C (2:08)

I would love to. I wanted to talk about how. And I'm trying to figure out how to not trigger everybody's. I'll say it once, I'll try to say it once and then maybe spell it after that. Getting a smarter Siri. There we go. I said it once and I'll try to be nice about the rest of it. So Apple has promised us this smarter smart assistance for a while now, back when we Learned about Apple Intelligence 2024 and we haven't gotten it yet. This, this assistant has not really become what we were promised. It hasn't become that super intuitive, you know, helper on your phone. But Apple is finally going to hopefully figure it out by partnering with Google. So according to Bloomberg, Apple is planning to pay around a billion dollars a year for this AI model developed by Google. We've heard a lot about Gemini and it's kind of everywhere these days and everywhere will soon include your apparently. So Apple's kind of shopped around a bit. They also reportedly looked into OpenAI's chatbots and anthropics Claude, but ultimately decided to go with Google earlier this year. And this is just going to be a much more powerful model than anything that Apple has right now. So Gemini would handle series summarizer and planner functions, essentially help it process information and figure out how to carry more complex tasks. You know, we were kind of told a while ago it would be able to function across apps and actually get things done for you in the way that an AI assistant should actually be an assistant. Right. So hopefully that happens soon. The plan is for upcoming spring and then some other Siri functions will still use. I'm sorry, I lied there, I said it, I said it again. But we'll use Apple's in house models. And so the key thing here too is that this model will run on Apple's private cloud compute server. So Google wouldn't have access to user data data. So that's still, you know, Apple keeping with that pledge for, for privacy that, that people care about, which of course Google pledges too. But you know, Apple's like, this is ours, don't worry.

A (4:14)

Known for it.

C (4:14)

Yeah, exactly, exactly. And the thing here, there's one really interesting caveat is according to this Bloomberg article, Apple will treat Google as a behind the scenes technology supplier. You know, so that it's, it's kind of this behind the scenes thing versus something that they're just blatantly telling you, oh, this is a Google Gemini thing. And part of the reason for that is they're not planning to use Gemini for the long term. They're kind of just, it's kind of the stopgap of like, okay, let's, let's use Gemini for now while we continue to develop our own in house models as well. And so it's not necessarily going to be Gemini baked into Siri as this chatbot that never really materializes will be more of a behind the scenes thing. You're not going to See, you know Google AI search woven into Apple's operating systems either. So Maika, I have a two part question here because there's two things at play. There's Gemini and then there's Siri. Sorry, I have to say it one more time. So what are your experiences with Google's Gemini offerings? Is that something that you lean on? But then also how often do you use Siri and do you think you'll use that more with this integration?

A (5:24)

I love this question because it was actually going to be what I would kick off in talking to you about in the first place regarding Gemini. I was kind of curious and talk more about it your thoughts on Gemini because I was just talking to Anthony Nielsen the other day. He is one of the producers and editors and graphic designers here at Twit and we were talking about Gemini. I can't remember what tool he was using specifically but I said I have been very impressed with the stuff that Google's Gemini team has done and there have been times where I don't get the responses or the experience that I'm expecting from some of the other AI offerings out there and Gemini somehow comes through and it does so quicker than some of the other options that are out there. And that's been very impressive to me. I think that Google's kind of killing it and doing a great job with what Gemini is able to provide. I think in particular because the company is so it exists as a consumer focused company, right where for years it has brought these products to the consumer and some will say maybe not as much of a focus on the consumer because of its ad business and blah blah, blah, but that's beside the point here. I think that that did that, that played a good role when it came to creating AI technologies for people to use. Whereas you see from the other companies, you know, the OpenAI's and to some extent like Claude's offerings, Anthropic's offerings. It's we've got this great technology, we're doing great things with it, but what does that look like for a user at the other end that in many cases is not a developer and that's where they can flounder or if not flounder just not do as good of a job. I think that that has helped Google and therefore yeah, Gemini I think is pretty impressive in providing results that people actually want. And I compare that with the results that I have seen from what Apple provides right now and it's I don't use any of the Apple stuff save for the Genmoji that's the one thing. But in my opinion, in terms of like, if we keep it in this context and in this vacuum, that's the easiest thing to get right. Because you can train something very specifically right. And even still, it doesn't necessarily always do I have to, you know, make adjustments all the time to get it to work. But yeah, I don't use those Apple offerings and Apple hasn't nailed it yet. And with what I've seen from Google, very impressed. Now the flip side of that is the second part of your question. I have a question and a follow up is that it is Siri is and has been for the longest time. Honestly folks, you should have the Hey, I agree version turned on.

C (8:44)

That's just make our lives easier. Yeah.

A (8:47)

Apple's virtual assistant I don't use because it is a disappointment. It is. It.

C (8:58)

Oh my God, you did it.

A (8:59)

No, Stop talking to me, please.

C (9:01)

See, that's what happens when we talk smack, is it comes back to us.

A (9:05)

Yeah, listen here. But it's. I don't, I don't use the voice controls, save for setting timers on my watch when I'm cooking food and dictation. But that isn't even really interacting with it. That is simply sort of responding with my voice to a message. So I don't even really count that as sort of voice computing.

C (9:26)

Yeah.

A (9:27)

So I don't know if the voice aspect. Because I don't. I'll be honest too. I don't really use the voice aspects that much of the virtual assistants either. I'm not having a back and forth conversation with them. So I don't see myself using that part of it. However, Apple has termed its offerings of intelligence as this. They've called all of it Siri. Right. Like all of the internal smarts have been named up to this point. Siri. I think it's changed a little bit with AI now Apple Intelligence. But given that, what I mean is this smarter version of that virtual assistant that is supposed to have more knowledge of what's going on. I do and could see myself using that because I remember watching the Made by Google event and going, oh, ooh, oh. At several of the things that, you know, if I could ignore the awkward cringeness of the situation that they announced and I'm going, those are actually helpful features that I would love to see on my device. So yeah, I think that Apple's making the right choice in that way, going with what Google provides because I've been impressed with what Gemini had to offer. It's weird how I said all of that in one sentence there at the end and maybe that's all I needed to say.

C (10:49)

No, I loved following your thought process because it really echoes mine. It echoes everything I feel in the sense that especially when, when you're reviewing phones all the time, when I'm, when I just have my iPhone on me, I'm like, God, I wish I had an Android on me so I could summon Gemini. Like, this happens all the time. I don't even bother with Siri. Like, I genuinely cannot think of the last time I intentionally triggered it without accidentally pushing a But. So to have that actually within the iPhone would be a game changer and beneficial for everybody, beneficial for users, for people even like me who are kind of AI skeptics who are like, why would I use this? But then you actually use it and you're like, wait, actually this is helpful. It's helpful for like, Gemini Live is great for like brainstorming and stuff. But even when I just want an answer to like, what's the best way to get a perfume stain out of my dress? You know, like things like that where I'm like, I want some detailed answers. I'm not going to ask Siri, I'm gonna ask Gemini. And Gemini's gonna give me so much more detail. So I think having that baked into the phone will be really great. And I'm also curious to see what Apple continues to develop because they say they're gonna keep pushing their models, but guess what? Google's also gonna keep pushing its model.

A (12:05)

Exactly.

C (12:06)

It's just gonna get better. And Apple's gonna have to still try to catch up to all that. So best of luck.

A (12:11)

Best of luck. With all the money that they have, they really need to attract the talent and make that happen. Like, I don't, I don't see any other way of pulling that off other than getting some of these people to come do that at Apple. The last thing I'll say about it is it is interesting, given the ongoing ability, at least as things stand, for Google and Apple to have the search deal in place, which is a billion dollar deal. And so it's almost now going to be a potential swapsies situation of Google offering Gemini, Apple offering, offering this, and I wonder what impact that's going to have on Apple's bottom line where before it was just a billion dollars to be able to have default search set up. That is, that's, that's like so easy on Apple's part now that money isn't there and the company's going to have to sort of reconcile with then a billion dollar expenditure. I think it'll keep the company motivated to reclaim that money from the search deal that's been in place for so long. So interesting.

C (13:25)

Yeah, it's funny how like in entangled they actually are behind the scenes and will continue to be. But you know what, your text will always still be green between phones.

A (13:35)

They'll still fight with each other on the outside. Exactly.

C (13:38)

That will always stay the same.

A (13:42)

All right, let's take a quick break. Before we come back with my story of the week, I want to tell you about Veeam bringing you this episode of Tech News Weekly. When your data goes dark, well, Veeam turns the lights back on. Veeam keeps enterprise businesses running when digital disruptions like ransomware strike. How? Well, by giving businesses powerful data recovery options that ensure you have the right tool for any scenario, you get broad, flexible workload coverage from clouds to containers and everything in between. Full visibility into the security readiness of every part of your data ecosystem. Plus tested, documented and provable recovery plans that can be deployed with a click of a button. That's why Veeam is the number one global market leader in data resilience. You just call them a global leader in helping you stay calm under pressure. With Veeam, it's all good. Keep your business running. @veeam.com that's V E-E-A-M.com and we thank Veeam for sponsoring this week's episode of Tech News Weekly. All right, we are back from the break, joined this week by Abrar Alheati. And there's a new AI powered wearable that has emerged from stealth mode with the promise of capturing that inner monologue and organizing your thoughts. It's called the Stream Ring, developed by former meta engineers from the neural interface startup Control Labs, represents a different approach to smart wearables. Sort of one that prioritizes thought capture over health metrics. With $13 million in venture funding and a unique Whisper to record feature, the Smart Ring aims to become what its creators call the mouse for voice. Oh, boy. Offering a frictionless interface between your thoughts and digital notes. So this stream ring is. Yeah, it's like a little wearable, almost like my aura ring, but you're meant to sort of hold it close to your face and just do a little whisper into it and keep your thoughts. It's got a capacitive sensor on the flat edge of it and you so you can tap and hold onto it. It does have Media control capabilities so you could be listening to a podcast and play or pause. Skip tracks. Volume control of course, waterproof, of course, all day battery life, of course, a proprietary charging dock. Every single ring has €1. Hey EU, can you get on that? It comes in silver and gold. It's in pre order right now and is set to ship in the summer of 2026. Now the reason why the company calls it the mouse for voice is because it solves, they say it solves a lot of the challenges of a voice interaction at once. Quote. We mostly imagine it phone away earbuds in this allows you to interact immediately with no wake words. So you're not saying that but instead can just do it, which is in theory a way to reduce some friction which would make you then more likely to want to use your voice. The other good thing that I'll say about this for sure is that it isn't always listening. All the other AI devices out there seem to be these. I'm transcribing every single thing that happens in the day, I'm processing every single thing that happens in the day and then I'm telling you about it later. This is not meant to do that. It's got a deliberate activation mode. It doesn't save audio recordings. Instead it takes speech and transcribes it so that there's text in the stream app. And that of course helps with some of those concerns that people have about these. Always on devices that are constantly listening. And on the back end, it does do some on device processing, the company says on the ring itself, which is interesting. But then the smartphone does processing for intermediate tasks. And then of course there's cloud processing for complex queries. Now one of the things that I found fascinating was according to the company, the beta testers that have responded to their use of the product, here's what they say about the three main usage patterns they're seeing. 20% like whenever they're using it. 20% of what they're using it for is note creation. I thought that would be higher. 20% of it single queries. So asking how many grams in an ounce or whatever and 60% back and forth conversations. What most of the uses back and forth conversations. And so some of those use cases across note creation, single queries and back and forth conversations are creating shopping lists by asking about recipe ingredients, crossing off items hands free while shopping, planning meetings or interview prep, tracking thoughts rather than heart rate, and building a running log of meals or workouts. This is interesting because another aspect of this that is Interesting is that when you first use it and set it up, you talk into it and kind of get it going. But then it makes the virtual assistant. I think they're partnered with 11 Labs, if I remember correctly. It makes the virtual assistant on the device sound like you. Yeah, here we go. During setup, the app captures your voice to create a personalized AI assistant that sounds like you, just slightly off. So that it helps to maintain distinction between the two of you. So yeah, let's start with this.

B (19:26)

Abrar.

A (19:27)

What is your kind of your thought, your take, your feels, your vibes about the current market of AI gadgets and kind of where this falls in line in that marketplace of what are mostly these always on, always listening devices. And then could you see using something.

C (19:48)

Like this, I love that these folks have found a way to monetize talking to ourselves, which is essentially what I see now because we all have those dialogues and we all have voice memos and notes that are just us, the stream of consciousness. Right. So it falls within this very niche, rare gap within these creepy AI devices where it's not pretending to be your AI friend. And it's not like you mentioned, kind of just recording anything and everything. And so this is something that doesn't make me uncomfortable, which is great. It's great that it's something that I'm like, okay, that's actually like if I had to, if I had the opportunity to use or test something like this, I would actually willingly do so, which is a big deal because again I mentioned being kind of a bit of an AI skeptic, but this is one of those uses where it's. Where it doesn't feel like a surveillance method. So that's really cool. And I think for, for a lot of us who tend to just kind of like brainstorm, you know, like what I was mentioning earlier where I sometimes brainstorm with, with Google Gemini, like it's kind of similar idea, but this, this is actually like kind of catered to that. But, but yeah, I think the, the having it read back your thoughts in your own voice is a really interesting thing that we're seeing with a lot of AI powered systems. So in Apple has something called personal voice that can also mimic your voice. And then Google in the new phone translating feature also mimics the sound of a person's voice when it translates what they're saying. So I, it's really interesting to see this AI being able to replicate our voices and only have it be slightly unsettling. And it's going to be really interesting to See, that kind of continue to develop and be used in things like this. But yeah, I think. I wonder if you feel the same way about kind of like the brainstorming and the. And the thought process. I was surprised as well as you were about the percentages of what people use this for. Because for me, I would think the number one thing is just kind of like, oh, I have a thought. It's 2:00am and, you know, I could reach for my phone or I could reach for just the rings already on my finger. And I. Whatever I'm thinking about, I just let out especially.

A (21:55)

So a lot of my thinking happened or a lot. I'm always thinking. But a lot of my actionable thinking happens when I'm driving or completing a different, you know, another task. And so that idea of. Because there are often times where it'll come into my head and then I'll think I should write that down. But I don't go and write it down 100%. And in fact, I. While we were talking earlier, you said something that made me think of something and I said, oh, I should write it down. I literally have a note card right here and I forgot to write it down. And now I don't remember what it was. But if I had the ring, maybe I could have whispered with the mute button on and then it would have been fine. I really think. Yeah, that would be my main use of it. I was shocked too, as I mentioned that that was as much as it was. I would think that hearing my own voice or slightly off version of my voice said back to me would make me less likely want to use it. It would be an uncanny Valley situation and make me kind of uncomfortable in theory because I do a lot of talking to myself and me in my head sounds like me.

C (23:01)

Exactly.

A (23:02)

You know what? I don't know that I've ever thought of that. I don't know that me in my head sounds like me now that I like, does me in my head have my voice when I'm hearing myself in my head, because am I really hearing myself in my head?

C (23:16)

Existential crisis.

A (23:17)

I. Yeah, I gotta think about that off of off camera. When I get. I'm just gonna sit with myself and I'm gonna talk and see, because. No, I'm not gonna. If I get into it, then we're gonna go for like 45 minutes. Because I could start talking about how our larynx will voice the things that we are saying to ourselves in our head still. Even with. Anyway, see there. I'm still trying to do it.

C (23:37)

There you go.

A (23:38)

Not doing it.

C (23:38)

So point is, pull yourself together. Okay.

A (23:44)

Oh, wait, I just heard myself say, pull yourself. No, I'm kidding. So with this, I don't. I think that this is one of these situations where it's sort of Apple's wait and do it better approach that we often see from that company. I have to give this company props because they saw the way that people felt about a lot of these AI pendants and devices and everything and said, how can we do it differently? And where. If this had just come out on the market on its own, right, without the context of what was already there, then maybe it wouldn't seem as appealing. But now that there is sort of this underlying sort of existence of this technology that for those of us who are early adopters and tech enthusiasts are going, well, maybe we should check that out. Then you're going to, oh, finally, there's one that I have to have because it isn't like those others. And that in itself is very clever because none of it is needed, but it almost makes you want this one more because it's better than the other ones that you don't need. And so that's clever in that way. And I've got to give them credit for that. One thing that always for me is a bit troublesome about these AI devices is there's too much of a black box around what AI models are being used and when and how. And I would love it if in the same way that we have nutrition labels that tell us what components make up and we have rules around terms and conditions and privacy policies. I think so. If you're listening, eu, I think that these companies, because let me be real, it's not as if the US is going to put these regulations in place. So it's our only hope. I think that you should be required to say which AI models you're using behind the scenes because we know that almost none of these companies are using, you know, purpose or custom built, you know, models. These are almost always something that already exists. And I think that that's an important aspect of just, just, just to have the awareness of, of where your data is going and how it's being processed and if you trust the company behind that processing. So, yeah, that would be nice, absolutely.

C (26:21)

Also, it's also just interesting to think about the form factor. Like rings are really having a moment in general. In a matter of time, your hands are just going to be full of.

A (26:29)

I've only got 10 fingers, I'm gonna have to get a Few more attached. It's gonna be because you're not gonna convince me. Toe rings, nobody.

C (26:37)

Oh my God. Can you imagine? That's the next thing they go into. Smart toe rings.

A (26:42)

I hate feet so much, so I just can't eat.

C (26:45)

The ads on that are not gonna be, oh, stop.

A (26:49)

I'm dying.

C (26:51)

I'm just upsetting everybody now.

A (26:52)

Yeah, the other day I was at. There was a bar that had all the Halloween decorations up and this place was way too busy. So I found myself into this back corner and then I look over and dangling right next to me is a skeleton and its feet. It's just skeleton bones, but its feet are like right in front of my face. I'm like, of course I get put in the feet corner.

C (27:14)

Truly. I mean, the scariest thing on Halloween is skeleton feet. There you go. Just a haunted house.

A (27:21)

Just horror. Yeah, that would be my. Nobody puts baby in the feet corner. That would be my hell for sure. Abrar, as I always say, it is so true. Somebody just posted feet in the discord. Oh no, this hand is literally blocking it because my heart rate just went up. Thank you so much. As you can tell, I always have a great time with Abrar. Of course you should read Abrar's work over on cnet, but I would love to know, as would our listeners, where else should people go to keep up to date with what you're doing?

C (27:54)

Absolutely. You can find me on Instagram, Abrar El Heiti. No spaces, no hyphens. Same thing on TikTok if you want. And I'm also on Xiti 3. And thank you again for having me. It's always so much fun, even when we don't talk about feet.

A (28:09)

Absolutely, absolutely. See you soon.

C (28:11)

Take care.

A (28:12)

All righty, folks, let's take a quick break so I can tell you about our next sponsor of the show. It's Spaceship. Yes, if you've been listening for a while, then chances are you probably know about Spaceship. We've talked about them on the show. I really think that spaceships are something you need to go and and try it out. And they've been part of the twit world for quite some time. And honestly, there's a good reason for that. Because Spaceship just passed a major milestone with more than 5 million domains under management. And that kind of growth doesn't just happen by chance. It's because Spaceship delivers real quality and features that make sense not just for domains, but for everything that helps you build and run your online presence. That means hosting, it means business, email, it Means tools for creating and managing web apps all in one straightforward platform. Another big reason people are switching, it's the pricing. There's essentially Black Friday and Cyber Monday level value all year round, so you don't have to wait for a sale to get a great deal. And right now, this is pretty great, Twit listeners. You get exclusive offers that make it even better. I got to tell you, Spaceship's so easy to use that we were on a call with them and I was able to set up a domain and get a website up and running during the call while still hearing everything that they were saying, because I could easily just pop over, look real quick, oh, yes. And then go back and boop, boop, boop. And I was able to get it all set up super easy. And I think it's so, so inexpensive as well. It's awesome. So whether you're planning a new online project or you're moving an existing one. Yes, it can do that too. Spaceship has what you need to get it launched, connected and running smoothly. Plus more affordably too. Check out spaceship.com TWIT to see the exclusive offers and find out why millions have already made the move. That's spaceship.com and we thank Spaceship for sponsoring this week's episode of Tech News Weekly. All right, we are back from the break and things continue in the Google vs. Epic saga. Joining us today to talk about it is Ars Technica's Ryan Whitwam. Welcome back to the show.

B (30:35)

Hey, thanks for having me.

A (30:36)

Yeah, absolutely. I think we had you back in the tech News today era, which is wild that this show happened every day. I can't even imagine it just once a week. So it's great to have you here. I saw this news break and wanted to get everybody kind of updated on where things stand now. So I was hoping that you could kind of walk us through what led up to what is now a proposed settlement or hopefully agreed upon settlement between Google and Epic Games and why this particular resolution is significant for both companies.

B (31:11)

Yeah, so this case stretches all the way back to 2020 when Epic decided that it wanted more of the Fortnite Mobile money for itself. And it started. It added an option to both the iOS and the Android version to pay them directly for the in game currency. Instead of going through the platform, they didn't want to pay the 30% that Apple and Google were charging. So, you know, they knew what was going happen to happen. They got removed from the store and they sued. Apple won, Google lost, and now here we are, you know, These years later, and there is kind of a settlement, Google was looking at some pretty, pretty serious structural changes to the Play Store based on the order from the court. And they are still making, you know, they're still going to make some pretty dramatic changes based on the, based on the settlement, which hasn't been approved by the court yet. But assuming that it is, Google is still going to have to change some things around. They're going to have to open up a little bit more to third party app stores, but not in the same way as before, but it's, but you know, and it's not going to happen overnight. This is going to take place over at least months because the systems necessary for the settlement have to be built into Android. So they said we're not going to see any of that until the next major version is released, which is next year sometimes.

A (32:28)

Understood. Now let's talk about kind of the changes that Google has committed to. What are the most substantial changes under this settlement, especially regarding that structure for the Play Store fee and any other agreements that Google has said. Okay, okay, mea culpa, here's what we'll do going forward.

B (32:50)

So the big changes are to the way fees are, are charged and to the way apps are distributed. So Google, under the original, the order from the court, they were going to have to actually distribute third party app stores and give all those app stores the Play Store apps, which would have been something Google, I think very obviously did not want to do. So what they instead are maybe going to do if the settlement is approved is they will certify third party app stores and then those app stores will be able to install App Store apps in a more Play Store like manner. So there won't be as many scary screens when you install apps. Like if you do now, like if you download the Epic App Store, like if you go to the Epic site to download that, they have a whole tutorial right on the page of like, click through this scary warning. You can, this is okay, check this box and then you can get the App Store. That stuff will go away and there will also be some sort of streamlining of the installation of individual apps. We don't know exactly how that's going to happen, but there are scary screens when you do that because it's still just, it's an app. It's just like we install the App Store, it's still going to warn you. So they're going to have to build into something in Android that recognizes that these stores are certified and it'll just let you install an app normally, somewhat like you do in the Play Store. So that's part of it. And then the other part is that Google has committed to changing the way it builds developers. So in the past, there was a 30% cut flat, and that was. Everybody kind of agreed that was a lot. Currently it's, I think it's 15% for like the first million, and then it goes up to 20, but it's not a size web four. But it's going to be either 20% or 9%. And the way they determine what the fee is is kind of convoluted and weird. And it's clearly based on in app purchases being the overwhelming majority of the money made made on mobile devices. But so developers will mostly probably see less money coming out of what they're taking into the Play Store. But Google has also agreed to do basically what Epic wanted originally and allow developers to just sell things directly or through other platforms. So they'll be able to say, you can buy it from Google for this price, or you can buy it through this other platform for a little bit less. But the agreement does allow Google to still force developers to have Play billing in their apps, even if it's not the only option.

A (35:10)

Okay, now one of the. You touched on this briefly, the registered App stores aspect. Can you talk a little bit more about how this system works? Like, what is the requirement from a company looking to have a registered App store and how other than the OR is the only difference right now the. Those warnings and those prompts that pop up in this new way of doing things, where right now with sideloading, it does all of that with the new registered app stores, is the only change that you won't get those prompts, or does it also impact finances and is it easier?

B (35:47)

So the. The unsatisfying answer to that is we do not know Google is going. So the settlement doesn't mandate any way that Google has to which it says that they have to be real. They can have a reasonable process by which they certify app stores and they're allowed to charge for that process, but they cannot charge based on the App Store's revenue. Like, it has to be a flat rate or. I mean, presumably Google could even choose to waive the fee if they want it. I don't know that they will, but the ball is kind of in Google's court with how they want to do that. And I feel like there's probably. I would not be surprised if they see this as a way to sort of smooth over all of this upset about the developer verification system that they're prepping because they want every developer, even if they're not distributing it in the Play Store, to verify their ID with Google. They say that's safer and people don't generally like that. But they've also noted that there could be an entire app store could have that verification so individual developers don't have to do it. So I wouldn't be surprised if at some point they decide that, you know, the app store verification certification or whatever they decide to call it also includes developer verification so individual devs don't have to do that. And maybe they'll see that as a way to sort of, you know, make people forget about sideloading a little bit. If you just have multiple app stores, then, you know, maybe it's easier for people.

A (37:07)

Understood. We saw Epic CEO Tim Sweeney call this an awesome proposal. But of course Epic initially was saying, look, we'll take this all the way to the Supreme Court. Any thoughts on why this agreement has reached what is required for Tim Sweeney to call it an awesome proposal and not asking for more?

B (37:31)

I mean, so Google really like the case did not go well for Google. I mean the order from the court was really, you know, it was, it reflected, I think Google's behavior over the past few years. Like that there was a lot of evidence that came out at trial that they were, they were throwing their weight around to suppress other app stores and the judge, you know, really let them have it. I think Epic probably would have been happier with a much more limited ruling that really just benefited them. The fact of the matter is I think Epic is getting one at once. So that's why it's awesome. They are going to get more of their Fortnite money and that's really all they want do to from, from the start. So Amy, like the, these like the percentages that Google is allowed to charge, like 9% is, is anything that's not like material to the game. Like it doesn't like, it's not like, like a bunch of new content. Right. It's like anything that's like, you know, a cosmetic or like some sort of like you know, just accessory you get in the game. Like that stuff is all 9% and that's like, that's, that's most of the money that is made in, in mobile gaming now. So, so they're fine with that. And that number should also, my understanding is apply to traditionally purchased premium apps and games. Like if you just go to the Play Store and it's like this is $3 and they would presumably only have a 9% cut that they pay to Google for that. So I mean, Epic is probably looking at this as like they got everything that they want. They also don't have to go to the Supreme Court for this. They don't have to spend the money on the lawyers to go to do all of that. Like they can just because. Because it looked like there was definitely going to be more litigation about how Google was going to have to do all of this mirroring of apps on other stores and letting apps into the Play Store or letting other app stores in the Play Store. It would have been logistically challenging and there would have been more legal wrangling over it. But now nobody has to do that. Assuming that the court approves this, this is the way it works moving forward for at least they guaranteed until 2032. But I mean, you know, if nothing blows up, I don't see any reason that Google would not continue doing this. But you know, and it's, and it's global. Before it was, you know, the court could only impose this in the US and indeed when Google made the first round of changes mandated by the court, you know, without the, you know, the app mirroring, when they were just saying developers can like link to other payment methods, that was only in the US this agreement will be global. So, you know, Epic is, is certainly happy about that. The US is the biggest market for in app purchases and games, but the rest of the world ain't bad to have either.

A (40:04)

Yeah, well, so speaking of that, the settlement applies globally through at least 2032. Can you tell us, is it the same across the board in the US and elsewhere? And so app developers and Android users outside the US can expect for. Because often it is the case that, you know, you'll get. The EU has one way of making it look and the US has another. Is the agreement as it stands just the whole thing is the same across the board. And I mean you just can expect.

B (40:34)

It sounds, it sounds like it should be. Yeah. I mean like if you have an iPhone in Europe you get third party app stores, but in the US you don't get that. And it sounds like this system will, will be available everywhere. So, you know, so developers won't have to deal with different rules for different countries. Like, it was weird that this brief period when Google started making these changes, when they're like, all right, in the US you can do this, but outside of the US you're not allowed to do this. That'll get you pulled from the store or demonetized or whatever. So it is going to be, I think it's easier for developers. So that's a good thing. Even though I think at the end.

A (41:07)

Of the day.

B (41:10)

I think that this agreement doesn't really flip the app ecosystem on its head like the original court order would, but it is still, it's still a net positive. It's just, you know, it took us five years to get here and it probably will be another year maybe before we see these changes actually happening. And I think looking at how long it took to get from Fortnite being pulled from the Play Store to maybe a settlement, I think Epic was definitely incentivized to like come up with a solution that didn't require going to the Supreme Court.

A (41:41)

Lastly, I'm curious, sort of forward looking, what potential challenges or concerns we think might arise as Google implements these changes, especially when it comes to creating reasonable requirements for certifying third party app stores. I think we've gotten a little preview of this from Apple attempting to follow agreements that have been put in place with EU requirements requirements and the back and forth of, well, that's not quite reasonable. This is, we're feeling the same way with Google sort of doing the, what do they call it? It's not cantankerous compliance, but it's something along malicious compliance. Malicious compliance.

B (42:20)

Are we thinking, you know, I think that Google is probably pretty happy that this settlement is possible and if they can adhere to it in ways that make that, you know, make the parties happy, they will do that. That said, I don't think that like that Epic is super concerned what happens to other companies. As long as they get what they want from the Epic games or an Android, they're not going to, you know, kick up a fuss about it. But you know, Google does sort of accept some risk when it dips its toe in these waters. Like it's going to have to, it will be, you know, sort of indirectly responsible for what happens on these other app stores. You know, if it's, Google is saying like, yes, this is safe, we certify this, it can install Android apps now and then and malware spreads on it like that's a bad look. And it's not like malware doesn't happen in the Play Store. It does sometimes, but Google has developed some pretty robust systems to, you know, get it out of there quick and like, how much due diligence are they going to do with these third party stores to make sure they have similar, you know, know, protections and, and if they don't like what happens. Can Google revoke, you know, certification? I think there are just, there are a lot of pitfalls and we're going to have to see how they, how they work around that.

A (43:32)

Absolutely. Well, I want to thank you so much, Ryan, for taking the time to join us today to give us the latest in the Google versus epic saga. Hopefully somewhat coming to a close here. If folks would like to keep up with the work that you're doing, where are the places they should go to do so?

B (43:50)

Arstechnica.com, go there hopefully every day, multiple times a day. Click on all of the articles, click on some ads also. Maybe you can also follow me on bluesky.

A (44:02)

Wonderful. Thank you so much. We appreciate it.

B (44:04)

All right, great. Thanks, guys.

A (44:06)

All righty, folks, let's take another break. Before we come back with a story of the week, I want to tell you about Zscaler, bringing you this episode of Tech News Weekly. Zscaler is the world's largest cloud security platform. The potential rewards of AI, you know, you can't ignore them. You want to, you want to do what you can and you want to make use of this new technology. But unfortunately, along with the rewards of AI, there are the potential risks as well. The loss of sensitive data, the attacks against enterprise managed AI, these specific attacks that focus on a particular individual or group of people, all of it is something that you have to combat. Generative AI increases opportunities for threat actors because it helps them to rapidly create phishing lures, write malicious code, and automate data extraction. We've seen so many instances, so many case studies about how AI is being used to complete phishing attempts. There were 1.3 million instances of Social Security numbers leaked to AI applications. ChatGPT and Microsoft. Copilot saw nearly 3.2 million data violations. So, yeah, I think it's time to rethink your organization's safe use of public and private AI. Check out what Siva, the director of security and infrastructure at zora, says about using Zscaler to prevent AI attacks.

D (45:40)

With Zscaler being in line, security protection strategy helps us monitor all the traffic. So even if a bad actor were to use AI, because we have tight security framework around our endpoint, helps us proactively prevent that activity from happening. AI is tremendous in terms of its opportunities, but it also brings in challenges. We're confident that Zscaler is going to help us ensure that we're not slowed down by security challenges, but continue to take advantage of all the advancements.

A (46:09)

With Zscaler. Zero trust AI you can safely adopt generative AI and private AI to boost productivity across the business. Our zero trust architecture plus AI helps you reduce the risks of AI related data loss and protects against AI attacks to guarantee greater productivity and compliance. Learn more@Zscaler.com Security that's Zscaler.com Security all right, we are back from the break and it's time for what? A conversation about ransomware. You know, in the world of cybersecurity, frankly, trust is everything. We talk about trust, trust, but verify, zero trust. And whenever it comes to the people who are attempting to make sure that your applications are working the way that they're supposed to, your services are working the way that they're supposed to, these people that you hire, trust is in particular, absolutely important. Which makes this week's shocking indictment all the more brazen because federal prosecutors have charged two ransomware negotiation specialists. Yeah, the people who are supposed to be helping stop this from happening with running their own cyber extortion scheme, essentially playing both arsonist and firefighter in the high stakes world of digital hostage situations. The accused include Kevin Tyler Martin, who worked for the Chicago based Digital Mint, and Ryan Clifford Goldberg from Signia Cybersecurity Services. Really fascinating that these people have sort of three name names, right? Who allegedly conducted five ransomware attacks between May 2023 and April 2025. Successfully, not failed, successfully extort, allegedly, of course, extorting $1.2 million from a Florida medical company while attempting to squeeze millions more from other victims. So here's the conspiracy. According to the Chicago Sun Times, the scheme, honestly, in reading about this, I can hear music playing and there are people with hoodies and roll out keyboards. It's a little bit of a cybersecurity thriller that's gone wrong because according to an FBI affidavit that was filed in September, Martin and Goldberg along, which again, those are just. That sounds like a firm. Anyway, Martin and Goldberg, along with an unindicted coconspirator also employed at Digital Mint, began deploying malicious software to lock down victim servers and demand ransoms. And I remind you, these are the people who are trying to. Who are supposed to be helping people avoid ransomware attacks or overcome ransomware attacks. Their target list and included a Florida medical company where they allegedly successfully extorted $1.2 million after demanding 10 million. A Maryland pharmaceutical company that was targeted but unsuccessful in getting it. Maybe they had one of our sponsors as a, as a protector, in that case, a California doctor's office where they allegedly demanded $5 million a California engineering firm where they were seeking a $1 million ransom, and a Virginia based drone manufacturer where they attempted to extort $300,000. It's fascinating. I would love to sort of talk to them and figure out how they determined what the, what the ransom was. If it was based on how much the company made or if it was based on not being, you know, having multiple failures, so just lowering and lowering and lowering the amount. Or if the AI told them what they should suggest as the possible ransom for the, you know, getting access back to the data. The FBI agent noted that while the medical company attack was apparently the only successful attack, the $1.2 million payment was routed through a mixing service and then through multiple cryptocurrency wallets, of course, in an attempt to launder the cash. Yeah, there's not just a, you know, a pet store or a dentist's office or, I don't know, a restaurant involved in money laundering anymore. It's all just digital now. How boring. Anyway, so it was, it was all working according to plan, but it began to collapse in April of 2025 because the FBI raided the home of the unindicted coconspirates conspirator. It's unclear, you know, who exactly this unindicted co conspirator is, but Goldberg's subsequent behavior then painted a picture of mounting paranoia because in May 2024. So again before the FBI raid about a year later, he searched online for the co conspirators name along with DOJ and asked, this is just. And asked, why would somebody who was accused and admitted to an FBI agent be let go but later indicted? Hmm. When FBI agents interviewed Goldberg in June, he initially denied involvement, but eventually admitted to the scheme, telling agents he engaged in the ransomware attacks to get out of debt and feared he was, quote, going to federal prison for the rest of his life. Ten days after that interview, Goldberg and his wife fled to Paris on a one way flight. It's just, it's, this is, this is such, it's such an obvious story. In a way, the people who are best at being able to stop ransomware attacks and understand how to combat ransomware attacks would be the ones who are then going to be very good at causing them. But at the same time, you're just going, oh my goodness, who, who can we trust here? What can we do? We'll talk in a minute about the corporate response, like the response from these companies that employed these alleged bad actors. But I do want to take a quick break to tell you about Our final sponsor on today's episode of Tech News Weekly, and that is Zapier. Love Zapier, Love what you can do with Zapier. I use Zapier all the time to complete tasks on my behalf that I don't want to do myself. And so there are often times where, say I'll get an email, and the information in that email, I know it needs to go into a Google spreadsheet, and instead of regularly going and checking the email and then moving that information over, why not have it happen automatically? But while I'm pretty good at this stuff, there are some places where I fall short, and that is where Zapier comes in with its AI assistant to help me out. So when I'm creating a zap, as they're called, which is this sort of automated process of some saying, look at this spreadsheet, or look at this email, find this specific kind of data, and then put this in this spreadsheet in this specific place, I can go, okay, I know how to do this part, but I'm stuck on creating this part. What specific term should I use to find the data that I'm looking for that AI can help me out? I mean, it feels like everyone is talking about AI these days. I mean, we talk about it on the show a lot. If there's one thing that you've learned learned, it's that talking about a new technology isn't the same as actually then implementing it. Right? You can, you can get excited about it or not get excited about it, talk about how it lets you down or how it works as you need to, but when it comes time, like at a company to put it all together, figure it out, that's the difficult process. Well, Zapier is where tech innovators break that cycle of just talking about and actually put it to work. If you don't know about Zapier quickly, it's how you bring the power of AI to your work in this way. With Zapier's AI Orchestration platform, you can actually add AI to any workflow. Connect top AI models like Chat, GPT and Claude to the tools your team already uses so you can add AI exactly where you need it. It could be AI powered workflows, an autonomous agent, a customer chatbot, or something else. Anything that you can orchestrate, you can orchestrate it with Zapier. Zapier, it's for everyone, Everyone. Tech expert or tech professional or tech power user or not. No IT bottlenecks, no complexity, no AI hype. You just get those results Teams have already automated over 300 million AI tasks using Zapier. Ready to join them? Get started for free by visiting zapier.comtnw that's Z A P I E R.comtnw and we thank Zapier for sponsoring this week's episode episode of Tech News Weekly. All right, back from the break, we're talking about an obvious and disappointing story from the Chicago Sun Times about an FBI investigation regarding a firm that helps combat ransomware attacks where some employees allegedly conducted ransomware attacks of their own own. After kind of figuring this out right then, you got to know what the companies thought about their employees doing so. Digital Mint and Signia have, of course, distanced themselves from the former employees. And Digital Mint issued multiple statements saying the alleged crimes took place outside of Digital Mint's infrastructure and systems. So Digital Mint says our stuff wasn't used at this at all. The suspects did not access or compromise client data as part of the charged conduct. The company fired both employees, of course, and is cooperating with the investigation and are, in fact, a cooperating witness in the investigation and not an investigative target. Digital Mint President Mark Granz stated here it is, quote, trust is earned every day. As soon as we are able, we begin communicating the facts to affected stakeholders. This level of transparency is a key part of the culture that has driven Digital Mint's success. So what are we looking at going forward? Well, Martin and Goldberg were indicted on October 2nd on three federal charges. Conspiracy to interfere with interstate commerce by extortion, interference with interstate commerce, and intentional damage to a protected computer. Goldberg has been taken into custody and ordered held. Or, excuse me, and ordered held pending trial. And then Martin was actually freed on a $400,000 bond. Wonder where they got the money for that bond. Both face potentially lengthy prison sentences if convicted, because cybercrime ain't no joke when it comes to federal prosecution. Well, this, of course, then leads to concerns in the cybersecurity industry, given, again, the trust factor there. Insider knowledge can be weaponized. We've seen that before with some security companies using some of the information that they have to hand it over to to sell it to the highest bidder and have that information used and weaponized. And given how they know how these ransomware negotiations work on the one side, then you can take it and flip to the other. We do it all the time where we take bad actors and we try to turn them into good guys. Right. And then, of course, what happens whenever you need this in your most vulnerable moment? Can you turn to these folks and say, I need your help? Or are you having to go, okay, well, we can't. We can't rely on people outside. There's an issue here. And of course, it's a huge economy, frankly, the ransomware economy. Negotiations, attackers, victims, all have to kind of do this dance. But the dance is happening in this shadowy place where in some places it's illegal to. In some places. And in some cases, it's illegal to pay the ransom. In some cases, it's discouraged. In some cases, there's insurance, but in some cases there's not. It's all very much this gray area. And then you got to ask about kind of like, what's the vetting process for the people that these companies are hiring and bringing in? It raises questions about how they choose their employees and what systems they have access to and when. And are you just looking for the best that you can get? And does that mean that you are getting a person who would be more likely to do something like this? But there's something that I think is not being considered here, which is, and I'm not, to be clear, I am not at all condoning behavior, but there is a part of me that says this person was talking about being in debt, right? And needing to make money to get out of debt. These people who are doing negotiations in a good way for millions and millions of dollars working for these companies, I'm like, are they being paid enough that they had to turn to this bad way of doing things? Goodness gracious. Like, that's sad to me that you are responsible for what can very easily become hundreds of thousands of dollars of profit for a company that is hired to deal with ransomware, and your job is to kind of negotiate this process, and yet you're still living with debt. And that's just a question that I have. Obviously, we don't know what's going on here. There could be millions of dollars of debt for the wrong reasons. But it is certainly something that I always ask, what drove this person to make that choice, as opposed to. To continuing to live in the light, as it were. This ransomware epidemic continues to plague organizations worldwide, Attacks becoming increasingly sophisticated and costly as AI continues to aid in the process. You've got those professionals who are tasked with trying to solve the problem, actually being the problem. Well, that leads to even more confusion, concern, and an overall kind of bleak landscape of cybersecurity, folks. That is, I guess, the unhelpful note. We're going to end things. On this week's episode of Tech News Weekly, I'll be back next week with more, but until then, it is time for me to say goodbye to all of you and thank you so much for tuning in. Of course you can head to Twitter TV tnw. That's where you go to subscribe to the show show audio video formats and head to Club Twit Twit TV Club Twit to check out the work we do in the club. When you become a member of Club Twit, you'll gain access to ad free content. All of our shows ad free. You get your personal custom feed which is super exciting. You also gain access to our club feeds. Yeah. So that includes our behind the scenes, before the show. After the show. You also gain access to our feed that has our news coverage. So that's live event coverage that we do, live commentary from Leo Laporte, yours truly and others on the network and a special feed for our club content like the book club from Stacy Higginbotham. You also get my crafting corner. We are in the process of of completing a Dungeons and Dragons adventure. We will be back very soon. I believe that is November 17th. We will cross my fingers, knock on wood. Wrap up our adventure at 2pm Pacific time where we're making our way through a spooky cornfield. So you'll be able to check that out as well. And that's the only way to do that is to be part of the the club. So head to Twitter TV Club Twit to check it out. If you'd like to follow me online, I'm ichasargent on many a social media network. Or you can head to Chihuahua Coffee, that's C H I H U A H U a Coffee where I've got links to the places I'm most active online. And be sure to check out my other shows on the network, including iOS today. Hands on Apple, Hands on tech. I think that's all of them. Yeah. So check those out as well. Bye Bye.