June 27, 2025 • 35 mins
How can you detect AI music? This week in the News Roundup, Oz and Karah unpack the music industry's scramble to build tech that labels AI-generated tracks. And the MIT study that took the internet by storm. On TechSupport, Politico’s Maggie Miller explains how the conflict between Iran and Israel was fought in cyberspace.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:12):
From Kaleidoscope and iHeart podcasts. This is tech Stuff. I'm
mons Valashan, and I'm delighted that Cara Price is back
with us. Today we'll be bringing you the emotional highs
and lows of Silicon Valley, from a tech Titan's gilded
nuctuals to the soulless writing of checchipt. Then, on a
more serious note, we'll be looking at the conflict between
(00:32):
Iran and Israel in cyberspace.
Speaker 2 (00:35):
Cyber attacks are often viewed as a much less costly
in terms of funding, but also in terms of lives,
way to critically wound an enemy.
Speaker 1 (00:48):
All of that on the weekend tech It's Friday, June
twenty seventh. Welcome back, Cara.
Speaker 3 (00:54):
Thank you as.
Speaker 1 (00:56):
Back to tech Stuff, just in time to cover Jeff
and Lauren's wedding out.
Speaker 3 (01:00):
A coincidence at all, I wouldn't have come back otherwise.
Speaker 1 (01:03):
You do love a Selim spectacle, and this one's going
to be pretty spectacular, perhaps unsurprisingly given Jeff Bezos's fourtune
or two hundred and thirty billion dollars and seems to
be thirsty for a big hype bash this weekend.
Speaker 3 (01:17):
And what do you do when you're the world's richest man,
you rent out Venice. Now, ven I think that's what
you do. We don't know much more about the ceremony
or the parties for that matter. I can guess that
some of the guests will be Kim Kardashian, who was
on Lauren Sanchez's bachelorette and then some others who were
(01:37):
on the Blue Origin spaceflight, which was not her bachelorette party.
Speaker 1 (01:41):
By the way, so the Virgin spaceflight was Kim Kardashian. No, No, Katy.
Speaker 3 (01:45):
Perry, Katy Perry, Gail King.
Speaker 1 (01:48):
I remember when Katy Perry came down from space. There
was a article in any Mail being like, it's confirmed
Katy Perry's career is over.
Speaker 3 (01:57):
Oh, I thought they were going to say it's confirmed
Katy Perry is an alien.
Speaker 1 (02:01):
I wonder which of the if the tech Titans will
be there, zak Elon, Tim Cook from Apple or Tim
Apples he's otherwise known, Larian Serge from Google. I would
guess there'll be fewer at the wedding than they were
at Trump's inauguration.
Speaker 3 (02:17):
Maybe maybe not.
Speaker 1 (02:18):
The details are murky, but there is a big banner
flying in Venice at the moment saying if you can
rent Venice for your wedding, you can pay more tax.
Speaker 3 (02:27):
You know, this wedding is so secret. I was making
a joke about renting out Venice, but it is hard
to tell. The party organizers of the wedding are denying it.
They actually released a statement saying it's not a city
takeover and the couple is committed to this is like,
this is insane. The couple is committed to minimizing disruption,
and Bezos donated three million dollars to various local organizations.
(02:50):
In the face of criticism, local Venice officials chimed in
and said the couple has only booked about thirty water
taxis for the event. I just live for this.
Speaker 1 (03:00):
I do too. And you pointed me to a piece
in the Wall Street Journal that was the best one.
It had a headline promising to spill the secrets and
another the fact, when there's a big, big wedding, make
this even the Wall Street Journal will slip into the Daily.
Mom My God, I spill the secrets.
Speaker 3 (03:13):
They were an excited to do so.
Speaker 1 (03:16):
I was a bit skeptical about opening the show with
talking about the Sanchez Bezos wedding, perhaps because I'm a
brit and we've had quite a lot of royal wedding
action in the last decade. But you pointed me to
something in the Wall Street Journal piece that just felt
so tech stuff. I couldn't wait him more about it.
Speaker 3 (03:32):
And this is so me. This is where the sort
of intersection between my nerdiness and my interest in celebrity
gossip intersects. I was reading the piece and I'm like,
this is a great piece, But there was a certain
thing that was mentioned. This luxury event designer said he
had recently commissioned hold your Hat, a five hundred thousand,
(03:53):
half a million dollar holograph of a bride's deceased grandfather
to share well wishes to the that's the cost of
like no percent of weddings is half a million dollars.
Speaker 1 (04:05):
Or no percent of Besos' wedding.
Speaker 3 (04:06):
That's right, that's right.
Speaker 1 (04:07):
You know it's funny because obviously there's this trend where
rich people want to live forever. I guess the like
this follow up trend to that is reanimating your your
dead relatives for the for the cool sum of half
a million dollars to deliver a toast at the wedding.
It does remind me. You remember of that movie Mulan the
Disney Words Drive when the ancestors reanimated to wish her
(04:29):
well in her quest. Yes, this is like being if
you're a billionaire, you can you can your wedding can
feel like the opening sequence of Mulan.
Speaker 3 (04:36):
When you're a billionaire, you can watch a movie like
Mulan and say I want that at my wedding.
Speaker 1 (04:40):
Please bring out her to us all remember that? Yes,
of course, so you've now been subjected to my singing,
which is appropriate. Turn to our next story, which is
about the music industry and how the industry is building
tech to make AI music more traceable.
Speaker 3 (04:57):
All right, so this is interesting because I do you
think music production is one of the most evolved uses
of AI. It duped me in twenty twenty three with
fake Drake.
Speaker 1 (05:09):
Fake Drake. I was actually hoping to tell you about
fake Drake and play that classic twenty twenty three banger
and test you on whether or not you knew it
was a fake or not. But let's play it nonetheless.
Speaker 3 (05:22):
Like it's fake question.
Speaker 1 (05:27):
But that was good. I came when my eggs like
the lean.
Speaker 3 (05:31):
Honestly though it's very good.
Speaker 4 (05:34):
I love she need.
Speaker 3 (05:39):
Given. You know, if I hadn't known it was AI,
I probably wouldn't have second guessed it at all.
Speaker 1 (05:44):
It really spooked people, especially the music industry, because if
people didn't know, and worst of all, if people didn't
care that this was a fake track, what could that
mean for the whole business?
Speaker 3 (05:55):
Yeah, you know, the music business has already been battered
so much in reaction first to piracy and illegal downloads,
and now the popularity of streaming platforms like Spotify.
Speaker 1 (06:05):
Yeah, and this is another disruption, and potentially an unmanageable one,
because if AI music is uploaded to streaming platforms and
it's not labeled as being made by AI, the streaming
platforms themselves and of course listeners might not be any
the wiser.
Speaker 3 (06:20):
But is this actually like a problem?
Speaker 4 (06:22):
You know?
Speaker 3 (06:22):
I wonder how much AI music is actually being like
dumped onto streaming platforms.
Speaker 1 (06:28):
You wonder, And I searched the web. According to the Verge,
who spoke to the French streaming platform Deza Desa, said
that as of this April, roughly twenty percent of new
uploads every day were fully AI generated, so about twenty
thousand tracks a day and I think the other important
point here is that AI is obviously trained on what
(06:48):
you feed it, so these tracks probably more often than
not imitating musical ideas that perhaps should be licensed before
the song is widely distributed.
Speaker 3 (06:57):
So it's kind of a money problem.
Speaker 1 (06:59):
Well, yes, the money problem. It's also a fundamental human
creativity in the age of AI problem, but the money
problem makes it more urgent capitalism to the rescue of
the music business. Basically, there are multiple services now being
developed that can be integrated into streaming platform structures to
analyze one if uploaded tracks are AI, and two if
(07:20):
they contain so called protected elements.
Speaker 3 (07:23):
So how does that work.
Speaker 1 (07:24):
There's one product in particular I want to tell you about,
which is called trace ID, and it's marketed as an
AI rights management platform. Basically, the software breaks songs into
stems from vocal tone to melodic phrasing in order to
better detect mimicry, and that means that the rights holders
or the platforms can then know if a track needs
to be licensed and paid for before it's released.
Speaker 3 (07:46):
So that is great for the industry, But what about me, Like,
you know, I care about infringement, but I'm not like
obsessed with it, and the thing that I'm really concerned
with is, like, I want to know if the song
that I'm listening to is real.
Speaker 1 (08:00):
Taking a step back and not wanting to get too
philosophical here, but it kind of raises these other questions
about what AI music actually is because obviously you have
like fully generative AI generated tracks that are basically have
no human input. But then a lot of like normal
musicians as part of their production workflow, use AI tools
(08:21):
in fact, just as we do right like we use
AII editing software, we sort of use it in research.
So like there's a kind of philosophical conundrum about what
AI music actually is. But these tools we're talking about
today are really about detecting like fully synthesized full AI tracks.
In addition to these externally developed products like trace id,
(08:41):
these streaming platforms are also internally developing tools to scan
uploaded music and then if they detect a concentration of
synthetic elements, they can reduce the visibility of AI generated
tracks in both their algorithmic and also their editorial recommendations.
Speaker 3 (08:57):
Yeah, I've actually seen people on the internet can play
that their release Radar playlist on Spotify is filled with
what they suspect to be AI music. This has not
happened to me personally, but like, it does take a
lot of work to then go to like an artist
page and see that someone has no listeners or followers
or only one or two tracks, you know, And I
(09:18):
guess there's hope that the actual places that are hosting
this music would would label it, label it. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (09:24):
Well, the other thing is they might have an incentive
to do so, because there's this emerging body of research
that suggests when people feel that interacting with AI generated content,
that should become less engaged. There's this marketing publication called
The Drum which reported that more than fifty percent of
people check out if they believe content is AI generated.
So again there's another business intentive for the platforms to
(09:47):
solve this problem.
Speaker 3 (09:48):
And speaking of AI generated content and interesting research, you
must have seen this the recent MIT study on CHATGPT
and critical thinking. I actually really liked the terminology that
they used in this research. The paper was titled your
Brain on Chat GPT accumulation. And this is what I
love of cognitive debt. When using an AI assistant for
(10:11):
essay writing task.
Speaker 1 (10:12):
I love the idea of accumulating cognitive debt. That that
is such a good phrase and so familiar. I mean,
I feel like scrolling on my phone. I mean most
of what I do is accumulate cognitive debt.
Speaker 3 (10:23):
We are just sacks of cognitive debt that we really
are right now. I mean people have to worry about,
you know, student debt, They have to worry about other
kinds of debt. Now we have to worry about cognitive debt.
Speaker 1 (10:34):
I saw a lot of action about this research all
over my LinkedIn.
Speaker 3 (10:38):
The first place I actually encountered it was in like
meme format, Like it was like a slideshow.
Speaker 1 (10:43):
There are pictures of their brains, right do lighting up
in des exactly like.
Speaker 3 (10:46):
I certainly did not see this on like a verified
news platform. I saw it like on a meme account
that was like, yeah, your brain's getting worse using chat GPT.
Before I explain the experiment, there are a few caveats
that the researchers themselves are eager to share. First, the
study only has fifty four subjects, which is a relatively
(11:08):
small sample. And second, and I think the least surprising,
is that this study has yet to be peer reviewed
by anybody other than our peers on LinkedIn and Instagram
and every.
Speaker 1 (11:18):
The interinet had.
Speaker 3 (11:21):
They really did. You know, it's a very buzzy concept,
this tool chat GBT that we all are using, maybe
eroding our own ability to think critically. And that's especially
alarming when you think of what this could mean for
not my brain, but developing brains. Mine has been developed,
the trade has left the station. But you know, as
(11:42):
we've talked about many many times on this podcast, AI
companies are really marketing themselves and I mean chat GBT,
especially to college students, and students are using chatbots like quite.
Speaker 1 (11:53):
A bit, quite a bit to assist.
Speaker 3 (11:55):
With or even do their homework. You know. The paper's
main author felt like her findings were alarming enough and
people are adapting to life with AI so fast. It
wasn't peer reviewed because waiting six to eight months might
be too late.
Speaker 1 (12:08):
The paper's outh theory is a bone hype beast, that's right.
Speaker 3 (12:11):
This is so she's like, it's got to get out
right now or it's going to be too late.
Speaker 1 (12:15):
But I mean, to be fair, it does sound pretty lombing.
Speaker 3 (12:18):
Yes, there are some silver linings. This is what happened
fifty four people ages eighteen to thirty nine from the
Boston area were separated into three groups. They were all
asked to write sat essays while an electro encephalogram or
EEG measured their brain activity or more specifically, the tiny
(12:39):
electrical signals produced by brain cells when they communicate.
Speaker 1 (12:43):
And so there were three groups. What was the difference
between each group?
Speaker 3 (12:47):
So each group was writing these twenty minute satsays using
slightly different tools. One group used open AI's chat GPT,
another Google search engine, and the last group didn't use.
Speaker 1 (12:59):
It anything at all, nothing at all, i e. Just
the human brain, just their brain for them.
Speaker 3 (13:04):
Unsurprisingly, the group that used chat GPT all delivered. This
is my favorite part similar essays. English teachers were consulted
and called them largely soulless. That is a sad indictment,
it is, and that's actually a good word for it.
Like if you read stuff that's written by chat GPT,
you're like, there's something, there's someone here, that's what the
(13:28):
lights are up.
Speaker 1 (13:28):
Fifty two percent of consumers per the drum check out.
Speaker 3 (13:32):
That feels like a low percent. But coming back to
the group we were using chat GPT, the EEG picked
up low executive control and attentional engagement in that group.
That's contrasted with the brain only group, which showed shocker
highest neural connectivity, especially in regions associated with creativity and memory.
Speaker 1 (13:51):
And what about the Google Search group, of whom I
count myself a member of that cohort.
Speaker 3 (13:56):
They're what we'd call mid Their brains were definitely more
active than the chat GPT groups. So they did this
experiment three times, and then the researcher switched it up
a bit. Each person was asked to rewrite one of
their previous essays, but the chat GPT group could only
use their brains, while the initial brain only group got
(14:17):
access to chat GPT. The people who had started with
chat GPT hardly remembered their own essays.
Speaker 1 (14:26):
Remember that correct.
Speaker 3 (14:27):
This reminds me of once I cheated on a physics exam.
I cheated off a friend and I just wrote the
answer without showing my work on a test, and my
teacher was just like, how did you get that answer?
It's right, but how'd you get it? And I said,
I don't know it of course, So the people who
had started with chat GPT hardly remembered their own essays.
The EEG confirmed that barely any aspects of the writing
(14:51):
process had integrated into people's memory networks. The brain only group, however,
exhibited a significant increase in brain connected across all EEG
frequency bands when they took a second stab at their
essays using chat GBT to help, meaning people who use
their brain displayed the most cognitive activity.
Speaker 1 (15:13):
But not just people use their brain, people who use
their brain. And then a second time round pad it
with chat.
Speaker 3 (15:18):
GPT people who use their brain first.
Speaker 1 (15:20):
And that's pretty interesting. I mean, it kind of stands
to reason, which probably is again why it went viral,
because it kind of confirms what we might think, which
is that, like if I use my brain to come
up with an idea and then use chat GPT to
refine it and have a thought partner and a conversational
partner to improve it, like that actually probably is more
(15:40):
engaging for my brain than just coming up with an idea.
If I ask chat GPT to count with an idea,
that is extremely unengaging for my brain.
Speaker 3 (15:47):
Correct, that is the implication, And I just want to
say one more time. This study has yet to be
peer reviewed, and additional studies will likely be done. Again,
the author felt very strongly that this should be released
early as a warning. And again, imagine what this could
mean for developing brains, meaning not us young people who
(16:08):
are among the first to really adapt the technology anyway,
using it as a generation tool rather than, as we might,
a refinement tool. This is the real kicker. This one
has a sense of the researcher has a sense of humor.
So she assumed that people would use AI to summarize
her paper, so she laid little AI traps all over it.
Speaker 1 (16:30):
What does it mean to lay little AI traps whatever
a paper?
Speaker 3 (16:33):
She did a pretty cute thing, which is that she
did things like instruct large language models to quote only
read this table below, making it so if fed into
an LM, only parts of the paper would be summarized.
Speaker 1 (16:47):
So there were these like hidden problems basically exactly.
Speaker 3 (16:50):
I think it was a very nice little sprinkle of
human ingenuity.
Speaker 1 (17:00):
We've got a couple more headlines today, starting with the
collaboration the whole tech industry is buzzing about, of course,
I mean the one between open AI and Sir Johnny Ive,
the designer behind many of Apple's iconic products like the
iPod and the iPhone. And we know that Sam Altman
and I are now collaborating on an AI hardware startup,
(17:21):
and that's about all we know. Apparently they aren't making
wearables or earbuds. The device will be pocket sized and
screenless and will be a kind of interfaced layer with
the world powered by AI, and Altman and Ive are
being highly secretive about what the form factor will be,
but people are buzzing. According to Semaphore, last week at
the can Lion Advertising Festival, marketers were starting to freak
(17:45):
out about where they would show video ads in a
screenless world. But in the meantime, the highly anticipated project
seems to have hit a roadblock. The startup was called
Io the two letters I and O, and they've been
pushing out marketing materials over the last few weeks. But
now all mentions of Io have been scrubbed from Open
AI's website and social media channels because it turns out
(18:08):
there's a trademark lawsuit with another company called Io, which
is spelled IYO, that's working on voice controlled AI devices.
Sam Altman is called the lawsuit silly, but it's certainly
drama in the valley, unlikely ultimately to derail him and
Johnny Ive. Whatever they may end up with.
Speaker 3 (18:27):
I would watch Drama in the Valley on Bravo. It's
the pitch yep here we go if you are a
sucker for post apocalyptic content like me. There's now a
follow up to the two thousand and one film twenty
eight Days Later, which is out this month called twenty
eight Years Later. The original film used lightweight, low resolution
Canon digital cameras, a cutting edge technology back in the
(18:50):
early arts, and for the follow up, director Danny Boyle,
another brit Yeah, chose to stay small and nimble with
the iPhone. He told Wired that the Apple device was
the principal camera for the film, with some caveats. Boyle
and his team ended up overriding the user friendly camera software.
The iPhone's camera automatically focuses on whatever it assumes is
(19:12):
the focus of your photo or video, but that's not
always what you want in a movie, so they essentially
hacked the iPhones to remove the auto focus. Also, most
of the time it wasn't just a cinematographer holding an iPhone.
The production used a massive rig that supported twenty iPhone,
fifteen Promax cameras my dream all with special accessories. So
(19:34):
that's twenty different angles on the action being filmed.
Speaker 1 (19:48):
We're going to take a quick break, but when we
come back, there is a tentative ceasefire between Iran and Israel,
but does that include cyberwarfare? Stay with us, Welcome back
(20:10):
to tech Stuff. We want to spend some time talking
about the conflict between Israel and Iran. Much of the
battle has played out in public. Missile and drone attacks
have caused mass casualties in major cities and hospitals. Military
bases and nuclear sites have all been targeted. As of
this taping on Wednesday morning, a ceasefire seems to be holding,
(20:31):
but today we want to shed light on a murkier,
often invisible act of warfare, and one that's likely to
continue well after the missiles cease Hittelbos understand how the
conflict between Israel and Iran is playing out in cyberspace
and how it might ultimately affect the US is Maggie Miller,
a cyber security reporter for Politico. Maggie, welcome to tech Stuff.
Speaker 4 (20:52):
Thank you so much for having me, either of.
Speaker 1 (20:54):
This taping or Wednesday morning. The ceasefire is an effect,
but of course by Friday morning things may be different.
Give US a bit of the background on both Israel
and Iran, what their cyber capabilities are, and how much
attention you were paying to those two countries in the
cyber realm before this conflict started.
Speaker 2 (21:10):
So Israel has seen pretty widely as one of the
most advanced in the world in terms.
Speaker 4 (21:16):
Of the cyber capabilities as a.
Speaker 2 (21:18):
Government, but also in terms of the industry experts that
they have in their country. Tel Aviv is a hub
of a lot of cybersecurity companies, so they have very
formidable cyber capabilities. We've also seen them brought to bear.
There was a cyber element involved in the explosion of
the pagers used by Hesbolah operatives in Lebanon in recent
(21:38):
months that was tied to the Israeli government. So anytime
there's a conflict with Israel, especially when it's being supported
by the US, which also has pretty formidable cyber attack capabilities,
you're going to keep an eye on it. Iran also
has had a history of integrating cyber attacks into its efforts,
sometimes lower level but still quite impactful. For example, in
(22:01):
the US, we saw in the weeks after the Hamas
attack on October seventh, twenty twenty three, onto Israel, there
were pro Iranian hackers. Sometimes Iran can operate also through
proxy groups as well as from the government, but we
saw at least one pro Iranian group hack into multiple
US water treatment facilities. Target has rarely made equipment in
(22:25):
order to basically deface it with a message against Israel
and really send a message that hey, you know, this
might be a small water facility in rural Pennsylvania, but
we can still cause damage. And so Iran has always
been one that the US has kept a close eye
on in cyberspace. So I think, you know, to emphasize,
all three nations involved here quite formidable and have demonstrated
(22:48):
these cyber attack capabilities in the past.
Speaker 1 (22:51):
How much did this cyber conflict between Israel and Iran
sort of take off after the twenty twenty three Hamas attacks.
Was that a kind of a turning point or where
do you trace this current phase of escalation too?
Speaker 3 (23:05):
Well?
Speaker 2 (23:05):
In terms of the escalation that we've seen in the
past week, there of course was a pickup after the
initial I believe it was June thirteenth strikes by Israel
against Iran, but there has been a heightened amount of
cyber threats, cyber attacks between the two nations since October seventh.
Both Hamas and Hezbula are very much affiliated, supported by
(23:29):
the Iranian government, often have served as proxies. Both have
been somewhat knocked offline due to a lot of the
Israeli attacks against both groups in the last two years,
but they did both carry out some cyber operations also
spearhead a lot of disinformation online. That's another big effort
by Iran. We've seen just in the past week, for example,
(23:51):
messages either of trace to the Iranian government or to
proxies being sent to Israeli phone saying, for example, oh
you don't need to go to the shelters during this bombing,
you can stay outside, or another case's messages with links
to try to gain information from Israelis. So it really
has escalated, i would say, in the past week, but
(24:14):
has been a steady clip since October seven.
Speaker 1 (24:17):
Do you see misinformation and disinformation as a type of
cyber attach or type of cyber warfare or as a
separate category as far as your reporting goes.
Speaker 2 (24:26):
They're often linked in that. Of course, one does not
involve hacking into any sort of system or operation, but
it does involve changing a perception and using social media
often or for example malicious texts or calls, etc. And
it's an even more I would almost say, at times
(24:47):
more effective way of changing perceptions and causing chaos and
causing panic because you don't necessarily know who to trust,
and especially in this day and age where I think
less less people may be understanding who to trust, I
think it's an even more potent avenue.
Speaker 1 (25:06):
How effective have Iran and Israel's cyber attacks on one another,
bin I mean, how much have they changed the face
of this conflict?
Speaker 4 (25:14):
There has been certainly some effect.
Speaker 2 (25:16):
So an example, and I've cited this in my reporting,
is there have been multiple major cyber attacks on Iranian
banks in the past week and a half that have
been linked to at.
Speaker 4 (25:26):
The least pro Israeli groups.
Speaker 2 (25:28):
You know, there's often a lot of cyber criminal or
activist groups in the world that may not be officially
affiliated with a government, but maybe that government wouldn't mind
their work. But there have been strikes against specific Iranian
banks designed to make it more difficult for Iranians to
access their funds, to access their accounts, and I think
critically to cause chaos. But on the flip side, there's
(25:49):
also been a tax linked to Iran and Israel. So
just a few days ago, Israel's cyber security agency put
out a warning that a lot of Israeli should disable
some of their home surveillance cameras because it was actually
being seen as a target used by Iran or pro
Iranian hackers trying to gather intelligence and gather real time
(26:11):
data on what was happening in the country. As I said,
there's also been a lot a huge ramp up of
phone messaging, emails, etc. From Iran targeting Israeli's designed to
either spread disinformation or in some cases trying to collect
information and data on Israelis or Israelis abroad.
Speaker 4 (26:32):
So it certainly has.
Speaker 2 (26:33):
Been an active campaign in cyberspace. And I think one
of the main questions I have is given this tenuous
ceasefire as of Wednesday while we're recording this. Often ceasefires,
of course mean physical strikes, and a lot of times
in the world, there isn't really a definition for what
that means in cyberspace, and we'll see if there really
(26:55):
is much of a ceasefire in the digital realm.
Speaker 1 (26:59):
And as I like two types of cyber attacks, but
one is designed to kind of sow chaos but not
be so destructive as to be an act of war.
And another is like to knock out some specific radars
so that like military planes can most successfully bomb without
any risk of being hit back. Like how much of
this is in direct coordination with military and like so
(27:21):
called kinetic strikes, and how much of it is like
more low grade social erosion chaos causing.
Speaker 4 (27:27):
No I think there's obviously different levels.
Speaker 2 (27:29):
It's not necessarily going to be different vectors of how
the attack is carried out, but there is. I would think,
just as with physical strikes, conversations often about Okay, how
far do.
Speaker 4 (27:39):
We want to take this?
Speaker 2 (27:40):
You know, disabling a major bank is going to cause confusion,
and I'm sure you're not going to make any friends
by doing that, but ultimately you're not necessarily going to
cause death, You're not necessarily going to cause widespread military impact,
but you know, something like for example, in the beginning
of twenty twenty two, when we saw the full invasion
(28:00):
of Ukraine, one of the first things that happened was
a Russian government linked cyber attack on a major satellite company.
Speaker 4 (28:07):
Called Viasat, which was very a key to.
Speaker 2 (28:11):
Ukrainian military communications, and that was very largely disabled and
taken out just before Russian troops pored over the border
into Ukraine, and that was I would think very much
coordinated with the government, definitely caused a lot of problems
with Ukrainians being able to communicate briefly in cyber space.
There isn't really an internationally regarded red line in the
(28:33):
sand of this to go to war. However, I always
point out, of course Israel and Iran are not in NATO,
but within the NATO Block, Article five is an effect
and that ensures that if there is a specific act
of war against a member, that I'll go to war.
And actually it has been revamped to include cyber attacks.
(28:55):
Now there isn't really a definition though of what that means,
and what's been explained to me is kind of of anything.
Speaker 4 (29:01):
That causes widespread deaths.
Speaker 2 (29:02):
So for example, if you saw power offline and the
dead of winter for a couple of weeks and you
saw people dying because they didn't have heat.
Speaker 1 (29:12):
We've talked a lot about cyber offense, what about defense?
I mean I read that Iran actually took most of
the Internet offline partly in response to cyber attacks, But
you tell us a bit about that, and what are
some of the other, maybe less dramatic defense tactics that
Israel and Iran a both employing.
Speaker 2 (29:28):
Yes, So with Iran this is several days ago. I
think it may be around a week as of this recording.
Most of the country was taken offline into a semi
blackout by the government and one of the reasons given
was the need to defend against Israeli linked cyber attacks.
Now I have spoken to experts who are a little
(29:49):
bit skeptical of that claim. It's also a moment of
a lot of fear by the administration in Iran about
their future, So it also may have to do with
simply controlling the messaging. But it is true that they
certainly are worried about cyber attacks. As I mentioned earlier,
the pager incident in Lebanon, I think has really changed
the game in terms of concerns. Of course, it involved explosives,
(30:12):
but it was triggered remotely, very kind of sophisticated attack,
and as a result, another effort that Aroan is put
in places. They've told basically all government cybersecurity officials any
of their staff to pretty much stop using Internet connected
devices as much as possible. Obviously, if you're working in
(30:33):
hacking capabilities, there's going to be certain devices you have
to use.
Speaker 4 (30:37):
But as I said, what.
Speaker 2 (30:38):
Happened in Lebanon really changed the game in terms of concerns.
Of course, Israel, as I mentioned, they're very vocal. They're
cyber agency warning civilians about a lot of these waves
of messages about not clicking on certain links sent to them,
about disabling home surveillance cameras.
Speaker 4 (30:53):
I do think though that Israelis.
Speaker 2 (30:55):
Are, in terms of digital threats, always on a bit
of a higher putting hire alert. It is a very
digitally interconnected society, as I mentioned, one of the most
advanced in cyberspace, and there are certainly no strangers to
threats like this.
Speaker 1 (31:10):
Let's talk about the US for remote, because you wrote
this story recently with the headline US critical networks are
prime targets.
Speaker 4 (31:16):
For cyber attacks.
Speaker 1 (31:17):
They're preparing for Iran to strike. So as of Wednesday, again,
did that happen in terms of.
Speaker 2 (31:23):
A major attack, No, But at moments of any sort
of geopolitical tension like this, especially when the US in
this case has directly.
Speaker 4 (31:32):
Weighted in by hitting Iranian.
Speaker 2 (31:34):
Nuclear sites, a lot of US critical infrastructure owners operators,
and when I say that, I mean everything from those
that operate the electric grid across the country, that operate
water treatment facilities, hospitals, educational facilities, a lot of different sectors.
Of course, they're going to be on a bit of
higher alert because, as I said, you know, cyber attacks
(31:57):
are not really clearly defined as an active war, or
if they are, how far you have to go. And
it's a very cheap but very effective way of getting
a message across. Say, all of a sudden, the water
supply is compromised in a city in America. I mean
that's pretty effective in terms of messaging. Same with oh
the lights went out in this major city for who
(32:19):
knows how long. So you know, I think a lot
of these organizations are simply on a higher setting in
terms of what they're watching for. And a lot of
times I like to emphasize whenever I talk about these
types of threats, probably more than about ninety five percent
of all successful cyber attacks, it's not something very sophisticated.
It's not, you know, something that a government was planning
(32:40):
for years. It can be something as small as oh,
this email came through.
Speaker 4 (32:45):
It looked legitimate.
Speaker 2 (32:46):
I clicked this link all of a sudden, you know,
for example, you click that on your work email, your
email is compromised. Through that, they're able to compromise other
accounts and kind of move through the IT network.
Speaker 1 (32:57):
But I guess my final question to you, Migi is,
as you look to the days ahead, what are you
expecting to see, What are you watching out for. What
are your sources telling you might be most interesting in
the Iran Israel conflict in the realm of cyber.
Speaker 2 (33:11):
I think again to emphasize that while there may be
a ceasefire in terms of physical missile strikes, it really
doesn't say anything in the ceasefire about what.
Speaker 4 (33:20):
The digital space will look like.
Speaker 2 (33:22):
So it will be very interesting to see if we
continue to see more low level I would say threats
in terms of disinformation, in terms of you know, maybe
targeting of Israeli or Iranian organizations that are critical to
day to day life but aren't necessarily going to cause deaths,
such as, you know, disabling a bank for another day,
or if we see that go up as a result
(33:44):
of kind of having their hands tied on either side
being able to drop missiles, you know, kinetic attacks, and
the fact that the international community seems to be a
bit frozen when it comes to cyber attacks.
Speaker 4 (33:56):
So, you know, if we.
Speaker 2 (33:58):
See major threats to hospital for example in either nation,
threats to the grid, threats to any of the really
really critical groups.
Speaker 4 (34:07):
So that would certainly be extremely interesting.
Speaker 2 (34:09):
If I saw that, I would hope as a citizen
of the world, that we would see more restraint.
Speaker 4 (34:15):
But we will see.
Speaker 2 (34:16):
And also, I think, you know it's been emphasized to me,
is that when it comes to retaliation, Iran especially likes
to play the longer game. So even if we don't
necessarily see major cyber strikes on the US this week,
that doesn't mean we might not see one a year
from now that has been extensively planned out. It really
is something that you can never really take your eye
off the ball, especially with Iran. So we will have
(34:38):
to see what happens in the years and weeks to come.
But I would be very surprised if in the coming
days it was completely dead and nothing happening in the
digital realm.
Speaker 1 (34:48):
Mate, thank you so much for joining us today, Thank
you for having me.
Speaker 3 (35:03):
That's it for this week for tech stuff. I'm Kara
Price and I'm mos Valoshin.
Speaker 1 (35:07):
This episode was produced by Eliza Dennis and Adriana Topia.
It was executive produced by me Kara Price and Kate
Osborne for Kaleidoscope and Katrina Novel for iHeart Podcasts. The
engineer is Elvira Gutierrez at CDM Studios. Jack Insley makes
this episode and Kyle Murdoch wrote our theme song.
Speaker 3 (35:25):
Join us next Wednesday for tex Stuff The Story when
we will share an in depth conversation with author Jahini
Vara about how the Internet has shaped us as individuals.
Speaker 1 (35:34):
Please rate, review, and reach out to us at tech
Stuff podcast at gmail dot com. We love hearing from
you
From Kaleidoscope and iHeart podcasts. This is tech Stuff. I'm
mons Valashan, and I'm delighted that Cara Price is back
with us. Today we'll be bringing you the emotional highs
and lows of Silicon Valley, from a tech Titan's gilded
nuctuals to the soulless writing of checchipt. Then, on a
more serious note, we'll be looking at the conflict between
(00:32):
Iran and Israel in cyberspace.
Speaker 2 (00:35):
Cyber attacks are often viewed as a much less costly
in terms of funding, but also in terms of lives,
way to critically wound an enemy.
Speaker 1 (00:48):
All of that on the weekend tech It's Friday, June
twenty seventh. Welcome back, Cara.
Speaker 3 (00:54):
Thank you as.
Speaker 1 (00:56):
Back to tech Stuff, just in time to cover Jeff
and Lauren's wedding out.
Speaker 3 (01:00):
A coincidence at all, I wouldn't have come back otherwise.
Speaker 1 (01:03):
You do love a Selim spectacle, and this one's going
to be pretty spectacular, perhaps unsurprisingly given Jeff Bezos's fourtune
or two hundred and thirty billion dollars and seems to
be thirsty for a big hype bash this weekend.
Speaker 3 (01:17):
And what do you do when you're the world's richest man,
you rent out Venice. Now, ven I think that's what
you do. We don't know much more about the ceremony
or the parties for that matter. I can guess that
some of the guests will be Kim Kardashian, who was
on Lauren Sanchez's bachelorette and then some others who were
(01:37):
on the Blue Origin spaceflight, which was not her bachelorette party.
Speaker 1 (01:41):
By the way, so the Virgin spaceflight was Kim Kardashian. No, No, Katy.
Speaker 3 (01:45):
Perry, Katy Perry, Gail King.
Speaker 1 (01:48):
I remember when Katy Perry came down from space. There
was a article in any Mail being like, it's confirmed
Katy Perry's career is over.
Speaker 3 (01:57):
Oh, I thought they were going to say it's confirmed
Katy Perry is an alien.
Speaker 1 (02:01):
I wonder which of the if the tech Titans will
be there, zak Elon, Tim Cook from Apple or Tim
Apples he's otherwise known, Larian Serge from Google. I would
guess there'll be fewer at the wedding than they were
at Trump's inauguration.
Speaker 3 (02:17):
Maybe maybe not.
Speaker 1 (02:18):
The details are murky, but there is a big banner
flying in Venice at the moment saying if you can
rent Venice for your wedding, you can pay more tax.
Speaker 3 (02:27):
You know, this wedding is so secret. I was making
a joke about renting out Venice, but it is hard
to tell. The party organizers of the wedding are denying it.
They actually released a statement saying it's not a city
takeover and the couple is committed to this is like,
this is insane. The couple is committed to minimizing disruption,
and Bezos donated three million dollars to various local organizations.
(02:50):
In the face of criticism, local Venice officials chimed in
and said the couple has only booked about thirty water
taxis for the event. I just live for this.
Speaker 1 (03:00):
I do too. And you pointed me to a piece
in the Wall Street Journal that was the best one.
It had a headline promising to spill the secrets and
another the fact, when there's a big, big wedding, make
this even the Wall Street Journal will slip into the Daily.
Mom My God, I spill the secrets.
Speaker 3 (03:13):
They were an excited to do so.
Speaker 1 (03:16):
I was a bit skeptical about opening the show with
talking about the Sanchez Bezos wedding, perhaps because I'm a
brit and we've had quite a lot of royal wedding
action in the last decade. But you pointed me to
something in the Wall Street Journal piece that just felt
so tech stuff. I couldn't wait him more about it.
Speaker 3 (03:32):
And this is so me. This is where the sort
of intersection between my nerdiness and my interest in celebrity
gossip intersects. I was reading the piece and I'm like,
this is a great piece, But there was a certain
thing that was mentioned. This luxury event designer said he
had recently commissioned hold your Hat, a five hundred thousand,
(03:53):
half a million dollar holograph of a bride's deceased grandfather
to share well wishes to the that's the cost of
like no percent of weddings is half a million dollars.
Speaker 1 (04:05):
Or no percent of Besos' wedding.
Speaker 3 (04:06):
That's right, that's right.
Speaker 1 (04:07):
You know it's funny because obviously there's this trend where
rich people want to live forever. I guess the like
this follow up trend to that is reanimating your your
dead relatives for the for the cool sum of half
a million dollars to deliver a toast at the wedding.
It does remind me. You remember of that movie Mulan the
Disney Words Drive when the ancestors reanimated to wish her
(04:29):
well in her quest. Yes, this is like being if
you're a billionaire, you can you can your wedding can
feel like the opening sequence of Mulan.
Speaker 3 (04:36):
When you're a billionaire, you can watch a movie like
Mulan and say I want that at my wedding.
Speaker 1 (04:40):
Please bring out her to us all remember that? Yes,
of course, so you've now been subjected to my singing,
which is appropriate. Turn to our next story, which is
about the music industry and how the industry is building
tech to make AI music more traceable.
Speaker 3 (04:57):
All right, so this is interesting because I do you
think music production is one of the most evolved uses
of AI. It duped me in twenty twenty three with
fake Drake.
Speaker 1 (05:09):
Fake Drake. I was actually hoping to tell you about
fake Drake and play that classic twenty twenty three banger
and test you on whether or not you knew it
was a fake or not. But let's play it nonetheless.
Speaker 3 (05:22):
Like it's fake question.
Speaker 1 (05:27):
But that was good. I came when my eggs like
the lean.
Speaker 3 (05:31):
Honestly though it's very good.
Speaker 4 (05:34):
I love she need.
Speaker 3 (05:39):
Given. You know, if I hadn't known it was AI,
I probably wouldn't have second guessed it at all.
Speaker 1 (05:44):
It really spooked people, especially the music industry, because if
people didn't know, and worst of all, if people didn't
care that this was a fake track, what could that
mean for the whole business?
Speaker 3 (05:55):
Yeah, you know, the music business has already been battered
so much in reaction first to piracy and illegal downloads,
and now the popularity of streaming platforms like Spotify.
Speaker 1 (06:05):
Yeah, and this is another disruption, and potentially an unmanageable one,
because if AI music is uploaded to streaming platforms and
it's not labeled as being made by AI, the streaming
platforms themselves and of course listeners might not be any
the wiser.
Speaker 3 (06:20):
But is this actually like a problem?
Speaker 4 (06:22):
You know?
Speaker 3 (06:22):
I wonder how much AI music is actually being like
dumped onto streaming platforms.
Speaker 1 (06:28):
You wonder, And I searched the web. According to the Verge,
who spoke to the French streaming platform Deza Desa, said
that as of this April, roughly twenty percent of new
uploads every day were fully AI generated, so about twenty
thousand tracks a day and I think the other important
point here is that AI is obviously trained on what
(06:48):
you feed it, so these tracks probably more often than
not imitating musical ideas that perhaps should be licensed before
the song is widely distributed.
Speaker 3 (06:57):
So it's kind of a money problem.
Speaker 1 (06:59):
Well, yes, the money problem. It's also a fundamental human
creativity in the age of AI problem, but the money
problem makes it more urgent capitalism to the rescue of
the music business. Basically, there are multiple services now being
developed that can be integrated into streaming platform structures to
analyze one if uploaded tracks are AI, and two if
(07:20):
they contain so called protected elements.
Speaker 3 (07:23):
So how does that work.
Speaker 1 (07:24):
There's one product in particular I want to tell you about,
which is called trace ID, and it's marketed as an
AI rights management platform. Basically, the software breaks songs into
stems from vocal tone to melodic phrasing in order to
better detect mimicry, and that means that the rights holders
or the platforms can then know if a track needs
to be licensed and paid for before it's released.
Speaker 3 (07:46):
So that is great for the industry, But what about me, Like,
you know, I care about infringement, but I'm not like
obsessed with it, and the thing that I'm really concerned
with is, like, I want to know if the song
that I'm listening to is real.
Speaker 1 (08:00):
Taking a step back and not wanting to get too
philosophical here, but it kind of raises these other questions
about what AI music actually is because obviously you have
like fully generative AI generated tracks that are basically have
no human input. But then a lot of like normal
musicians as part of their production workflow, use AI tools
(08:21):
in fact, just as we do right like we use
AII editing software, we sort of use it in research.
So like there's a kind of philosophical conundrum about what
AI music actually is. But these tools we're talking about
today are really about detecting like fully synthesized full AI tracks.
In addition to these externally developed products like trace id,
(08:41):
these streaming platforms are also internally developing tools to scan
uploaded music and then if they detect a concentration of
synthetic elements, they can reduce the visibility of AI generated
tracks in both their algorithmic and also their editorial recommendations.
Speaker 3 (08:57):
Yeah, I've actually seen people on the internet can play
that their release Radar playlist on Spotify is filled with
what they suspect to be AI music. This has not
happened to me personally, but like, it does take a
lot of work to then go to like an artist
page and see that someone has no listeners or followers
or only one or two tracks, you know, And I
(09:18):
guess there's hope that the actual places that are hosting
this music would would label it, label it. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (09:24):
Well, the other thing is they might have an incentive
to do so, because there's this emerging body of research
that suggests when people feel that interacting with AI generated content,
that should become less engaged. There's this marketing publication called
The Drum which reported that more than fifty percent of
people check out if they believe content is AI generated.
So again there's another business intentive for the platforms to
(09:47):
solve this problem.
Speaker 3 (09:48):
And speaking of AI generated content and interesting research, you
must have seen this the recent MIT study on CHATGPT
and critical thinking. I actually really liked the terminology that
they used in this research. The paper was titled your
Brain on Chat GPT accumulation. And this is what I
love of cognitive debt. When using an AI assistant for
(10:11):
essay writing task.
Speaker 1 (10:12):
I love the idea of accumulating cognitive debt. That that
is such a good phrase and so familiar. I mean,
I feel like scrolling on my phone. I mean most
of what I do is accumulate cognitive debt.
Speaker 3 (10:23):
We are just sacks of cognitive debt that we really
are right now. I mean people have to worry about,
you know, student debt, They have to worry about other
kinds of debt. Now we have to worry about cognitive debt.
Speaker 1 (10:34):
I saw a lot of action about this research all
over my LinkedIn.
Speaker 3 (10:38):
The first place I actually encountered it was in like
meme format, Like it was like a slideshow.
Speaker 1 (10:43):
There are pictures of their brains, right do lighting up
in des exactly like.
Speaker 3 (10:46):
I certainly did not see this on like a verified
news platform. I saw it like on a meme account
that was like, yeah, your brain's getting worse using chat GPT.
Before I explain the experiment, there are a few caveats
that the researchers themselves are eager to share. First, the
study only has fifty four subjects, which is a relatively
(11:08):
small sample. And second, and I think the least surprising,
is that this study has yet to be peer reviewed
by anybody other than our peers on LinkedIn and Instagram
and every.
Speaker 1 (11:18):
The interinet had.
Speaker 3 (11:21):
They really did. You know, it's a very buzzy concept,
this tool chat GBT that we all are using, maybe
eroding our own ability to think critically. And that's especially
alarming when you think of what this could mean for
not my brain, but developing brains. Mine has been developed,
the trade has left the station. But you know, as
(11:42):
we've talked about many many times on this podcast, AI
companies are really marketing themselves and I mean chat GBT,
especially to college students, and students are using chatbots like quite.
Speaker 1 (11:53):
A bit, quite a bit to assist.
Speaker 3 (11:55):
With or even do their homework. You know. The paper's
main author felt like her findings were alarming enough and
people are adapting to life with AI so fast. It
wasn't peer reviewed because waiting six to eight months might
be too late.
Speaker 1 (12:08):
The paper's outh theory is a bone hype beast, that's right.
Speaker 3 (12:11):
This is so she's like, it's got to get out
right now or it's going to be too late.
Speaker 1 (12:15):
But I mean, to be fair, it does sound pretty lombing.
Speaker 3 (12:18):
Yes, there are some silver linings. This is what happened
fifty four people ages eighteen to thirty nine from the
Boston area were separated into three groups. They were all
asked to write sat essays while an electro encephalogram or
EEG measured their brain activity or more specifically, the tiny
(12:39):
electrical signals produced by brain cells when they communicate.
Speaker 1 (12:43):
And so there were three groups. What was the difference
between each group?
Speaker 3 (12:47):
So each group was writing these twenty minute satsays using
slightly different tools. One group used open AI's chat GPT,
another Google search engine, and the last group didn't use.
Speaker 1 (12:59):
It anything at all, nothing at all, i e. Just
the human brain, just their brain for them.
Speaker 3 (13:04):
Unsurprisingly, the group that used chat GPT all delivered. This
is my favorite part similar essays. English teachers were consulted
and called them largely soulless. That is a sad indictment,
it is, and that's actually a good word for it.
Like if you read stuff that's written by chat GPT,
you're like, there's something, there's someone here, that's what the
(13:28):
lights are up.
Speaker 1 (13:28):
Fifty two percent of consumers per the drum check out.
Speaker 3 (13:32):
That feels like a low percent. But coming back to
the group we were using chat GPT, the EEG picked
up low executive control and attentional engagement in that group.
That's contrasted with the brain only group, which showed shocker
highest neural connectivity, especially in regions associated with creativity and memory.
Speaker 1 (13:51):
And what about the Google Search group, of whom I
count myself a member of that cohort.
Speaker 3 (13:56):
They're what we'd call mid Their brains were definitely more
active than the chat GPT groups. So they did this
experiment three times, and then the researcher switched it up
a bit. Each person was asked to rewrite one of
their previous essays, but the chat GPT group could only
use their brains, while the initial brain only group got
(14:17):
access to chat GPT. The people who had started with
chat GPT hardly remembered their own essays.
Speaker 1 (14:26):
Remember that correct.
Speaker 3 (14:27):
This reminds me of once I cheated on a physics exam.
I cheated off a friend and I just wrote the
answer without showing my work on a test, and my
teacher was just like, how did you get that answer?
It's right, but how'd you get it? And I said,
I don't know it of course, So the people who
had started with chat GPT hardly remembered their own essays.
The EEG confirmed that barely any aspects of the writing
(14:51):
process had integrated into people's memory networks. The brain only group, however,
exhibited a significant increase in brain connected across all EEG
frequency bands when they took a second stab at their
essays using chat GBT to help, meaning people who use
their brain displayed the most cognitive activity.
Speaker 1 (15:13):
But not just people use their brain, people who use
their brain. And then a second time round pad it
with chat.
Speaker 3 (15:18):
GPT people who use their brain first.
Speaker 1 (15:20):
And that's pretty interesting. I mean, it kind of stands
to reason, which probably is again why it went viral,
because it kind of confirms what we might think, which
is that, like if I use my brain to come
up with an idea and then use chat GPT to
refine it and have a thought partner and a conversational
partner to improve it, like that actually probably is more
(15:40):
engaging for my brain than just coming up with an idea.
If I ask chat GPT to count with an idea,
that is extremely unengaging for my brain.
Speaker 3 (15:47):
Correct, that is the implication, And I just want to
say one more time. This study has yet to be
peer reviewed, and additional studies will likely be done. Again,
the author felt very strongly that this should be released
early as a warning. And again, imagine what this could
mean for developing brains, meaning not us young people who
(16:08):
are among the first to really adapt the technology anyway,
using it as a generation tool rather than, as we might,
a refinement tool. This is the real kicker. This one
has a sense of the researcher has a sense of humor.
So she assumed that people would use AI to summarize
her paper, so she laid little AI traps all over it.
Speaker 1 (16:30):
What does it mean to lay little AI traps whatever
a paper?
Speaker 3 (16:33):
She did a pretty cute thing, which is that she
did things like instruct large language models to quote only
read this table below, making it so if fed into
an LM, only parts of the paper would be summarized.
Speaker 1 (16:47):
So there were these like hidden problems basically exactly.
Speaker 3 (16:50):
I think it was a very nice little sprinkle of
human ingenuity.
Speaker 1 (17:00):
We've got a couple more headlines today, starting with the
collaboration the whole tech industry is buzzing about, of course,
I mean the one between open AI and Sir Johnny Ive,
the designer behind many of Apple's iconic products like the
iPod and the iPhone. And we know that Sam Altman
and I are now collaborating on an AI hardware startup,
(17:21):
and that's about all we know. Apparently they aren't making
wearables or earbuds. The device will be pocket sized and
screenless and will be a kind of interfaced layer with
the world powered by AI, and Altman and Ive are
being highly secretive about what the form factor will be,
but people are buzzing. According to Semaphore, last week at
the can Lion Advertising Festival, marketers were starting to freak
(17:45):
out about where they would show video ads in a
screenless world. But in the meantime, the highly anticipated project
seems to have hit a roadblock. The startup was called
Io the two letters I and O, and they've been
pushing out marketing materials over the last few weeks. But
now all mentions of Io have been scrubbed from Open
AI's website and social media channels because it turns out
(18:08):
there's a trademark lawsuit with another company called Io, which
is spelled IYO, that's working on voice controlled AI devices.
Sam Altman is called the lawsuit silly, but it's certainly
drama in the valley, unlikely ultimately to derail him and
Johnny Ive. Whatever they may end up with.
Speaker 3 (18:27):
I would watch Drama in the Valley on Bravo. It's
the pitch yep here we go if you are a
sucker for post apocalyptic content like me. There's now a
follow up to the two thousand and one film twenty
eight Days Later, which is out this month called twenty
eight Years Later. The original film used lightweight, low resolution
Canon digital cameras, a cutting edge technology back in the
(18:50):
early arts, and for the follow up, director Danny Boyle,
another brit Yeah, chose to stay small and nimble with
the iPhone. He told Wired that the Apple device was
the principal camera for the film, with some caveats. Boyle
and his team ended up overriding the user friendly camera software.
The iPhone's camera automatically focuses on whatever it assumes is
(19:12):
the focus of your photo or video, but that's not
always what you want in a movie, so they essentially
hacked the iPhones to remove the auto focus. Also, most
of the time it wasn't just a cinematographer holding an iPhone.
The production used a massive rig that supported twenty iPhone,
fifteen Promax cameras my dream all with special accessories. So
(19:34):
that's twenty different angles on the action being filmed.
Speaker 1 (19:48):
We're going to take a quick break, but when we
come back, there is a tentative ceasefire between Iran and Israel,
but does that include cyberwarfare? Stay with us, Welcome back
(20:10):
to tech Stuff. We want to spend some time talking
about the conflict between Israel and Iran. Much of the
battle has played out in public. Missile and drone attacks
have caused mass casualties in major cities and hospitals. Military
bases and nuclear sites have all been targeted. As of
this taping on Wednesday morning, a ceasefire seems to be holding,
(20:31):
but today we want to shed light on a murkier,
often invisible act of warfare, and one that's likely to
continue well after the missiles cease Hittelbos understand how the
conflict between Israel and Iran is playing out in cyberspace
and how it might ultimately affect the US is Maggie Miller,
a cyber security reporter for Politico. Maggie, welcome to tech Stuff.
Speaker 4 (20:52):
Thank you so much for having me, either of.
Speaker 1 (20:54):
This taping or Wednesday morning. The ceasefire is an effect,
but of course by Friday morning things may be different.
Give US a bit of the background on both Israel
and Iran, what their cyber capabilities are, and how much
attention you were paying to those two countries in the
cyber realm before this conflict started.
Speaker 2 (21:10):
So Israel has seen pretty widely as one of the
most advanced in the world in terms.
Speaker 4 (21:16):
Of the cyber capabilities as a.
Speaker 2 (21:18):
Government, but also in terms of the industry experts that
they have in their country. Tel Aviv is a hub
of a lot of cybersecurity companies, so they have very
formidable cyber capabilities. We've also seen them brought to bear.
There was a cyber element involved in the explosion of
the pagers used by Hesbolah operatives in Lebanon in recent
(21:38):
months that was tied to the Israeli government. So anytime
there's a conflict with Israel, especially when it's being supported
by the US, which also has pretty formidable cyber attack capabilities,
you're going to keep an eye on it. Iran also
has had a history of integrating cyber attacks into its efforts,
sometimes lower level but still quite impactful. For example, in
(22:01):
the US, we saw in the weeks after the Hamas
attack on October seventh, twenty twenty three, onto Israel, there
were pro Iranian hackers. Sometimes Iran can operate also through
proxy groups as well as from the government, but we
saw at least one pro Iranian group hack into multiple
US water treatment facilities. Target has rarely made equipment in
(22:25):
order to basically deface it with a message against Israel
and really send a message that hey, you know, this
might be a small water facility in rural Pennsylvania, but
we can still cause damage. And so Iran has always
been one that the US has kept a close eye
on in cyberspace. So I think, you know, to emphasize,
all three nations involved here quite formidable and have demonstrated
(22:48):
these cyber attack capabilities in the past.
Speaker 1 (22:51):
How much did this cyber conflict between Israel and Iran
sort of take off after the twenty twenty three Hamas attacks.
Was that a kind of a turning point or where
do you trace this current phase of escalation too?
Speaker 3 (23:05):
Well?
Speaker 2 (23:05):
In terms of the escalation that we've seen in the
past week, there of course was a pickup after the
initial I believe it was June thirteenth strikes by Israel
against Iran, but there has been a heightened amount of
cyber threats, cyber attacks between the two nations since October seventh.
Both Hamas and Hezbula are very much affiliated, supported by
(23:29):
the Iranian government, often have served as proxies. Both have
been somewhat knocked offline due to a lot of the
Israeli attacks against both groups in the last two years,
but they did both carry out some cyber operations also
spearhead a lot of disinformation online. That's another big effort
by Iran. We've seen just in the past week, for example,
(23:51):
messages either of trace to the Iranian government or to
proxies being sent to Israeli phone saying, for example, oh
you don't need to go to the shelters during this bombing,
you can stay outside, or another case's messages with links
to try to gain information from Israelis. So it really
has escalated, i would say, in the past week, but
(24:14):
has been a steady clip since October seven.
Speaker 1 (24:17):
Do you see misinformation and disinformation as a type of
cyber attach or type of cyber warfare or as a
separate category as far as your reporting goes.
Speaker 2 (24:26):
They're often linked in that. Of course, one does not
involve hacking into any sort of system or operation, but
it does involve changing a perception and using social media
often or for example malicious texts or calls, etc. And
it's an even more I would almost say, at times
(24:47):
more effective way of changing perceptions and causing chaos and
causing panic because you don't necessarily know who to trust,
and especially in this day and age where I think
less less people may be understanding who to trust, I
think it's an even more potent avenue.
Speaker 1 (25:06):
How effective have Iran and Israel's cyber attacks on one another,
bin I mean, how much have they changed the face
of this conflict?
Speaker 4 (25:14):
There has been certainly some effect.
Speaker 2 (25:16):
So an example, and I've cited this in my reporting,
is there have been multiple major cyber attacks on Iranian
banks in the past week and a half that have
been linked to at.
Speaker 4 (25:26):
The least pro Israeli groups.
Speaker 2 (25:28):
You know, there's often a lot of cyber criminal or
activist groups in the world that may not be officially
affiliated with a government, but maybe that government wouldn't mind
their work. But there have been strikes against specific Iranian
banks designed to make it more difficult for Iranians to
access their funds, to access their accounts, and I think
critically to cause chaos. But on the flip side, there's
(25:49):
also been a tax linked to Iran and Israel. So
just a few days ago, Israel's cyber security agency put
out a warning that a lot of Israeli should disable
some of their home surveillance cameras because it was actually
being seen as a target used by Iran or pro
Iranian hackers trying to gather intelligence and gather real time
(26:11):
data on what was happening in the country. As I said,
there's also been a lot a huge ramp up of
phone messaging, emails, etc. From Iran targeting Israeli's designed to
either spread disinformation or in some cases trying to collect
information and data on Israelis or Israelis abroad.
Speaker 4 (26:32):
So it certainly has.
Speaker 2 (26:33):
Been an active campaign in cyberspace. And I think one
of the main questions I have is given this tenuous
ceasefire as of Wednesday while we're recording this. Often ceasefires,
of course mean physical strikes, and a lot of times
in the world, there isn't really a definition for what
that means in cyberspace, and we'll see if there really
(26:55):
is much of a ceasefire in the digital realm.
Speaker 1 (26:59):
And as I like two types of cyber attacks, but
one is designed to kind of sow chaos but not
be so destructive as to be an act of war.
And another is like to knock out some specific radars
so that like military planes can most successfully bomb without
any risk of being hit back. Like how much of
this is in direct coordination with military and like so
(27:21):
called kinetic strikes, and how much of it is like
more low grade social erosion chaos causing.
Speaker 4 (27:27):
No I think there's obviously different levels.
Speaker 2 (27:29):
It's not necessarily going to be different vectors of how
the attack is carried out, but there is. I would think,
just as with physical strikes, conversations often about Okay, how
far do.
Speaker 4 (27:39):
We want to take this?
Speaker 2 (27:40):
You know, disabling a major bank is going to cause confusion,
and I'm sure you're not going to make any friends
by doing that, but ultimately you're not necessarily going to
cause death, You're not necessarily going to cause widespread military impact,
but you know, something like for example, in the beginning
of twenty twenty two, when we saw the full invasion
(28:00):
of Ukraine, one of the first things that happened was
a Russian government linked cyber attack on a major satellite company.
Speaker 4 (28:07):
Called Viasat, which was very a key to.
Speaker 2 (28:11):
Ukrainian military communications, and that was very largely disabled and
taken out just before Russian troops pored over the border
into Ukraine, and that was I would think very much
coordinated with the government, definitely caused a lot of problems
with Ukrainians being able to communicate briefly in cyber space.
There isn't really an internationally regarded red line in the
(28:33):
sand of this to go to war. However, I always
point out, of course Israel and Iran are not in NATO,
but within the NATO Block, Article five is an effect
and that ensures that if there is a specific act
of war against a member, that I'll go to war.
And actually it has been revamped to include cyber attacks.
(28:55):
Now there isn't really a definition though of what that means,
and what's been explained to me is kind of of anything.
Speaker 4 (29:01):
That causes widespread deaths.
Speaker 2 (29:02):
So for example, if you saw power offline and the
dead of winter for a couple of weeks and you
saw people dying because they didn't have heat.
Speaker 1 (29:12):
We've talked a lot about cyber offense, what about defense?
I mean I read that Iran actually took most of
the Internet offline partly in response to cyber attacks, But
you tell us a bit about that, and what are
some of the other, maybe less dramatic defense tactics that
Israel and Iran a both employing.
Speaker 2 (29:28):
Yes, So with Iran this is several days ago. I
think it may be around a week as of this recording.
Most of the country was taken offline into a semi
blackout by the government and one of the reasons given
was the need to defend against Israeli linked cyber attacks.
Now I have spoken to experts who are a little
(29:49):
bit skeptical of that claim. It's also a moment of
a lot of fear by the administration in Iran about
their future, So it also may have to do with
simply controlling the messaging. But it is true that they
certainly are worried about cyber attacks. As I mentioned earlier,
the pager incident in Lebanon, I think has really changed
the game in terms of concerns. Of course, it involved explosives,
(30:12):
but it was triggered remotely, very kind of sophisticated attack,
and as a result, another effort that Aroan is put
in places. They've told basically all government cybersecurity officials any
of their staff to pretty much stop using Internet connected
devices as much as possible. Obviously, if you're working in
(30:33):
hacking capabilities, there's going to be certain devices you have
to use.
Speaker 4 (30:37):
But as I said, what.
Speaker 2 (30:38):
Happened in Lebanon really changed the game in terms of concerns.
Of course, Israel, as I mentioned, they're very vocal. They're
cyber agency warning civilians about a lot of these waves
of messages about not clicking on certain links sent to them,
about disabling home surveillance cameras.
Speaker 4 (30:53):
I do think though that Israelis.
Speaker 2 (30:55):
Are, in terms of digital threats, always on a bit
of a higher putting hire alert. It is a very
digitally interconnected society, as I mentioned, one of the most
advanced in cyberspace, and there are certainly no strangers to
threats like this.
Speaker 1 (31:10):
Let's talk about the US for remote, because you wrote
this story recently with the headline US critical networks are
prime targets.
Speaker 4 (31:16):
For cyber attacks.
Speaker 1 (31:17):
They're preparing for Iran to strike. So as of Wednesday, again,
did that happen in terms of.
Speaker 2 (31:23):
A major attack, No, But at moments of any sort
of geopolitical tension like this, especially when the US in
this case has directly.
Speaker 4 (31:32):
Weighted in by hitting Iranian.
Speaker 2 (31:34):
Nuclear sites, a lot of US critical infrastructure owners operators,
and when I say that, I mean everything from those
that operate the electric grid across the country, that operate
water treatment facilities, hospitals, educational facilities, a lot of different sectors.
Of course, they're going to be on a bit of
higher alert because, as I said, you know, cyber attacks
(31:57):
are not really clearly defined as an active war, or
if they are, how far you have to go. And
it's a very cheap but very effective way of getting
a message across. Say, all of a sudden, the water
supply is compromised in a city in America. I mean
that's pretty effective in terms of messaging. Same with oh
the lights went out in this major city for who
(32:19):
knows how long. So you know, I think a lot
of these organizations are simply on a higher setting in
terms of what they're watching for. And a lot of
times I like to emphasize whenever I talk about these
types of threats, probably more than about ninety five percent
of all successful cyber attacks, it's not something very sophisticated.
It's not, you know, something that a government was planning
(32:40):
for years. It can be something as small as oh,
this email came through.
Speaker 4 (32:45):
It looked legitimate.
Speaker 2 (32:46):
I clicked this link all of a sudden, you know,
for example, you click that on your work email, your
email is compromised. Through that, they're able to compromise other
accounts and kind of move through the IT network.
Speaker 1 (32:57):
But I guess my final question to you, Migi is,
as you look to the days ahead, what are you
expecting to see, What are you watching out for. What
are your sources telling you might be most interesting in
the Iran Israel conflict in the realm of cyber.
Speaker 2 (33:11):
I think again to emphasize that while there may be
a ceasefire in terms of physical missile strikes, it really
doesn't say anything in the ceasefire about what.
Speaker 4 (33:20):
The digital space will look like.
Speaker 2 (33:22):
So it will be very interesting to see if we
continue to see more low level I would say threats
in terms of disinformation, in terms of you know, maybe
targeting of Israeli or Iranian organizations that are critical to
day to day life but aren't necessarily going to cause deaths,
such as, you know, disabling a bank for another day,
or if we see that go up as a result
(33:44):
of kind of having their hands tied on either side
being able to drop missiles, you know, kinetic attacks, and
the fact that the international community seems to be a
bit frozen when it comes to cyber attacks.
Speaker 4 (33:56):
So, you know, if we.
Speaker 2 (33:58):
See major threats to hospital for example in either nation,
threats to the grid, threats to any of the really
really critical groups.
Speaker 4 (34:07):
So that would certainly be extremely interesting.
Speaker 2 (34:09):
If I saw that, I would hope as a citizen
of the world, that we would see more restraint.
Speaker 4 (34:15):
But we will see.
Speaker 2 (34:16):
And also, I think, you know it's been emphasized to me,
is that when it comes to retaliation, Iran especially likes
to play the longer game. So even if we don't
necessarily see major cyber strikes on the US this week,
that doesn't mean we might not see one a year
from now that has been extensively planned out. It really
is something that you can never really take your eye
off the ball, especially with Iran. So we will have
(34:38):
to see what happens in the years and weeks to come.
But I would be very surprised if in the coming
days it was completely dead and nothing happening in the
digital realm.
Speaker 1 (34:48):
Mate, thank you so much for joining us today, Thank
you for having me.
Speaker 3 (35:03):
That's it for this week for tech stuff. I'm Kara
Price and I'm mos Valoshin.
Speaker 1 (35:07):
This episode was produced by Eliza Dennis and Adriana Topia.
It was executive produced by me Kara Price and Kate
Osborne for Kaleidoscope and Katrina Novel for iHeart Podcasts. The
engineer is Elvira Gutierrez at CDM Studios. Jack Insley makes
this episode and Kyle Murdoch wrote our theme song.
Speaker 3 (35:25):
Join us next Wednesday for tex Stuff The Story when
we will share an in depth conversation with author Jahini
Vara about how the Internet has shaped us as individuals.
Speaker 1 (35:34):
Please rate, review, and reach out to us at tech
Stuff podcast at gmail dot com. We love hearing from
you
TechStuff News
Hosts And Creators
Oz Woloshyn
Karah Preiss
Popular Podcasts
United States of Kennedy
United States of Kennedy is a podcast about our cultural fascination with the Kennedy dynasty. Every week, hosts Lyra Smith and George Civeris go into one aspect of the Kennedy story.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.