apple Intelligence to be really good, because that's going to be the one that works the best across all these Apple surfaces. It's going to pull my messages, and it's going to pull my calendar from Apple Calendar and all these other Apple things. So I want the Apple Intelligence AI to be good on my Apple device, and of course Gemini will be good across all these Google services, pull from my Google Drive, Google Photos, Google whatever. So that's what we were hoping for from Apple Intelligence, but now they're just kind of giving us the choice of other ones that don't really talk to Apple stuff.

Speaker 5:
[38:04] Yeah.

Speaker 3:
[38:06] I'm not a businessman. I don't know how money works.

Speaker 7:
[38:08] I'm a businessman.

Speaker 3:
[38:09] However, I've always understood Google's whole business bottle to be, we're going to either sell our hardware at a loss or with the slimmest possible margin we can do because you're going to use all these Google services and we can harvest your data.

Speaker 1:
[38:26] Yeah.

Speaker 3:
[38:26] And so I kind of agree with David. I see going forward Google's going to be like, you're using Gemini because if someone buys a pixel and then uses Claude, they're losing money on that.

Speaker 1:
[38:36] That's an L for Google.

Speaker 4:
[38:37] You bought the pixel. Yeah.

Speaker 1:
[38:38] You don't make money on the pixels. That's an L for Google.

Speaker 3:
[38:41] That's an L for Google. Yeah. I'm saying Google all of a sudden is not making... They're still harvesting all your data because they're using a pixel, but they need the Gemini data, I think, to really make it worth it.

Speaker 4:
[38:50] I think my thing is that no AI is making money anyway. Google can just burn money because they own the Internet.

Speaker 3:
[38:57] No, but Google will make money by getting training data off of your Gemini chats and then also using the data they get from you via your Gemini chats to make your ads more targeted.

Speaker 4:
[39:08] But they're getting that data already from the iPhone, which is giving them a billion dollars on top of that. I think they need the 3% of pixel users to use Gemini. They're going to let you use Anthropic.

Speaker 3:
[39:18] Guys, I think I might have just gotten clapped back.

Speaker 1:
[39:20] But what I'm saying is like Google is always going to be pushing you towards Gemini, right? Because all of their services, all of the things on the phone, like it's so embedded into the phone that it's easier to use Gemini. And so if you're like a Claude super user, you might be kind of annoyed that like now half of my contacts is in Gemini and the other half is in Claude. And whether or not that ends up being a thing that incentivizes people to buy an iPhone, it probably won't be, but it's just kind of an interesting interaction because of the way that AI has been commodified.

Speaker 4:
[39:49] Well, more so my point was I don't think there's a world where Apple is more open with that kind of thing with sharing the context between different AIs than Google.

Speaker 1:
[39:58] I kind of disagree with that.

Speaker 4:
[39:59] Specifically because Apple has the servers that they're making with Google in partnership. Like Anthropic has servers from AWS, they have servers from Azure, they have servers everywhere. Apple is not gonna let your data go to some random server. They want control of the server, which they have a partnership with Google.

Speaker 1:
[40:14] Yeah, and the things that happen autonomously with the phone are obviously through Apple, through Google, through those servers that are nothing touches it. I just think they care less about what AI that you use versus Google really, really wants you to use Gemini, and the market incentives will probably push them towards making Gemini the choice they want you to.

Speaker 3:
[40:34] I think you both have really, really valid points in the sense that I still I really see where you're coming from, where it's like Google doesn't have as much of an incentive to lock you into Gemini as I thought they might have at the outset of this conversation. But also, I do think Apple's opinion on this matter would change a lot more than Google's when you're talking about just like a normal generative transformer versus something agentic that's like monkeying around in your phone.

Speaker 1:
[40:58] For sure, yeah. I think there's also probably a world where a lot of people at Google believe that if you do use...

Speaker 3:
[41:05] I'm sorry, Andrew's face.

Speaker 2:
[41:07] No, my Pixel makes me want to never touch Gemini ever again.

Speaker 3:
[41:10] Please, I'm sorry to interrupt you.

Speaker 1:
[41:12] Go ahead.

Speaker 3:
[41:12] The look on Andrew's face was...

Speaker 1:
[41:13] I guess I think that there's probably a lot of people at Google who believe that they want you to use Gemini because that represents the next stage of all the data harvesting that they do. If you start using a different AI and start doing all these searches and all these queries and all this stuff, that represents a bunch of data that they're not getting. 100%. If they're allowing people to move on from Gemini to a bunch of other stuff, and then they slowly get less and less data from the old ways of gathering data, then they miss jumping the boat. Yeah. I mean, think about this. They're basically transitioning from Google Search being their primary revenue driver to Gemini. So if they don't have as many Gemini users, that's a huge impact for them.

Speaker 4:
[41:54] That's why. I'm trying to envision a world where I can go into the iPhone settings and change Siri to Claude versus going into the Pixel settings and changing Gemini to Anthropic, like to Claude. And I'm trying to think which one is more likely to happen. Really?

Speaker 1:
[42:10] Because just because of who's a player in the game, I think. Like, the way you can choose your search engine now on the iPhone, you could just move it from Google to whatever you want. Because they don't make their own search engine. I think when there is a Clawd and Anthropic and a GPT and a Gemini, you can do that on the iPhone and pick your model as well. Because they don't have a competitor in that space.

Speaker 3:
[42:29] But not to just regurgitate Adam's earlier point, but I totally think that's the case with a chat. However, if everyone's trying to get these agentic models that can actually do stuff inside your phone, it seems to me like a more uphill thing getting Apple to let an agent run on someone else's servers. And I can't believe Apple would want to set up their own data centers.

Speaker 1:
[42:54] Well, the agentic...

Speaker 3:
[42:55] To run agentic, other people's agentic models?

Speaker 1:
[42:58] The agentic stuff is probably going to be a local Gemini Nano model, which is different from the things that are hitting the servers.

Speaker 3:
[43:04] Yeah, but that sucks. I want local clod. I want local coup.

Speaker 1:
[43:10] Yeah, and I don't think that Apple is going to allow multiple different models for that because they want the user experience to be unique and the same across all devices. I could see Apple eventually working with Anthropic and OpenAI for the stuff, the AI stuff that happens in the cloud, because then they're creating a marketplace where they can reduce the cost that they're paying to those model providers. And also it gives people the option to use whatever commodity that they use.

Speaker 3:
[43:37] Hear me out. We do a bonus episode.

Speaker 2:
[43:39] This feels like a bonus episode. This is like a whole episode.

Speaker 3:
[43:42] We get Tim Cook, we get Sundar, we get Sam, and we just go, who was right? Tell us who was right.

Speaker 4:
[43:49] Which one of us was right?

Speaker 3:
[43:49] Was it me?

Speaker 1:
[43:50] I want to do a cage match.

Speaker 4:
[43:52] This was not supposed to go on this long.

Speaker 5:
[43:53] We were talking about the iPhone Fold.

Speaker 3:
[43:55] No, but it's an interesting question, and it's one that we will get the answer to, I think.

Speaker 1:
[44:00] In a couple months.

Speaker 3:
[44:01] Pretty soon, yeah. Yeah, and then we'll find out who was right.

Speaker 1:
[44:05] Yeah. You see that up by the moon? That's the rails. We are so far off the rails. Wow.

Speaker 2:
[44:11] I was going to add my one thing about AI phones, which is my Pixel. I came across this thing the other day where I was like, my Google Home, my Nest Doorbell isn't giving me notifications anymore. What broke on this? And I realized I turned it off because I was getting so annoyed. I changed my Google Home camera stuff for the notifications to like, it says you can use AI to search through activities that happen. But what it really does is not just that, but every time it sends a notification, it's this like really long, terrible sentence about what may have happened. And I got so annoyed at the notifications of like, a person walks up from a delivery giant to the thing, just like, I just want to see there's a person at the door. That's all you have to tell me. And having 30 of those notifications, I guess I got so mad I turned it off one day and forgot and then realized a month later.

Speaker 1:
[45:02] And there aren't like, granular settings to change.

Speaker 2:
[45:04] There might be something in there now. I just wanted it to be able to search like, did somebody drop something off between 2 and 4 o'clock?

Speaker 1:
[45:12] And that should work. I think the search part works.

Speaker 2:
[45:15] But the notifications are sufferable. And it's so bad. And it also, even though all of my family's faces are attached in there, it correctly identifies the person one out of 40 times. Despite almost looking directly at the camera, like face scanning.

Speaker 1:
[45:34] Mine's pretty good. I remember the day I started getting the new notifications because it would always just be like, person, person, person, movement, person. Now it's like a UPS driver dropped off a medium size box at the door. And I'm like, I...

Speaker 2:
[45:49] But then you click that and it's like, Claire coming home with groceries.

Speaker 1:
[45:53] Mine has been pretty... I would say mine have been like 90% way too accurate and then 10% totally off.

Speaker 2:
[46:01] Mine's 90% totally off.

Speaker 3:
[46:04] While we're talking about Ring, shout out to the new Ben Jordan video. Another absolute banger. It's terrifying.

Speaker 1:
[46:10] Surveillance day.

Speaker 2:
[46:11] I just like to say hi to everyone watching me when I'm here.

Speaker 1:
[46:14] Yeah. All right. Well, that went quite a while. Can someone transition?

Speaker 2:
[46:19] Samsung Messages is getting shut down. Yeah.

Speaker 1:
[46:20] Okay.

Speaker 5:
[46:21] Thanks.

Speaker 2:
[46:21] I mean, it actually is a good segue because that segue was as abrupt as Samsung shutting down Samsung Messages because they're basically like, yo, peace, the **** is gone.

Speaker 5:
[46:31] July.

Speaker 1:
[46:32] That's kind of a segue within a segue.

Speaker 3:
[46:34] What is Samsung Messages?

Speaker 1:
[46:35] So, maybe like a decade ago, if you bought a Samsung phone. No, this is not. I'll make it short, I'll make it short.

Speaker 5:
[46:42] No, no, no, no.

Speaker 1:
[46:43] Samsung used to ship their own Messages app, and you know, you bought a Samsung phone, and there'd be Samsung Messages, and have its own chime, and have its own layout. It was just exactly like Google Messages or whatever. And I would always actually go to the Play Store and download Google Messages because I liked it better. And then one day, maybe five, six years ago, I'm not sure exactly when.

Speaker 2:
[47:00] Six or seven.

Speaker 1:
[47:01] Six, seven years ago, they started just shipping Samsung phones with Google Messages by default. Like they stopped shipping it with Samsung Messages. They still supported it, and it still existed, but they just accepted that people just use Google Messages when they buy an Android phone. And now it's a couple years later, and they're like, all right, we're not going to keep supporting Samsung Messages. So whatever servers, whatever service there was, it's gone. If you still actually use Samsung Messages.

Speaker 2:
[47:26] Be very careful.

Speaker 1:
[47:27] Yeah.

Speaker 2:
[47:28] The thread on the Samsung subreddit is very upset.

Speaker 1:
[47:32] Well, if I'm on the Samsung subreddit, I probably am more likely to be a user of Samsung Messages.

Speaker 4:
[47:36] Just what's crazy is that every month heads up. That's crazy.

Speaker 2:
[47:40] That's so fast.

Speaker 4:
[47:41] That's pretty fast.

Speaker 1:
[47:42] What happens when it EOLs? I assume you can't send messages using the app anymore. That would be insane.

Speaker 2:
[47:49] It's got to be.

Speaker 1:
[47:50] It should just update and auto download Google Messages and replace it. I mean, that's essentially what you're going to want to do at this point. Yeah, but it's crazy that they're making people do that manually. Well, I think they accepted that this would happen at some point, like five years ago when they stopped shipping it as a default on their devices. But they should have given people a heads up way, way long ago when they stopped shipping as a default, that, hey, we're going to shut this down at some point. They probably just didn't know they were going to do it. Now they just decided they're doing it and they're doing it in two months.

Speaker 4:
[48:17] So yeah, like my dad's on a Samsung. I doubt he's going to know to update before June or July.

Speaker 1:
[48:23] But is it update or is it you also have to download Google Messages?

Speaker 4:
[48:26] That's a great question.

Speaker 2:
[48:27] I didn't understand what you're saying. Yeah, for the people who don't know, not everyone's going to see this thing. Are they just going to wait three days later, be like, I haven't had to text in a little while.

Speaker 3:
[48:36] Don't worry, it's totally OK. Everyone knows Android users are notoriously awesome at keeping their phones up to date. Literally the best user base for hitting the update button. They're going to be fine.

Speaker 1:
[48:47] The Verge says 2024 is when they start shipping as a default Google Messages. I feel like it was way before that. Well, they did it because of RCS. They were trying to really force people on to Google Messages because for a while, Google Messages and weirdly Verizon Messages were the only apps that supported RCS. And then they had that weird bromance with Google for a long time that sort of is still in action but not as much anymore. Yeah, I don't know. It's strange.

Speaker 4:
[49:12] Can I rant about the time? Sorry. Quick tangent.

Speaker 1:
[49:15] I like it.

Speaker 4:
[49:16] Because it has to do with Google Messages.

Speaker 2:
[49:17] First ad breaks should be 57 minutes.

Speaker 4:
[49:21] I got ratioed so hard on threads.

Speaker 3:
[49:23] Oh yeah.

Speaker 6:
[49:25] What did you do? What did you do?

Speaker 4:
[49:28] I posted a screenshot of Google Messages on a Samsung device. I circled the whole top half of the screen just as Google Messages, like the logo. I'm like, why is this here? I agree with you. Half of the screen is just unuseful information.

Speaker 1:
[49:42] Why would you get ratioed for that?

Speaker 4:
[49:43] Everyone was like, bro, just scroll. I'm like, I know how apps work. I'm saying, why isn't there useful information here?

Speaker 1:
[49:51] There was a moment where everyone applauded that white space. They were like, wow, how thoughtful. I can reach my problems.

Speaker 4:
[49:56] That's the whole point. That's why I'm getting ratioed because one UI is for one-handedness. I was like, yeah, I know. I'm saying it's stupid because if you go to Samsung phone app, they make use of that space. It's not things that you can tap or whatever, but it'll tell you you have a missed call. You have useful information. Why don't I have that in other places?

Speaker 1:
[50:13] I have a question for you because I haven't used Google Messages in a while. Can you pin message threads or messages?

Speaker 4:
[50:21] You can and it stays in the middle. It doesn't pin to the top the way it does on Apple.

Speaker 2:
[50:25] Adam's just saying it should be usable space. I think that's totally fair.

Speaker 4:
[50:29] I guess it should be usable, but tell me some sort of useful information.

Speaker 2:
[50:33] It should just be a clock.

Speaker 4:
[50:35] I would be happy with that.

Speaker 2:
[50:38] It's going to be ads one day.

Speaker 1:
[50:42] Don't give them those ideas. It's going to be a giant Gemini button at some point.

Speaker 2:
[50:46] Samsung Messages is shutting down. LeshChoice sucks. We're going to leave a little pause here for all the people who are about to type. Just use WhatsApp. Go on, do it. I don't want you to miss any more of the episode. Got it. Almost. Little angrier. Perfect.

Speaker 1:
[51:01] LeshChoice does suck, but I would never be sad to see Verizon Messages plus implode.

Speaker 6:
[51:09] That's all I'm going to say.

Speaker 1:
[51:12] Just saying.

Speaker 6:
[51:12] That's a good take.

Speaker 2:
[51:13] Fair. That's a good take.

Speaker 1:
[51:15] Yeah. All right. Well, we should take a quick break. We have talked for quite a while about a bunch of things, and now we should do trivia.

Speaker 2:
[51:22] The next one was going to be a nice, simple little section.

Speaker 1:
[51:24] Well, it could be simple for the beginning of the-

Speaker 2:
[51:26] I'm just kidding. It literally says debate. There's no chance.

Speaker 6:
[51:29] Thank you.

Speaker 1:
[51:31] It's not really debate. I think we're all on the same page.

Speaker 2:
[51:33] We are not.

Speaker 5:
[51:33] Oh.

Speaker 2:
[51:34] I know. No. Yeah.

Speaker 5:
[51:36] Good to know this one.

Speaker 2:
[51:36] Trivia.

Speaker 3:
[51:37] Trivia. A little bit of foreshadowing after the break. We're going to talk about what is, in my opinion, the craziest tech news story of the year, assuming no one's lying, Anthropix Project Glasswing. But the question is, where does the term Glasswing come from? And it's multiple choice. A, Glasswing is an experimental F1 rear wing design from the ground effect era of cars. B, a Glasswing is a Central American butterfly with transparent wings. C, a Glasswing is a type of parachute used by first responders to jump into dense forest canopies. Or D, it's an acronym, General Layer Analysis Screening with Integrated Neural GPTs. GPT standing for Generative Pre-trained Transformer.

Speaker 5:
[52:26] There's a nested acronym.

Speaker 2:
[52:27] The nested acronym is wild.

Speaker 1:
[52:30] Okay. I definitely wouldn't have gotten that without the multiple choice. I still might not get it, but we'll think about that. Answers will be at the end like usual. We'll bear it back.

Speaker 2:
[52:39] I don't think I want my parachute to be called a Glasswing.

Speaker 1:
[52:52] Support for the show comes from Zapier. When it comes to bringing AI into your workflows, there's no shortage of hype, but turning that hype into something real and actionable starts with the right tools. Zapier is here to help. Zapier turns strategy into execution, so you're not just talking about AI, you're delivering on it. With its AI orchestration platform, you can bring AI into any workflow and focus more on what really matters to your company. You can even connect top AI models, including ChachiBT and Claude, to whatever tools your team already uses, so you can incorporate AI exactly where you need it. That can be workflows, an autonomous agent, a customer chatbot, or whatever else. You can orchestrate it all with Zapier, letting you do more with your time. And it's designed for everyone, not just tech experts. According to data from Zapier, teams have already automated over 300 million AI tasks using the platform. So join the millions of businesses transforming how they work with Zapier and AI. Get started for free by visiting zapier.com/wave. That's zapier.com/wave. Support for the show comes from Framer. So the reason you create a website is so that your business can thrive. But some websites just don't look the part. Framer can help with that. Framer is the enterprise-grade no-code website builder used by teams at companies like Perplexity and Miro to move faster. With real-time collaboration and robust CMS with everything you need for great SEO, not to mention advanced analytics that include integrated A-B testing, your designers and marketers are empowered to build and maximize your.com from day one. So whether you want to launch a new site, or test a few landing pages, or migrate your fold.com, Framer has programs for startups, scale-ups, and large enterprises to make going from idea to live site as easy and fast as possible. Learn how you can get more out of your.com from a Framer specialist, or get started building for free today at framer.com. So good, so good, so good. That's framer.com/wave for 30% off. framer.com/wave. Rules and restrictions may apply.

Speaker 8:
[54:49] So good, so good, so good.

Speaker 9:
[54:51] New markdowns up to 70% off are at Nordstrom Rack stores now. And that means so many new reasons to rack.

Speaker 10:
[54:58] Cause I always find something amazing.

Speaker 9:
[55:01] Just so many good brands.

Speaker 7:
[55:02] Cause there's always something new.

Speaker 9:
[55:04] Join the Nordy Club to unlock exclusive discounts. Shop nur rack. Plus buy online and pick up at your favorite rack store for free. Great brands, great prices. That's why you rack.

Speaker 2:
[55:18] All right, welcome back. Got a little debate for y'all. So David Pierce wrote an article on The Verge this week called Vertical Browser Tabs Are Better and You Should Use Them, about how Chrome finally added vertical tabs to their browser. And then listed out some of the reasons why you should use them. So I know a lot of us on this podcast have very strong opinions about vertical tabs. So I thought the best thing to do is to talk about how we like them or don't like them, list some of the reasons David Pierce laid out, and in true podcast fashion, we can debate him in a situation where he can't defend himself.

Speaker 5:
[55:50] Yeah, that's cool.

Speaker 1:
[55:51] Yeah.

Speaker 2:
[55:51] Okay.

Speaker 1:
[55:52] So he's very pro vertical tabs. David, on the next Vergecast episode, you will respond. This is how we start YouTube drama.

Speaker 5:
[56:00] You got to make response videos to each other.

Speaker 1:
[56:02] That's actually valid. And we haven't done this yet. So it's time.

Speaker 2:
[56:05] I think, let's all start. I think you two are pro vertical tabs, right?

Speaker 1:
[56:09] Here's my browser right here. Vertical tabs on the side. You think I'm pro vertical tabs? This should be common knowledge. It's also 75% of why I started using Arc. Yeah, Arc, I mean, in the episode where I talked about Arc for the first time, I explained it so horribly, but the only thing where I was like, this is amazing, was vertical tabs.

Speaker 2:
[56:29] What about you two?

Speaker 4:
[56:30] Vertical tabs all day.

Speaker 2:
[56:31] That was, yeah, thank you.

Speaker 3:
[56:34] Yeah, no, horizontal tabs.

Speaker 2:
[56:35] Horizontal tabs all day.

Speaker 1:
[56:36] Interesting. And is this because you haven't tried or you dislike vertical?

Speaker 4:
[56:42] His screen is square.

Speaker 1:
[56:44] That's actually very important for this.

Speaker 4:
[56:46] Very valid for this.

Speaker 3:
[56:47] Even better, though. My, when I'm a browsing, I'm one of those people who is like stuck in the year 2011 and I use command and one through nine to go through my tabs.

Speaker 1:
[57:00] So you just memorize which tab is in which number.

Speaker 3:
[57:04] It's not really like, I mean, I guess that you make it sound like it's a big mental task.

Speaker 1:
[57:08] Sounds like one. That's how you switch between tabs, but you still have all of your tabs up at the top of your browser.

Speaker 3:
[57:13] Yeah. But the buttons are horizontal.

Speaker 1:
[57:16] Oh, the, oh, interesting. Oh, so maybe there's a little mental alignment.

Speaker 3:
[57:20] No, it's just wrong. The other way. Like, sorry.

Speaker 1:
[57:23] That's valid. Okay.

Speaker 2:
[57:24] I'm pro horizontal tabs with Ellis.

Speaker 1:
[57:26] Pro horizontal. And does that mean you are anti-vertical?

Speaker 2:
[57:28] Oh yeah.

Speaker 3:
[57:29] I would-

Speaker 1:
[57:30] Interesting.

Speaker 3:
[57:30] I'd be down with like a grid of tabs and then I could use the numpad for that. But they need to be in the same shape. Like a three by three grid of tabs.

Speaker 1:
[57:38] Do you have a numpad?

Speaker 3:
[57:40] Yeah. On all my computers. Pro Tools pretty much requires you to have a numpad. I use my laptop almost exclusively in dock mode with a keyboard with-

Speaker 2:
[57:50] And like 400 peripherals.

Speaker 6:
[57:52] Yeah.

Speaker 3:
[57:54] I'm out of, sorry, I'm out of USB ports on every single setup I have, which is hilarious because I have a CalDigit TS5, like it's just, anyway.

Speaker 2:
[58:03] Everything.

Speaker 3:
[58:04] Yeah. I like horizontal tabs. But I'm also a Safari user.

Speaker 1:
[58:07] Yeah, that's crazy.

Speaker 3:
[58:08] So I don't know if my opinions are super valid.

Speaker 1:
[58:10] That's crazy. It's crazy that you use Safari because if you're docked all the time, the battery life doesn't really matter. And Safari is only good for one thing, which is battery life.

Speaker 2:
[58:23] I like the icon. Whoa, whoa, whoa.

Speaker 1:
[58:26] Unfortunately true.

Speaker 10:
[58:26] Commonly accepted facts.

Speaker 5:
[58:28] Commonly accepted facts.

Speaker 11:
[58:29] Accepted by who?

Speaker 10:
[58:30] Lunatics?

Speaker 1:
[58:31] I would say ask any browser enthusiast.

Speaker 3:
[58:33] This is not what this conversation was supposed to be about.

Speaker 2:
[58:36] What are we debating?

Speaker 1:
[58:37] I'm so attacking Ellis.

Speaker 3:
[58:38] The reason Safari is goaded. It's, okay, one, I'm on an Apple Silicon laptop. Battery life is going to be legit no matter what or where I'm going.

Speaker 1:
[58:46] No, no, it's not.

Speaker 3:
[58:48] That's not true. I'm a super turbo power user. I can at least get four hours of battery life no matter whatever I'm doing.

Speaker 1:
[58:55] The difference between Chrome and Safari in regular browsing for several hours is shockingly high. It's huge.

Speaker 3:
[59:01] Really?

Speaker 1:
[59:01] It's dramatic. Oh my God. This laptop is terrifyingly long lasting battery on Safari is average at best with Chrome.

Speaker 3:
[59:10] Wait, so why are we hating on Safari then?

Speaker 1:
[59:13] I am, so you're saying you use it docked so that the performance and efficiency battery gains that you get are effectively not important at all?

Speaker 3:
[59:22] No, the performance is super important.

Speaker 1:
[59:24] Performance is great.

Speaker 3:
[59:25] I like having RAM on my computer.

Speaker 1:
[59:27] Valid, and I think there's a little bit more of a, obviously, people, it depends on how much RAM you have, where this argument becomes more important, but how long it takes to open the browser, I notice Safari is faster, and then once I'm into browsing, I notice effectively no difference. And the battery life is the main thing that I would use Safari for.

Speaker 3:
[59:45] Interesting. My thinking is, one, I do a lot of RAM-heavy tasks all the time. I really like having as much RAM free as possible at any given moment. Love that. Two, I'm a little bit of a security freak. Over the past few months, I've become way, way, way more freakish about my data, and I love private relay. I see private relay securing me all the time now. And then I guess I don't really use browser extensions very much. It's like very not often that I see a browser extension that I'm interested in. And then whenever I have Chrome installed on all my computers for when there is a specific extension I need to use, but I have yet to find a single browser extension that I'm like, this is so essential to my life that I'd be willing to use 60 gigabytes of RAM.

Speaker 1:
[60:34] Do you use the Claude and Chrome extension?

Speaker 3:
[60:36] I do. That's the only time I open Chrome. So I'll be doing all my stuff in Safari, and then I'll have a Chrome window open that Claude is controlling.

Speaker 1:
[60:43] If I can make an analogy, when I first got Andrew to use a Tasks app, and there were like 75 options, and you were like, I'll just try Google Tasks first. And I was like, okay, that's, it's a good, like it's the default one. There's no advanced features or no plugins or anything crazy like that. But it is, it gets you in the door. That is Safari, I think. Yeah. As soon as you find like two or three features that are not available in Tasks that you start to lean on, it's the same thing as finding two or three extensions in the browser, or two or three UI features in the browser that you start to lean on. I think Safari is so far behind. It has extensions, but the amount of UI fun and trickery and elegance and interesting things happening in, I mean, Arc is obviously the one we talk about a lot, but so many other browsers, they're just not in Safari.

Speaker 3:
[61:29] I really want to talk about tabs. I don't want to make this happen.

Speaker 2:
[61:31] Do you know what feature is really stupid to lean on? Vertical tabs.

Speaker 1:
[61:34] Okay, let's talk about vertical tabs. No, you can literally lean on them because they're vertical like a wall. You can't lean on the ground, that's horizontal. All right, your monitor is a widescreen. This is the default, right? Your monitor is a widescreen. When you have a bunch of tabs at the top, it's cramming them all into the top and you can't see anything. Putting them over to the side, you can have as many tabs as you want. You'll never run out of room. You don't run out of vertical real estate because your tabs are only a slot. So just horizontal tabs just make sense for a vertical browsing experience on a widescreen monitor. Agreed? Agreed.

Speaker 2:
[62:08] Agreed in that scenario. But, question, well, okay, there's more scenarios in this. One, do you guys use your Mac Dock on the side?

Speaker 1:
[62:16] It's at the bottom. What's a Mac Dock? Actually on my desktop, it is on the side.

Speaker 2:
[62:20] It's on the side?

Speaker 1:
[62:20] I don't use it on the side. That's crazy.

Speaker 2:
[62:23] Why would, why not? If it's widescreen and it's vertical. I see what you're saying.

Speaker 1:
[62:27] I don't really use my Dock. I see what you're doing.

Speaker 2:
[62:30] I see what you're doing.

Speaker 1:
[62:31] I see what you're doing.

Speaker 2:
[62:31] Yeah, I just. It's the exact same thing.

Speaker 3:
[62:35] I think Marques might win this one because.

Speaker 6:
[62:37] Well, because he does use it.

Speaker 2:
[62:38] Adam uses it on the side also. What?

Speaker 3:
[62:40] No, no, no, I used to use it on the side too, but the icons are square. And so it doesn't matter what direction, whereas writing is horizontal. So you couldn't.

Speaker 2:
[62:47] No, no, but we're talking about width of screen real estate and that a general web page is vertical. This is something David Pierce says also. He says.

Speaker 1:
[62:54] Precious vertical pixels.

Speaker 2:
[62:56] Virtually every modern computer display is widescreen. Most web pages are taller than they are wide. So if you're reading in a thing, you don't need the width of space.

Speaker 3:
[63:04] I don't agree with that. I think the idea is that if you have something that is larger in the horizontal dimension, then you'd want to stack it vertically because you lose less information per instance.

Speaker 1:
[63:16] I think it's even simpler. I have more horizontal pixels, so I will waste more of them on tabs. I have less vertical pixels, so I want to scroll less by having less things wasting my vertical pixels. Something you guys are disregarding is the magical ability to hide your tabs. ARC, this is my goaded ARC setup. Hidden tabs. Yeah, you swipe, okay, the active page, you swipe over and then your tabs come out.

Speaker 2:
[63:39] There's something so funny about you not doing that with your doc. What do you say, you don't use your doc?

Speaker 1:
[63:43] Well, I don't really use my doc. You can hide your doc.

Speaker 2:
[63:45] You should hide your doc.

Speaker 1:
[63:46] Yeah, I should. I never thought about that.

Speaker 2:
[63:49] You should definitely hide your doc.

Speaker 1:
[63:51] But okay, this is the goaded ARC setup. You have two windows. ARC does have a feature where you can have like two, it's one window, but you have two separate pages, but that's lame.

Speaker 2:
[63:59] Can I pause you right there really fast? Because that's what I wanted to say. Everyone's talking about width of screen real estate. I put two windows up. So now, yeah, I don't have that much screen real estate. Now in two windows, if you're not doing his goaded ARC setup, if you have two windows with vertical tabs, now you're taking up so much space.

Speaker 1:
[64:18] But there's no way.

Speaker 2:
[64:19] And you have this huge buffer in between. You're very specific scenario.

Speaker 1:
[64:23] Come on, most people hide the tabs in ARC.

Speaker 2:
[64:25] In ARC, but this whole article is about Chrome.

Speaker 1:
[64:28] Yeah, because Chrome sucks.

Speaker 2:
[64:30] I think by default, you don't hide your tabs, right?

Speaker 1:
[64:34] No, I don't.

Speaker 2:
[64:34] So if you have two browser windows, sorry, I feel like I'm interrupting a lot here, but I don't want to miss specific things we're talking about. Yeah. If you have two browsers open side by side, so now it's tabs, article, tabs, article, and it's all like, yeah, that's a lot of people.

Speaker 1:
[64:51] I do that sometimes. On a widescreen monitor, it's still fine. There's enough horizontal pixels. On your 32-inch monitor. Well, it's wide. But what about your 14-inch MacBook Pro? There are people who use ultra-wides. Anyone who uses an ultra-wide cannot possibly justify not using horizontal tabs or vertical tabs. Yeah, for sure. You gotta use vertical tabs. Yeah, they're not, yeah. But on my, you know, the Pro display or whatever, it's still widescreen. I still got plenty of horizontal pixels to spare, and every website is vertical. What about this computer? Your 14-inch MacBook Pro. Yeah, you got one window. You have one window. Yeah. Okay.

Speaker 3:
[65:22] What about Mac OS and not Windows, idiot?

Speaker 1:
[65:25] One window, Docs at the bottom. I could easily move the Docs to the side. That's totally valid point. But yeah, I see all my tabs. Can I see?

Speaker 2:
[65:32] What about watching videos in a browser?

Speaker 1:
[65:34] What about it?

Speaker 2:
[65:35] It's widescreen. You're losing a bunch of real estate, especially in an MKBHD 2x1 video.

Speaker 4:
[65:41] I watch videos on my phone all the time.

Speaker 1:
[65:42] Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, sorry. I'm watching a video in my browser. It's a widescreen video. And then I maximize it.

Speaker 2:
[65:48] You just vertical tab this is making it smaller.

Speaker 1:
[65:50] But you can maximize it. Oh, no, it's not. There's still extra horizontal. There's still white space to the left and right of every video.

Speaker 2:
[65:57] Really?

Speaker 1:
[65:57] Yeah.

Speaker 2:
[65:58] Open up YouTube right now.

Speaker 1:
[65:59] You have so much left and right. You don't maximize it? If I maximize it, it's full screen. Yeah, exactly. Yeah, just full screen. It's whatever.

Speaker 2:
[66:04] Wait, wait, what do you mean?

Speaker 1:
[66:06] Yeah, black space, black space, left and right. What the heck? There's just more blank space. The video is the same size. Oh, shit.

Speaker 2:
[66:11] Can you do an MKBHD video?

Speaker 1:
[66:13] Yeah, it's two by one, though, if I switch to, well, which is why, yeah, which is why it would be. Oh, okay. Oh, that's what you meant by two by one. So this is a bluey phone review. And so now there's, this is about, ooh, almost perfect, but there's still extra horizontal space. Okay, now get rid of it. Same size video. Same size video. I had my tabs. I got plenty of horizontal pixels to work with here.

Speaker 2:
[66:34] It's all about the vertical space. If you want, you're recommended on site. If you're outside of theater mode, it does.

Speaker 1:
[66:41] Oh.

Speaker 2:
[66:42] Okay, that kind of screws my point up there.

Speaker 1:
[66:44] Yeah, the video is the same size. So I, I'm a big, I agree with David Pearce, I think. I'm going to read his article, but I assume he's saying precious vertical pixels. You need those.

Speaker 2:
[66:54] Pressure, yeah. I did do a super, super scientific test, which is I took a screenshot of my browser with vertical pixel, or sorry, horizontal tabs and vertical tabs. I brought it into Photoshop. I took total pixel size and took a percentage of space inside my browser window and how much it's taking up.

Speaker 1:
[67:11] Okay, but yeah, it's going to take up more space. But you can spare that. That's like saying I have two bank accounts. One of them has way more money in it, and I'm spending a larger percentage of the smaller one, but the smaller one was just for extra stuff. That's a terrible analogy. But it's like I have a front yard and a back yard. I got one. I got a front yard and a backyard. The backyard is smaller, but it's the backyard. Like I can do whatever. So if I have a front yard and I want to put a sculpture in one of these yards, I can put a way bigger sculpture in the backyard because it's my backyard. I can do whatever I want. I've got extra grass back there. The front yard is precious to use for front yard stuff. I'm bad at this.

Speaker 2:
[67:51] I'm saying I would put a sculpture in the front yard if I was getting a sculpture.

Speaker 1:
[67:54] Help me out. What is a good nail? I have a drive-by. I've got a two-car garage.

Speaker 2:
[67:58] Horizontal tabs.

Speaker 1:
[68:00] I've got a two-car garage. Let's go with it. Okay. And I have a...

Speaker 5:
[68:03] I'm trying to understand what you're saying.

Speaker 1:
[68:05] I have a Hummer. Okay. I have a two-car garage and I have one massive car, a Hummer. If I wanted to build a gym in my garage, I would build it in the half garage that's not being used while I still park the Hummer in the big garage slot. And how does this relate to the tabs? Because that half garage is extra, right? So, you're saying it takes a big, the gym takes a huge portion of that second garage spot, but who cares? It's the second garage spot. I wasn't using it for anything. Does that track? I see what you're saying. I think the difference, what would need to happen is the Hummer would need to be able to expand to fill the space allotted, which is not how Hummers work. No, the gym expands.

Speaker 6:
[68:47] The gym is what's expanding.

Speaker 1:
[68:49] The gym can expand. You're building a gym in the garage. You have a two-car garage. So, the Hummer is the tabs, is what you're saying? The gym is the tabs. The gym is the tabs. But the tabs don't expand to fill the whole screen, right? No, but they take up more. You're saying, so Andrew said, Andrew said that when I switch to vertical tabs, it's turning into blank space way more.

Speaker 2:
[69:14] Well, it's overall taking up more space inside of the browser. The browser is for looking at webpages. It's taking away more space for the web page.

Speaker 1:
[69:21] And my argument is, it's taking up way more space, but it's taking up a whole bunch of space that you weren't going to do anything with because every website is vertical.

Speaker 2:
[69:29] Not, yes. Every website. Majority of websites. I still disagree with some of those things. If I'm also on my computer putting multiple windows next to each other, I'm losing horizontal space, so therefore now if there's a vertical tab list on every single one of those windows, it is destroying real estate of web browsers.

Speaker 1:
[69:50] You don't even need to have this argument if you just do what you're supposed to do, which is to do the hover thing where the tabs expand.

Speaker 2:
[69:55] In the browser that's gonna be sunset within the next year?

Speaker 1:
[70:00] I don't care. Can you hide your tabs at the top? If you have top tabs? Oh, I don't know. Can you hide those?

Speaker 4:
[70:09] I think you can turn off the bookmarks bar or whatever. Oh no, wait, the tabs you mean.

Speaker 1:
[70:15] Okay, here's my take. Look at this, look at your screen, Andrew.

Speaker 2:
[70:19] Perfect.

Speaker 1:
[70:21] There's like 12% of your screen that's being used by useless s***t.

Speaker 2:
[70:26] You're in a different, you're basically in like a full screen mode.

Speaker 1:
[70:30] Me?

Speaker 2:
[70:30] Yeah.

Speaker 1:
[70:31] Yeah, because that's how you should use your computer.

Speaker 6:
[70:34] Okay, I have, I have a way to take...

Speaker 2:
[70:38] Wait, can I just say the percentages of what I calculated?

Speaker 6:
[70:40] Sure, yeah, yeah.

Speaker 2:
[70:41] Horizontal tabs took 3% of the total pixels used by my browser window. Vertical tabs took up 14% of the total pixels of the browser window. Yeah, yeah, whatever.

Speaker 4:
[70:51] So my take is, I would argue that's functional space though, because the way that I use my vertical tabs is folders and their drop down. So when you click on one, it pops out underneath. So I could see everything.

Speaker 3:
[71:03] Let's go.

Speaker 2:
[71:04] You can do tabs or groups.

Speaker 1:
[71:06] Waterfalling cascading, that's how folders work on your computer.

Speaker 3:
[71:10] If you only have like three tabs open, is the entire sidebar just empty then?

Speaker 2:
[71:16] Yes.

Speaker 1:
[71:16] Yeah. And you weren't going to use those pixels anyway.

Speaker 2:
[71:19] Because I got a blank space.

Speaker 1:
[71:20] And that's why you got to be me and you got to be maximalist for the amount of tabs that you have open. Yeah. If I have 20 tabs, it fills up the whole list. But I never have that many tabs open. And this whole left area, which was not going to be used either way, switch to vertical, switch to the top tabs. It's also still blank because the website's in the middle of the screen. So those tabs are all white no matter what you do. You might as well have the superior.

Speaker 2:
[71:40] Well, yeah, it just takes up like eight times as much screen real estate. Unless you hide them.

Speaker 1:
[71:46] You say screen real estate like it's precious, but it's blank pixels.

Speaker 5:
[71:50] Hide them.

Speaker 2:
[71:50] I do think it's.

Speaker 5:
[71:51] This all gets solved if you hide them.

Speaker 2:
[71:53] Every website. I'll hide them when you hide your doc right now. I'll hide my doc right now.

Speaker 1:
[71:57] Every website scrolls up and down. I'll do it. Everyone, every single time, scrolls vertical. Turn hiding on.

Speaker 2:
[72:04] I need to have a screenshot of my...

Speaker 3:
[72:06] Look at that shit bro.

Speaker 2:
[72:06] I just want to see your two web browser windows open with vertical tabs side by side next to each other doing something.

Speaker 3:
[72:16] Yeah, you do have way more...

Speaker 2:
[72:18] You're like, wide screen people are stupid. But I have two.

Speaker 1:
[72:20] I also have two monitors. No more doc for me. Wow. It's committing to it. I'm committing. I like that. I don't click on those things. I just do command space. Actually, yeah. Wait. I'm going to do that too. I'm going to hide my doc.

Speaker 3:
[72:33] Wait a second.

Speaker 1:
[72:33] Is this something we can all agree on?

Speaker 2:
[72:35] Well, I wasn't going to say.

Speaker 3:
[72:36] I can't.

Speaker 2:
[72:37] The real end to this whole debate is, everyone has way too many tabs open and just do whatever you want.

Speaker 1:
[72:42] Not end.

Speaker 2:
[72:42] I thought it was fun.

Speaker 1:
[72:43] Yeah. That's the whole reason I liked Arc in the first place, because I have way too many tabs open and it closes them for me.

Speaker 3:
[72:48] You don't want Arc. You want an AI browser of Vietlacian.

Speaker 1:
[72:55] Give me my JIRA ASAP.

Speaker 5:
[72:57] Integrate with my KPIs.

Speaker 2:
[72:59] Also, Firefox has had vertical tabs for a while. I don't use them. I'm just saying Firefox is superior.

Speaker 3:
[73:06] It's interesting the meme of the guy at the party who's like, no one here. No one.

Speaker 6:
[73:09] I use Firefox.

Speaker 2:
[73:11] I also totally understand. I'm the last person you should be taking advice for.

Speaker 3:
[73:17] I'm the last. I use Safari.

Speaker 2:
[73:18] My desktop is insane. It makes no sense. On the Pro Display XDR, I use that big screen real estate by just having a bunch of different sized aspect ratio windows where a corner of them is popping out all over, so that's how I can just click between all my different windows. And I also am running Android Studio because I don't have Instagram on any of my devices, which means I can't share things to my story. So I now have a virtual Pixel 9 running on my desktop just so I can add things to my story when the studio tags me in.

Speaker 1:
[73:50] I think what we're learning is all of us have very different habits on our desktops and we just kind of have to use what works for us.

Speaker 3:
[73:56] You didn't let me talk about the most goaded Safari feature of them all, the one that literally is causing Safari to lap all other browser offerings.

Speaker 1:
[74:05] Oh, God.

Speaker 3:
[74:06] You guys ever checked out your reading list?

Speaker 1:
[74:09] Oh, no. I've only ever accidentally clicked that. You know, there's like 8,000 Chrome extensions that do that. Yeah. You can save things to your superior bookmark aggregation service with a simple plugin. That is multi-platform. That syncs to all your devices.

Speaker 3:
[74:28] See, but I don't know what background processes that's running. I don't know what servers is connecting to...

Speaker 1:
[74:35] Wait, okay.

Speaker 3:
[74:35] Before we move on, I have a reading list. I'm on my computer at work and I see an article that I'm interested in. And I'm like...

Speaker 5:
[74:42] Chrome has that.

Speaker 3:
[74:44] Shut up. I'm talking here, okay, buddy? And then I'm like, damn, I want to read that, but I'm doing work right now, you know? And then I get on the bus and I open my phone and I hit reading list.

Speaker 1:
[74:55] You can do that with Chrome, too.

Speaker 3:
[74:56] I get a few, I don't care. You know how many hoops I have to go through? I have to put my computer on a spit over a fire and spin it while doing some tribal dance.

Speaker 1:
[75:08] Just put it in a fridge. Look, Ellis, I understand that you're traumatized from the iPhone 12 mini battery life, so now you're only focused on battery life, and I understand that.

Speaker 3:
[75:16] No, I'm not focused on, I'm focused on RAM. I'm focused on RAM and I'm focused on, I don't like my browser connecting to random servers. I didn't tell it to because I downloaded some random extension from somewhere in the world, okay?

Speaker 4:
[75:28] You get your viruses.

Speaker 5:
[75:30] Yeah.

Speaker 3:
[75:30] Yeah, thank you.

Speaker 5:
[75:30] Come on, man.

Speaker 1:
[75:31] I want to make my virus soup. I have a quick question for you guys. What browser do you use on your phones? Dad, I actually, that's a good, I have several answers.

Speaker 4:
[75:41] Quick question.

Speaker 1:
[75:43] No, on my Android phone I use Chrome, on my iPhone I use Arc and Safari. What? Unfortunate. What do you use Safari for? I default to Arc, but I have several tabs that I leave open in Safari that I always go back to. Why don't you just have them on Arc?

Speaker 5:
[75:58] I don't know.

Speaker 2:
[76:01] This conversation is going to end and all of our audience is going to be like, why do I listen to these people's talk? These are the people I take advice from?

Speaker 1:
[76:08] This is just revealing that a lot of us started habits that we just didn't think about.

Speaker 5:
[76:12] And now we're like, that's too bad.

Speaker 3:
[76:13] I wasn't prepared to, why are we doing this? No, I've tried to switch, I've used, I never tried Arc because I was so annoyed, but I've tried every other browser. I even tried the perplexity one, Comet.

Speaker 5:
[76:23] Comet.

Speaker 3:
[76:24] You know, I haven't tried Opera GX either. Ask me what I use on my phone.

Speaker 4:
[76:27] What do you use on your phone?

Speaker 6:
[76:28] Safari.

Speaker 1:
[76:29] You must if you have the reading list.

Speaker 2:
[76:30] Please don't use Safari.

Speaker 1:
[76:32] You have the reading list on your phone, right?

Speaker 6:
[76:36] Safari music.

Speaker 2:
[76:37] Is this Safari music?

Speaker 6:
[76:38] Yeah, Safari music.

Speaker 2:
[76:39] The Safari icon is the superior icon of everything?

Speaker 4:
[76:43] I've tried to use a bunch of the browser icons. Safari is fine, but the reason why I can't go all in on it is because it's not multi-platform.

Speaker 1:
[76:50] Yeah.

Speaker 4:
[76:50] That's basically it. At home, I use a Linux computer. I can't download Safari on a Linux computer.

Speaker 1:
[76:55] You also can't download on your Android phone.

Speaker 4:
[76:58] Yeah, and I can't download on my Android phone, and I switch back and forth all the time.

Speaker 1:
[77:00] Yeah, yeah, yeah. I've been weaning off of Arc slowly. I should be leaving Arc. Why? Because the lack of updates, I just know it's not going to perform well in a year. It's going to be a slow crawling mess. It's been dead for a while, and I still use it. But do you ever check on other browsers and go, oh, Arc is a slow crawling mess? I check on other browsers, but what do you mean by slow crawling? It takes 30 years to open. No, it doesn't take 30 years to open. Try opening another browser. See how fast it opens.

Speaker 2:
[77:29] My God. I think David hit the nail on the head. It's habit, and all of us are in weird habits, and a browser is one of those habitual things you're in so much that any change feels really weird.

Speaker 1:
[77:40] Does Arc still sync? I don't know. Yes, yes, yes, yes. It does? Yes, yes, yes. Maybe I'll switch back and hate myself a little more.

Speaker 4:
[77:47] It's a good thing none of these browsers have any critical vulnerabilities.

Speaker 1:
[77:51] Yeah, that's a great segue.

Speaker 2:
[77:53] I think they all do.

Speaker 1:
[77:54] They actually all do.

Speaker 3:
[77:56] They actually everything does.

Speaker 2:
[77:58] Actually everything does.

Speaker 1:
[77:59] Okay, very, very big story dropped.

Speaker 4:
[78:02] I love this episode. This podcast has a critical vulnerability.

Speaker 1:
[78:06] Insane story dropped yesterday, Tuesday, April 7th.

Speaker 3:
[78:10] Chachi BT is in your car now.

Speaker 1:
[78:13] You know, it's going to happen eventually. Anthropic announced a large project called Project Glasswing, which is a joint cybersecurity effort to patch various vulnerabilities across different OSs, across various software. The reason this is a big deal is because I think last week or possibly the week before, we talked about how Anthropic had accidentally leaked a bunch of stuff that it had been working on for a very long period of time. One of those leaks, probably the biggest of those leaks, was a new model called Mythos that they have been working on, which is the biggest model they have ever trained. It has trillions of parameters. It is this giant kind of behemoth. It's a good name. Yes, very good name. They trained it specifically to be good at coding. Something that they found out after they trained it was not only was it good at coding, but a side effect of being good at coding was that it was extremely good at cybersecurity and finding bugs and things like that. They were messing around with it. They were trying to do some cyber tech stuff with it. They found thousands of high severity security vulnerabilities, including some in every major operating system and web browser. It can chain together various different security vulnerabilities to come up with more powerful outcomes. For an example, in Linux, they found various different vulnerabilities that allowed you to have admin access to any Linux computer by chaining together a bunch of these different bugs that is in the Linux kernel.

Speaker 4:
[79:42] That's combo.

Speaker 1:
[79:45] Combo breaker.

Speaker 2:
[79:45] Get comboed.

Speaker 4:
[79:46] The scary thing too is that it did it autonomously.

Speaker 1:
[79:48] Autonomously.

Speaker 4:
[79:49] Like just by itself.

Speaker 1:
[79:50] Allegedly. Allegedly. All of this is alleged, by the way, because they're not releasing this to the public.

Speaker 3:
[79:55] David and I were talking about how in the Mythos release paper stuff, there were a few things.

Speaker 1:
[79:59] System card, yeah.

Speaker 3:
[80:00] Yeah, there were a few things they described as unprompted, which were like, basically prompted. Definitely prompted. So it's like, you got to take all this a little bit of a great assault.

Speaker 1:
[80:09] But the system card, which is kind of like this, it's like 200 and something pages of like, what happened during their testing process of this new model. There are various things that were kind of interesting that happened, but that they definitely kind of hyped up a little bit to catch more headlines. Like, for example, they put Mythos in the sandbox environment and they instructed it to break out of the sandbox environment. And it did, and you know, in the little, there's this little like, what's it called when you put a little ticker above it that says like 10, and then lower down, it's like, this is what 10 means. What's that called?

Speaker 2:
[80:43] Oh, an annotation.

Speaker 1:
[80:45] Yeah, annotation. They put an annotation and they were like, it, you know, autonomously broke out of here.

Speaker 3:
[80:50] You're talking about footnotes?

Speaker 1:
[80:51] A footnote. Yeah, sorry, footnote.

Speaker 3:
[80:53] Not an annotation. That was the most abstract way I've ever heard.

Speaker 1:
[80:55] Sorry, I'm just thinking about it in my head. Yeah. So in that one, they had said like, the security researcher only realized that had broken out of the sandbox when he received an unprompted email from the model telling it had broken out of the sandbox. And I was like, well, okay, that is kind of crazy. But at the same time, like you said, it said when he received an email while he was in the park eating a sandwich, which is like, why did you say that?

Speaker 3:
[81:18] And then the other part was like, it was not just prompted to break out. It was prompted to email him.

Speaker 1:
[81:22] To let them know. Yeah. So it's like, you know, it's- It was supposed to. Yeah. It's crazy that it is able to do that. Like it was able to run JavaScript and figure out a way to like break out of the sandbox by running specific JavaScript things, which like no one's supposed to be able to do. But regardless, anyway, so because this model they found to be so powerful, they formed this alliance called Project Glasswing, which is this multi company security effort where they're giving mythos to a number of different companies because they have found major security vulnerabilities in every major OS and most of the platforms like and apps in the world. So anyway, they're also giving access to 40 different organizations to use mythos previews to be able to secure their environments before this kind of cybersecurity AI agent is unleashed on the world because I think if there's one thing we know, it's that if you make software and you say we're not going to make this available to the public, it will eventually become available to the public either because you decide to eventually release it or because someone else hacks you or because your open AI or Google eventually develops an agent that's just as powerful and can do the same things. So what they're trying to do now is they're basically trying to like secure major software before agents come out that can find vulnerabilities in all of this software. There was also a bug in OpenBSD that has been present for 27 years that nobody knew about that is able to crash any machine. So yeah, pretty big vulnerabilities there.

Speaker 3:
[83:02] There was also one in FFmpeg, which is like the...

Speaker 1:
[83:05] Video encoder, decoder, every single thing uses.

Speaker 3:
[83:08] Exactly. It's just, yeah, exactly. Sorry. You played it so much better than I was going to be able to. Absolutely. But yeah, it's code that's present in most software that is able to encode and decode videos because why would you write it yourself when you can just pull it off the shelf? So yeah, essentially, most software, it turns out, had zero-day vulnerabilities. It took a robot to figure out.

Speaker 1:
[83:30] Yeah. So I think that the kind of scary thing about stuff like this is that part of the AI race is that there are companies that will say, well, if Anthropic's not going to release this, we're going to develop a model that's just as powerful and we're going to release it because we want to gain market share. That's what people are freaked out about. And so that's why Anthropic is trying to secure this stuff ahead of time. In my opinion, I don't think they should have even put out the blog post before they did a lot more work on this, but it's possible.

Speaker 4:
[83:59] That's where my alarm bells go off.

Speaker 1:
[84:01] Yeah.

Speaker 4:
[84:01] Why would you even tell anyone about this?

Speaker 2:
[84:03] Because it got leaked.

Speaker 1:
[84:04] That's what I was going to... Yeah, I think the main reason why they ended up talking about it was because it got leaked.

Speaker 4:
[84:09] Oh, yeah. They leaked the whole source code. Exactly who I want in charge of. Cybersecurity.

Speaker 3:
[84:15] Right. I know. They leaked Opus source code. Yeah, it wasn't. And in Opus, they found references to this thing called mythos. So everyone was like, what the hell is Anthropic mythos?

Speaker 4:
[84:25] It could have just been like nothing. Don't worry about it.

Speaker 1:
[84:27] Yeah. They also had little characters that you could dance around and you could have on your computer, which is arguably more important.

Speaker 3:
[84:33] The disclaimer that David and I, when we were talking about this, David and I carpool to work on Wednesdays together. So we talk about all the pod stuff. But the thing that David and I really wanted to talk about is just that as much as this seems legit and seems freaky deaky, they have a financial interest in lying. So maybe they're lying. Maybe they're not, I don't know.

Speaker 1:
[84:55] Yeah, I don't know. I mean, they got 12 large corporations and 40 organizations and they have all these quotes and they have people in the video talking about how important it was. One of the best security researchers in the world said that while he's been using mythos, he's found more bugs than in his entire career.

Speaker 3:
[85:10] Yeah, no, it definitely seems pretty legit, but I just also know, like...

Speaker 1:
[85:15] You should take all of this with a grain of salt.

Speaker 3:
[85:16] I've been listening to Sam Altman saying he's one second away from curing cancer for the past two and a half years. And so, you know, I'll take it all with a grain of salt.

Speaker 2:
[85:23] Don't worry, he bought a podcast. We're all good.

Speaker 5:
[85:25] Oh, my God, dude.

Speaker 3:
[85:28] Speaking of safety.

Speaker 2:
[85:31] Speaking of safety. That's good. That's good. Good job. Nicely done. I saw this article, this release today, and I just thought it was a cool little article. Skoda, the car company, is designing a bell for your bike for the sole purpose of being able to penetrate active noise canceling. So the car company released a new bell, and they are talking in their video about the release of it in London, a city with 1.5 million bike commuters per day, a city where 54% of all headphones sold have active noise canceling and has also seen a 24% rise in cyclist-pedestrian collisions. They decided that they needed to work on this new bell because while there are obviously so many variables between pedestrian, cyclist, automobiles and everything, they believe that the mix of smartphone usage and active noise canceling is being detrimental to situational awareness and recognizing alert sounds. So what they decided they had to do was find a way to make bells on your bike noticeable by somebody wearing noise canceling headphones. There is this big study. We will link it in the show notes. Ellis could potentially help me explain this better. But they essentially tested the top six most popular headphones with active noise canceling to try and find a frequency that... Ellis, is this the easiest way of describing it? Active noise canceling essentially looks at the frequencies that are coming in and then plays the reverse version of it to cancel out the noise. So they found that 750 Hz was a frequency that for whatever reason ANC just wasn't really able to handle in terms of blocking out.

Speaker 3:
[87:12] They found a bunch of things. They found a few different things. The first is that how cluttered the noise environment that you're in affects what frequencies the ANC is better at canceling out versus others. So when there's a lot of noise going on, certain frequencies are better. When there's not a lot of noise, other frequencies penetrate better. Another thing they found was that tonal frequencies, like frequencies that have a clear like bass and then harmonic stack on top of them, work better than sounds that are a little bit more random and chaotic and like what we would call noisy. There's a bunch of interesting things. But yeah, largely that's the big thing is that in a lot like there are certain situations where 750Hz works really well and then there are certain situations where I think it was like 1k or 2k or something like that. Works really well.

Speaker 2:
[88:04] So I thought what it was is that the 750Hz was the frequency that ANC basically was not able to counteract and so that could pierce noise canceling headphones.

Speaker 1:
[88:16] Isn't it like a super like a bass?

Speaker 2:
[88:19] So the reason this is called the Skoda Duobell is because the 750Hz can break noise cancellation but that is a very low noise for people who are not wearing noise canceling headphones. So that bell just by itself at 750Hz probably won't actually alert somebody in an environment that's not wearing the headphones. So that's why the bell has two different frequencies on it. One is over 2000Hz because that is still a general like bike bell alert sound that people are used to. So people who aren't wearing headphones, it would be crazy to do this whole thing to help people with headphones and then make it worse and not alerting people who aren't wearing the headphones.

Speaker 1:
[89:01] I'm just trying to imagine the sound of a bike chime but in a much lower pitch. I don't know if I would, I guess it would be interesting to hear, like if I'm listening to music and it has bass in it, that's gonna sound like more bass.

Speaker 2:
[89:13] I would assume it's something different, you're not used to, you're wondering what that sound is. Maybe. The way they tested it is through this kind of complicated way, they like did virtual reality where one person was walking. That's 750.

Speaker 1:
[89:28] That sounds higher than I thought.

Speaker 2:
[89:33] But like if, well, I guess it's one thing, the bell is all mechanical. It's not digital. 2000 is pretty high. I was listening to these before to try and see what they sounded like. But you also have to think of it, it has to be in a bell that goes, bring bring bring bring. Like the way they did it is they tested it by a person in virtual reality, was wearing noise canceling headphones and was in the virtual reality, supposed to be doing something on their phone to be paying attention to it. It's hard to imagine these as the bike tone that would be on it, but that's much louder. And so in their testing, they found that people wearing ANC headphones heard the bell 22 meters earlier or five seconds sooner than an average person biking, which is huge. I want it because when we are trying to do water runs in the studio I think they're testing in London, they're planning on expanding it. I want it, because when we are trying to do water runs in the studio and everyone's wearing headphones, I want to try and alert everybody. So we should just put it at the front door so we can just ring, ring, ring, ring, ring, ring, and everybody can then know we're going to do a water run.

Speaker 1:
[90:36] Why were they in VR when they were testing this again?

Speaker 6:
[90:39] So they get some funding money.

Speaker 3:
[90:41] Because they weren't just...

Speaker 2:
[90:43] The original testing.

Speaker 3:
[90:44] Yeah, so they weren't just being like, how well do you hear this? They were simulating distractions both in the foreground, background and periphery. And so they were trying to figure not just how well can you hear something, but how well does the ear response actually reach your brain? Because when you're riding a bike, you're focused on stuff. Well, I guess not ready. But when you're in the world.

Speaker 2:
[91:06] They're saying people with headphones are generally also a lot of times looking at their phone and just completely unaware of what's going on. Yeah. One thing in here, though, is with all the testing, they did create a graph of the AirPods, Mac, Bose, QuietComfort, Sony WX1000s, AirPods Pro, JBL Live Pro, and Samsung Galaxy Buds. And they have a graph of how well the mean attenuation is. And AirPods, Macs just kind of blow everything out of the water.

Speaker 3:
[91:32] I was a little confused by this because they don't say which generation of these they use. That's sort of frustrating. They don't say which Sonys. They don't say which AirPod Pros.

Speaker 5:
[91:42] Which AirPods, Macs, Pro.

Speaker 3:
[91:45] There is the new one.

Speaker 2:
[91:45] Now there's a new one, but I think this happened before that. That came out like last week.

Speaker 1:
[91:49] Yeah, just, but yeah, none of them have a number.

Speaker 5:
[91:51] Yeah, true.

Speaker 1:
[91:52] Apple's got to be very, like the new Galaxy Buds are way better than the old ones. At noise canceling specifically. Yeah, Apple's got to be very annoyed at this chart because they said AirPod Pro and AirPod Macs. And as we know, Apple's very specific.

Speaker 2:
[92:08] There's a lot about the Sony WX1000s. They just get, even they were like, this name sucks. I'm not listing the whole thing in it.

Speaker 1:
[92:16] Samsung Galaxy Bud.

Speaker 2:
[92:17] And just JBL Live Pro, all lower cases.

Speaker 4:
[92:19] A part of it might also be because they're trying to, like, not make it about the individual headphones. Like, that's not the point. The point is just headphones in general, you know.

Speaker 8:
[92:26] The point of our podcast is to make it about the individual headphones.

Speaker 1:
[92:31] They do break it down.

Speaker 3:
[92:32] Guys, what's my least favorite thing in the world?

Speaker 2:
[92:35] The noise of a bee's asshole.

Speaker 3:
[92:37] It's frequency response charts. It's frequency response charts, because there's so much information about noise canceling that this graph does not show. So I'm also not mad that, because you would not be able to, as much as I want to be like, Ellis is f***ing right, AirPods, Macs are the goat. But it's like, for example, like the speed of the drivers, like how fast those drivers can move in and out will affect how much of sudden sounds are able to be canceled. The excursion of the drivers, how far spatially they can move from their resting point is going to affect like how much like really low booms are able to be canceled. You know, there's a lot of other features that you can't just be like X frequency is canceled Y amount. If anyone ever sends me a frequency response chart, block my number.

Speaker 6:
[93:23] Bro, what do you mean?

Speaker 1:
[93:25] It's kind of like an MTF chart.

Speaker 3:
[93:26] I said what I said.

Speaker 1:
[93:27] It's kind of like an MTF chart for lenses.

Speaker 3:
[93:29] It's like when people are like the sound stage of headphones. I'm like, miss me straight up miss me.

Speaker 4:
[93:36] Well, I have many thoughts, but we have to get going.

Speaker 1:
[93:40] Adam, you should try.

Speaker 2:
[93:41] I just want to try. I want the bell and I want to see what it sounds like.

Speaker 3:
[93:45] I mean, Andrew, you and I, we always want the bell, baby, but you know, like a boy.

Speaker 5:
[93:50] What does that mean?

Speaker 3:
[93:51] Taco Bell.

Speaker 2:
[93:51] Oh, got it.

Speaker 5:
[93:52] Yeah, same.

Speaker 3:
[93:54] We should. I would be interested in obtaining this.

Speaker 2:
[93:56] I don't know how we will because it's only in London right now. Skoda, if you're listening.

Speaker 5:
[94:00] I would fly to London because I'm glad.

Speaker 1:
[94:03] Anyway, Adam, do you want to transition to us and to your rant?

Speaker 4:
[94:07] Speaking of things that I'm angry about.

Speaker 5:
[94:09] There you go. You're angry at bells?

Speaker 4:
[94:12] No, not really.

Speaker 6:
[94:14] More so, more speaking about it.

Speaker 4:
[94:16] No, I'm mad at Ellis' frequency response.

Speaker 1:
[94:18] Oh, okay.

Speaker 4:
[94:19] But also about Pixel 10a coming out in Japan in blue. Okay, I have a few questions here. So if you don't know, the Pixel 10a got a Japan exclusive variant that is like a nice blue color. It has its own cool icons and wallpapers and all this stuff.

Speaker 1:
[94:37] Yeah.

Speaker 4:
[94:38] It's neat. Fine. I'm confused because isn't this just the Pixel 10 color? Like the blue looks exactly the same.

Speaker 1:
[94:44] Well, that's where you get triggered the design people.

Speaker 4:
[94:48] I know.

Speaker 1:
[94:49] It's such a specific blue.

Speaker 4:
[94:50] It is a very specific blue and it has a special name and everything. But I'm looking at it. And again, we don't have the actual device. So I'm looking at it on the screen. And I'm looking at the Pixel 10 that we have here in the office. And I'm just like, it's the same picture.

Speaker 1:
[95:02] Yeah. I don't know what it is about these companies that they sort of over... Maybe they overdo how much they think we care about the exact color. You know what Motorola does? They have a partnership with Pantone. And they'll do a special edition phone that is in the Pantone color of the year. As if I've ever met anyone who even knows what that is. Like, we do have designers here.

Speaker 3:
[95:25] You don't remember Cosmic Latte?

Speaker 2:
[95:27] No.

Speaker 1:
[95:30] I know that there are people who care about the Pantone color of the year. And those people are a very specific person who, you know, pays attention to colors and new things like that. And that's very exciting to them. But does Motorola think that there is like a huge audience that's like, oh, man, I can't wait for this Pantone color of the year to be a phone. I guess they do think that because we get that every year. And so here comes Google and they're like, we've got this very specific blue. And then it's not the same as the Pixel 10 blue. It's a certain, what are they calling it? Isai blue? Am I saying that right?

Speaker 4:
[95:56] Isul? Isai?

Speaker 1:
[95:57] I think it's named after the designer.

Speaker 2:
[95:59] Yeah, it seems like this is less about the color and more about the collaboration.

Speaker 4:
[96:02] Yeah, which that's my next point. That's a really cool collaboration. That dude is like a great artist. Why do we get Wicked and Spongebob themes here in the States while Japan gets this?

Speaker 1:
[96:13] I think you know the answer to that question. Because people here know about this and people there know about that.

Speaker 2:
[96:19] How many times do we reference this guy and how many times do we reference Spongebob?

Speaker 4:
[96:22] That's fair. That's fair. Also, a little annoyed just generally about Pixel availability just because it just came to Mexico this past year. There's multiple countries where not all the features are available. Pixel stuff is just all over the place and it's very confusing. But more so, the main reason why this caught my attention was because when I saw the article and I clicked the link to watch the video, the video popped up in 4x3. And it's from Google Japan YouTube channel with a 4x3 video. And I was like, what?

Speaker 1:
[96:55] Google Japan is so stylish.

Speaker 4:
[96:56] The arts.

Speaker 1:
[96:57] If you go to Google Japan's YouTube channel, everything they do is so awesome.

Speaker 4:
[97:00] Yeah, but every other, well, not every other video. The few other ones that I clicked on are just regular like 16x9. This one was 4x3. And I think it has to do with like the artsiness of it. But I just found it so interesting because Google is like the most corporate, corporate company. Yeah.

Speaker 1:
[97:16] And they're not as corporate as like Microsoft though.

Speaker 4:
[97:18] I would disagree. Really? I think they're very corporate in different ways.

Speaker 1:
[97:22] I guess.

Speaker 4:
[97:23] But I think they still have this like idea of whimsy from back in the day, but they are super corporate. And the fact that I clicked on a video and it was 4x3, I was like, whoa.

Speaker 1:
[97:31] Yeah. Yeah.

Speaker 4:
[97:32] That was my brain.

Speaker 3:
[97:33] I have to, I have a correction. Cosmic Latte was not a Pantone.

Speaker 2:
[97:37] How dare you?

Speaker 1:
[97:38] Don't worry. There's already, there's already seven comments.

Speaker 3:
[97:41] I'm so sorry. Cosmic Latte was, remember like 10 years ago, they were like, this is the average color of the universe.

Speaker 2:
[97:47] Whoa.

Speaker 1:
[97:48] Cosmic Latte.

Speaker 3:
[97:49] How do you guys not remember this? This is like the most Marquette space and color.

Speaker 1:
[97:53] That's, I, if you can rail against frequency response charts, I'm railing against average color of the universe. That is the most useless thing I've ever, what? The average of the universe? That sounds like something you'd be interested in. But we can only see like, the average of the universe is zero, is black. It's nothing. Black, yeah.

Speaker 6:
[98:11] Most of the universe is.

Speaker 2:
[98:11] Well, is that a color? Is that a lot of?

Speaker 3:
[98:12] Not according to Johns Hopkins University, bro.

Speaker 6:
[98:15] All right.

Speaker 1:
[98:16] I mean, there's obviously the core of a neutron star, which is the brightest thing ever.

Speaker 4:
[98:19] The average color of the universe is infrared.

Speaker 1:
[98:21] No, it's cosmic light. Is it in the visible light range? Is what you're saying? Is the average of the universe? Oh, you mean if you compressed it into the visible light range? It seems the same. I guess.

Speaker 3:
[98:32] You know, Marques, I would read about, I don't understand this stuff. I don't understand.

Speaker 1:
[98:37] For those wondering, the cos book, the Pantone Color of the Year. It's freaking tan, bro. It sucks.

Speaker 5:
[98:45] It's lame.

Speaker 1:
[98:45] No, it's blue.

Speaker 5:
[98:46] No, it's not.

Speaker 1:
[98:47] Cloud Dancer. This year? That's lit. 11, 4201. What? What happened to Cray?

Speaker 4:
[98:53] Yeah, all of a sudden, I'm a big fan of Pantone.

Speaker 2:
[98:55] That's awesome.

Speaker 1:
[98:55] No.

Speaker 2:
[98:56] Adam, I looked up the only other Google Japan video I could ever think of, which is their 2022 April Fool's joke, which was they just made a keyboard where all of the letters are one really long stick. And funny enough, it starts in 4x3, and then when they announce the board and start swiping down, it expands to widescreen to put more of the keyboard.

Speaker 4:
[99:16] Damn, that's so cool.

Speaker 1:
[99:19] Yeah, that was an April Fool's Day thing.

Speaker 3:
[99:20] Before we move on, do you guys know about Klein Blue?

Speaker 2:
[99:24] What is Klein Blue?

Speaker 3:
[99:25] There's an artist named Yves Klein who made this painting with this paint, blue paint, that they mixed themselves. And then they trademarked it, and now they have their own blue. And when you say it, it's like, that's stupid. Like, you can't use this color blue unless you pay this guy Yves Klein. But then you look at the blue and you're like, damn, that's a good blue.

Speaker 1:
[99:46] This is also a bonus episode. If you if you click on the Pantone color of the year, it's like, please no more. Here's a paywall. Sign up for 15,000 colors. Like, I, what, what? Dude, Cloud Dancer, which is the color of the year this year.

Speaker 3:
[99:58] It's just like, it's beige.

Speaker 1:
[100:00] It's literally beige. There's a really awesome article. But it's a very specific.

Speaker 3:
[100:04] I don't care.

Speaker 1:
[100:05] There's so many colors. There's a, there's an awesome article, I think by Mia Sato on the verge where she went to like the Pantone color of the year party. Wow.

Speaker 2:
[100:14] See, this is, that's the- That sounds lit.

Speaker 1:
[100:17] No, think of the person who would go.

Speaker 2:
[100:19] No, no, no, no, no. I'd go to that.

Speaker 1:
[100:20] I would normally go to that if it was anything but beige. You would normally go to the Pantone color of the year party.

Speaker 5:
[100:26] Of course.

Speaker 2:
[100:28] Would you not? That sounds pretty sweet. That sounds better than every South by Southwest party I've ever heard of.

Speaker 3:
[100:33] I think Pantone gets a bad rep because they're one of those companies that, you know-

Speaker 1:
[100:36] Is evil.

Speaker 3:
[100:37] Well, that's the thing is like-

Speaker 1:
[100:38] Paywall in colors.

Speaker 3:
[100:39] I get the idea. Like, yeah, you're paywall in colors, but also like, thank God they exist, dude. Because like, especially like right now, for example, right?

Speaker 1:
[100:48] This should be a bonus episode.

Speaker 3:
[100:50] I'm trying to, I got a suit jacket for a great price on eBay, and I'm trying to find matching pants, and I cannot find pants that are the exact same color. Like this color matching has just been, and the whole point of Pantone is standardized. So if you see something on the internet, you can just read, that's color 89627. You open up your book that you paid $10 million for-

Speaker 2:
[101:10] And you can't leave in the sun.

Speaker 3:
[101:12] Yeah, I can't leave in the sun. And then you find 89267, and then you go, okay, now I'm certain.

Speaker 1:
[101:17] And it standardizes it across different materials, different finishes and this whole thing. We accidentally know way too much about this and maybe should actually be a bonus episode, but I am also fine with trolling Tim and people who are listening to this by saying they're paywalling colors.

Speaker 4:
[101:31] This month's bonus episode is a Q&A. Link in the description to ask your questions. Please give us questions because we don't have any.

Speaker 2:
[101:38] You think people are still listening.

Speaker 4:
[101:40] I know, if you're still listening, then we want your questions because you are in this with us, so please.

Speaker 3:
[101:45] We have a beautiful domain. You can go to waveformsurvey.com.

Speaker 5:
[101:51] We're not reusing that at all.

Speaker 3:
[101:53] We've never used that before.

Speaker 1:
[101:55] We paid for it. It's worth it. So to be clear, we are going to be doing a bonus episode soon. If you are still listening this far in the podcast, you are the type of person we want to answer the questions from. Go to waveformsurvey.com. Ask us questions on an upcoming bonus episode. We will answer those questions.

Speaker 3:
[102:11] But you know what else has questions and answers?

Speaker 1:
[102:13] What is that, Ellis?

Speaker 3:
[102:14] You already know. Oh, I left a fader down.

Speaker 1:
[102:19] Trivia.

Speaker 4:
[102:20] Trivia, dude. So we just spoke about Anthropic discovering all these vulnerabilities in Linux specifically. It's just one of the examples they used. But Linus Torvalds, when he initially made Linux, debated naming it something else. Was it A, freaks, a combination of free, freak and the letter X to indicate that it was a Unix system, B, Weenix, changing the U in Unix to We, C, Tiger, which was the mascot at the University of Helsinki, where he was at at the time, or D, Torvus, a combination of his last name and his first name.

Speaker 2:
[102:56] Can you reread the first one?

Speaker 3:
[102:58] Yo, your Weenix is showing.

Speaker 4:
[103:01] Freaks, F-R-E-A-X.

Speaker 2:
[103:03] No, but you said, what was the reason it's a mix of free and freaks?

Speaker 4:
[103:07] Freak and the letter X to indicate that it was a Unix-like system.

Speaker 2:
[103:11] I like that it's a combination of free and freak when it's just freak.

Speaker 1:
[103:16] Hey, it's a tough one.

Speaker 2:
[103:18] Or is it F-R-E-E-K?

Speaker 4:
[103:20] F-R-E-A-X.

Speaker 2:
[103:22] Oh, free freak.

Speaker 5:
[103:25] It's a nested acronym, bro. It's fine. Wow.

Speaker 1:
[103:29] I like that we have multiple choice trivia. Thank you. It narrows my odds to 25%. Slightly above zero.

Speaker 2:
[103:34] Can I say, when I was looking up Artemis' stuff, the number of how, the furthest distance they were away from the earth, and I kept being like, read it four times, because I assumed that was going to be a trivia question. I'm really upset. This is the first time I was doing research, and I was like, that's going to be a trivia question.

Speaker 1:
[103:50] You have to remember it was a 252,000.

Speaker 2:
[103:52] 252,000, and I think it was like 750 or something.

Speaker 1:
[103:55] That would have been a good trivia question.

Speaker 4:
[103:56] Well, this is-

Speaker 1:
[103:57] At least now we know.

Speaker 4:
[103:58] Now that we're mentioning multiple choice, the reason why I wanted specifically to do multiple choices this week is because YouTube has a feature where you, dear listener, on YouTube can play along and guess what the trivia answers are.

Speaker 2:
[104:11] What?

Speaker 4:
[104:12] If it doesn't work, then ignore all of this.

Speaker 6:
[104:15] Is it new?

Speaker 4:
[104:16] As of like a month ago, and I've been meaning to bring it up for me and Ellis, but Ellis today just happened to pick a multiple choice question. I was like, oh yeah, I'm going to pick one too so we could test this out.

Speaker 1:
[104:25] So they can do this, but they still can't make an actual timestamp UI?

Speaker 6:
[104:29] Exactly.

Speaker 1:
[104:30] Okay.

Speaker 3:
[104:30] The reason I knew is, you remember that headache you woke up with a few days ago?

Speaker 1:
[104:34] He wishes he doesn't.

Speaker 3:
[104:35] No, I neural linked us, bro. Me and Elon, we broke into your house, we neural linked you.

Speaker 2:
[104:41] Well, Glasswing found a couple of vulnerabilities in that.

Speaker 3:
[104:45] I neural linked me too. Sorry, that's why I left that. So we're linked neuraly. Okay.

Speaker 2:
[104:49] 252756, I was four miles.

Speaker 1:
[104:52] Is that the Pantone color?

Speaker 2:
[104:53] Yes.

Speaker 3:
[104:54] We'll be right back. We're leaving.

Speaker 2:
[104:56] It's beige.

Speaker 3:
[104:57] But we'll be back.

Speaker 8:
[105:08] Wishing you could be there live for the big game, soaking up the atmosphere in a crowd. But too often, life gets busy, or the price holds you back. Priceline is here to help you make it happen. With millions of deals on flights, hotels, and rental cars, you can go see the game live. Don't just dream about the trip, book it with Priceline. Download the Priceline app or visit priceline.com. Actual prices may vary, limited time offer.

Speaker 10:
[105:37] So, you're saying with Hilton Honors, I can use points for a free night's stay anywhere?

Speaker 9:
[105:42] Anywhere.

Speaker 10:
[105:43] What about fancy places like the Canopy in Paris? Yeah, Hilton Honors, baby. Or relaxing sanctuaries like the Conrad in Touloume?

Speaker 6:
[105:50] Hilton Honors, baby.

Speaker 10:
[105:52] What about the five-star Waldorf Astoria in the Maldives? Are you going to do this for all 9,000 properties?

Speaker 7:
[105:59] When you want points that can take you anywhere, anytime, it matters where you stay. Hilton, for the stay. Book your spring break now.

Speaker 11:
[106:07] Spring Black Friday is on at the Home Depot. Save on grills and patio sets that will be sure to bring your hosting game up a notch. Fire up your feasts with help from the Home Depot and save on grills. Like the next grill for Burner Propane Gas Grill was $249, now on special buy for $199. Or give everyone the best seat in the yard with the Hampton Bay Mayfield Park 4-piece conversation set for only $399. Save on grills and patio sets with low prices guaranteed during Spring Black Friday only at the Home Depot. Now through April 22nd, while supplies last. Exclusions applies to homedepot.com/pricematch for details.

Speaker 2:
[106:37] Welcome back. Whoop update from my rant last week, which first of all, I want to say if you enjoy Whoop and you were mad at me for saying that, I'm sorry, enjoy your Whoop band. I'm way more mad at Whoop, the company and their pricing and how insufferable their CEO is. But after I ranted about that, a bunch of fun stuff came out about Whoop, which really people were amped that I ranted about it despite I didn't know what was going on. But Whoop is in the process of suing a company called Bevel, who is very similar to an app like Athletic that you use. Essentially, an app that can take fitness and activity data from whatever activity tracker you're using and concluded into different types of sleep data and strain data and recovery, whatever all those different things that every single other thing uses, but Whoop just tells you that they're better at it. But some of the reasons for why they're suing them is just very funny. Do you remember the Fine Bros?

Speaker 1:
[107:41] Yeah, the Fine Bros when they tried to trademark React. Because they... Long story, but they wanted to own the concept.

Speaker 2:
[107:50] They basically wanted to own the word React.

Speaker 1:
[107:52] Yeah.

Speaker 2:
[107:52] Just remember that in some of what I'll say here. Bevel released a video going over a couple of the things of when Whoop sent them a cease and desist and now this most recent lawsuits. Wow. Total brain. We are very far into this episode and it is showing. In their first cease and desist, they asked Bevel to disable dark mode and change the name of Strain and Recovery as the names of metrics in their app. Because I guess those are things that only Whoop can do.

Speaker 1:
[108:22] Strain and Recovery.

Speaker 2:
[108:23] Strain and Recovery. The funny thing about this is, Whoop only has one color background, which is dark, a dark gray. Bevel has light mode and dark mode, like every single other app that's ever been made. But, and light mode is their default. But I guess Whoop doesn't like their dark mode, because it looks too similar to Whoop's. And they also don't like the names Strain and Recovery, because I guess those are metrics that Whoop wants to own.

Speaker 1:
[108:52] Those are things that they've named. The compilation of those metrics might be totally different in Bevel's app, but they probably feel like they want, like the word, like everyone I know who has a Whoop is like, what's your recovery score? There's my recovery score, how's your recovery? That's all they talk about is the recovery. So I can imagine an upstart trying to steal users from Whoop also using the word recovery very intentionally.

Speaker 2:
[109:15] It's one of those things that when you start focusing too much on a word that has been around forever, it's just a pretty common word that fits in there.

Speaker 1:
[109:23] If you bring your computer into recovery, are they going to sue you?

Speaker 3:
[109:26] Let's quick caveat though, and this is not me defending this, but it's a trademark and not a copyright, which means part of the nature of a trademark, if they're attempting to trademark this, they're trademarking its use in a specific method. For example, here's a great example. I could release, I don't know.

Speaker 1:
[109:45] Body battery.

Speaker 3:
[109:46] Well, I'm gonna take it another industry. I could release a line of protein supplements that I call Ellis' 1989 super protein, but I cannot sing a song in which I say the line, I would like to party like it's 1989, because Taylor Swift has the number 1989 trademarked for musical purposes.

Speaker 1:
[110:05] She does?

Speaker 6:
[110:05] Yes.

Speaker 1:
[110:06] You can do that?

Speaker 3:
[110:07] Yes.

Speaker 1:
[110:08] I don't like that.

Speaker 5:
[110:10] So, wow, that's lame.

Speaker 6:
[110:14] Yeah.

Speaker 1:
[110:15] I mean, everyone's going to hate whoop suing them, because obviously punching down looks terrible. But at the same time, there's going to be a lot of companies, and I have no idea what Bevel is doing. I should probably be more informed on it. But there are going to be companies that are going to try to specifically steal users from whoop probably by mimicking a lot of their features.

Speaker 2:
[110:31] Here's a couple of their claims that I'll read out loud. They claim that their home screen looks too much like theirs, that both apps use rings to represent user strain and recovery scores near the top. Those rings are colorful circular bars that increase clockwise, and there's a coaching feature in a rectangular, in a rectangle using rounded edges and a dark gray background. So rings with colorful, I mean, so like every health metric ever, Chief Fitbit uses it, Apple uses it, Garmin uses it, all rings with colors. Because colors and strain, green and red are pretty common. Green yellow red is how most of that happens. A rectangle using rounded edges is a hilarious way of saying a button, every button ever that's been made. They said that Bevel's app updated the home screen and it's obviously confusing and substantially similar to the Whoop app home screen. The only problem, so the way the home screen looks, it has three circles, the three different scores on the top when you go into it. Bevel originally had it separated into three rings and Whoop for a long time was actually only one ring and then updated their app after Bevel already had that and now has the three rings to the point where when they updated it, there was people commenting on it saying, like, looks like you're copying Bevel. But now they're suing them saying it looks too much the same. There's a section that says both apps use a Crescent moon icon to demote sleep.

Speaker 1:
[111:53] Denote, you mean?

Speaker 2:
[111:56] Denote, yeah, sorry. But to indicate sleep, I think a moon and sleep is pretty synonymous with each other.

Speaker 1:
[112:02] Maybe some Zs.

Speaker 2:
[112:04] Yeah, and I think my biggest thing here is, which is, I'm sure, in the trademark lawyer we're totally fine, but kind of stupid, I think, is saying the design's similar and could potentially confuse people into Whoop's UI. But Whoop is a thing that only exists when you are using the product. Nobody is getting confused if you don't have a Whoop band and go into the Bevel app. Like, it literally has to. Yeah. No one's like buying a Whoop using it and doing the setup, and then accidentally in Bevel and being like, oh, s***.

Speaker 5:
[112:40] Also, is that really a problem?

Speaker 1:
[112:42] Like, they're not stealing users. The copyright thing is usually like, are you replacing this or are you supplementing it? If you are replacing revenue that's coming to that company, then it's a problem. If you're not and it's just supplemental, it's usually not as much of a problem. They're a competitor. So, yeah. Yeah. Well, does Bevel have like a band or anything, or does it just take your existing fitness?

Speaker 2:
[113:03] As far as I know, it's only an app.

Speaker 4:
[113:06] Can it take the metrics from Whoop?

Speaker 2:
[113:08] Probably, but I don't know that for sure. Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if Whoop doesn't let that.

Speaker 1:
[113:13] I was going to say Whoop probably has that s*** locked down.

Speaker 2:
[113:16] I don't know how Athletic and Bevel work. I just know that they can be used with different trackers, whether it's a ring, whether it's a watch, whether it's whatever.

Speaker 1:
[113:24] That may be not Whoop.

Speaker 2:
[113:25] Anything, but possibly not Whoop.

Speaker 1:
[113:27] Possibly not Whoop. I'm not sure.

Speaker 2:
[113:29] So yeah, I don't know. This really just feels a lot like the Fine Bros trying to trademark.

Speaker 1:
[113:34] Well, we know how that ended.

Speaker 2:
[113:35] Yeah, didn't end great. This is great for Bevel because they were all over Twitter and probably got... I've never heard of them before and probably more people know about Bevel now. I hope it doesn't go too deep, but I think trademarking recovery and strain seems like an absolutely insane thing and a really lame thing to do, which feels pretty on point for Whoop.

Speaker 3:
[113:56] Quick clarification. While Taylor Swift does have the number 1989 trademarked, the specific trademark violation is she also has the phrase party like it's 1989. She does have the phrase, the number 1989 trademarked, as well as I found out in making sure I was correct on that. She has the phrase, this sick beat trademarked.

Speaker 1:
[114:16] No, hell yeah, that's because it's the best part of the song. Is it the way she says it? Because she says it's special. This sick beat.

Speaker 2:
[114:23] I think trademarks are so stupid.

Speaker 3:
[114:26] Trademarks are really stupid, but I do understand why they're in. Well, and they're different than copyrights because it's your right to do business as a thing, essentially. You know what I mean? I don't know. I think it's...

Speaker 1:
[114:42] I also just want to say Taylor Swift was born on December 13th, 1989, and to imply that she was partying at that age is just bullsh**.

Speaker 2:
[114:50] She was at the most...

Speaker 6:
[114:52] You don't know that. She was writhing. You can't prove that.

Speaker 1:
[114:55] As a party to some people.

Speaker 2:
[114:56] Wasn't even sentient.

Speaker 1:
[114:58] She was not even sentient yet, bro. So she was training her AI model in the early stages.

Speaker 3:
[115:03] On a list of recent trademarks, she had recently gotten Female Rage colon the musical, which I don't even know what that's about. But comment down below if you do know what that's about. You know what I do know lots about?

Speaker 1:
[115:17] What is that? The answer to the trivia question was that you wrote?

Speaker 3:
[115:20] With the fader up this time.

Speaker 2:
[115:21] Nice.

Speaker 5:
[115:22] I like that. I like that.

Speaker 3:
[115:24] Waveform, episode 345, trivia question number one. That was me pretending to be Jason Derulo.

Speaker 2:
[115:32] That's a sick username. J. Jason Derulo.

Speaker 1:
[115:35] I think someone already has that.

Speaker 2:
[115:36] That has to be a real thing, right?

Speaker 3:
[115:38] Yeah, that's pretty good.

Speaker 1:
[115:40] We get sued.

Speaker 3:
[115:42] Guys, where does Anthropics Project Glasswing get its name? A, an experimental F1 rear wing design from the ground effect era. B, a Central American butterfly with transparent wings. C, a type of parachute used by first responders to jump into dense forest canopies. Or D, it's an acronym, general layer analysis, excuse me, general layer analysis screening with integrated neural GPTs.

Speaker 2:
[116:17] The whole time you were saying Glasswing, I just kept thinking of DuckTales for some reason. That's all I could think of. Don't know why. Is there a Darkwing? Darkwing Duck? Yeah, Darkwing Duck. That's what I was thinking of.

Speaker 4:
[116:28] Wow, what a reference.

Speaker 2:
[116:30] Wow, we all said the same thing.

Speaker 4:
[116:32] What did you guys say?

Speaker 1:
[116:34] All three of us said butterfly.

Speaker 2:
[116:35] David drew a tooth for some reason.

Speaker 3:
[116:37] Guys, I think that means I'm getting worse.

Speaker 5:
[116:41] Never claimed to be an artist.

Speaker 3:
[116:43] Because you're all correct.

Speaker 1:
[116:45] On the blog post, they have a picture of a butterfly. I didn't go to it during the podcast, but I was reading it.

Speaker 3:
[116:51] But am I losing my sauce?

Speaker 1:
[116:53] No, thank God, Ellis.

Speaker 3:
[116:56] I used to deliver four bangers.

Speaker 1:
[116:58] Yeah, but we never get- We're still bangers. We never get points.

Speaker 3:
[117:02] On Anthropics. Well, all three of you got points, so it's as if none of you got points. Yeah, so I still failed. That's true. It's called Glasswing from the Butterfly because- Also, none of those other three things are real. I made them all up.

Speaker 1:
[117:16] Yeah, I figured.

Speaker 3:
[117:17] The metaphor can- This is from Anthropics' actual website in a- What one up here and what does the one bean down there? A footnote. The metaphor can be applied in two ways. The butterfly's transparent wings let it hide in plain sight, much like the vulnerabilities discussed in this post. Semicolon. They also allow it to evade harm, like the transparency we're advocating for in our approach.

Speaker 1:
[117:43] Transparency. Wow. Wow.

Speaker 4:
[117:46] They backroom their way into that or what?

Speaker 5:
[117:48] Bork.

Speaker 1:
[117:50] They probably ask Claude. Somebody got a raise for coming up with that line. Claude got a raise. What should we name this, Claude?

Speaker 4:
[117:57] All right. Quick update on the score after that correct question. Marques with 21. Andrew with 22. David in the lead with 25.

Speaker 2:
[118:08] David with 22.

Speaker 5:
[118:09] But I'm not around to him.

Speaker 6:
[118:10] Hey, that's trademark.

Speaker 5:
[118:11] That's trademark.

Speaker 6:
[118:11] That's trademark.

Speaker 2:
[118:12] You're going to get two. Careful. Careful.

Speaker 8:
[118:16] All right.

Speaker 4:
[118:17] When he initially made Linux, Linus Torvalds debated naming it something else. Was it A, Freaks, B, Wenix, C, Tiger, or D, Torvus?

Speaker 3:
[118:33] You know what's crazy? There's one thing that Adam left off there, which he was also considering, which was Linus Tech Tips.

Speaker 4:
[118:44] He was way early. Flip him and read.

Speaker 1:
[118:50] What do we got?

Speaker 4:
[118:51] Wow, you guys are locked in today.

Speaker 1:
[118:53] Yeah, we're locked in. We are neurolinked. Yeah, all of us said D, Torvalds.

Speaker 5:
[118:59] Nope, was it B?

Speaker 4:
[119:01] It was not B.

Speaker 5:
[119:02] Oh, good.

Speaker 4:
[119:03] It was also not C.

Speaker 1:
[119:04] No way it's Freaks.

Speaker 4:
[119:04] It was A, Freaks.

Speaker 1:
[119:05] No way.

Speaker 2:
[119:06] Freaks, yeah.

Speaker 1:
[119:08] Well, I'm glad he didn't do that.

Speaker 2:
[119:10] F-R-E-A-X?

Speaker 4:
[119:12] Yes.

Speaker 1:
[119:13] That is simply a bad acronym.

Speaker 3:
[119:14] Is that a reference to phone freaking or is that just like, you're a freak?

Speaker 2:
[119:18] What's phone freaking?

Speaker 3:
[119:19] Really fast, 30-second definition. Phone old analog, like landline phone dialers actually work by tones. You have a thing, each button creates a tone and then that tone doesn't program on the other side of the thing. Someone realized you could hack into phones by generating tones and that was called-

Speaker 2:
[119:35] Oh.

Speaker 1:
[119:37] Phone freaking was P-H-R-E-A-K-I-N-G.

Speaker 3:
[119:41] So this was not that.

Speaker 2:
[119:42] It was the cool version. Yeah.

Speaker 1:
[119:44] It was Taylor's version.

Speaker 2:
[119:46] Oh, no.

Speaker 6:
[119:47] Careful.

Speaker 11:
[119:48] Lawsuit, lawsuit, lawsuit, lawsuit.

Speaker 1:
[119:51] And with that, the podcast was finally over. Again, if you have questions for us, the comment section is always open, but if you made it this far, you can of course go to wavformsurvey.com and ask us whatever you want because we're gonna do a bonus episode where we actually answer those questions. So take your time. Come up with the best questions you possibly can. Leave your whatever questions down below, but come up with the best questions for wavformsurvey.com and they'll be answered on a bonus episode. Other than that, thanks for watching. Hopefully the astronauts touched down safely in the ocean. Wait, that's Waveform with vowels, not without vowels. That's Wave, W-A-V-E-F-O-R-M. Good clarification. Hopefully now they've found it. I don't know whatever freaky website you went to before, but now they found the correct survey website. All right. Catch you next week. Peace.

Speaker 2:
[120:37] Waveform was produced by Adam, Alina and Ellis River and partner with Vox Media Podcast Network and a director of music was created by Vansil.

Speaker 1:
[120:43] You do that early, Adam. Speedrun.

Speaker 2:
[120:52] Are you looking at all of the Glasswing?

Speaker 1:
[120:53] No, we're looking at Cosmic Latte, which is the average. It is, see, it is, you have to read this very carefully. It describes the average color of the galaxy of the universe as perceived by a typical human observer, which to me says that the average is not actually in the visible wavelength typically.