PodSearch

The Talk Show

406: ‘Hock TUAW’, With Christina Warren

 

00:00:00   The breaking news, if we want to get right into it, yesterday, iOS 18.1 and MacOS 15.1 Sequoia betas shipped with some Apple intelligence features.

00:00:15   Yeah, which I'm glad they did that. But this dual beta process, that's fun.

00:00:21   I got the night before. Yeah, Sunday night, I got invited to a WebEx briefing from Apple PR. And

00:00:29   they never did. I don't think this is breaking the omerta, the NDA of, do you agree that this is on

00:00:37   background? But their usual technique is not to tell you what the briefing is about, even.

00:00:43   I don't care. And oftentimes, based on who from Apple PR is reaching out to me, I have a very good

00:00:51   guess sometimes, but sometimes not. And this is one where it's not because it is sort of general,

00:00:58   right? It's not like there are people at Apple PR who are in charge of developer betas, you know,

00:01:03   just sort of like iOS people or Mac people or something. But I am so, I'm so mad once I found

00:01:11   out what it was, I was, I'm still fuming that I didn't guess weeks ago that they might do that

00:01:18   this summer with the Apple intelligence. Because I realize this is very strange to have two forks

00:01:26   of the next year's. But if ever there was a reason to do that, I think Apple intelligence would be it.

00:01:33   StephanieH: No, I mean, it makes sense on a lot of levels. I mean, one, I think,

00:01:37   just to really be able to hone in on testing and getting feedback on those specific features,

00:01:42   right? So that's one part of it. And then the secondary part is, as Apple's product catalog

00:01:47   becomes more varied, it does become difficult and has more architectures, right? You do start to have

00:01:53   this increasing kind of dichotomy between like what features are supported on what platforms.

00:01:58   And that's hard to ship even in a normal OS update. But I think in a beta, that could be a

00:02:02   really difficult thing to like, okay, how can we zone in on what are show-stopping bugs and what

00:02:08   are specific things maybe that are specific to this architecture that whatever version of the

00:02:14   binary we wind up shipping to these devices is going to be different. So having different,

00:02:19   you know, I guess like branches does make some sense.

00:02:23   Yeah, and I feel and it's funny, because I just from the previous episode of this show,

00:02:31   where just a couple days ago, Hunter Hillegas was on, he's the developer of an app called Vegas

00:02:36   Mate, and I had him on, we talked about a couple of things. But at one point, we got talking about,

00:02:41   I forget what led us there now. But we were talking about the legendary purple button in the

00:02:48   pre Mac OS 10.0 betas that would put the Mac into single window mode. I mean, I know that this is,

00:02:57   you were very young at the time. But I'm sure you've seen the stories that it,

00:03:01   yes, for Mac OS 10 came out there. In addition to the red, yellow, green buttons, there was going

00:03:06   to be a purple one in the other corner. And then your Mac would only have one window at a time.

00:03:11   And when you switched to another window, they would automatically, whichever one was open,

00:03:18   would genie into the dock, and whichever one you were switching to would genie out of the dock.

00:03:23   And it did look cool.

00:03:24   So it was Stage Manager.

00:03:26   Yeah, I think that that's one of the things that Stage Manager put it back, put this idea back

00:03:33   into the air, right? You know, like what comes around goes around, right? And when Stage Manager

00:03:38   was new, those of us old timers who were there for the early days of Mac OS 10, were like,

00:03:44   we've seen ideas like this before. But yes, very sort of similar, except Stage Manager is more than

00:03:50   one window. But right. But well, you know,

00:03:53   it depends on what iPad you're on.

00:03:56   Yes, yes, exactly. But I always say, and I've stuck with it. And it's generally good advice is

00:04:04   a lot of the times, as a user, or even as a colleague, when you're working, I bet you have

00:04:10   this experience to even as a colleague, working with engineers, software engineers, a lot of the

00:04:18   times, the best way to make a feature request isn't to describe what you think you want.

00:04:26   But just describe your problem. And then, if you have an idea, maybe tack it on. But start by

00:04:33   describing the problem. And oftentimes, that's just a better way to frame it for the engineers. And

00:04:39   Stage Manager today, and the purple button single window mode, 24 years ago, did try to solve the

00:04:48   same problem, which was, hey, if you've got a lot of windows open, because you're using either a lot

00:04:54   of documents in the same app, or many apps, each with a window, it can get visually cluttered on

00:05:01   screen, which might just annoy you aesthetically, but also make it hard to switch between the few

00:05:07   that you want to switch between, right? It solves the same problem, managing the visual complexity

00:05:13   of multitasking. But what struck me was in the show notes, I put, I think Hunter actually sent

00:05:19   me the link, but it was a great link. It's like a seven or eight, nine minute link. I guess now I'm

00:05:24   stuck putting it in the show notes again for this episode, but I will. But it's Steve Jobs at, I

00:05:31   think probably Macworld. I didn't even look. 2000, maybe it was WWDC 2000. But he's demoing to the

00:05:39   audience, this beta version of Mac OS X. It might have been the first public demonstration of the

00:05:46   Aqua user interface. And what made it seem relevant in addition to the whole Stage Manager

00:05:53   thing and whatever Hunter and I were talking about was just that one of the things that's come around

00:06:00   and Apple seems to have come back around to is not being afraid to show software well in advance of

00:06:09   when it ships, right? They're still totally as secretive as they can possibly be about hardware,

00:06:16   right? You could not get Jaws right now. If it was me and you and Jaws on this podcast,

00:06:22   instead of just me and you, we could not get him to tell us that there will be new iPhones

00:06:28   in September, right? Right. Well, you have to wait and see. We're like, bro, we know.

00:06:33   We're aware. We know everything about it. We've seen the leaks of the colors. Come on.

00:06:38   Not even getting him to tell us whether there's an extra button this year for the camera,

00:06:47   what the colors will be, what the materials will be. No, no, no. He wouldn't even acknowledge that

00:06:51   he could exist. He's like, I don't know. We always have a lot of things going on. I think you'll be

00:06:54   excited, but like, don't know. But with software, there, you know, to me, it's just one of the

00:07:02   differences between hardware and software. There's just not, and here's Steve Jobs in the year 2000,

00:07:09   over a year before Mac OS X actually shipped, a couple of years before Mac OS X certainly became

00:07:16   the mainstream OS for Mac users. Yeah. Or good. Well, I mean, I mean, honestly,

00:07:21   being, just being candid here, it was immediate. It was obviously the best desktop operating system

00:07:27   ever, but it was, what do you think? I think it was, I think it was 10.2 before it got good.

00:07:34   Yeah. That's, yeah, that's probably where, 10.2, yeah, there was like a blurring of some,

00:07:42   for some people it was 10.2, some say 10.3, 10.4, which I think was Tiger,

00:07:47   I think was the one that was sort of universal. Or almost everybody could agree that the combination

00:07:56   of Mac OS X getting faster and supporting more old stuff that people were waiting for, combined with

00:08:02   classic getting longer and longer in the tooth because they weren't.

00:08:07   Right. And you also had the Intel transition that happened with Tiger as well, right?

00:08:11   So you had finally, you had like that. Yeah. So you had like good hardware, right? So you had like,

00:08:16   you had spotlight, you had all kinds of stuff. Yeah.

00:08:18   Yeah. They needed the hardware to get faster just to be fast enough to run the software.

00:08:24   But I mean, genuinely, I mean, unless you were running in like one of the towers, in which case

00:08:28   you're like, great. Okay. As long as you need to like heat your house, it's great. But yeah.

00:08:33   I just thought that was really cool. Serendipity of it's on my mind now this week, because Apple

00:08:39   is already, you know, as two versions now of these operating systems in beta this summer,

00:08:44   they've told us all the features, they do this now every year. And it's not just three months

00:08:50   in advance from June to September. It's really sort of the roadmap for the next year, or at least

00:08:56   yeah, pretty much until WWDC, right? Yeah. I mean, basically, I mean, I think that

00:09:02   there was a time when you would basically have everything that was going to launch would launch

00:09:06   in September, and then you would maybe have some point releases and whatnot. With macOS, that

00:09:10   sometimes maybe that was a little bit different, but it was kind of finalized. But with iOS,

00:09:14   especially, and we've seen it with macOS too, it has been interesting in the last probably,

00:09:18   I'd say probably five, six years, where they've started to push out features throughout the course

00:09:24   of the year. So you might see a preview of something in June, right? And then you might

00:09:29   not have it until March, which to your point, and I hadn't even thought of this, is more similar to

00:09:34   what it was like in before now, now, now times, right? When 25 years ago, it made sense to kind of,

00:09:43   I think, pre-announce, especially for Apple, who was in a different position of, I guess,

00:09:49   a different power position than they are now. They really needed to let developers know as quickly as

00:09:54   possible what was happening, especially in the macOS 10 era, right? Because there had already

00:09:59   been so many aborted attempts at getting the next generation OS. They'd already burned a lot of

00:10:04   devs, which I know probably firsthand from either experience or from places you worked, where people

00:10:10   are like, "Oh, we're going to be doing this Rhapsody thing." Oh no, nevermind, right? And then

00:10:13   it made sense to, I think, kind of let people know as early as possible, this is what we're working

00:10:19   on so that they could start planning accordingly. That hasn't really been the case in the iOS era.

00:10:24   But again, like in the last five or six years, it has been interesting that they'll kind of

00:10:29   announce and kind of show off a vision of a feature that might not be realized and finalized for

00:10:35   several months after the initial OS release comes out. Yeah. I thought it was interesting at the old

00:10:41   demo where Jobs was showing, and it was mostly about the dock, the whole nine-minute video is

00:10:47   like about the dock, and single window mode was considered a dock feature because, like I said,

00:10:52   as you switch between apps or windows... Right, it would just kind of...

00:10:56   Go in and out of the dock. Yeah. And it included the, I don't know what the,

00:11:00   he said there's a shortcut. He didn't say what it was, Jobs, while he's demoing it. But, you know,

00:11:05   in modern day, it's the shift key, it has been for 20 years where if you hit, you know, I'm sure

00:11:11   somebody out there listening to the podcast is about to have their mind blown. But if you hold

00:11:15   down the shift key, when you hit the yellow button on a Mac window, it goes into the dock in slow

00:11:24   motion, which is really cool. And it was there in 2000, just so he could show how cool it was.

00:11:32   And he even showed, it was, this is how old it was, it was a trailer for Mission Impossible 2.

00:11:38   Oh my God. That's so funny.

00:11:41   But in terms of some things changed, some don't, there are still Tom Cruise starring

00:11:49   Mission Impossible movies coming out. So... Yes. Well, I mean, forever, right? I mean,

00:11:54   well, what's funny, that reminds me, I don't know if you've ever read Gil Amelio's book, which,

00:11:59   if you haven't, it's so good because it's so bad, but it's genuinely one of my favorite,

00:12:04   completely tone deaf memoirs ever. It's called 500 Days on the Firing Line or something like that.

00:12:07   Which is a great title, you know, he didn't come up with, you know, that his publisher was like,

00:12:13   this is not going to sell many copies. And this is a self-own in every respect, but man,

00:12:19   we're going to give it the correct title. But, you know, the entire book is just kind of an

00:12:23   apology for, and it wasn't my fault, it was basically the thesis of the book. And then

00:12:28   when you read it, you're like, it kind of was your fault, Gil, it kind of was. But one of my

00:12:33   favorite anecdotes in it is he talks about how he spent, he's bragging about himself, how he spent

00:12:38   all this time getting Whoopi Goldberg's Nephew, one of the power books that was in Mission

00:12:43   Impossible, because she wanted one and he was like, very proud of himself for this. Keep in

00:12:48   mind, this was like one of the famous power books that like overheated that they had to like recall

00:12:53   because of the battery issues. So,

00:12:57   Dave Asprey Oh, man, like the what was it the 5400 or something?

00:13:01   Jessica Vinas-Nelson Yeah, I think I think it was that one. And it

00:13:03   was in and he was very frustrated because they had this massive media moment with that MacBook

00:13:08   and that power book rather in that huge movie. And then it was it was a recall, they had to recall it

00:13:13   like it was it was one that they really couldn't ship and it was just not a good product.

00:13:18   And so I'm happy that they were able to at least I guess keep that Paramount relationship

00:13:23   intact so that they could get the product placement for Mission Impossible too.

00:13:27   But yeah, it is crazy that we're however many years later and Ethan Hunt is still is still

00:13:33   Ethan hunting. And we're like, yeah, you're gonna be 70 years old and hanging off the side of a

00:13:38   helicopter and we're, we're gonna be like, yeah, because you're Tom Cruise. Makes sense. That's

00:13:44   just what you do. Dave

00:13:46   I am going to tell you I don't think I've told this story yet. I have such terrible podcast

00:13:51   amnesia, but I don't think I have. I think you're going to enjoy this. And I've, I've been thinking

00:13:56   about telling this story now for seven, eight weeks. So backstage at my live show this year

00:14:04   at WWDC.

00:14:05   Jessica Vinas-Nelson Which was great. By the way, I was there. It was awesome.

00:14:08   Dave Oh, yes, you were there. Thank you. Thank you for coming. Thank you for the good words.

00:14:12   I am drawing a blank on his name. And maybe it's best that I am. All I remember now, I have it

00:14:18   written down somewhere in a notebook, but it's, it was one of those names like Sean, but it wasn't

00:14:25   Sean, but where it could be spelled two different ways. I had to figure out how to spell it. But

00:14:29   anyway, he's sort of an old, I would say a gentleman in his late 60s, sort of a hippie,

00:14:35   long hair, kind of seemed to have enjoyed some, some marijuana before. He's the sound one of the

00:14:43   sound guys for the California theater. And he was probably kidding. He was putting my lapel mic on

00:14:51   and my battery pack. And we went out and did a sound check with me on stage. And you know,

00:14:59   this year was a little different because we had the 3d cameras for the sandwich vision broadcast.

00:15:05   The spot where I was going to stand had to be adjusted, you know, so that I'm in camera,

00:15:10   blah, blah, blah. And, you know, we're doing the sound check and he's, I've never met this guy,

00:15:15   been at that theater before, but I don't know how, you know, if it's like a day gig type thing. I

00:15:21   mean, he's, but anyway, he's been doing sound for shows in Silicon Valley for decades. And I,

00:15:32   lovely gentleman and I'd somehow, I think he asked me if I'd ever met Steve Jobs.

00:15:37   And I told him I had twice, really told him briefly about it. And he said that he did,

00:15:45   I think three times, three or four times where he had miked him for events. And he said,

00:15:53   I'll tell you one story. And he didn't remember the year, but it was the year where Gil Amelio and

00:15:59   Steve Jobs, I think it was the infamous horrible Gil Amelio never ending keynote, which I think was

00:16:07   like Macworld. Oh yeah, where he had the terrible shirt, which he also wrote about in the book and

00:16:11   he complained about the shirt. Yes. The keynote where I think Muhammad Ali was there and also

00:16:17   Waz was there, which Steve Jobs was not happy about, but that had been an

00:16:22   Amelio idea to have them together. Sorry, go on. Yeah.

00:16:24   It was just after, so it was probably like Macworld 1997 in January and the deal to reunify

00:16:32   and acquire next was in December of 1996. So it's January, they're going to announce this. They're

00:16:39   going to announce that Steve Jobs is going to be a special advisor while Gil Amelio remains the,

00:16:45   and he said that he'd miked them both and they went into the nicest green room, just the two of

00:16:51   them. But unbeknownst to them, they were still miked and he could hear everything they were

00:16:57   saying. Oh my God. And he said that Steve got going about something and I, it's something about,

00:17:06   and I think it was because of, I forget if Muhammad Ali was there too, he didn't say, but

00:17:11   you know, they had some special guests and Steve said, what we should do for these things is start

00:17:17   having great musical bands come in as the special guests and let them play. And he said, you know

00:17:24   who we should get? We should get the Grateful Dead. That's it. They're a great American band

00:17:29   with a great history and they really kind of stand for a lot of the stuff that Apple stands for. And

00:17:34   he said he went on and on and he said there was just silence from Gil Amelio. And then he said,

00:17:43   Steve said to him, you've never dropped acid and gone to a concert, have you? And Gil Amelio said,

00:17:48   no. And I said, that was the end of the conversation. And they just sat in silence

00:17:54   afterwards. And I said to him, I said, you might've heard the moment when it clicked in

00:18:00   Steve Jobs, the moment when it clicked in his head, I got to get rid of this bozo.

00:18:05   Yeah. No, I think you nailed it. That's fantastic. I think he was there for it. He like,

00:18:10   it probably been, you know, in Steve's mind, he's like, I don't know, I'm selling the company.

00:18:14   Maybe I'll just focus on Pixar, whatever. Who knows? Then he talks to this guy and goes,

00:18:18   oh no, oh no, no, no, no. We're getting rid of this guy. I'm coming back in. I'm saving this.

00:18:23   We're taking this back. We're not letting the guy who's never been high at a concert. We're

00:18:29   not letting him run Apple, right? No. He said from his perspective, he honestly wondered if

00:18:38   Gil Amelio had ever heard of the Grateful Dead. And you know what I mean? This isn't like,

00:18:42   it was like the year 1997. It's pretty well known.

00:18:47   They were, I mean, you know what? I would bet that Gil Amelio is probably like my parents

00:18:51   and that they knew of the dead. My parents have been dead heads, but because my parents are just

00:18:56   not the types of people. My mom is definitely into the Beatles. She liked the Stones too. My dad

00:19:01   is a little bit older than her. And so he doesn't even like that as much, but they have like

00:19:04   different types of things. My parents are too straight edge for that sort of thing. So I bet

00:19:08   that's Gil Amelio where he's like, no, because I think he came from a semiconductor company or

00:19:13   something. Yeah. National semiconductor. That's right. That's right. Yeah.

00:19:18   I mean, I don't want to go off on a Gil Amelio tangent more than we already have, but I do

00:19:26   remember thinking as an outsider, God, I wish I had been writing Daring Fireball just five, six,

00:19:32   seven years earlier. So there'd be an archive of it. But I remember having being mostly queasy

00:19:39   because even then I thought that an outsider could never properly run Apple. I still think that's

00:19:47   true, but Apple had been in such trouble that who knows? I mean, I don't know. It just seemed so,

00:19:58   the situation seemed so dire. And then some of the things he said seemed to make sense.

00:20:03   Totally.

00:20:03   He often made the connection that he wanted Apple. He saw Apple to computers, what Maglite

00:20:09   is to flashlights and that anybody can go into any store and buy those plastic ever-ready flashlights

00:20:17   for $3 and they work. And probably 95% of the dashboards in cars in America have one of them

00:20:25   in there. But if you really care, you're willing to spend 10 times that or more than 10 times that

00:20:31   and get a Maglite flashlight that's made of actual steel and it's made in America and the buttons

00:20:38   are really nice and it's brighter. Everything about it is better. And it costs a lot more.

00:20:43   And he said, "That's what I think Apple is to computers." And I thought, "Oh, that's pretty

00:20:47   good." And then the guy shows up for keynotes wearing a suit and it's, "That's not Apple."

00:20:52   No. And then in addition to be like, "Oh, we want to be the definitive thing. You pay more for us.

00:20:57   Oh, but we're also going to license the... We're going to let people do clones." Right?

00:21:01   So I think that... I don't know. He's one of my favorite kind of exec stories because he's just

00:21:06   the wrong hire. A lot of his ideas for turnaround would have worked at a different company.

00:21:11   And they weren't even bad things. And you can credit him for Johnny Ive a little bit because

00:21:19   he was the one who really kind of elevated some of that and Johnny Ive's predecessor a little bit,

00:21:24   at least keeping them in the flow of things there. But he's just the wrong guy for the company. I

00:21:31   mean, look, Apple did not hit the problems that it hit because of him. He came in after Michael

00:21:36   Spindler, right? There was already so much turmoil, but he was just... I think that his techniques

00:21:43   would have worked at a different type of company, just not Apple. And we are fortunate that he was

00:21:48   at least smart enough to buy the right macOS spinoff to get next instead of B. And...

00:21:55   Yeah. Yeah. He made the one... The most important decision he made wound up being the one that was

00:22:03   ultimately the best decision in the history of the company for sure. And the industry probably.

00:22:10   Like when it came down to one single decision, you'd have to go back... The only things you could

00:22:16   compare it to would be like Gates talking IBM into licensing DOS from Microsoft. There's a couple of

00:22:23   singular moments where you can easily see how whoever made the decision could have decided

00:22:29   something else. Some other engineer at IBM could have said, "Come on, we can write our own DOS."

00:22:34   Yeah. The guy from... I can't remember what company it was, but the guy made a digital research,

00:22:39   I guess that's what it was. Like could have not been on the airplane and could have taken

00:22:43   the call from IBM or whatever. I think that's apocryphal. I don't think that's quite true.

00:22:48   People have disputed that, but I think there's enough truth in it to be like there was some of

00:22:53   it there. But yeah, you can see how, yeah, if that hadn't happened, things would be different. And

00:22:57   the same thing with Apple. And so, yeah, I mean, to all the shit that I like to talk about Gil

00:23:01   Emilio, admittedly, again, to your point, when it matters, he made probably one of the most important

00:23:06   business decisions in modern history. And that was a really good thing. Just put that on your

00:23:13   epithet, dude. That's what made, I think, the book so funny is that it's just this whole tome about

00:23:18   him basically rationalizing all this bad decision. It's like all you really had to do is be like,

00:23:23   "I brought back Steve Jobs." That's all you had to do. That's it. That's it. Don't focus on any of

00:23:29   the other stuff. That's it. And then just like sell yourself on the speaking circuit on that alone.

00:23:33   "Oh yeah, I had the foresight to see this and then get out of the way." Like just do that.

00:23:37   That would have been a better title for his book. "I brought back Steve Jobs."

00:23:41   Yeah, absolutely. Not just to Apple, but from the wilderness,

00:23:46   really. Right? I mean, everybody, you know, it's weird how young Jobs was at the time to say he was

00:23:52   sort of in the wilderness, but he was. Next was sort of languishing. It certainly wasn't super

00:23:57   relevant at any point in the Next's company history. People, pundits like me at the time,

00:24:04   always talked about Steve Jobs in the past tense. It was kind of weird.

00:24:10   And then he had this beautiful kind of one-two thing with the success finally of Pixar after

00:24:14   years of struggling the breakthrough with Toy Story and that becoming like a real thing.

00:24:19   I know.

00:24:19   And then basically the same time, like a year later, Apple is, "We want you back."

00:24:25   Or, "We want to buy your company. We don't necessarily want you back." And he's like, "Okay,

00:24:29   well, there we go." Suddenly like the relevancy thing is just off the chart.

00:24:34   Yeah. It's just crazy how stuff works out sometimes. It really is. What a digression

00:24:39   from talking about iOS 18.1. You mentioned in the show notes, and I am the same way, there is

00:24:45   no way I've got a couple of trips for August coming up. There's no way I'm putting any beta,

00:24:53   let alone the next beta on my carry phone. So I will wait until after my vacation time. I'll wait

00:25:02   till the end of August to put it on my regular phone. And because my regular phone is my only

00:25:07   15 Pro and therefore the only phone I have that's eligible for Apple intelligence,

00:25:11   seemingly no point really to trying these new betas, the 0.1 betas on Mac or iOS if you don't

00:25:21   have an Apple intelligence compatible machine. Right. Yeah. I might put it on my personal M3

00:25:31   Macs MacBook, but I'm either on a separate partition or something, or container, whatever the

00:25:38   term is. But yeah, I'm not putting it on my phone. I would love to play around with it,

00:25:44   but I'm like, I don't have two iPhone 15 Pro Maxes. I just, I don't. So I will just have to

00:25:50   wait until yeah, probably end of August, like you, once it's basically about to kind of be released.

00:25:56   And then I'm like, all right, now I'll play around with some stuff. I do think Apple under Craig

00:26:02   Federighi, and it almost pains me to admit it because now that I see Federighi every year at

00:26:10   my show, it's like, I'd rather be able to kid him about it. But I feel like their engineering

00:26:18   discipline is just at an unprecedented level year over year that they, the way that they've,

00:26:26   without ever announcing it officially, but clearly by evidence have switched to a, from a,

00:26:35   let's try to get everything we announced at June out in the big release in September or October,

00:26:42   depending on whether it's iOS or Mac to let's figure out how we can slot these features into

00:26:49   dot updates a couple of weeks after September, we'll get one out in November, December, then

00:26:56   we'll have one in January, February, and then we'll have a last one in the early spring.

00:27:01   It's been a really good, I think the last, I forget the numbers, but I think it might've been

00:27:08   iOS 13, four or five years ago was a really, really rocky September version. It was the one where

00:27:16   the iPhones came out with it and they came out with, I think it was 13.

00:27:22   I think it was 13, right? Yeah. They had to do the point release basically in the boxes before

00:27:26   they developed the technology to do it. But it was one of those where like, you had to run an update

00:27:30   before you could even set up your new phone because it was like that rocky. Yeah.

00:27:34   Yeah. It was, it was pretty bad. And I feel like that might've been their, Hey, let's not let this

00:27:39   happen again moment. And I feel like the way they've managed it since has been really

00:27:44   It's improved a lot. I fully agree. I will say though, like just as an end user who I do usually

00:27:50   have a separate phone that I can use for testing, although not in years like this for some of the

00:27:56   Apple intelligence features. But before I transitioned careers, like Apple would usually

00:28:02   kindly supply me with a, a, a loaner phone to, to use that I could run betas on. And, and I would

00:28:08   put it on my, my main phone too, but it was just kind of like part of the job now that that doesn't

00:28:12   have to be part of my job. I will say that. I think it was iOS 13. That whole beta process was

00:28:19   so Rocky and so bad that that kind of dispelled me of the notion of being like, yeah, I'm not,

00:28:24   I'm not putting this on my main carry until I get kind of a heads up from people I trust online,

00:28:31   that it's not going to be a disaster. And I know they've improved the processes since then.

00:28:34   But it, that was kind of one of those moments for me where I'm kind of like, I know they,

00:28:38   and I agree with you, I think it's really impressive what they've done, but I'm still

00:28:41   skittish. I'm like, nah, I'm out of weight. I remember that one. And it was public. I mean,

00:28:47   people, you know, we were talking about it on podcasts and blogging about it, but it was like,

00:28:51   I don't know, like August 21st or somewhere around not quite the very end of August,

00:28:57   but like last week of August. And it was an awful beta, just awful. I don't know what exactly the

00:29:03   problem is. There were some crashes. Maybe it was like, you'd start at 100% battery life and

00:29:08   two and a half hours later, it was like dead, dead, just right up and just be dead. Yeah,

00:29:12   that was, that's what I remember the battery life just being atrocious, crashing too. But I really

00:29:16   remember the battery life. Right. And if you hadn't been paying attention to it, you're like,

00:29:19   I didn't even get like an alert, like a low power alert. It's my phone's right dead. And it's warm

00:29:25   and it's plug it in, wait. And yeah. But what I remember was everybody doing the math. Well,

00:29:30   wait a minute. We were, they always hold these iPhone events in September, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12,

00:29:37   somewhere in those early days of September, the new iPhones have to have the new OS. That's the

00:29:43   only OS with the hardware support. And so like doing the math of like, when did these factories

00:29:49   start churning out a million of these things a day or millions of these things a day?

00:29:55   It's gotta be around now. Right. I even, and we're all like, well, but then that would mean

00:30:00   they're going to ship all these phones with a really buggy OS. And we're like, I guess.

00:30:05   And then turned out they did. They did. They did. They had to like get out at the point update

00:30:11   literally like the day before, day after. Yeah. Which is, yeah. I think that I do, I do appreciate

00:30:17   kind of this approach. And I have to say, even though I'm like, I'm not a windows user,

00:30:20   this is something Microsoft does a little bit too with, with the, I guess their current kind of

00:30:24   like windows thing where they basically have either one or two big kind of releases each year.

00:30:29   And I think that splitting things up that way, like I like Apple's approach of announcing it all

00:30:33   at WWDC and then kind of slowly rolling things out over the year. I think that's a much,

00:30:38   I have to imagine that for the engineers, it's a better process for them. They don't feel as

00:30:42   constrained by crunch. And I think for end users too, there is something to be said about the fact

00:30:47   that because of the longer beta process and the fact that people can get used to things like

00:30:53   you're aware of features and you're, there's like more of a education aspect where people can kind

00:30:57   of, you know, through kind of the ethos of social media or friends or whatever, kind of become aware

00:31:02   and be like, Oh, okay, this is what's going to come. And this is, this is what this is. So it's,

00:31:06   it's not as, as much of a day one dump that it was before where sometimes people, a new feature will

00:31:13   come out and there were so many of them that people don't even know what something is, right? Like

00:31:16   they don't even know, might not even discover it for years until somebody points it out. And so

00:31:22   I think that's kind of one of the benefits too, is slow rolling it a little bit, give some of those

00:31:26   new things, a chance for people to really discover, especially when it comes to UI changes.

00:31:30   Trenton Larkin Yeah, I think so too. I think that's sort of

00:31:33   underappreciated, but I find myself even as an obsessive who professionally covers new features

00:31:39   and stuff like that, I actually do find that I, turning them out over a couple of releases over

00:31:46   the year does bring attention to features that if they all came out at once, maybe one of them would

00:31:51   have been, I didn't even know I've had that since October. I didn't even realize that it's less

00:31:56   likely to happen. I do think, so I think good for Apple that they've got these two forks of the OSs

00:32:04   right now. I suspect, and I'm hearing from a couple of friends, this is not great for third

00:32:10   party developers, really. And especially I think on the iOS side, which let's face it is A, the

00:32:17   highest priority one, and it's certainly the one with the most users. But the problem is now what

00:32:23   do you do if you're a developer and you've got a testing phone? Do you run 18.0 betas because that's

00:32:30   the one that's coming first? Or do you put 18.1 beta on because you would like to start integrating

00:32:39   Apple intelligence features or test the ones that are built into the system, right? Like the,

00:32:45   and we'll get to this in a second, the writing tools feature is one of the features that's

00:32:51   already in the first beta where you, any system-wide text field, you can select some

00:32:56   text, bring up the writing tools and say, make the sound more professional or make it funnier

00:33:03   or something like that. And if you want to make sure, 'cause you're thinking, well, our text field

00:33:08   we're subclassing UI text field or whatever, but we've done enough customizations for whatever

00:33:15   reason. I've been a little worried ever since WWDC that ours isn't going to work, but now what do you

00:33:21   do? Like how many iPhone 15 pros are you supposed to have for testing? Well, that's, I mean, this

00:33:28   is the frustrating thing, right? Is that these are, it was easier a decade ago when the median

00:33:34   price of the phone was like $700, but now it's more than that. And you already have the struggle

00:33:41   of having to test on a number of different screen sizes and device types and whatnot. But yeah,

00:33:45   to your point, like how many pros are you supposed to have? And it's okay, well, maybe I have a whole

00:33:49   collection of pros at that catalog. But only this one. Exactly. These are $1,100 phones. You're

00:33:55   like, okay. And it's also, it's one of those things, 'cause it's okay. And I know they would

00:34:00   never do this. I know they wouldn't, even for developers, I know they wouldn't, but it does make

00:34:04   you think you're like, man, why can't they just let you dual boot like two different OS versions

00:34:09   if you're one of the very special jail mode, right? That would be just for developers, like

00:34:13   not even like you can even disable certain telephony or other types. Well, I guess you'd

00:34:17   have to have telephony, but you could even disable certain like user focused features, but just be

00:34:22   able to do that just for testing would be really nice. It also kind of, again, kind of opens up,

00:34:26   I think what people have wanted for a long time and Apple's even sued some people over this. This

00:34:30   is why people try to create virtualized versions of iOS that they can run on their Mac so that they

00:34:36   can at least experiment with things. It might not be the same as the, although at this point it would

00:34:40   be the same as the normal hardware, but basically, but that would be a good way to be able to test to

00:34:44   see, okay, is this going to work or is it not without having to buy multiple $1,100 phones

00:34:49   that are going to be obsolete. This is a bad thing, right? They're literally going to be obsolete in

00:34:54   six weeks and you're going to have to buy multiple of the next iPhone 15. You're going to have to get

00:35:01   like a bunch of, or 16, you're going to have to get a bunch of those, the pro versions of those,

00:35:06   right? So there are very few, very few things that I would feel confident saying that every single

00:35:13   person listening to this podcast would agree upon. But I think here's one where I think we could ask

00:35:20   every single one of the tens of thousands of people who are listening to this episode,

00:35:24   what month of the year is the worst month of the year to buy a new iPhone?

00:35:28   Yep. August. Yep. August. August.

00:35:31   Always. Always. Well, it's so funny because I have friends who their phones will break and like,

00:35:34   if your phone breaks, your phone breaks, but I'm always like, okay, do we have a used one? Do I

00:35:38   have an old one I can send you? Can you get a good trade in thing? Like, what's the best deal

00:35:43   you can do? I have two. I have two. I've done that multiple times for friends because it is just one

00:35:47   of those. Yeah, it's the worst time. Like the only way I would ever suggest it would be like,

00:35:52   you don't have any other choice and they're giving you one hell of a trade in for your old broken

00:35:58   phone and without a shadow of a doubt that you have no interest or budget to be able to buy

00:36:03   the next year's model. Like that's the only way because otherwise, yeah, like,

00:36:08   yeah. If you were already going to buy like the iPhone 14 or whatever, or 13, which I think they

00:36:15   still sell. Sure. Why not? It doesn't matter. You could wait a month and get then for the same price

00:36:20   the iPhone 14 would drop down, but you don't care. So just buy the phone. But otherwise, yeah. And

00:36:25   the other thing too, I know this, I have enough friends, you know, who work, you know, I have

00:36:30   friends who are totally indie like me, like one person companies. I know people who work at mid-size

00:36:36   companies and I have friends who work at very large companies and even at like very large

00:36:42   companies, it is often hard to requisition hardware. You can't just because you work at,

00:36:49   I'll just say Netflix, right? A very successful company. You can't just raise your hand and say,

00:36:54   yeah, we need a bunch of iPhone 15 pros because now we've got to install this. That may not work.

00:37:00   No. Well, especially when they know they're like, okay, but we're going to be getting a requisition

00:37:03   in literally six weeks for a bunch of iPhone 16 pros, right? Because that's the ones we're really

00:37:09   going to want to focus on because we know that that'll have even more RAM and that's going to

00:37:12   have even more neural imp users and other other things that we know that no matter what Greg

00:37:18   Jazwiak would never tell us that they're going to be releasing, they're going to be really

00:37:22   optimized for this software, right? Which honestly, maybe, I don't know, which honestly kind of is one

00:37:30   of the reasons why I haven't been as focused, at least on the phone side about even testing

00:37:34   anything because I have such a strong feeling. I'm like, okay, if they're gatekeeping it so much,

00:37:39   just for the current pro devices and select Apple Silicon machines, if they're gatekeeping it to that

00:37:46   degree, that really says to me, okay, well then the 16 is going to be the one that's really going

00:37:51   to be able to show this stuff off. So in my mind, I'm kind of like, I'm not building apps, right?

00:37:55   Like I'm an enthusiast, but I'm not building apps. I'm not having to write about all these features.

00:37:58   So I'm in a little bit of a different position where I'm just like, yeah, I can wait until the

00:38:02   new phone comes out to really play with this stuff because that's going to be the better experience

00:38:08   anyway. And also I'm only going to have this phone for like six more weeks.

00:38:12   Right. And again, this is pure speculation. I literally, nobody would tell me this anyway.

00:38:18   And nobody who knows would tell me, but I wouldn't be surprised too, if both for legitimate silicon

00:38:28   reasons, because the iPhone 16 chip is designed for this, that in addition to doing a better job

00:38:36   running all of the Apple intelligence features that Apple already showed us in June,

00:38:40   wouldn't be surprised if there's X, Y, and Z Apple intelligence features that only run on the iPhone

00:38:47   16 Pro. Absolutely. No, I have the same and even fewer people would, no one would tell me,

00:38:53   people wouldn't tell you, they would certainly never tell me. So yeah, again, just pure

00:38:57   speculation, but that's been kind of my thought too, because they do that a lot, right? Where

00:39:00   there will be some things that we only learn about at the launch event. And this, it struck

00:39:05   me actually watching the keynote last month, actually, where I was like there now close to

00:39:11   two months ago, where I was thinking, I was like, okay, they're so light on so many of the details

00:39:16   on this. We don't know when this is hitting beta, the real extra wow features and some of the other

00:39:21   stuff is only going to be available probably again, like for hardware design, all kinds of

00:39:25   reasons on the next phone, right? Like we're getting a real preview of this now kind of at

00:39:31   a high level. That's how I viewed the keynote at WWDC was this is setting out our vision, no pun

00:39:38   intended, of how we see the AI landscape, not this is a well trotted out narrative of everything we

00:39:46   expect to accomplish, more like this is our high level goal. And we'll sprinkle in the details as

00:39:51   things become more available and as we learn more and as we get more feedback and as hardware is

00:39:55   better, but it was very much kind of much more aspirational, I think, rather than prescriptive,

00:40:01   which has not been the case for a lot of years and is not a typically very Apple thing to do.

00:40:06   But I think in this case makes a lot of sense, especially just given how much the tech,

00:40:10   not just raffle, but for everyone is changing so quickly.

00:40:13   Trenton Larkin Yeah. Yeah. If I had to guess and it's just because

00:40:17   the camera is so important and somebody did a poll is like, what do people who think they might buy

00:40:25   a phone? Anybody just general public, not nerds. What are the biggest priorities for the next phone

00:40:30   you buy? And it's I might get the order wrong price, battery life camera. I think that's the

00:40:38   order though. And of course, everything everybody buys in life price matters. So price is always

00:40:43   first. It's almost like you could take it off the list. Right. Battery life for features is above

00:40:49   everything else. And it's true. I mean, we all bitch about it, but it's true. And for all of

00:40:55   the fancy portrait mode and slow motion mode and cinematic mode in the camera and all the Apple

00:41:00   intelligence stuff coming out this year, and whatever new apps that come out, blah, blah, blah,

00:41:04   battery, battery, battery, battery, battery. But the camera is third. And there's a reason

00:41:09   that Apple has been running. I forget how many years now. As far as I know, it's the only

00:41:16   permanent ad campaign in tech history. Maybe the shot on my phone campaign. Is that what you're

00:41:22   talking about? Yeah. Shot on iPhone. Yeah. It goes back easily over 10 years. And with absolutely no

00:41:30   abatement, billboards all over the place. I live near a billboard here that Apple has had

00:41:37   continuously for years. There's a couple of them, I think in center city, Philadelphia, but I know

00:41:41   of one. And new iPhones come out. It's always for the new iPhones. And there's other things.

00:41:47   I think right now it's a Safari, the actually private browser right now. In the summertime

00:41:56   when there's no new actual products, that's when they'll do something like a privacy ad,

00:42:01   but at least a few months of the year shot on iPhone. It's super important. I could definitely

00:42:08   see how there would be. And they didn't really talk too much about Apple intelligence in the

00:42:12   camera. They talked about it with photos, the photos app. Apple intelligence will categorize.

00:42:18   Exactly. Because I think they want to be really careful there. Like A, they don't want to be like

00:42:24   Samsung and create the moon out of thin air. And I think even more to the point, because Apple has

00:42:31   been one of the pioneers of this, we've been using AI to make photography better for a decade now.

00:42:38   And that was a different type of AI than the AI we're talking about now. But that's,

00:42:40   it's been a consistent thing. Google has done a great job with that too. A lot of upscaling

00:42:45   things. There's a lot of things that go into that. But when we talk about this new era of AI and

00:42:51   generative AI, I think Apple wants to be really careful not to conflate things because they still

00:42:56   want people to feel like the photos you take are your photos. And this isn't something that is

00:43:01   changing reality for you. And it's not using, it's not training on your photos, which is an

00:43:07   important thing, but it's also not retrospectively, again, to use the Samsung analogy, yeah, great,

00:43:11   that moon looks awesome. That's not the moon. You don't want it to change what actually happens. And

00:43:16   so I think you have to be careful how you thread that needle. But I do expect to see some things on

00:43:22   the hardware level, like improvements, right? I anticipate that how it will be with the narrative

00:43:28   around that will be, will again, to my point, it won't be about anything is changing, but just

00:43:32   look at how much better we're going to make this so that you can take the perfect shot.

00:43:36   We're going to do an even better job at automatically selecting the right frame.

00:43:40   They're not going to take the gray out of my hair and my beard, right? They're not going to make me

00:43:44   look 10 years younger as much as I wish they could. But I mean, I would love that if they could,

00:43:49   but yeah, yeah, they might do a better job of making sure everybody's eyes are open.

00:43:53   I don't know color balance and all sorts of stuff they could do along that spectrum. And then they

00:43:57   could say this is powered by Apple intelligence only because of the whatever chip the A exactly

00:44:03   will be the A 18 pro blah, blah, blah. Before we move on, you sent me a tweet. Somebody's already.

00:44:10   Yes. I've loved this so much. This is so good.

00:44:13   How do we, how do we put this on podcast terms though? It's not really an explicit podcast.

00:44:18   Yeah. Okay. So we'll just use the word F I guess.

00:44:24   Yeah. Yeah. This is great.

00:44:27   You want to read it or should I maybe I should.

00:44:30   Yeah, you go ahead. You read it. I will put this into show notes. Hold on. Let me,

00:44:34   let me do this right now. But somebody on Twitter was like, no, Apple intelligence. No. And what

00:44:40   they did is they typed in. Let's F daddy selected it. And with the actual F word spelled out

00:44:49   and then use the writing tools. Yeah. Let's F daddy select all writing tools.

00:44:55   Professional professional, make it professional.

00:45:00   And then it changed it to let us engage in sexual intercourse with our father.

00:45:05   And they added, they added the period, which is more professional.

00:45:10   It is, it is more special and then submissive. Okay. It's not wrong though. And then they added

00:45:15   in a comma. But I think I don't think no Apple no is I think that's the wrong take. I think that

00:45:24   Apple intelligence should do this because I agree. It's Oh no, no, no, no, no. I think no was was

00:45:31   saying this is not the correct interpretation of what I was writing. I don't think it was. I don't

00:45:38   think it was St. Apple should do this. Cause I agree with you. I was actually thrilled to see,

00:45:41   I see what you mean. I see. I see. I see. You're there. They're dinging Apple intelligence,

00:45:48   not for allowing them to say inappropriate things, but for not getting what the original slang intent

00:45:56   was. Exactly. Which, which is, which is, which is, which is why when they added in a comma,

00:46:01   which is great, the comma is better. It's it says, let's F comma daddy. It becomes when you

00:46:06   use professional, it becomes let us engage in sexual intercourse, comma father. Much better,

00:46:15   much better. I get it now. So I'm glad we talked about this. I get it. I misinterpreted what,

00:46:20   what their objection was, but now they're on team team us that you should be, it shouldn't,

00:46:25   shouldn't bring up topics like this unprompted, but if you input something like this,

00:46:31   that's your artwork and, or, or your communication. And, and we talked about it on at my show and they

00:46:38   were like, yeah, if you, you get to be you and Apple intelligence will help you, but Apple

00:46:43   intelligence shouldn't be bringing this topic up out of nowhere. No, it definitely shouldn't,

00:46:48   right? It shouldn't be suggesting that, especially in a professional context, probably any context,

00:46:52   it shouldn't be suggesting that. However, if you're trying to yeah, professionalize your,

00:46:57   your, your sex or whatever, that should be, yeah, your flirtation. Absolutely. I mean, look,

00:47:03   I'm hoping that I, I, I'm really into emoji pastas, which are like the ridiculous, like

00:47:08   chain texts that people send with that are very, very, very profane with those emoji things. And,

00:47:13   and I've used various like generator things for years and I'm a big fan of those,

00:47:17   my friends and I, but I would love for Apple intelligence to help me create those. Right?

00:47:22   Like that would be in, in, in a peak world, something that could look at things, help me,

00:47:25   help me do this. And I don't know if that'll ever be a thing that they would embrace, but to me,

00:47:29   that is kind of the right balance, which is we're not going to suggest those things. But if people,

00:47:35   look, people are adults, these are our computers. If you want to use profane language with these

00:47:39   tools, if you're told no, that's just to me, that'd be like, okay, well, I'm never using this

00:47:43   feature, then what's the point in the same way that it just dumb? No, no AI at all. If you want

00:47:51   to write some sort of offensive manifesto in text edit, yeah, or send it to send a very rude or

00:48:00   threatening email in mail. You just, you're the one type, you're the one typing these things and

00:48:06   it's the computer's just a tool. Apple intelligence is a tool and I think Apple is very clear about

00:48:13   that. And I think that's one of the things that's very clarifying about their approach so far to,

00:48:19   to LLM AIs. Yeah, no, I totally agree. And I think it's a good thing. And, and I don't know about

00:48:24   you. I remember one of the first things doing with the McAnnel entry school was you could make them

00:48:29   say things and yeah, typing, trying to see what profanities and what profane things we could get

00:48:34   the computer to say, but to just, to reel out, right? This is just the thing that kids are going

00:48:38   to do and the people are going to use these tools for and any attempts to prevent that from happening

00:48:45   is, is just going to make people even more committed to the bid. And, and it's, I don't

00:48:50   think it's the place of, if you're really wanting to be in the background, especially the way that

00:48:54   Apple is by making it so clear through their messaging that they want this to be on device

00:48:57   as much as possible and that it is private and whatnot. I'm like, okay, well then don't judge

00:49:02   me because of what you want to proofread, right? What I want you to proofread.

00:49:06   Trenton Larkin All right, let me take a break here and thank

00:49:08   our sponsor. It's our good friends at Squarespace. Go to squarespace.com/talkshow. Know the,

00:49:15   just slash talk show. You get a 30 day free trial. You get 10% off your first order, everything you

00:49:22   would want. That's the URL. Look, they've got a new feature speaking of AI right on, right on

00:49:26   subject. They call it Blueprint AI. You can start a completely personalized website with Squarespace's

00:49:33   new guided design system, Squarespace Blueprint. You start with professionally curated layouts and

00:49:40   styling options, just like which direction do you want to go and asks you some questions and you

00:49:46   steer it with just language, which way, how you want it to go. And you can build a unique online

00:49:51   presence from the ground up tailored to your brand or your personal personality. Optimize for every

00:49:58   device. Of course, easily launch your website and get discovered fast with optimized SEO tools too.

00:50:04   That's part of Blueprint. So you can show up more often to more people and grow the way you want to

00:50:10   grow. Another great feature at Squarespace, flexible payments. They want me to emphasize

00:50:15   this and they really do have all the payment options you could possibly want. For whatever

00:50:21   you might be selling, which could be products, could be t-shirts, could be stuff, could be your

00:50:26   time if you're a consultant or a trainer or something like that. But if you want to sell

00:50:31   stuff through your own website and you build it with Squarespace using their built-in payments,

00:50:36   you get credit cards, of course, PayPal, Apple Pay, and in eligible countries, they even offer

00:50:44   the buy now pay later stuff like Afterpay and ClearPay, which I actually pronounced correctly

00:50:50   for once. I usually say ClearPlay, but ClearPay is the name of the product. They've got all of that

00:50:55   you could possibly want and they take care of all the hassles of online commerce that you don't want

00:50:59   to deal with, all the stuff that it's just all wrapped around their stuff. You just get the money.

00:51:05   Fluid Engine is their new layout tool. Blueprint works with it. But Fluid Engine is the thing that

00:51:14   lets you, in addition to the old way where you can, of course, use a desktop computer to do

00:51:19   tweaks to your layout or adjustments or something like that. You can do it right from your phone now,

00:51:24   right down to your phone or your iPad or something like that. Everything works great. They've

00:51:28   optimized it with knowing just how many people their phone is their primary computer these days,

00:51:35   and their new Fluid Engine is built with that in mind. And the great thing about building phone

00:51:40   first is for anything really is if it works great on the phone, of course, it still works great on

00:51:46   the desktop computer. It's really vice versa often doesn't work. Build desktop first often doesn't

00:51:51   work, doesn't fit, something like that on the phone. But the other way around works great.

00:51:55   Email campaigns, they've got great, great automatic email marketing tools that engage with

00:52:01   your community, can help drive sales and simplify audience management. So if you want to run like a

00:52:07   newsletter or something like that, you could do all of that through Squarespace too. All of that's

00:52:11   available so much more. Just go to squarespace.com/talkshow. You get a free trial 30 days,

00:52:18   and you save 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain by using that domain,

00:52:23   squarespace.com/talkshow. Well, the other the other reason I've been meaning to have you on

00:52:32   the show, Christina was you. I had my identity stolen. And I'm the one who told you. You're the

00:52:41   one who figured it out. I was gonna say because of you, I found this out. It's an incredible story.

00:52:45   Ridiculous. So what happened? I'll start is, yeah, you start because you're the one who figured this

00:52:52   out. So at this point, I guess it's about two or three weeks ago. I keep meaning to write about it,

00:52:58   but I'll just talk about it now. But I've been having a strange problem on my Mac with the auto

00:53:04   complete feature. And in certain apps, I'm not getting a full list of words. But this is the

00:53:09   feature where if you start typing H O S P, and then you hit F5, it should complete with words

00:53:18   like hospital. It's been there. I think it might even go back to speaking of next, might go back

00:53:23   to next step, certainly has been part of Mac OS X since for 24 years. And for me in certain apps,

00:53:29   in some apps, I get the full list of dictionary words. And then in a few apps, it must be some

00:53:35   kind of preferences. I don't know, I still haven't figured it out. But it's the main reason I want to

00:53:39   write about your story here. So I can get this off my chest. And maybe a reader will help me debug

00:53:43   this problem. But anyway, I started searching the web for this, about this feature. And it doesn't

00:53:50   really have a name. So it was kind of hard to Google for. And then I found a daring fireball

00:53:57   article, or just a brief link, like one of those links where I linked to something and I only wrote

00:54:03   one sentence and I didn't even block quote it. And it but it was a link. And I hovered over the link,

00:54:09   and it went to Tua, the unofficial Apple web blog for those of you who don't remember, but it was a

00:54:14   long standing, very popular group blog run by web blogs, Inc. Right? Yeah, that's right.

00:54:21   You know, the early years of daring fireball work coincident with Tua. And I happened to I forget

00:54:29   the number. But I because of this story, I've looked up how many times I've linked to Tua over

00:54:34   the years. And it's dozens and dozens of times really good site. Lots of great writers started

00:54:39   there, including I don't know if you started there, but it was it was my first tech writing. Yes.

00:54:44   It's the first time I remember your byline. Yeah, I mean, I was still in college. I did a thing for

00:54:51   USA Today about American Idol of all things. That was my first thing that I shocked shocker Christina's

00:54:57   shocking, absolutely shocking, Christina. Well, what's shocking is that I got that gig because I

00:55:02   was a commenter on the music editors blog. He had a music blog, and then he had an American Idol blog

00:55:08   and thought that my comments were smart enough to reach out to me and was like,

00:55:12   we're looking for a contributor to the print an online edition about the show. So it was like me

00:55:17   and a couple people who actually knew what they were talking about giving the contestants advice

00:55:20   each week. So fake it till you make it works. But no, but yeah, Tua was my very first paid for tech

00:55:26   writing gig. Yeah. So you say Tua? I always say to most people say to most people say to I think

00:55:33   I've always been the aberration there. But yeah, although I guess that brings up the the hawk to a

00:55:38   girl it does which people made some really good puns about that actually, which was really,

00:55:43   really good. I think I think that 404 media when they wrote about this incident, which will be

00:55:46   they wrote they hawked Tua which yes, very good. Well done.

00:55:55   So anyway, I found an old Daring Fireball link and I thought I don't remember what I linked to,

00:56:01   but it was clear from the little brief thing that I had written that it was a story at Tua

00:56:08   about this feature. And I thought, well, if I link to it, it must be good. And I don't mean that to

00:56:14   be self serving to me. I just mean that's probably why I linked to it. Oh, and I know that the

00:56:19   unofficial Apple web blog got shut down like a decade ago. And unfortunately, whoever still owned

00:56:25   it hadn't kept the archive up. And I thought, this isn't the links not going to work. But what

00:56:31   I thought was, well, I'll click it anyway, it probably won't resolve. But then I'll copy the

00:56:37   link and go to the Internet Archive, paste the link. But when I do I just thought, well, I'll

00:56:44   try it first. And before I do the copy and paste with no, I don't even know why I did it that way.

00:56:49   It occurred to me to just it actually seemed lazier to do it that way to just click rather

00:56:55   than control click, copy and go. It was like, I'll just click it and then I'll copy. But lo and

00:57:01   behold, it worked. It loaded. And then I thought to myself, my first thought was, oh, maybe I'm

00:57:08   wrong that they took down. Yeah, I don't know. And then I saw that the article's byline was

00:57:16   Christina Warren. And I do not have a really great memory of 2006 links at Daring Firewall.

00:57:27   Jessica Vinas-Nelson Right.

00:57:27   Jared I did think at first,

00:57:29   Jessica Vinas-Nelson You're like, that seems odd.

00:57:31   Jared Because it doesn't seem like your type of topic,

00:57:34   right? Like I said, this is where I first became aware of you. And I remember you writing for TUOP,

00:57:41   but I don't remember you writing things like the Esoterica of a nerdy text autocomplete

00:57:49   in F5 feature. But I thought maybe. And then I start reading and I'm like, this doesn't sound

00:57:56   like what? It's just this, it didn't sound wrong. It just didn't sound like you. And I know your

00:58:04   voice, not just your literal voice here. I know. Jessica Vinas-Nelson No, you know my writing

00:58:07   voice. Absolutely. Yeah. Jared Absolutely. And I just, spidey sense started going off. And then I

00:58:12   got, this is where it gets funny. I get to the bottom and there's the author bio and it says,

00:58:19   "Christina Warren is a dedicated writer with a deep love of technology, Christine blah, blah,

00:58:24   blah." And there's a photo. And the photo is not you. Jessica Vinas-Nelson It is not me. It is not

00:58:31   me. It is not even a real human. Jared Nope. Well, it's got that generic, it is a young

00:58:38   white woman with long brown hair. But it's clearly in hindsight AI generated. It doesn't have

00:58:48   telltale signs of being AI generated, but you know. Jessica Vinas-Nelson No, but it's just,

00:58:52   if you've seen enough of these things, like I do anyway, like I look at them like, "Oh, okay,

00:58:55   yeah, this just has a slightly uncanny valley." It was not a bad AI generated photo. And

00:59:01   I made this photo in my profile picture for a few days. So I had to stare at it a lot. And I also

00:59:06   did it at work, which was very funny. But when you sent me the link, at first I was like, "So go on."

00:59:12   Jared Well, that's it. But literally, then I thought this is screwed up. Either something's

00:59:18   gone on with Too Odd that I missed, or something has just happened. And I stumbled across it. And

00:59:24   so I took a screenshot of it. I forget which I sent to you first, the screenshot of the bio with

00:59:30   the picture or just the link. Jessica Vinas-Nelson I think it was just the link. Yeah, it used to be

00:59:34   both. I think it was just the link. And I was like, "What in the hell?" And at first, my first

00:59:37   thing, because I think it was just the link that came in first, going back, I'm trying to scroll

00:59:41   through and find it. I was like, "Okay, what is this?" Because at first I was like, "Oh, yeah,

00:59:46   you found like an old link. Yeah, this doesn't resolve anymore. This hasn't resolved in years."

00:59:49   And then I clicked on it. And I realized it did resolve. And then I saw the photo and I went,

00:59:54   "What the f," but I didn't censor myself. And then I linked you to the author's page. And I said,

01:00:01   "LMAO, they stole all of us. This is insane." And they basically just, what we realized they did is

01:00:07   they bought the domain from Yahoo, Apollo Global, who were the, I guess, current owners of the

01:00:13   domain and whatnot. They sold the domain, but they did not sell the content. It turns out the content

01:00:18   actually, they couldn't have sold it. Even if they'd wanted to, it belonged to us. And it was

01:00:23   very clear, even in this company's about page, they only bought the content. And then what they

01:00:28   did is they scraped the internet archive, ran the archives that they could find through an AI

01:00:34   rewriting thing, and then just randomly assigned different authors to different stories. So

01:00:40   that link resolved and it was probably similar, but still uncanny valley compared to what an

01:00:47   original author wrote back in 2006. But they just randomly assigned author IDs to things.

01:00:53   But I had no idea. You were the one who just, you're, and I think you caught it. I think that

01:00:59   when people did some research, it looked like it had maybe launched a week earlier. So it was a

01:01:03   really, really recent thing. So it was like, I'm so grateful that you happened to be lazy and not

01:01:10   go immediately to the internet archive to click on that link, because I don't know when I would

01:01:15   have found out that my identity and name was being stolen and reused on stuff. At first,

01:01:22   I thought I was like, okay, well, they just, because this has happened before where a domain

01:01:26   expires, somebody buys it, and then they create kind of a splog, like a spam blog using archives

01:01:32   they can find. And I've seen that for years. That happened to the Hairpin a couple years ago,

01:01:36   which was a really great website. But what was, what incensed me where I kind of frankly, like,

01:01:43   lost my mind a little bit was that I realized that they were publishing new articles.

01:01:49   Yeah. And still using the old author names on those new articles. And that's when I flipped

01:01:57   my stuff. Well, the whole thing is so scummy and scammy. I mean, I don't know, we need some kind of

01:02:05   combination word for scummy and scammy. But yes, there have been, and I know this firsthand from

01:02:12   all of the various domains that have gone defunct that I've linked to 10, 15, 20 years ago, that

01:02:21   like the best case scenario is when the domain is just, nothing is there. And it's like, okay,

01:02:26   all the URLs are 404s, but you can go to the Internet Archive or whatever. But a lot of them,

01:02:32   whatever the scam of the day is, it used to be like links to casino sites or something like that.

01:02:40   In recent years, it's more, a lot of times it'll be like a Bitcoin or cryptocurrency type thing.

01:02:47   Imagine if they did it with Tuod. Here's a site that used to be the unofficial Apple web blog,

01:02:51   and it was a bunch of Mac and iPhone nerd stories. And now it's trying to convince you to give your

01:02:57   money to cryptocurrency or something like that. That's the old way. This is sort of,

01:03:04   and it could only happen with AI. That's this, I think. I mean, in theory, you could do it

01:03:11   another way. But it's so bizarre that this guy, and apparently his name, I have tried to reach

01:03:20   out to him, but his name is Haider Ali Khan, and he's bought a bunch of other domains. I forget

01:03:27   some of them. What's his name? Ernie? Yeah, Ernie Smith from TDM figured a lot of this out.

01:03:33   Ernie Smith from TDM, who anybody who's like, "Ah, where'd I hear of him recently?" He's the guy

01:03:39   who figured out the UTM 14 trick to get pure web search results out of Google.

01:03:47   You had to get the good Google results. Yeah.

01:03:48   So I had linked to him recently and his UTM 14 or whatever the hell it's called site,

01:03:55   which I am just jotted down, duly noted to put in the show notes. But he figured out that it's

01:04:00   this guy Haider Ali Khan. And I forget what other sites he's bought. iLounge, I think.

01:04:06   iLounge, yeah.

01:04:07   Yep. And anybody who remembers 2UP, I remember iLounge.

01:04:11   Yeah. I remember when it was iPod Lounge. iLounge was probably... That and ThinkSecret

01:04:16   were probably two of the earliest in the blog era Apple sites that I remember.

01:04:21   Yeah. I still think of it as iPod Lounge too.

01:04:24   Yeah. Yeah. I remember when it changed and I was like, "Aw, end of an era." But yeah.

01:04:30   But think about that. It is clever. I often think about this. Whenever new technology comes,

01:04:37   most people are good people and they are honest people and they don't think of novel ways to rip

01:04:47   off, screw and defraud people. They just don't. And the whole history of computing is like things

01:04:57   that had never occurred to anybody. And they're like, "Oh yeah, I guess that is insecure."

01:05:01   I mean, it used to be. I mean, as late as the '90s for sending email, you would just telnet

01:05:09   into email server, an SMTP server on, I forget, it was like port 20 or something like that.

01:05:16   And you didn't have to log in. You could just start typing email commands. And so you could

01:05:20   send email from any address on that domain to anybody you want to forge an email from somebody

01:05:28   because the SMTP protocol was written thinking like, "Well, what's the easiest protocol we could

01:05:35   have for sending email?" And it would be like, "Oh, you would just write a program to telnet in

01:05:41   on port 20 and start typing commands." Right? And the whole idea of spam, which is a forever problem

01:05:49   for email, but the idea that anybody can send email to anybody else, it sounded wonderful

01:05:55   originally. And then somebody figured out, "Well, hell, I could send a million of these to every

01:06:00   single email address on the internet." All sorts of problems like that. But people just don't think

01:06:07   of these things, right? And so I never would have thought of this scam. This never even occurred to

01:06:11   me. But what he did, I just, you described it, but I just want to reiterate. So he bought the domain

01:06:17   legally from Verizon or whoever, whatever the…

01:06:21   Yeah, it's Verizon, yeah, Apollo Global, one of them, yeah.

01:06:26   So he bought the domain but did not buy the content rights to everything Tua had written.

01:06:32   So all he had was a domain. But he knows somehow, I guess, through the Internet Archive,

01:06:40   he scraped the Internet Archive to get all the URLs from old Tua articles and then got the

01:06:48   content from them from the Internet Archive. Knew somehow he had the moral compass not to just

01:06:57   steal the content, which he didn't have a right to, and paste it in,

01:07:01   but instead fed it into AI and said, "Rewrite every one of these articles."

01:07:07   Yep.

01:07:09   And so the articles are about the same subjects. If you go to the Internet Archive and look at the

01:07:16   original, it is about the F5 autocomplete feature. I think it was Dave Campo or somebody had actually

01:07:24   written the original article at Tua. And I could see once I read the original on the Internet

01:07:29   Archive, I was like, "Oh, yeah, I could see why I linked to this. It was a good article."

01:07:32   But what he did is he had every single one of those articles rewritten, put them at the same URL

01:07:37   they used to be, and yet for whatever reason decided or maybe by happenstance, just randomly

01:07:45   assigned bylines from the list of actual people who had previously written to Tua to each article.

01:07:52   So each article, whoever wrote the original one, like there were—here you got assigned to an

01:07:57   article you didn't write, and then there were other articles you did write that got us—

01:08:01   That you did write and other people's names were on it. Yes.

01:08:03   Yeah, like Scott McNulty wrote this article.

01:08:05   No, he did not write an article about American Idol or whatever it was that you wrote. They're

01:08:11   all mixed up and jumbled. Every single one of these authors, he decided, "I'll use their real

01:08:18   names, but I'm going to make AI-generated headshots for each of them. Good to go."

01:08:26   Yeah, this is fine. And then had the temerity to write in the about page that, you know,

01:08:35   they had meticulously rewritten the articles to match modern standards. And that was when,

01:08:43   when I talked to The Verge, they had a really nice poll quote for me that I can't repeat on this

01:08:47   show, but it was great. That's when I said that poll quote, because that was when I was like,

01:08:52   "Okay, genuinely, you can go believe yourself," because it's bad enough to do all this, but then

01:08:57   to write, "Oh, meticulously rewritten to adhere to modern standards." Are you actually out of your

01:09:04   mind? Right? And like you, this scam had never occurred to me. Of course, I've seen people rebuy

01:09:09   dead domains and revive the URLs and whatnot, but I never thought that somebody would try to

01:09:16   revive a brand using the names of the former writers with fake photos, and then do what they

01:09:25   did, which is like, "Okay, we want to keep the past links because we want to have good Google

01:09:29   juice, but we're not even going, we're going to rewrite them in a mishmash way because we think

01:09:34   that'll get us around the copyright infringement. It won't, but we think that'll do it. And we'll

01:09:38   just assign different author names because that'll be fine. The actual people who wrote that content,

01:09:43   they won't be mad about this at all. Spoiler alert, I was mad. I was very mad.

01:09:48   Our good friend, the hater Ali Khan, had originally given himself much credit on the

01:09:58   about page as a visionary media mogul and investor. And then surprisingly,

01:10:07   once you went public with this on social media and it got picked up by The Verge, it got picked up by

01:10:13   404 Media. What's it, Jason? Yeah, Jason Keebler.

01:10:18   Keebler? Is that how you pronounce it? I'm not sure, actually. So I probably

01:10:21   said it wrong. I apologize, Jason, but he wrote a great post. InGadget wrote about it.

01:10:25   Yeah, Jason Snell was really kind enough to link to it early on because he saw my post on Macedon.

01:10:30   Because what happened is you told me about this and I was incensed and I was actually sick that

01:10:35   day. I was incensed. That's why I saw it a couple hours late. You sent it to me earlier in the day.

01:10:40   I woke up because I hadn't been feeling well. I'm incensed. And so I immediately do the only

01:10:46   thing that I feel like I can do in that situation, which was like, "Okay, well, I'm going to throw a

01:10:50   temper tantrum and hope that people care enough online." And so I posted about it on Twitter and

01:10:54   on Threads and other places and people saw this and were understandably, they're like,

01:10:59   "Are you kidding me?" Because just everyone else's response was the same response that you and I had,

01:11:03   which was I didn't even think that somebody could do something like this, right? I obviously,

01:11:09   this is a human problem, not a technology problem, but the way they were able to do this in such a

01:11:13   quick way obviously only happens because the AI would allow them to automate the way that they

01:11:18   did. But I was incensed and I was like, "Okay." I also sent an email almost immediately to the

01:11:25   one contact thing on the site and I was like, "Remove my name from your website immediately.

01:11:30   I don't want to be contacting my attorney." And I meant that. I was like, I didn't want to,

01:11:35   before I knew anything about the guy, I was like, "There probably isn't even any jurisdiction where

01:11:39   I could get these people and I don't really have the time. It's not even a money thing. I don't

01:11:43   have the time to fight this, but I just really wanted my name off the website." And so I sent

01:11:48   kind of a threatening email and then I had an inkling that it might get some attention because

01:11:54   some friends of mine who work at The Verge told me that they were posting about it in their Slack.

01:11:59   I was like, "Okay, well maybe they'll do a story," but I wasn't expecting anything.

01:12:02   And then my friend Karissa at Engadget was kind enough to write a story. She was assigned,

01:12:06   she didn't even like the pitches and they just said, "Hey, can you do this?" She was like,

01:12:09   "Can I talk to you about this thing?" And I was like, "Yes, absolutely." And 404 Media was also

01:12:13   working on something at the same time. And so I was able to basically within the first day,

01:12:20   what they did was, and this was even funnier. So first, after my email came in and after the

01:12:26   story started going up, clearly the heat was on. And so first my byline was changed just from

01:12:33   Christina Warren to Christina. And I was like, "That's still not good enough." Because unfortunately,

01:12:39   and not unfortunately, for better or worse, even though the site's been gone for a really long time

01:12:42   and I haven't written for them since 2009, a lot of people will associate me with TUAW. And I was

01:12:48   like, "No, there's one Christina that's associated with that domain, with that brand and you can't

01:12:53   use my name in any way." Then it quickly shifted from that to Mary Brown. And they did change the

01:13:00   names of all the authors, which was my primary concern was not even for myself, because I'm

01:13:05   fortunate enough that I have a big platform other ways that even though I wouldn't want people to

01:13:10   mistake new AI generated slop with my byline and a different photo from me, I wasn't overly concerned.

01:13:17   But there are other people who have other careers and done other things who don't have the same

01:13:22   profile I do, who their names are being reused and are being again, like published actively on a site

01:13:28   that is in Google News, has been indexed, they know how to play this game that has a lot of backlinks

01:13:33   and Google doesn't care about that stuff, no matter what they say, they'll let these sorts of

01:13:37   scams go on. I there's, there's no way that a search engine would pick up that anything

01:13:43   suspicious. No, not at all. Not at all. It would just be like the search engine would be like,

01:13:47   "Oh, this URL is active again. Here's an article, let me index it." Exactly. Exactly. And so my main

01:13:54   concern was I was just like, I don't want some of my former colleagues to have their SEO and other

01:13:59   things caught up in this because that could hurt them professionally and whatnot. And then

01:14:03   selfishly too, I was like, I don't want my name on this stuff. I'm pretty protective over that.

01:14:07   So they changed the names and all the bylines. By the time the 404 media story was up, they started

01:14:14   to go through that process of changing it. But what was funny is that the backlash kept building

01:14:19   and it became bigger and bigger. It was a slow news week. So lucky for me, and also thank you

01:14:23   very much again for sending me the first heads up. I didn't expect it to have legs, but I'm

01:14:28   sort of person I've never met like a crisis that I won't turn into a publicity stunt. And so I was

01:14:33   like, I will milk this for everything that's worth, right? Because I think we need to talk about this.

01:14:37   And also this is insane that this happened and there'll be a great story for years to come. But

01:14:43   what was funny is that as this sort of be uncovered about this guy, he started removing

01:14:49   his own information from the internet, which was very, very funny because-

01:14:53   I was about to say, I don't know, because I don't know about you. Did you get an answer to any of

01:14:59   your emails? I did not. I just double checked right now just to make sure-

01:15:05   I got nothing. There was no correspondence with me at all. All I know is that within about a couple

01:15:11   hours of me sending that initial emissive and they started changing the bylines and stuff. And I know

01:15:16   that that wouldn't have happened if there hadn't been the media attention. And also if I hadn't

01:15:20   sent the vaguely threatening email.

01:15:23   And there's still some fishy stuff. I'm looking at the homepage of tuah.com right now, and I don't

01:15:28   recommend anybody subscribe to the feed. But it's still up to date. There's July 30, July 30,

01:15:36   I don't know, three or four articles a day. But it's like the byline for the first four stories,

01:15:42   five stories, six stories, seven stories is Paul Terpstra, T-E-R-P-S-T-R-A. Now there's-

01:15:50   Brett Terpstra.

01:15:52   Brett Terpstra, a good friend of mine. And I told Brett to do this-

01:15:54   Who was an author at Tuah and is best known-

01:15:58   He was. He's something I met.

01:15:59   He's written a bunch of markdown related utilities. People listening to this have

01:16:03   probably heard his name. And it's quite frankly a somewhat distinctive surname.

01:16:07   It is. It is.

01:16:08   I don't know any other Terpstas.

01:16:10   Yeah, no, I told him because he and I do a podcast together called Over Tired,

01:16:14   please subscribe. I told him, I was like, you should contact them and be like,

01:16:20   change the name. Because to me, that one, like everybody else's names were sufficiently

01:16:25   different enough. That one wasn't. And I don't know who just laziness, what the situation was,

01:16:31   but I don't know if they would listen or anything, but since they were responsive the first time,

01:16:36   you'd like send an email and see what you can do. Because yeah, that's still there.

01:16:41   I still don't love that hyperlinks, the two things that I wrote now go to something that is not what

01:16:48   I wrote and whatnot. I can't really do anything about that because again, the domain was sold and

01:16:53   I don't think you can copyright URLs, nor would I want people to. And yes, there is, I'm sure,

01:16:58   copyright infringement case brought up, but this guy, even finding out what country he's in would

01:17:04   be difficult. I'm not pursuing that. I have too many other things to do.

01:17:07   I've just never, but it never occurred to me and it is devilish and it sucks that it's still up.

01:17:13   Because like you said, as somebody else who didn't have my unique position of having been

01:17:23   doing the thing I do while Tua was an act of concern and knowing you personally,

01:17:29   it wasn't just a random- No, it's amazing that we caught it the way that we did. And I hadn't been

01:17:35   aware of how you described it to me, but I hadn't quite understood until you explained it on the

01:17:41   podcast how you'd come across it that you'd actually click the link. I had thought that maybe

01:17:45   you had Googled something and then it came up in the Google results.

01:17:48   Well, but it was my article that came up in the search results.

01:17:52   Okay, okay. Got it, got it, got it.

01:17:54   And I thought, I will admit, there's a lot of times where I'm searching for something

01:18:01   and if a Daring Fireball link comes up, I think, "Oh, maybe I already knew the answer and I've

01:18:07   forgotten it." Oh, totally. No, I think we've all gone through that.

01:18:10   I've definitely done that. I found my own articles or own documentation to solve a problem that

01:18:15   currently has. I'm like, "Oh, right. I did figure that out however many years ago. Got it." Yeah.

01:18:20   As I accelerate through middle age, it happens more and more and I'm like, "Oh, younger John

01:18:28   solved this problem. Thank you, younger self."

01:18:31   Yeah.

01:18:32   No, it is so—no, and I will say though, it only took a couple minutes to really sort of figure out

01:18:38   the scope of the basic gist of what this guy had done. But every click along the way, my first

01:18:45   thought was, "Oh, they just—somebody resuscitate—" Obviously, I knew the site had been

01:18:51   defunct for a while and it had been—the best case scenario is somebody bought it and resuscitated it

01:18:56   and I was actually kind of happy for a moment. I was like, "Oh, this is fantastic." Some—whether

01:19:02   it was Verizon or whoever—somebody took the care of rejuvenating a site that I wish had never gone

01:19:10   away. I mean, I get closing it, but I wish that like the way that old copies of magazines that

01:19:17   don't exist anymore, you could still go to the library and read them on microfilm or if you have

01:19:22   a copy of the magazine in your box in your garage, it's still there for you to read. I wish Tua were

01:19:29   still there as it was on the day it shut down forever. I wish everything I've ever linked to

01:19:35   was still there. And I am so, so happy that the Internet Archive exists and I'm so worried because

01:19:44   it occupies a singular position on the entire Internet. There is—if something were to happen

01:19:53   to the Internet Archive, what's plan B for finding the original version? Unfortunately, not everything

01:20:01   that you wish you could find from 2006 on the web is in the Internet Archive, whether it was because

01:20:06   the site had a robots.txt file that said, "Don't even use the Internet Archive. We don't want to

01:20:12   be archived." Why in the world anybody would do that? It's bizarre and beyond me, but people have

01:20:17   done it or it was an obscure site that they didn't index. I've run into that problem where I can just

01:20:25   tell this is not a very popular—this was not a popular website and the Internet Archive, "Sorry,

01:20:32   no, we don't have any indexes of that. Darn." But here's one that did. But every step of the way,

01:20:38   I thought, "Oh, somebody resuscitated this and they mixed up the images. They made a—maybe it's

01:20:43   a coding error." And like I said, you were a 20-something white woman with long dark hair,

01:20:55   and this is a 20-something woman with long dark hair. So I could see how somebody might have

01:21:00   made the mistake. But the more I looked at it, the more I'm like, "No, no, no, no, no." And then I

01:21:07   started clicking around the site and I sort of got—I was like, "Oh, oh!" And it's like, "Oh!"

01:21:15   And the key, of course, was when I went to the authors page where they had all of the authors.

01:21:22   And I know at least half of them personally, maybe more than half.

01:21:26   Stephanie: Yes, exactly. And you were like, you're just like, "Wow, okay, this is great. This is not

01:21:31   at all who you are."

01:21:32   Geoff; None of these are the actual people. And then you—

01:21:37   Stephanie; I do have to say, the nice part about this was that Jason at 404 Media reached out to

01:21:40   Mike Schramm, who had been an early and frequent contributor to the blog, and he'd sent an email

01:21:45   to a number of us. And so some of—I've kept in touch with a number of people from that era,

01:21:50   but a bunch of people I haven't talked to in years and years and years. And so it was kind of nice

01:21:54   that there was kind of a mini email reunion amongst some old writers that came out about this,

01:21:59   which was good. But no, it was just such a bizarre and utterly weird thing to happen.

01:22:05   And I am—I'm angry at a lot of people about it, obviously, primarily the guy who did this.

01:22:10   I'm also a little bit annoyed, I'm not going to lie, with Yahoo, Apollo Global, whatever, for

01:22:15   selling the domain, making it clear that it's just that. And then I'm like, "Okay, you had the

01:22:20   perpetual license to this content too, but it's like, what are you doing? Do you do any due

01:22:24   diligence about this or not? Because the amount of money that you sold this for, which was probably

01:22:29   five or 10 grand, it couldn't have been a lot of money, especially for their bottom line. It's

01:22:33   completely inconsequential. What are you doing? Like, what's the point?"

01:22:37   It is frustrating. And it's only slightly tangentially related. But just a week or so

01:22:45   ago, the news came out that Google is shutting out—or years ago, it said they're deprecating

01:22:50   their link shortener, which was like a Bitly type thing. There was a brief period of time—

01:22:57   Everybody had a short URL, yeah.

01:22:59   Driven by Twitter's then 140 character length, which counted the entire URL as part of the

01:23:07   character count. And I had my own custom—

01:23:10   Yep, same.

01:23:11   —Daring Fireball link shortener, which—but guess what? Mine still works. I don't use it anymore.

01:23:16   I don't need it anymore. But as long as my internet presence is active, those links will

01:23:24   keep redirecting. And Google announced that, I don't know, in a couple months, they're all

01:23:28   just going to die.

01:23:29   They're all going to die, which is—look, on the one hand, they shut the service down

01:23:33   six years ago. And I get that there is a very real cost to maintaining an older service

01:23:39   and whatnot. Having said that, at GitHub, we went through a similar situation where

01:23:44   we had a URL shortener that only worked for GitHub URLs. And so it wasn't widely used,

01:23:49   and we were going to sunset it. And the initial plan was to just get rid of all the URLs.

01:23:54   And then we heard back from people who said, "Well, no, we've used these things in academic

01:23:59   papers and in other research stuff." And so we got that feedback, and we went, "Okay,

01:24:03   well, we will scan." And in our situation, it was a little bit better because it wasn't

01:24:08   a general URL shortener like what Google's was, which could go to any number of resources.

01:24:13   Right.

01:24:13   It's just going to go to GitHub repositories. But we were able to say, "Okay, well, what

01:24:17   we'll do is we will scan these URLs that have been created. And any ones that go to something

01:24:22   that 404 is out, we're not going to maintain. And anything that goes to something that we

01:24:27   have viewed as spam or malicious or anything else, we're not going to maintain." But we

01:24:32   will go ahead and we kind of created a static service that somebody is maintaining to continue

01:24:37   to make the redirects work, which I think is the right thing to do. We got that feedback

01:24:41   from our users. And yeah, it's not as if it wasn't a ton of work that went into it, but

01:24:47   it required some. But that's the right thing to do.

01:24:49   Like one of the core tenets-

01:24:50   Especially when you're a somewhat big-ish company or GitHub, right? I mean, GitHub-

01:24:54   Well, GitHub, absolutely. No, it was the right thing to do, right? One of the tenets of the

01:24:58   web, this doesn't really hold true anymore, I guess, which is really sad. Again, to your

01:25:05   point why it's so important the Internet Archive exists, but you're not supposed to

01:25:08   break links. That's just one of those things. And-

01:25:11   And you think Google would know that more than anyone.

01:25:14   Exactly. Exactly. And again, I'm not saying that they should have to maintain this service

01:25:19   forever, because I'm sure that has a real cost and they're probably running older servers

01:25:23   and older software and I get all that, but they could do something similar to what we

01:25:27   did, which is, okay, scan the links, find the stuff that goes to 404, find the stuff

01:25:32   that goes to malware, extricate that. Even if you can't save all of them, look at the

01:25:36   top ones, but okay, has it received at least one click in the last X number of months?

01:25:40   Then statically maintain this. It's not like your DNS file is that is going to be even

01:25:46   more complicated. Your Google, again, you can handle the redirects.

01:25:49   This would be a fantastic project for interns. I mean, it's almost like the definition.

01:25:55   Yes. 1000-

01:25:56   And I suspect Google has a few interns. I don't know. And I get it that it's not quite

01:26:04   as simple as like my URL shortener, which only points to daring fireball articles. So I know

01:26:12   there are no DF4.us. That was my, but that still is my shortened URL or domain name. None of those

01:26:23   direct anywhere except to daring fireball. And then it's at daring fireball where there's an

01:26:29   article that links elsewhere. And so I get it that Google's could go anywhere. And so it's not,

01:26:34   but the basic mechanics of taking a short URL and redirecting to a long one is, I mean, like trivial.

01:26:43   It's so simple.

01:26:43   Yeah. That would be like, not for an intern. That would be like day one of learn to code.

01:26:48   Oh no, totally. I was going to say, I've literally written tutorials using Azure

01:26:53   functions and things like that on how to create like a short, a URL shortener. I mean, it's an

01:26:57   incredibly simple thing. And again, it's not like they don't have a ton of redirects and they own

01:27:02   the domain. They're not, they're never going to get rid of that domain. So it's like,

01:27:05   They're not going to get rid of the domain.

01:27:07   So, so again, you don't want to maintain a database. What I think we did for that reason

01:27:10   is that we have a static kind of, we figure out the kind of a static way to kind of, you know,

01:27:14   serve like the URLs we were doing.

01:27:15   Super easy. Right. You could just do it with a cache of text files.

01:27:19   Yeah, absolutely. Look, I'm not claiming it would take no effort, but it wouldn't be,

01:27:23   to your point, I think it'd be a great intern project. And then you would not be breaking the

01:27:27   web, which is a thing that you penalize people for all the time. If, if, if, cause like people

01:27:33   like your blog, like if you are sending, if you have a bunch of links that don't resolve,

01:27:36   like they will combat against you when they do their scanning and whatnot. So what are you doing

01:27:41   here? The funniest part about that to me too, is that Google's suggestion about six years ago,

01:27:47   they're like, okay, well, everybody should move, move to this Firebase service for, for short URLs.

01:27:52   Well, that Firebase service has now been deprecated as well. And, and, and, and so, and when people

01:27:57   are like, well, what should we do for this? The, the basic response is kind of like shrug.

01:28:02   Yeah. And it is very Googley. I mean, it's like when they shut down, I mean,

01:28:07   one that everybody still laments is Google Reader.

01:28:09   Of course.

01:28:10   Which again, if you, if they wanted, you know, and it is slightly different. I see the argument of,

01:28:15   well, we've decided to abandon this, so we're not going to keep it going. But what people wanted,

01:28:20   and I don't think it was unreasonable was okay, stop adding new features, but just let it go

01:28:24   for a couple of years. It's not broken, right? Just let it just, just keep it up. How much could it

01:28:29   cost? Can't cost anything that would matter to them. It just can't. And I do, I get it that

01:28:35   something, whoever bought old domains, like two hours or whoever shut down the hairpin or whatever

01:28:41   other site, it, it is more expensive to keep them running in perpetuity just to always have it up,

01:28:48   but it is not that expensive. And now one, everybody knows that once a site stops publishing

01:28:56   new stuff, traffic plummets. You, you, you just, all you have left is the long tail,

01:29:03   but that long tail matters for archival purposes, right?

01:29:08   It does. It does.

01:29:09   You know, so keeping sites, okay, we're all of the things that suck. Oh, I loved the hairpin,

01:29:17   or I love to, or I love my favorite site is shutting down. I can't believe it. And everybody

01:29:23   feels bad when staff gets laid off. And especially because it tends to come in waves as the economy

01:29:30   goes up and down. And so it really sucks when a site lays off their staff at a time when other

01:29:36   sites are laying off their staff. So the job market is tight. It sucks. Everybody who's ever

01:29:42   been in this business knows that it sucks and knows that it's, it's a hard business to want to

01:29:49   be in. But man, it is like insult to injury to say, Oh, and by the way, on your way out,

01:29:55   all the work that you've put into the site for the last years, many years, in some cases,

01:30:00   Oh, yeah, it's all just gonna go away and won't even resolve anymore.

01:30:04   No, that's really, that is just kicking dirt on somebody when they're down.

01:30:10   No, it totally is. And then, and it's, it's bad too, because I'm a big, strong proponent of kind

01:30:16   of preserving the web because this is the stuff matters. Like MTV news, this was one that,

01:30:19   that really hurt. Like they, that's how they existed for more than more than 20 years. And

01:30:24   they just completely nuked the whole thing. And again, I'm sure that it was expensive. They'd

01:30:29   been on WordPress and they moved to another CMS. I was trying to get in contact with people there

01:30:34   to see if there was a way that maybe we could crowdfund some money to save it. Matt Mullenweg

01:30:39   from Automattic has, like they offer a thing where WordPress, where basically you pay like,

01:30:43   I think it's 25 grand or something, and they'll host your content for life, which would be a

01:30:49   reasonable amount of money for Viacom to pay, but Viacom is undergoing ownership changes and, and

01:30:54   all that stuff. And so we were like, well, maybe we could crowdfund that. I wasn't able to get in

01:30:59   contact with anybody who had access to kind of IT stuff there to see if they even still had the

01:31:04   archives available. But I was trying to kind of help a week before all this stuff with the AI,

01:31:09   stealing my identity thing happened. The MTV news shutdown happened and writers lost decades worth

01:31:15   of work in some cases. The messenger, when that site, which lasted less than a year, like they

01:31:20   shut that down basically the day that I guess they filed bankruptcy or chapter seven or whatever.

01:31:25   And it was just like removed off of Amazon like instantly. So people's work is just gone and,

01:31:31   and it's a shame. What's, what's super interesting about the, the, the, the two-aw situation though,

01:31:36   is that they didn't redirect the URLs. However, to their credit, like when they got rid of the site in

01:31:43   2015, they did archive all the contents on Engadget. And so, so the content has been archived

01:31:49   that the URLs don't resolve, but like the content has been archived. And I was very appreciative of

01:31:54   them at the time, even when they did that, I was like, okay, well, I'm glad that even though the,

01:31:58   the images won't work and the formatting is different and whatnot, like at least this

01:32:01   preservation of this thing that, that I, that I did in college is still out there somewhere. And

01:32:05   I appreciated that, but that then made it almost that much more jarring. And it's okay. You did

01:32:10   the right thing. And, and to be clear, they didn't do that for all of their sites. Like when I worked

01:32:14   also for a site called download squad, which was great. And when that died, I think in 2010,

01:32:18   they, they didn't archive any of that. And and so those archives literally only exist in the

01:32:24   internet archive and it wasn't a popular enough site for it to probably have, you know, as many

01:32:28   iterations as two-aw did, but yeah. I don't know what the backstory on that is. I don't know,

01:32:35   maybe you do, but it is great. I am glad that Engadget.com is hosting all of the old original

01:32:43   two articles so that the only it's not the internet archive is not the only place to find them.

01:32:49   It's that's great, but I can't help but imagine that internally there was like one person who

01:32:55   wanted to do the right thing. And somehow somebody was like, all we have to do, it'll cost us like

01:33:03   20 bucks a year to keep the domain name registration for two-aw.com. And they're like,

01:33:08   Nope, Nope. And it's, what can I do? Well, that was the thing. They kept the registration. They,

01:33:14   I think they just didn't want to migrate the site over and whatnot. So, so, so I think they just,

01:33:19   they migrated the archives. Why they didn't do redirect, I couldn't tell you. I didn't work there

01:33:23   then, but at least they kept the archives, but then that was the thing, right? They kept paying

01:33:27   the $20 a year renewal. And then I guess they are approaching like the 10 year mark and they're like,

01:33:32   okay, well, we'll see if we can sell this. I saw it is the four character.com. It's a good one.

01:33:40   It's a good one. And a dot com, right? Like it's a four character one. Like it's, it's a good one.

01:33:44   And it's one of those things you could see in like a perfect world where like, if somebody wanted to

01:33:49   revive the brand, even if I didn't agree with it, I would be like, good luck to you. Even if,

01:33:53   even if they didn't in a kind of scammy way, fine. All power to you. Where I got angry was just,

01:34:00   okay, you can't take my words and you can't take, you can't bastardize my words and you certainly

01:34:06   can't take my name, right? That's the best word. I honestly think what he did is worse than just

01:34:13   stealing the original content from the internet archive and copy and pasting it onto his new

01:34:19   rebranded to all.com. I think having AI rewrite each article is worse because it,

01:34:29   the articles are worse. They're all, they're all ever so slightly one generation of slop reduced

01:34:36   from the original pros of these writers who were all, it was a really good site with a bunch of

01:34:42   really good writers. And it was like that, like I said, the first, before I got to the picture,

01:34:49   that was not you, it was the pros. And again, it's not quite, it's, it's so hard to put your finger

01:34:55   on what makes AI slop pros tingle my spidey sets. Cause it's not as bad as the old game of, oh,

01:35:07   start with an English sentence, tell Google translate to translate it to Hungarian and then

01:35:15   translate it back to English or go like English to French, to German, to Mandarin, back to English.

01:35:23   Now what does it say? Ha ha. It's really nonsensical.

01:35:27   There's a great news radio episode about that.

01:35:29   Let's have sexual intercourse with your father.

01:35:33   Exactly. No, totally, totally. No, exactly. Like it's, it's better than that. Right? Like that,

01:35:37   that's the thing, but it's just uncanny enough, especially for blogs where there was this

01:35:41   conversational method. Yeah.

01:35:44   Jason and I, when we were, we were on the phone together and when he was interviewing me about a

01:35:48   story, we were both at the same time clicking through links. Cause I still had a kind of an

01:35:52   archive of some links that I'd written for the site ironically backed up on my, on my tumbler.

01:35:56   And so I still had what the original URLs were. And so we were able to, we were, both of us were

01:36:00   kind of comparing what was originally there and what was there now. And it was very funny just to

01:36:06   see kind of the subtle differences and, and the verge even did like comparison between that too,

01:36:11   for some stories, because it was, it was just subtle enough, but yeah, there was an uncanny

01:36:15   quality and yeah, but, but again, I wouldn't expect somebody who didn't know me, right?

01:36:20   This is why we got so lucky, right? Somebody who didn't know me from anything, or maybe they knew

01:36:25   of me, but like certainly didn't know like my, my, my, my writing voice, my style wouldn't have

01:36:29   been able to look at that. They might've thought as you did initially, and I would have thought

01:36:32   this too, Oh, they just got the byline photo wrong or whatever, but they wouldn't have understood,

01:36:36   Oh, that's not how Christina writes, right? Like many people would just be like, no, that's,

01:36:40   that seems appropriate, especially if it were from this past date, right? That's, that's how you

01:36:45   wrote. And I will, I will defend or not defend, but I will, I will own up to the bad writing that

01:36:50   I wrote as a college student. That's fine. I'll take my lumps on things that I wrote that I'm

01:36:54   sure some of them were good. Some of them were not good, but I, I won't take responsibility for stuff

01:36:59   I didn't write, right? Or if you're going to make it worse like that, that's when I get insulted.

01:37:03   Okay. I will own my bad work, but I will be damned if you're going to make it something that I didn't

01:37:08   actually write. Yeah. And it's just, I was just the right, right person to stumble across it.

01:37:15   I knew it. But the other thing that also makes it a little insidious is, and now the link doesn't

01:37:22   go there anymore. I don't know my original one, but I'm pretty sure he either removed the dates

01:37:27   or changed the dates ostensibly because they'd been refreshed. Like you said, refreshed from

01:37:32   modern standards or whatever. That's bullshit was, but any, anything that would have alerted

01:37:39   somebody to, Hey, this is a 20 year old article or 17 year old article or something.

01:37:44   No, they didn't do that. Right. Yeah, exactly. Yeah. All the dates were set up kind of on these

01:37:48   modern kind of things. It's like the slug. Yeah. Wouldn't be clear. Like you could go through the

01:37:53   archives and you could find things where like on, at least at the time when I looked at it,

01:37:57   if I went to an author page, I could go all the way kind of through the history

01:38:02   and I could be like, okay, which, which now I think they've changed. But at the time when

01:38:06   it was live, like my, my author page was like hundreds of pages long and I could go back and

01:38:11   I could see things going back to 2004, which was before I ever wrote for the site. I think they've

01:38:16   kind of gotten rid of that now. And, and so, and I was like, I didn't write any of this. Um, now it

01:38:21   seems like they've, I don't know if they've culled some of the archives or if they've just hidden it

01:38:24   or what the process has been, but yeah, you're right. They, that, that was the insidious thing

01:38:29   is that like you might know from one view that the article was this age, but then you click on it and

01:38:33   all of a sudden the date is been modernized, which is a scam that a lot of companies have done for a

01:38:38   lot of time, for a long time news organizations, especially because it'll bring them higher in

01:38:42   Google results where they'll just make some small update and then all of a sudden it'll be like

01:38:47   originally published this, but if they even have that there, but it'll have a more current date up

01:38:53   top. So yeah, very insidious, as you said, I mean, very much trying to get people to think that this

01:38:58   was the site that they used to know. And if people hadn't been following those things and who would

01:39:03   right. Like it's just small again, like I just, the, the luck that, that, that it had in this,

01:39:09   and I'm, I'm so grateful for you for pointing this out to me because we were able to get it taken

01:39:13   care of. And also I think it's a good, I hope, look, these things will happen again. I hope that

01:39:19   people can maybe be more prepared for them. And that the, because it was a slow news day, which

01:39:25   thank God, because literally a couple of days later it was not. And so being able to, I think,

01:39:31   have kind of the outrage from a community perspective is good. I hope that obviously if

01:39:37   there's money, you meet people will do it, but I hope that it will make it harder for people to try

01:39:41   to pull off scams like this in the future. Yeah. And I don't want a lot of credit. It was just

01:39:47   serendipity that I found it early. And I think the baffling thing, and it wasn't genius that

01:39:51   uncovered the scheme. It was pretty obvious. Oh yeah. It was very obvious once you could see it.

01:39:55   It was just the awareness. We just didn't know the URL resolved. And the just pure dumb good luck

01:40:01   that I decided to go on this search into this problem like a week after the scam had started,

01:40:07   because the crazy part is it was inevitably going to come out. I mean, I think by now, right? I mean,

01:40:13   there's no way it would have gone a month before somebody stumbled across it and been like, "Hey,

01:40:20   that's not Scott McNulty. I mean, come on. It doesn't look anything like him. What the hell is

01:40:26   going on here?" Like how this guy thought he was going to get away with it is crazy. But that is

01:40:30   often the case with scams of all sorts when they're uncovered. You're like, "How did they

01:40:35   think they were going to get away with it?" I don't know. There's no point trying to

01:40:38   debug the mind of a scammer. I don't know. Exactly.

01:40:45   All right. Well, I told you an hour. We only overshot by 50 minutes, but

01:40:52   too much good stuff to talk about. I thank you, Christina. It's always good to talk to you. And

01:40:57   it's good to talk to the real you. Yes. Thank you. Thank you for having the real me. Thanks again.

01:41:02   Like, I'm just such a weird, a couple of events, but thank you for helping bring that attention.

01:41:06   And I'm going to be dining out on the AI still mind-numbing story for like years.

01:41:11   Like it's—

01:41:11   Though the funny part, the other—we have to mention this—the other part is when you were—after

01:41:16   this got taken care of to some extent, you started joking by using the AI-created avatar as your

01:41:23   avatar. But then you ran into the limit on certain—which social networks that don't let you

01:41:30   change them back right away? Was it Twitter?

01:41:33   It was Twitter. It was Twitter because I have enough—they gave me a blue check. I can't do it.

01:41:37   I got mine back too. I did not ask for it. But—

01:41:40   I didn't ask for it, but, you know—

01:41:41   Yeah, but the downside—

01:41:44   Then I was stuck. I was like stuck with this photo. And I was like, "Can you change this?" I was like,

01:41:49   "No, I can't." I was like, "I'm in hell." It was very funny.

01:41:52   So for like—you wanted for like one day as a guy—

01:41:55   Exactly.

01:41:56   While everybody was talking about this to use your fake—

01:41:59   Exactly.

01:42:00   Fake Christina as real Christina and you ran into the "you can only change your avatar once a week"

01:42:05   or whatever the rule is.

01:42:06   Exactly. Yeah, right. I had to wait for like Twitter's AI or whatever to verify that my photo

01:42:14   was not breaking any guidelines so I could actually change it back to my real photo. It was a very

01:42:18   funny circumstance. And then I was like, "Well, I did it to myself." But I also—

01:42:23   But it was the perfect coda though to the story.

01:42:25   No, it really was. It was the perfect thing. I will say though, what made it—and now obviously

01:42:30   it doesn't work this way—but at the time what was funny was that when the Verge story came out,

01:42:35   their embeds all had the fake profile photo, which the commenters enjoyed. And I did too. I was like,

01:42:43   "This is even funnier now." Because you've got to find it funny. I initially only did it on

01:42:48   on Slack at work. And some of my colleagues who followed out what happened thought it was funny.

01:42:53   And then one of my colleagues kind of dared me. He was like, "You know, you've got to do this on

01:42:57   all your social networks." I was like, "Okay, why not?"

01:43:02   Things that sound good but have unforeseen—

01:43:05   Well, especially since I had a whole situation with my Twitter account getting—I lost access to it for

01:43:10   a couple of months. And so I really was like attempting fate there. I will probably never

01:43:17   change my avatar or anything in my profile ever again on Twitter anyway. But yeah, that was a very

01:43:22   funny thing. I was like, "Well, I'm stuck with the fake me." And people were like, "You have to

01:43:25   change your profile photo. It's freaking me out." I'm like, "It's freaking me out too. I can't do

01:43:30   anything about it."