If iOS Is Forced To Be Like Android

Tailosive Tech Streamed: April 15th, 2024

Episode Transcript

(00:03):
We are back. Ladies and gentlemen, Welcome back to Tailoes of Tech Live
on YouTube. It's been a while. Feels nice to say that. Yeah,
yeah, I took a break because, in case you weren't a wear,
did a big, big road trip, So I was gone for a
while, but pretty much on thatroad trip, made four or five different
videos, but they were all telosof EV related, not tech related.

(00:27):
Sorry, so less things to postabout here as we're waiting around for iPads
to drop and dub dub too comearound and all that jazz. So in
the meantime, I'm basically trying tofigure out what are you guys interested in?
What do you guys want to talkabout? So that's what we're kicking
off today's livestream with is Taylors oftech Pro member questions. Thank you,

(00:50):
by the way for those who submittedquestions, so I'm kind of honoring those
who asked first, who this timeappears to be Alpha the Wolf saying what
would happen if iOS became forced tobe like Android? So I believe he's
mostly referring to a lot of theEU and Department of Justice lawsuits and pressure

(01:11):
from governments both domestic and foreign toopen up Apple, open up iOS and
kind of strip away a lot ofthe Apple ecosystem what do you call it,
Walt Garden like mentality of it.And the truth is, I don't
think the federal government on any scalewill really get too deep into the roots

(01:33):
to the point where you have alot where you can't tell the difference between
iOS and Android. I think thatthey will always have little details that help
each platform kind of stay iconic andrecognizable in its own right. But being
able to have software exclusives or softwareadvantages on your platform, I feel like

(01:55):
might slowly start to become a thingof the past, at least with platforms
are so widespread, so nationwide.You know, when we're talking about a
platform that billions of people use,I think when you're talking on the scale
of billions is when governments starts steppingin and start saying, you know what,
I think you have a little bittoo much control over this app store,

(02:15):
over this platform. Doesn't matter ifApple wants it to be private and
lockdown or not. When the scaleof these devices and the volume at which
they sell at acceeds to these absurdamounts, it just becomes impossible for governments
not to get their hands in itbecause they're like, Okay, this affects

(02:35):
everybody. It's just too much controlfor one company to have. So I'll
definitely be answering the other questions.By the way, Hi, Nicholas J.
Money, thanks for tuning in.Ryan Freeley, thanks for tuning in
as well. I do have aTaelos of EV video uploading actually right now
over mint Mobile because I needed tofree up the bandwidth to do the live
stream over Wi Fi. Yeah,there's been a ton of EV news in

(02:59):
general. I've got the next twoTelos of VV videos done, just a
matter of bandwidth getting them up.But it's funny how that works. EV
news is like this, and technews is kind of down here like this,
But I don't mind. That's thebeauty of having two channels, as
you can kind of focus on whicheverone has the more interesting news. Right
now, that's definitely EV. Butas far as yeah, government regulation,

(03:22):
like Ryan said, it's a doubleedged sword, I agree. I don't
think a perfect system is one wherethere's no government, and I also don't
believe the governmental control everything. Likemost things in life, there's a good
balance that needs to happen, andI think it'll be interesting to see what
happens with iOS with all of thisgovernmental pressure. But personally, I still
think that there will be unique andiconic features of iOS, like the graphic

(03:47):
design, like the animations that Applebanks in that make it really really hard
to switch to Android, even thoughtechnically feature wise everything could come home.
Apple could allow more sideloading, moreemulation, more alt stores, more third
parties being able to do whatever theywant on the operating system, whichever one

(04:11):
they choose, whether it's iOS orAndroid. But I think that Apple will
always still have a little bit ofa design edge, specifically when it comes
to the software that will keep peopleover there. And I think what could
be potentially hilarious that I've entertained theidea of a little bit in the past
when it comes to like forcing Appleto open up everything and making sure there's

(04:34):
less software exclusives. The example Departmentof Justice references is like, you have
to make sure that the Apple Watchworks on Android and that Android watches work
on the iPhone and they have thesame features. You need to be able
to read text messages and respond tothem, and answer phone calls and have
the same phone number on your AndroidWatch as your smartphone, even though currently

(04:56):
that's only possible with the Apple Watch. So the world gardens might knocked down
quite a bit because of the federalgovernment. You know, we don't get
to vote on this, so wedon't know what's actually gonna happen. It's
not like this is some public forumthat we all debate what goes on and
then the government goes Okay, Taylor, sub Tech viewers, what are we
gonna do? You guys have todecide what's the answer. Now. It's
like the chips are gonna fall wherethey're gonna fall. Governments have power and

(05:20):
they're gonna use it. The EuropeanUnion has arguably already had a pretty massive
effect because not too long ago,I recall people saying, Drew, the
iPhone's never gonna switch to USBC,and now, baba, it's literally right
here in front of me and Ican utilize that. So that's an easy
one because that's one that I thoughtwas a great idea, and I wanted

(05:41):
Apple to come to that decision ontheir own. It's a shame that the
European Union had to force them toget to that point. But There's other
things, specifically when it comes moreto the App store and iOS and cross
device compatibility that I might not feelas open towards or less passionate about,
or you know, the morals oflike forcing a company to make sure that
all of their hardware is compatible witheverybody else's hardware. I think could have

(06:05):
some unintended consequences. But another unintendedconsequence that could actually help Apple is if
we find out, hey, guesswhat if you open up the Apple Watch
to be compatible on Android, AppleWatch sales might just continue to grow,
and Android watch sales might decline ifit turns out that Android phones can now

(06:29):
use the Apple Watch as well.Same thing as far as the app store
is concerned. I know a lotof people don't agree with me, but
there's a lot of people that arein favor of app store should be open,
or Apple should let me sideload,Apple should let me install side what's
it called ald stores, Apple shouldlet me sideload apps onto my phone.
Okay, you and me may disagreeon some of these things, but let's

(06:51):
say you're right. Let's say thegovernment forces that upon Apple globally they have
to open up the app store theyhave to open up iOS and let I
message come to Android and all thatstuff. What if it turns out that
by opening it up, iPhone salesgrow Because there's a lot of people like
you that want Apple to open upand be more you know, transparent,

(07:14):
or allow more sideloading or allied,allow emulators or cloud gaming and all that
stuff. Let's say they open itup and it turns out iOS now has
even more advantages. Now there's lessreasons to stick with your Android phone because
your iPhone can now do all thosethings you bought an Android for. Wouldn't
that be kind of hilarious if itbackfired? Michael Lizito, by the way,

(07:35):
thirty one months, thank you foryour support. I hope the lawsuit
never goes to it will It's theDepartment of Justice, Unfortunately, I think
they are pretty good at getting thingsinto trial. Mc rich, thank you
by the way for your super chat. That's incredibly kind of you and entirely
unnecessary. Love how we're all ignoringGoogle copying each part of Apple's ecosystem,
the pixel watches pixel only. Yeah, but no one buys the pixel watch.

(07:58):
That's why we're not concerned about it. I'm pretty sure. The motivation
here is that Apple is known fordoing all of these things the most,
so the laws being targeted at them, and then whatever the consequence to Apple
is that will then be enforced uponeverybody else. So basically, you knock
over the big domino first and thenthe little dominoes fall in their way.

(08:22):
Next up would be the US governmentonly funds NAS chargers, which I'm in
favor of. Oh my god,Honestly, I don't really think we need
more EV tax credits or electric vehiclecharging funding. I'd be more just in
the removal of subsidization of oil.You know how much gasoline would cost if

(08:43):
we didn't subsidize it. Holy crap. The government subsidizes so much oil imports
it's insane. So I think youwould notice electricity being far more affordable,
in EV's being far more practical ifwe just didn't subsidize gas vehicles so much
J money. Thank you for thirtyone months of some very kind of you.
Yes, it makes a market thathas to fight to be better for
the user. Wise, this sobad, I don't personally see it as

(09:09):
that clear. I think that you'retaking away current advantages which a lot of
could be software. But if you'retaking away companies' ability to have software advantages,
you're actually kind of removing their abilityto be competitive. Now the only
way they can be competitive is throughhardware, which means the companies like Samsung

(09:31):
that that are already their own manufacturersare now at a severe advantage to anybody
that's not their own manufacturer. Soessentially, you give a company that already
has, you know, global highestmarket share even more market share. If
we just assume that hardware is theonly way devices can compete, they're not

(09:52):
allowed to compete with any kind ofsoftware. To me, that's more anti
competitive, But it may not matterwhat I think. Jay, thank you
for nineteen months of support. WheniPad is gonna dead, iPads are never
I don't think they're gonna die.There's still a bunch of people that are
gonna buy iPads, it's just they'renot the expensive ones. iPad os is
fine for a three hundred dollars tablet. I don't think it's fine for a

(10:15):
two thousand dollars tablet, despite Appleselling those. But the nation would be
treated to California gas prices without subsidies. Even California, I think would get
much much higher gas prices, andI think EV adoption would speed up a
lot faster if suddenly oil and gasimports were not subsidized as much as they
are suddenly. Although the reason noone's gonna do that is because of course

(10:39):
gas vehicles have been around for sucha long time. So if you remove
all the oil subsidizations, then peoplewho are on the lowest income paying for
gas are gonna pay the highest fees. So you reward all of the people
who already bought an EV, whoare usually you know, have a little
bit more disposable income because they canford an EV, and then you penalize

(11:01):
people who don't have the disposable incomes. It wouldn't be a great look.
But just purely speaking from an energyefficiency standpoint, electricity from the grid is
far, far, far cheaper thanpumping oil out of the ground, refining
that oil, transporting that oil,and then moving it into your car.

(11:22):
But yeah, sorry, you justmissed my answer to your question Alpha.
But basically, I think that iOSwill continue to have its own unique set
of advantages even if the government getseverything their way and pushes Apple to open
everything in sideload and alt stores andall that there may be less advantages,
but I think that in a lotof ways there could be more advantages because

(11:46):
the people who like sideloading and likethe alt stores will now have an iPhone
to choose from, and that couldinadvertently result in a decline in Android sales,
which would be kind of hilarious.Yes, I'm an Aptera believer time,
I've got my app Tera sticker,I've got my Aptara hat. Aptaura
is my favorite company on the world, in the world at the moment.

(12:11):
Very excited for their future, butwrong channel. What the DJ should do
is require Apple to make a TVI know they never would. That would
be a great lawsuit. Thank youfor nine months of support. By the
way, Nicholas linthecom he says,speaking of Bounster, what is your personal
opinion on AI? Do I thinkgovernment should ever? Yeah? I wonder
if what you're asking now ties intoyour pro member question, because I know,

(12:35):
okay, I'll read both just tomake sure I'm not missing anything.
Do I think government should have regulationson how we can use it, such
as AI is being forced to creditsources when providing information. Personally, No,
I think that the government should focusfocus on the people's biggest threats or
biggest most dangerous things to the country. Personally, I don't think AI is

(12:56):
as dangerous as most people think itis. I think tends to have this
s curve in terms of growth andcapability where it has little spurts where it
gets really impressive. But as AIactually deceiving a lot of people, and
not any more than headlines are.People are going to believe what they want
to believe. You can already photoshoppictures, you can fake videos and make

(13:18):
people think they are real, andwe have deep fake technology that's been around
for years to make it look like, oh, look, this guy's doing
such and such, and then AIis just another tool that people can use
to create misinformation. But we've hadtools to create misinformation for years. In
fact, most people I know thesedays that are fighting about politics or controversial

(13:39):
subjects like that they pick and choosewhich news articles or which facts they want
to believe based on headlines. Soif a headline says something that doesn't support
what they believe, they discredit thatheadline and say, well, it's probably
not true. But if a headlinedoes support what they want to believe,
then they believe that and say,Okay, that news source probably is true.

(14:00):
Well, I don't think AIS isas dangerous as people claim. Personally,
I could be wrong on that,But what I think is far more
dangerous to the general public that's notbeing acknowledged enough is food and drug administration
is not spending the thumbs up.There's so much horrible stuff in our food

(14:24):
that's incredibly addictive and damaging to ourguts and our microbiomes that everybody just consumes
on the regular and it is prettymuch like high fruitose or added sugars is
in pretty much like over seventy percentof our food and grocery stores. And
because most people don't have the timeor know how to become their own farmers
to grow their own food, you'rebasically at the mercy of whatever is in

(14:46):
your local supply chain, your localgrocery stores. And heart disease is one
of the biggest causes of death inour country and in the world. It's
not just a US problem, It'svery prevalent in other countries as well.
So I would say governmental focus farmore on like what we're eating and putting
in our bodies and how that supplychain is being managed. And how much
subsidization goes on with a lot ofthese big corporations that are managing all of

(15:09):
our food and we don't have reallyany control over that. So I would
basically just go down a list oflike most common forms of death, and
let's just tackle those things first,most common forms of death. I don't
see AI and smartphones and app storesbeing a huge I mean, you could
say livelihoods, but again I don'tthink they're as big an issue as the

(15:31):
healthcare crisis, insurance problems. There'sall kinds of bigger problems that I think
government should tackle. I don't thinkapp stores and sideloading is as big a
deal as those other things. Also, military spending as far too be dB.
Thank you for the super chat.I have a game Boy Emily later
on my iPhone. Now this wasn'tthe win that Android people thought it was.

(15:52):
Now I have one less reason toeven buy an Android. Wouldn't that
be funny? That'd be another situation, but we'll probably be a full circle
where Apple is forced to allow sideloading, They're forced to allow alt stores,
and then less people buy Android phonesbecause of that, more people buy iPhones,
and then Apple has even bigger marketshare, and then they have to

(16:15):
be breaking up because of a monopoly, which might make a fun video.
I don't know, how would youbreak up Apple if they were accused of
being a monopoly? How would youseparate that business? Yeah, Crown is
saying heart diseases the number one causeof death in Japan, and they eat
much healthier than most countries do.Yeah, it's a worldwide problem. I
think it mainly has to do withthe amount of stuff we put in food

(16:37):
to get it to last, andalso to make it more addictive. There's
actually a lot of evidence that theconsumption of fructose is just as addictive or
has similar effects on the brain ascocaine or heroin. You know, we've
normalized it. We don't think aboutit as much because it's everywhere, and
it's kind of impossible for us towrap our brains around the concept of not
consuming fructose and added sugar anymore.If you tell people these days to just

(17:02):
try to eat more whole foods anddon't consume these kinds of sugary substances,
they're kind of like, what's thepoint Why would I live if I can't
eat these snacks or I want toeat these things that I want to eat.
I struggled with this as well.I still struggle with these things because
of course, the kind of foodsyou grew up with or the foods you
go out to eat for you've tastedthings that your body was probably never meant

(17:25):
to taste. You know, we'vehad our food and beverages change more in
the last fifty years than they havein the previous thousand years. And our
bodies were really you know, evolvedand adapted for this kind of hunter gatherer
like diet and mainly just eating thingsin your local surroundings, whereas now we're

(17:47):
getting used to eating things that arefrozen and transported from hundreds of thousands of
miles away, and in order toget them to last, in order to
get them to sustain or in afree market where you're trying to make foods
that are more competitive against other brandsfood, you have to add all of
this sugar and fruit toose and artificialstuff that of course makes it delicious.
There's no denying that, especially inAmerica, we have oh many delicious food

(18:12):
options. But aren't they good foryou? Of course not. Yeah,
it's it's a huge problem and Idon't think there's much being done about it,
honestly, Like there's not much focuson like, oh yeah, that's
like pretty much all soda is prettymuch like just a poison and a can.
Yeah, good luck. You knowhow much high fructose corn syrup is

(18:33):
in food, you'd have to bandlike over fifty percent of food. It'd
be a huge it'd be a hugeproblem. And there's a lot of lobbying
power by the Food and Drug Administration. So anyway, it's a it's a
whole sidetrack thing we could go down. But Ryan Farley says, agree,
one hundred percent people selectively consume media. Yeah, and that's why I don't
think AI is that damaging. I'vetalked to a lot of people that say

(18:56):
AI is going to become a reallyprobably a real big problem because now people
are going to believe more and morefake information or misinformation, and I'm like,
we already had that problem. Don'tact like this is a new thing.
Misinformation people believing what they want tobelieve. Yeah, good luck.
I mean, I don't think artificialintelligence really changes it all that much.

(19:19):
People act like, oh, well, they can crank out a video of
anything you want now, and it'slike, Okay, most of these companies
that are coming up with the textof video thing with AI, most of
them are pretty progressive anyway and beingvery careful about what you can and can't
render out. I think most peopleare pretty Most of the developers with this
AI stuff are pretty conscious of like, yeah, don't let the chat bot

(19:41):
tell people how to rob a bank, or don't let the chatbot tell you
how to I don't know, poisonpeople or something like that. They're pretty
good at detecting that kind of thing, So I don't know. It's to
me, it always falls back tolike, no, the people are what's
dangerous, not the technology. Technologycan encourage or become more destructive. I

(20:04):
mean, this easily gets very political, but I don't know. Moon River
says, you know, tech isdry. When I didn't even know that
the Humane AIPAN thing existed, andI look at it and I'm just like,
eh, I don't really care aboutit. I didn't watch the videos
on it. I'm surprised so manypeople thought that it had like a chance.
That's the surprising thing to me aboutthe Humane aipin Like, the second

(20:25):
I saw it, I was like, that's excuse me. Sometimes I get
these coughing fits. I'm almost donefrom being sick. Yeah, I agree
with Jordan. AI is hyper censoredalready. I'm sick and tired of hearing

(20:52):
about AI. Yes, I agreewith you. Apple repair. I think
it's a hype word. It buildsa lot of investment because the investment community
is constantly trying to figure out whatis the next big thing. That's why
Apple suddenly starts using AI all thetime, I think because they just know
that open AI got a bunch offunding very quickly, because investors are all

(21:15):
about, Okay, what's showing alittle bit of promise that is about to
take off, that's going to like, you know, multiply my investment by
a ten x or twenty x.And AI is perfect at that because AI
always makes some impressive big jumps inprogress, but it never quite gets to
perfect. But at least for theinvestor, it makes them think that it's

(21:36):
about they're about to crack some bigcode that's going to change everything. And
then it changes some things and it'sa useful tool, but it never quite
is as disruptive as I think peopleexpect. But yeah, I was surprised
that you know, the first timeI saw the humane aipin, I was
just like, that doesn't seem likea good idea at all, and I
didn't think it was worth making avideo on. I'm surprised that the company

(22:00):
got enough traction that it deserved somuch. You know, even Marquez reviewed
it and all that stuff. Iwas like, did no one else just
see this coming from a mile away? Like that's just a bad idea from
the get go. I don't.Yeah, I'm surprised so many people thought
it was a good idea. Mcrich supertedted. I really liked the idea

(22:23):
of people as a neighborhood paying afarmer to come farm their backyards and then
everyone shares communism. Yeah, Imean, ideas are easy. Execution is
the hard part. But I appreciatethe super chat. It's really not necessary.
But thank you turning ihous into Android. But why would I ever want

(22:45):
to do that. I don't thinkit will become Android exactly. But Android
copies things from iOS, and justso we're clear, iOS copies things from
Android too all the time, andI'm okay with that. As long as
you copy the good things and youtry to make them better. I'm all
in favor of it. I don'tthink you know what did Steve Jobs always
say a good artist copy great artistssteel. There's totally a bunch of stuff

(23:11):
that Apple takes from other companies almosteverything. Hardly ever, is Apple first
really to any technology. They're alljust about the execution. I think that's
what's underrated. Too. Much ofthe market is focused with who's first,
not who's best, Like what's thewho's the first to implement something, versus
who's the best to implement who's thebest at implementing something. Apple is a

(23:33):
classic example of that. On howlike, everything Apple does is rarely about
we were the first to do this. It's always about we were the first
to implore or we were the bestat implementing this. I don't think having
access to competitive app stores is belike Android. Android doesn't close their os,
but either does Windows or Mac.The lack of openness is a distinctive

(23:55):
feature of iOS, but being opento customization is not an Android feature.
It's just an absence of restriction.And of course the government does have reasonable
authority to incentivize competition among app stores. Well, I just we've talked about
this a million times, so I'mdebating if I should keep talking about it.
But it goes both ways. Becauseone platform wants to be closed that

(24:15):
another one doesn't. So you're saying, eliminate the option to have a platform
that wants to be closed off.It's like if someone wants a closed off
experience and wants a phone that justhas one app store, which, believe
it or not, some people dobecause iOS marketer is growing. I think
the company should have a right todo that. But you know government's going

(24:37):
to government, so the government can'tforce you to download a third part of
the app store, sideload anything,so there's really no risk. No,
but there's nothing preventing Meta or Googlefrom coming up with their own app stores
that are separate from the iOS appStore. This is the exact same thing
that happens on Windows. You know, you can't force all the games to
go on the same launcher, whichmeans you've got to download fifteen different launchers

(24:59):
now to act access all of yourgames. It can we what's it called?
It can worsen the experience for theend user. If the devs can
kind of do whatever they want unregulateit, how are they going to download
it? If it's not through theapp store, it's probably going to be
through a browser. So how doyou download it through a browser? You
probably have to tap on a link. If all it takes to download an
app that's not approved by Apple andwe don't know what it does is tapping

(25:22):
a link, there's going to bean increased growth in malware because now you
can just be browsing a website,tap an ad that's seemingly convincing to an
elderly person or someone who's not techsavvy, then now downloads an app in
the background that starts doing something thatit's not supposed to do because Apple can't
approve it. You know, there'sdownsides to it as well, and the
government just I don't think visualizes thedownsides. But I think Apple is probably

(25:45):
smart enough and intelligent enough to finda way to regulate the sideloading and regulate
the third party app store so thatyou definitely know if a company is trying
to put an app on your phoneand is unable to do it secretly in
the background. But again, ifan app finds a vulnerability or a backdoor,
Apple can't shut it out because nowthey have to allow everybody on there,

(26:06):
not just their own devices. AndApple makes mistakes. We know that,
so I don't think MKVHD killed thecompany. I think the product idea
was flawed from the start. Butneed super Chat. It's his thoughts on
Apple making a banking app. Theydon't have to use their own money.
I have Apple Cash account. Justgive me physical card and a routing and
an accounting number so I can leavecash app. I've been I thank you

(26:26):
for the super Chat name. I'vebeen in supportive that for a long long
time. Just feels like Apple wantsto just keep, you know, laying
off people and downscaling things. Butyeah, the wall and app is already
halfway there. You got a cashcard, you got a credit card,
you gotta save his account? Reallyjust a debit card? Well they already
got a debit card. Really withthe Apple Cash, all you really need
is a checking account with like yousaid, routing an accounting number and they'd

(26:51):
be good. But again, thankyou for the super Chat. Very kind
of you let me before I forget. Nicholas length to come renewed his subscription,
but he also asked a question inthe Tailor's with tech Pro member section.
Here he says, since it soundslike this year Apple is having to
license all of the AI features fortheir platforms. Do you think one day,

(27:11):
if ever, if Apple ever hastheir own AIGPT like model, they
would start completely from the ground up, meaning starting completely from scratch by scrapping
Cyrus, forcing the company to createa whole new large language model with a
new APK developer method. To me, it seems like the method of action
would be the best route for Appleto take when they truly want to delve
into AI. Seems like Cyrus hasbeen so limited from the get go.

(27:34):
You would think for a company thattruly waits to put new innovations out on
the market that they would take bettertimes last care into AI since Cyrus the
virtual assistants seems always slagged behind thecompetition, So they talked about this on
the Waveform podcast recently. I personallythink that Apple's at a crossroads because usually
what helps large language models the mostis lots of data and lots of training,

(27:57):
and Apple just doesn't have a greatway to build in lots of training
data because they're mostly a hardware companythat's trying to get more into software,
but most of their revenue comes fromselling phones and selling hardware, whereas Google
is more of a search company,so they have lots of training data from
Google Search. Large language models andchatbots are usually pretty good at just you

(28:21):
text it or you ask it aquestion, and Google Search is very much
asking questions or people trying to findan answer to a question. So Google,
because they run the world's biggest searchengine, I think, will always
have kind of a bigger advantage inthat regard. And also a lot of
ais dependent on training data, anda lot of training data sometimes comes at

(28:41):
the cost of privacy, whereas Appleskind of build their whole brand and everything
around. We are the privacy company. We don't need your data, we
don't want to track your data,we don't want to build a profile on
you, which is nice, butit usually comes at the cost of Okay,
well, then your AI, yourdigital assistant isn't going to be as
knowledgeable. It's not going to knowas much. So personally, I don't

(29:02):
think they will start from scratch.I could be wrong, excuse me,
but I think Apple will likely buyout training data from other companies or partner
with other companies like their room andto license Google's Gemini technology and integrate that

(29:23):
into iOS in some way. Ifthere's any AI that they can do locally
or natively with their neural cores builtinto Apple Silicon, they definitely will do
it. But I think there's certainadvantages that other companies are always going to
have because Apple is not built around, you know, a search engine,

(29:47):
and the companies that are just goingto have way more data to train their
large language models with Burckhart says,I mean it's worth noting that iOS apps
are still sandbox and malware would onlywork if they could exploit the system to
get root access, which is veryhard as is jail breaking is dead.
I agree, but I do thinkthat it would be more plausible with sideloading

(30:08):
and old stores than without. Soyou're increasing a certain amount of risk,
but there is probably a safe,reliable way to do it in the same
way that macOS allows sideloading and oldstores, but for the most part is
pretty safe. But I would saythat mac os is probably a lot more

(30:30):
dependent on just using the Internet.There's a lot less people that need to
download specific apps on their laptops anddesktops because they're not as specialized, whereas
our phones do. So many differentthings all at once. We use them
for payments, we use them ascameras, we use them for email,
we use them for games, weuse them for movies and so many things.
Note, taking, calendar, allthat stuff that. You can do

(30:53):
a lot of that stuff on alaptop or a desktop, but people just
tend to use laptops and desktops formore specialized things, I think, than
smartphones, which is why apps area bit more common. What would you
do if tomorrow Apple decided to dropa search engine. I think I would
like apple stance on privacy. It'swhy I use Safario over Chrome. I
use both. But keep in mind, I think Apple's privacy stance is mostly

(31:19):
a pr thing. I mean,they were caught in the past sharing audio
recordings that people had with home pods, and they were sending those audio recordings
to third parties and letting people listento them to validate them, and they
weren't telling people they were doing that, And that's just what they got caught
doing, so imagine what they don'tget caught doing. But yeah, there's

(31:40):
definitely certain things they do that areobjectively helpful, whether it be hiding your
email address or you know, encryptingmessages and to end or that objectively does
help with privacy and stuff. ButI do think for the same reason,
an Apple search engine probably wouldn't beas good as a Google search engine because
it's not trained as it's not goingto be trained as well, and if

(32:01):
Apple tries to put more of aprivacy emphasis on it, then it's not
going to learn as well what yourneeds are, what your preferences are.
I'm still wondering what's taking so longto get the driver's license thing at Apple
Wallet that's on the States, thathas nothing to do with Apple. Apple
has private APIs which can be accessedby developers now and can pose a threat
Apple to screens for those now,so they rarely get on the store.

(32:24):
Yeah, I believe it. Ibelieve that what did Greg say, sideloading
is a scam artist's best friend.Really, both Samsung and Google are both
the so called super company, sinceApple seems to have a true reliance on
the both of them. Hot take. That's a good point. Apple's very
much the design company when it comesto the software and the hardware, but

(32:47):
they do kind of rely on Googlefor search and a lot of our services,
whether it be Gmail or YouTube orI guess those are the big ones.
But then Sam a song as doingall the manufacturing rcs. I don't
think is necessarily encrypted, but itcan be. Apple is still reviewing all

(33:07):
of the apps that go on theALT stores, so yeah, for now,
I don't think that's the long termplan. But that's the whole malicious
compliance thing where they were like,Okay, we'll allow alt stores, but
we're going to do it in theworst way possible and make it financially unviable
for anybody to attempt. I feellike every time I do a livestream,

(33:30):
we come back to these same topics. But as long as you guys are
interested in, I hope you're notgetting bored. But I hope that answered
Nicholas's question that I do not thinkthey will start from scratch, just because
the Apple's privacy emphasis and the factthat they get most of their revenue from
hardware sales, not search revenue likeGoogle, puts them at a fundamental objective

(33:52):
disadvantage compared to their competitors. SoI don't think even if Apple developed their
own search engine, it would getmuch use compared to Google, and financially
doesn't make much sense for Apple tocome up with their own search engine,
because Google will pay them tens ofbillions of dollars to do nothing. So

(34:12):
the second Apple makes their own searchengine and switches that as the default on
all their Safari browsers, they loseout on tens of billions of dollars worth
of revenue, and now they haveto also develop their own search engine,
which is going to cost them money. So Apple will literally save tens of
billions of dollars a year by notdoing that. They handle those home pun

(34:34):
recordings in house. Now, Appleisn't perfect. They overlook things, and
I completely understand companies are just agroup of flawed humans. Yeah, but
my point is that's what they gotcaught doing. They I think they knew
it was wrong. They just theywere hoping it wouldn't be seen. I
don't think anyone would share audio recordings, especially when at the same time they
had advertisements on billboards that said privacythat's iPhone. You think they were putting

(35:00):
up those billboards but then thinking sharingaudio recordings with third parties was okay.
No, they would just say,well, let's not bring much attention to
that. Where's Microsoft's lawsuit? Asthey're practically on the desktop laptop computing market.
Well, they were sued I thinkin the early two thousands for monopolistic

(35:21):
practices. But yeah, it mightbe time again, but it would more
for me be because of acquisitions thanbuying up companies, big companies like Activision.
So Google isn't a monopoly either inmy opinion, I mean, not
the kind of monopoly that I thinkneeds government intervention. But if we're looking
at monopolies as a spectrum, becausethe definition of monopoly is kind of vague,

(35:45):
it's not very specific, you know, I would say internet providers and
utility companies should be looked at farmore closer as monopolies because a lot of
people are forced to use internet providersor utility companies that they don't want to
use, but because they live inan area where that's the only option,
that they raise their prices and theyget price couched with big tech companies that

(36:07):
are on a global scale. Ifyou want to make the case that any
company that has a higher than fiftypercent market share, because that's what the
Department of Justice was claiming, isthat Apple is a monopoly purely because they
have sixty percent market share, andamong teenagers they have you know, like
eighty or ninety percent market share.To me, that's not quite the same
as okay, well, is itbecause teenagers can't buy Android phones? Are

(36:31):
they choosing to buy iPhones or they'rebeing forced to buy iPhones? In my
opinion, I think it's kind ofrude to the Android market to claim that
they cannot use androids. I havea lot of friends and family members that
use Android phones and are perfectly happywith them. They're able to get by
in their day and they're coexisting withtheir iPhone friends. So I would say,

(36:52):
no, Apple's not a market sharein that regard. But if you're
purely judging a monopoly by its marketshare, Google has a fi far far
higher market share of their you know, search engine or YouTube as far as
online video content goes, I wouldsay, if we're just talking about market
share, Google's much closer to beinga monopoly than Apple is. But yeah,

(37:17):
apparently I'm missing the point. Butyou're not very good at articulating what
the point is because I'm not seeingany other message from you. But I
want to get the point. Pleasehelp me understand. Let's see, I
switched to Technaco off of it's thestupid state government's I beta test in Florida's

(37:37):
idea appsence that sucks. They evenchanged the law that you can drive without
physical idea. Yeah, in Californiathere is a digital driver's license, but
it's not through the Apple wallet app, which is so frustrating. I'm currently
using a pixel as part of thechallenge throughout the month of April. There
you go. Alpha is somehow ableto do it. Samsung is the real

(37:58):
super company. They basically do iteverything from Memories, Rams, fabs to
even being the leading phone manufacturer.If they stopped working, everyone would be
disrupted. Yeah, but I guessSamsung isn't based in the US, right,
so the government can't do much aboutthat. Wouldn't the Walt Disney Company
be considered a monopoly under what theDOJ is claiming, because after the Fox
acquisition they now own sixty percent ofHollywood? Yeah, I mean again,

(38:21):
it's it's not the kind of companythat I think we need government involvement with
because it's I mean, at worst, it's just a lot of dominance in
an industry, so that affects people'sjobs. But like, is it bad
for the general public that all ofour movies and TV shows are owned by
one or two companies. It's like, I don't think that's a huge threat

(38:42):
to our country, our population.But I guess if you're just purely basing
it off of market share, yeah, Disney, you could make the cases
a bit of a monopoly. Ithink it's just baked by Epic Game,
Spotify and those who don't want topay for the app store fees. Yeah,
I think that's a huge motivation.There's a lot of money to be

(39:02):
saved, at least on paper.I think a lot of people have this
mindset that if I could reduce Applesfee, or I could get rid of
Apples fee, we would increase ourrevenues by twenty to thirty percent. So
of course people want that to happen, but I think it could come at
the cost of the user experience gettingworse. But I think Apple will do
the best they can with whatever therules and jurisdictions are. Which of these

(39:29):
worst devices which you take? iPads? Who may pin or Chromebok oh?
iPads? Of course I love iPads. You're using such emotive language. Apple
doesn't need protection. I know Icoulplain about Apple more than anybody It's funny
how people just assume that I'm tryingto defend them. I'm I'm just saying

(39:50):
what I think. Man. Isold my Apple Watch, I sold my
iPad because I was unhappy with themin the on them. So if I
think Apple's in the wrong, justlike when they had lightning on the iPhone,
I will complain about them day andnight. But when I think they're
in the right, I will alsodefend them. Would you give the iPad

(40:14):
pro another shot off it had ofmeaningful changes in this hardware this month or
next. Just because my MacBook Prois so great, I probably wouldn't give
it like I'm gonna buy and keepthis another shot, But I'd be willing
to start like recommending it again ifsomeone is in the market, because I
think the iPad Pro has the chanceto become basically the best two in one

(40:37):
product in the world. I thinkit could be a fantastic tablet and a
fantastic laptop that could beat out allthe other two in ones. But because
Apple is just kind of stuck intheir ways, they're insistent that iPad has
to be iPad and Mac has tobe Mac and we are wrong to try
to blur the two. Even thoughI think the iPhone is a success because
it blurres so many products together.The iPhone is a tremendous success because it

(41:00):
was a combination of camera, phone, iPod, internet, communicator. All
of these things merged into one fantasticproduct, which is why it's so hard
to beat. That's why the humaneaipin or Apple Vision Pro can't compete with
the iPhone because it combined a bunchof different products together. And when I
try to use that same argument inthe case of the iPad, I'm just

(41:21):
instantly met with a bunch of thecommunities saying, no, Drew, iPad
is iPad, So if you expectit to do Mac like things, then
you should just buy Mac. That'show I said. Okay, then I'm
just gonna keep using my Mac andI'm not gonna buy any more iPad.
Yeah, the hardware isn't really theproblem, although if it did run macOS,
then yeah, mymacwick Pro would kindof do a lot of things better
with more ports and stuff. Thepoint is that Apple makes it hard to

(41:45):
use any other product that isn't theirown. This is anti competitive because if
you can't have an iPhone, youcan't buy a Samsung Watch. It's not
about bankrupting Apple. I think that. I know we don't agree on this,
but to me, it's not anticompetitive to just simply not do something.
Apple would have to put in morework, more time, more software

(42:07):
engineering efforts to make sure that everyfeature that the Apple Watch has is also
available on the Android side. It'svery easy for them to develop Apple Watch
features because they get to justify itas well. Watch OS needs to be
capable of doing that. If youwant an APK to make sure that every
company on Earth is also capable ofaccessing all of those texting and notification features

(42:29):
that you designed for watchOS. Thattakes more time, that takes more money.
I'm not saying Apple can't do that. I'm just saying should it be
illegal for them to not put inthe time and effort that it would take
to develop those APKs for developers.Personally, I don't think that's anti competitive.
I just think it's a choice thatthey made. But if you do

(42:50):
think it's anti competitive, then Iguess you also have to think Google's anti
competitive because they don't let the pixelwatch work on the iPhone. I like
the way you think, but doyou ever think one day we will see
a touchscreen MacBook. I guess nothing'simpossible, but I feel like they could
have done it years ago and theystill haven't. So if they haven't done
it by now, they probably neverwill unless there's a big change in leadership

(43:13):
that drastically rethinks everything. But I'mokay with it. I think Mac Os
is well optimized for keyboard and mouse, and I think if you want touchscreen
on a bigger size, iPads theway to do it. I think what's
far more likely is to get macOs on an iPad, assuming the iPad
has a keyboard and mouse connected toit, and then you'd have one device

(43:35):
that can do you know, touchthings and keyboard and mouse things really well.
But the idea of adding a touchscreento the Mac I just don't think
is necessary and would dirty up thescreen a lot, complicate the manufacturing a
lot, and make the software teamhave to work API. Sorry, sorry,
my bad, You're right, mcrich, I'm using the wrong acronym.
There's too many acronyms to keep trackof, but appreciate the super chat,

(43:59):
thank you. They just don't haveto limit the Samsung Watch. They're
not actively limiting the Samsung Watch ismy point. They would have to go
out of their way to make theSamsong Watch compatible because they didn't want to
design the API, Thank you mcrich. They didn't want to design the
API to make the Samsung Watch pairwith the iPhone. I mean, technically

(44:22):
you compare them via Bluetooth. There'sjust a bunch of features that don't work.
But that's because Apple didn't build thosefeatures. It's not like the features
were there and they were working incompatibleand then Apple chose to shut them off.
They just never built the tools neededto port those devices to work together.
But personally, I would ask howmany iPhone users would buy the Samsung

(44:44):
Watch even if it did work.I don't think a lot. But ironically,
if the Apple Watch worked on Android, I think the Apple Watch might
actually kill off a lot of Androidwatch sales because the Apple Watch is kind
of the best smart watch given thefact that it sells so well even though
iOS is not the dominant market share. Boy, can you imagine how many

(45:07):
more Apple Watches they could sell ifthey were on Android. Yeah, uses
the car Bluetooth features, but inthe form of a watch. Yeah.
To me, anti competitive is whenyou go out of your way to prevent
a competitor from getting a feature towork. It's not when you just simply
don't help your competitor. Building theAPI to help your competitor is what you're

(45:30):
suggesting. It's not like the APIswere already there and they just chose to
shut them down. So Devil's advocate, I will critique Apple on something they
have done that I would agree isanti competitive, which would be preventing Spotify
from advertising premium in the App Store. I thought that's anti competitive because you're

(45:52):
letting other developers advertise, you're takingad revenue from other apps. But suddenly
this developer wants to advertise some thing, and because it competes with Apple Music,
you're going out of your way tosay, actually, no, you
know what, that doesn't That doesn'tfly. So it's like, Okay,
if you would have done nothing,Spotify could have advertised, but you went

(46:13):
out of your way to make surethey couldn't. To me, that's anti
competitive, and I would say,yeah, that shouldn't be allowed. And
I think Spotify had a much bettercase against Apple, but Epic Games did
not have a great case against Apple. That's why they lost. Pretty much
all the all the counts in thecase. But uh yeah, I think

(46:36):
the argument that the Samsung Galaxy Watchisn't compatible with the iPhone, that's that's
because Apple did nothing. Apple wouldhave to go out of their way to
do something to get it to work. I think that is one argument they
make because you have the watch onlyfor the iPhone, when you which you
need to not only buy a newphone but also a new watch. Yet
I do think it would be good. I mean, I think that's personally

(47:01):
kind of a weak argument because ofcourse, when you buy a new product,
the accessories from before might not workwith the new one. Like that
happens with everything. Like I couldbuy a different car than the car I
have now and the tires may notfit. Or you know, the case
I buy from my iPhone isn't goingto be compatible with the case on an
Android I buy. But I guesswhat it mostly boils down to is people

(47:25):
don't see software development is that valuableor that hard. So it mainly just
comes down to, oh, well, just make it work, make it
compatible, make it have all thosefeatures. And because you know, the
Department of Justice or lawmakers don't understand, like ah, that's kind of a
lot of development or time to comeup with these APIs and SDKs for everything
to be cross compatible and make sureeverything is working with every other device on

(47:50):
the market, because there's all kindsof different connectivity standards that Apple's going to
have to abide buy with those thirdparty watches, Whereas when they just design
it for the Apple Watch, theyknow exactly which connectivity they have to prioritize,
so to keep things simple and tokeep support easy, they just made
it work with the Apple Watch.But to a you know, lawmaker or
the government, they don't know aboutall of the work that goes into that,

(48:10):
so they just go, ah,yeah, well of course it could
do all those things. But Applejust flipped a switch that prevented them from
doing all those things. So it'slike, yeah, you probably don't think
of it as that big a deal, but mc rich says it is.
I hate them as conception of developmentis easy. Now. I'm not trying
to make the argument that Apple doesn'thave the resources, because clearly Apple's a

(48:34):
trillion dollar company. They have themoney, They have the software engineers to
develop an API or an SDK ifthey so desire. But my point is.
I don't think it should necessarily beconsidered wrong for them to choose not
to develop all those things to makesure all of the devices are compatible with
one another. Like, if theywant to do that, they can,
But I don't think it should beconsidered criminal for them to not go through

(48:59):
those steps to make sure that theApple Watch works on Android. Megato Schmidt
says, yes, they think it'sjust a button press to support something,
which it could be that simple.Yeah, I mean, relatively to the
executives and Apple, it probably is. I mean, they could probably just
tell Craig by the way, makesure the Apple Watch works on Android,

(49:20):
and it would take a while.But all of that time it's probably not
so much like they can't develop anAPI. It's mainly just like all of
that time the software engineers spend makingsure that a Galaxy Watch works with the
iPhone or the Apple Watch works witha pixel is time spent away from developing
new features for watch os, ortime spent away improving or bug fixing watch

(49:42):
os and iOS in its current form. So they Apple's prioritizing themselves obviously,
because the hardware is what brings inthe revenue, and Apples not put a
big priority on making sure that theircompetitors have a good experience. That's I
don't think that's criminal. I thinkit's a little selfish. Sure, you
can argue that it would be nicerfor Apple and more generous of Apple to

(50:06):
make sure that all of my thirdparty hardware and accessories are compatible with my
first party hardware and accessories. Butshould it be considered illegal? That's where
I say No. Apple is avery lean company, so they generally have
to hire new people for something asbig as that. Yeah, but I
agree that they probably would, Butthe lawmakers are probably just saying, nah,

(50:27):
yeah, let's say they get tenengineers. That's like two million dollars
a year. Oh easily, probablymore. But yeah, two million a
year for Apple is dropping the bucket, right, So it's like a lawmaker's
not going to say, oh,you don't want to pay two million a
year to bring Apple Watch support toAndroid or something. But in theory,
shouldn't we work towards the future whereeverything works with everything else as far as

(50:50):
possible. It's possible, so whyshouldn't we I know, money, I
mean, you can believe that youcan argue in favor of that I just
don't believe in the if a companychooses not to, should that be considered
criminal. It's a different of like. I think that's where the big disagreement
is. It's like there's a preferenceand then there's a a legal thing like

(51:15):
should it be illegal for a companyto prioritize their own hardware to build up
their own walled garden. Yeah,Burkehart is going to have to explain there's
employee counts in that kind of thingcompared to other brands. But anyway,

(51:36):
someone was asking about home Kit accessory, so I should make sure I answer
Joshua Miller's question here before we wrapup. He says, it amazes me
that with every other smart home standardworking, find that Apple still can't seem
to fix HomeKit and Matter to whereyou don't have to try sixty times to
add one device and constantly have todisconnect power and reconnect it every time you
want to use that accessory. Ican't tell you how many hours of annoyance

(51:58):
and frustration would have been wouldn't havebeen wasted had they actually fixed these issues
with it. It's all just soridiculously unreliable. It's almost like Microsoft developed
these standards. Yes, I agree. I don't use my smart I don't
use my home Kit stuff anymore.I mean, my blue light is technically
HomeKit enabled, but I just flippedthe switch on and off to control it.

(52:21):
I don't control it through my appor anything like that because it's just
too unreliable. And I've reviewed somany different Wi Fi networks and used different
routers in the past, and everytime I changed routers, everything, all
the smart home stuff just breaks.So yeah, I just I think the
experience would be so much better ifhere we go. This kind of relates

(52:43):
to our last topic. If Applemade their own accessories, if Apple was
the one making the smart switches,if Apple was the one making the thermostats
and the doorbell and the security camerasand all that, or the light bulbs,
if Apple was designing all that,I'm sure it would just work because
you just have so much more communicationbetween the software and hardware teams. You
don't have a billion different standards thatyou're trying to join together. Actually,

(53:06):
the failure of Matter and home Kitmight be a prime example of what happens
when you try to get a bunchof companies that are all in different parts
of the world that can't all collaboratetogether because it's just physically impossible. You
get a disjointed, kind of harderto use experience because different communication protocols,
different hardware standards, So you can'texpect a software team to optimize every single

(53:30):
piece of hardware that comes out ofthe market. It's just again, software
optimization is far more complicated than peoplehave than people believe it is. It's
called Matter. That's good. Iknow the intention behind Matter, but Joshua

(53:52):
Miller saying the Matter experience is stillYeah, the Matter experience is still not
great or not that consistent, ButI don't know. I haven't reviewed them
recently, so I'm not sure.But we need things like Matter, which,
by the way, Apple was onboard with. So why are we
upset? You want to see howApple software works on an open platform,

(54:13):
see how the plethora of home kitaccessories work together. Could probably make the
same argument for CarPlay. Yeah,CarPlay is kind of a different experience depending
on which car you went. Recentlya company released Minion routers. You should
google it on stream Minion mounters.Okay, why would you say Matter failed?
I'd argue it's still getting on itsfeet. Well, I just it

(54:36):
was supposed to fix everything. Iguess they never put a timeline on it.
But I'm just repeating what others havesaid because I don't have experience with
it, so I shouldn't comment onit that much, I guess. But
did I hear that Ticketmaster's parent company, Live Nation is reportedly going to hit
with an antitrust lawsuit. I didn'tknow. I didn't hear that. Why

(54:58):
is Apple making the three iPad prothinner? They should put a bigger battery
in it. I think the mainreason is because Apple doesn't put kickstands on
their iPads, so they know thatmost iPad pros are going to be used
with a keyboard case, and thekeyboard case is supposed to be switching to
aluminum and probably be a bit heavierand thicker. So Apple is still in
favor of this detachable system where youcan use the tablet without a case for

(55:23):
drawing, but most of the timeyou'll dock it with a case and have
the keyboard and then you can foldit up. So I don't think it's
just because, oh, we wantit to be thinner and lighter. It's
because they know they're going to becoupling it with a big, heavy case,
so you need the iPad part ofit to be as thin and light
as possible so that the rest ofthe thing isn't too darn heavy. It

(55:45):
got delayed like five years from initialannouncement of launch. Also interesting. I
hope iPhone will be forced to bringback the headphone jack. Yeah, good
luck with that one. I'm lessconvinced that's gonna get passed, but it
would be quite hilarious. There's beenlaws about USBC, but there hasn't been

(56:05):
much laws about the headphone jack.Should government prioritize education over tech company?
Well, I mean, education isa whole other issue. I'm not convinced
there is a good way to domass education, but I do think the
Food and Drug Administration could be doingfar more. The government should be far
more interested in what's killing most people. You know, average lifespans have actually

(56:29):
been declining despite advancements in medical tech, which is I think quite scary and
not being brought up enough in publicdiscussion, Like we have all this new
medical technology and people are actually notliving as long as they used to.
Why is that? It's probably becauseof food and diet. Let's see things

(56:51):
like matter won't work without government push. I lose faith every day in private
companies. North America needs an organizationlike EU to set standards across the continent.
Well, for better or for worse. The US government was designed to
be slow because it was created bypeople that were tired of a tyrannical government,
so they intentionally made it very veryhard to change laws, and that's

(57:13):
why the US government typically acts veryvery slowly on things. YouTube is the
best form of education. There yougo. I still don't get the point
of the tablet keyboard cases if youplay it on long typing session, then
get a laptop with a full sized, proper keyboard. Well, I don't
personally think it's wrong if someone wantsto do long term typing but also want

(57:34):
something that can draw and take noteson. I don't use it as much
anymore because the subject lift became afeature, But I used to love using
my iPad to create video thumbnails,so I don't think there's anything wrong with
wanting a device that can edit videosof course, and do software engineering and
audio engineering. But I can alsotype on it for extended periods, or

(57:59):
I could draw it and do artworkon it, or take notes. If
I'm in class, having one devicethat can do all these things, I
think would be pretty cool. ButI think Apple, I guess, would
rather you buy two, like buyan iPad and a MacBook. It's like,
okay, buy an iPod in aphone. Why do you want to
put an iPod app on the iPhone? Do you think Apple will ever give

(58:20):
us thunderbolt on an iPhone? Ever? They almost did with the fifteen pros,
So yeah, I mean, Iwouldn't be surprised if the sixteen pros
have Thunderbolt. California government has rememberedde band food that has read dye in
it or spicy food do a healthrisk, but not the rest of the
states. Oh that's interesting. I'llbe curious to see how that goes.
My Carpolay compatible car also doesn't connectto my phone as reliably as my Apple

(58:42):
Watch. The screen is almost nevermulti touch, it's a low frame rate,
et cetera. So you get it. Yeah, I can see that.
When you have a bunch of differentstandards you're trying to abide by,
the experience is usually more clinky.What's killing a lot of Americans is the
obesity crisis. We need to beproactive in implement some sort of sugar tax.
No, I agree, definitely.I mean the tax only gets you

(59:05):
so far. I mean, weheavily tax cigarettes, but it doesn't stop
people from smoking. I think outrightbanning would probably be more effective because people
can't. People struggle with self control. It really just doesn't work. The
substances are just too addictive. DoI think the new iPads will be extremely

(59:28):
different or do you think that's thereason when we had an iPad less year.
No, I don't think they'll beextremely different. That would kill funians,
Yeah, exactly. That would bepretty disruptive, but probably good for
us. Honestly, if there wassomething I think the government should be,
you know, I don't consider myselfvery left or right leaning. I'm pretty

(59:51):
apolitical. But if there was somethingI would say the government should just get
really super involved in and really crackeddown on, I do think it should
probably food. I don't think.I mean a lot of people would be
upset. Obviously, a lot ofpeople would be annoyed, and a lot
of people would protest, or maybea lot of people would even leave the
country if they found out that thegovernment was gonna ban you know, high

(01:00:14):
fruit toast, corn, syrup andsugary foods, and there's a certain amount
of added sugar that we cracked downon that you could add per day if
they really got strict about it.I was like, you know, if
we left everything else alone except thefood and beverage industry, it'd be kind
of interesting to see what happens ifeveryone was just kind of forced to eat

(01:00:34):
healthy your foods. You probably justcan't control people as much as you want,
but you know, it'd be likeprohibition. People would find other ways
to eat young food. They'd importit or smuggle it or whatever. But
hypothetically speaking, that's that's always whatgovernment talks about. Imagine banning hamburgers.
Oh my god, I love hamburgers. But I also just think that in

(01:00:58):
general, we have a lot ofdependence on food for not just hunger,
but like emotional or people eat outof boredom, And it'd be really interesting
if we just like suddenly cracked downon all that. I mean, you'd
probably never get someone who would dothat elected. You're never gonna run for
president and say I'm gonna ban desserts. Good luck winning those votes over,

(01:01:25):
But it would be interesting to seewhat would happen. I think a lot
of people would probably lose their mindsgo crazy if they were like I mean,
A huge one that I think causesa bunch of problems is what if
soda was just banned. There's nomore soda? Dang, think of what

(01:01:45):
think of the ad revenue that woulddecline? So much advertising revenue comes from
Pepsi and Coca Cola. No moreroot beer floats, no more ice cream
on fourth of July. Oh man, it would be rough. But I
bet there's be a noticeable uptick onThere'll probably be a noticeable uptick on healthier

(01:02:07):
diets, or there'd be a declinein obesity. But then there'd be this
uptick in depression or something. Ibelieve you saying you're not super left or
right, but you can say you'rea political if you have opinions. I'm
political. I'm like a two parties. Well. The reason I say I'm

(01:02:28):
a political is because I personally justI don't believe that there is a good
way to manage people at mass,whether it's a company or a government.
I just think humans in general thrivebetter and do better under smaller groups.
Any kind of big group of humansmanaging another group of humans is just always

(01:02:49):
going to fail. It's always goingto be bad. Just humans are not
good at managing large numbers of peoplein any political system. I'm guessed I'm
like a what do you call it, a defeatist, Like I just believe
there's no good system. Really.Even if you tried to do all these
things that I'm doing, it probablybe executed poorly and fall apart, and

(01:03:13):
the intention of the intention of thelaw would probably be lost along the way.
You don't need to ban all thestuff, you just need to reduce
the bad stuff in it. Eh, there's a lot of stuff that's just
mostly bad that a lot of peopleeat every day. And I partake in
this stuff too. You know,I'm a hypocrite, but that's why I'm

(01:03:35):
part of the belief that it's likeads, these substances are too addictive for
us to just have self control becausea lot of people can't help it.
I mean, I live a prettychill, relaxed life thanks to you guys
and your support. I have avery dream job. And usually when life
is less stressful and less anxious andyou have less pressure, it's easier to
have self control. A lot ofpeople eat because they don't have much control

(01:04:00):
over other aspects of their life,or they eat because they're stressed, or
because they're worried, or they're anxious, and especially with economic climates we're in
right now, or with people gettinglaid off and things like that, they
eat to escape. So it's like, of course, people who are struggling,
or people who don't have a lotof controllers in their life, which
could come from family or relationships orany of those things, of course they're

(01:04:20):
going to flock towards food as acomfort because it's something they can control and
something that brings them joy and givesthem dopamine rush. So it's like,
yeah, as long as these substancesare available, they're going to be consumed
at mass. It doesn't matter whatI tell you, It doesn't matter what
I know about it. You cando as much advertising as you want about

(01:04:43):
how bad it is for you,people will still do it. I don't
think a tax would work, butbanning and probably wouldn't help either. Again,
it all comes back to it's thehumans that are flawed. It's not
the system, it's not the technology. I wouldn't outright band desserts just swap
the bad ingredients out for healthier ingredients. Yeah, it's a slippery slope because

(01:05:06):
then companies get to decid, well, what do you consider a healthy ingredient?
Are you saying raw cane sugar?Brown sugar is bad? It's like,
well, it depends on how it'simplemented. A certain amount of it.
Everything would probably taste horrible if youjust started taking out all of this
stuff that people are used to eating, and then no one would buy it,
and then the companies would go bankrupt. So no, I don't think

(01:05:30):
I'm a nihilist, but I amlike we need a new term for it.
I'm a localist. I'm in favorof like humans should just take care
of their own little communities. Youshould just trying to be in touch and
be on good terms with people inyour community. If you don't get along
with your community, maybe consider movingsomewhere else, or moving somewhere more affordable

(01:05:55):
or smaller, where you get alongwith people and just you stick together,
help each other out, You helpthem as much as you can, and
you look out for each other.And humans in like small little communities,
whether it's a horrible country or anokay with first world country third world country.
I'd actually learned recently that first worldcountries have higher anxiety levels on average

(01:06:19):
than third world countries, so peopleliving in third world countries aren't as anxious
despite having less money. Sugar freesoda tastes pretty good now, though,
Yeah, but that doesn't mean it'sgood for you. Usually sugar free soda
is replacing it with artificial sweeteners,which can cause just as high of an
insulin response by your body. Soeven though it's not technically sugar, the

(01:06:43):
same side effects that your body getsfrom consuming sugar can still be can still
be caused. So when you intakesugar, you're typically consuming a lot more
calories or a lot more sucrose thatyour body needs to break down to create
energy, and it releases insulin,which can store a lot of that excess

(01:07:05):
energy in the form of fat.But when your body is tasting things that
are sweet, even if they're notsugar, like, artificial sweeteners that are
mostly in sugar free soda can stillrelease that insulin and can still you know,
increase your weight. But so Drew, by paying your YouTube membership,
am I really not supporting your YouTubechannel? But I just supplementing your burger

(01:07:27):
slash soda pop addiction. I willcancel the membership now, No, unfortunately,
I mean you can cancel if youwant. For the record, I'll
be totally fine if there's no channelmembers It's not like some like, oh
please, I'm not gonna be ableto make this month's you know budget.
If you guys cancel like support ifyou'd like, and I'm very grateful for

(01:07:48):
all those who's supporting. But I'llbe totally fine if you don't. But
no, we don't eat out alot and we don't consume. I'm trying
to remember the last time I bought. I mean, usually if I'm at
a we definitely don't buy soda forthe household. There's like there's no soda
in my fridge. We never buysoda and keep it around the house.

(01:08:10):
If I'm at like a family gettogether or something, or a lot of
the times when we, you know, get something from a restaurant or whatever
that comes with a drink, I'llusually go for the diet soda. I
know it's not good for me,but again, it comes down to the
whole self control thing. So Itried to drink as I try not to

(01:08:31):
drink a lot, but I stillpartake. Eventually with some human some form
of government always forms because there willalways be people that want power over other
people, and eventually people get fitup over getting oppressed. Well, I
think it depends on the number ofpeople. If communities stay small, the

(01:08:53):
government can stay small. And Iwould argue like the smaller the government,
probably the more effective it is.What's the unhe healthiest thing you eat?
You eat regularly? Yeah, probably, I still have a diet soda here
and there. You know, sometimesespecially this is a problem in America in
general, but sometimes when you runninga bunch of errands and you're kind of

(01:09:14):
in a hurry, but you needto eat something, it's it's so convenient
to just grab some food real quick, because it's difficult to try to like
home cook every single meal, eventhough that's really what's best for you.
So, like we went to Costcoyesterday and it's like we're getting food,
we're getting loading up on groceries forthe week, and it's very affordable and
very easy and very practical. Costco'sstill got the dollar fifty hot dog and

(01:09:38):
a drink. So for a buckfifty, I can have a hot dog
and a soda. It's not thehealthiest thing, but I'm kind of hungry
and we've got places to be,we've got things to do, so okay,
I still partake in that. No, I don't drink alcohol. I
rarely eat desserts, but I stilloccasionally partake. There's just a lot of

(01:10:00):
social events too, where it startsto become awkward or difficult. Like I
met up with some family that Ihadn't seen in a long time when I
was out in Arizona, and youknow, they brought this like homemade cake
and they put it on this niceplate, and you know, they brought
it out to me. They're like, here's dessert, and I was just
like, well, that's way toomuch. Like I wouldn't have cut it

(01:10:23):
up like that. So if someonelike cuts it up for me and hands
it to me, it's hard andkind of socially awkward to be like,
oh, no, that's bad foryou, especially if you tell someone like
you're trying to cut back or you'renot eating sugar, and then they are.
Then they start to feel bad andthen they're like, oh, well,
I guess I'm wrong to eat this, or then it's like no,
I don't want you to feel bad. It's just a me thing. So

(01:10:45):
sometimes it's just socially acceptable to justpartake a little bit, as long as
you're just trying not to go forseconds. And if someone say, oh,
there's a little bit more, whowants to finish it? Try to
be quiet and try to just sayno, I'm full, I can't need
anymore. Trying to find the mostsocially acceptable way to do that. But
yeah, it's like, who's thatguy on the Hubanman podcast. I listen

(01:11:10):
to things you do once or twicea year. Aren't what's gonna kill you.
What's gonna kill you diet wise?Are things you do every day constantly
or you know, regularly. Sure, having a soda, if you're having
like ten to twelve sodas a week, that's that's gonna cause a lot more
problems. If you're having one soda, you know, one or two sodas

(01:11:30):
a month, it's probably not goingto do it and make a big impact.
But I've read that sugar free sodacan increase the likelihood of heart issues
well soda in general. But yes, there's there's certain sodas that can cause
certain things. But yeah, communismworks in a small group. The bigger
the group, the more it fallsapart. I guess, so I don't

(01:11:54):
It's hard to start any sentence withcommunism works. I don't think it would
necessarily be coming. Is You andLouise cook a lot from Rachel rays to
cook Like, No, No,don't know. We don't use a lot
of cookbooks. Honestly, nothing wrongwith having a soda when eating out as
a treat. Junk food shouldn't bea staple, obviously, but you can
be healthy and eat things that aren'thealthy once in a while. I wouldn't

(01:12:15):
call it a self control thing anyway. Yeah, it's just I mean,
I'll admit I like the taste,So I'm not trying to say that the
taste is bad. In fact,quite the opposite. I'm saying the taste
is so good. You know,a lot of these foods. I'm a
big dessert fan, less so nowbecause I'm you know, cut back and
I've lost about seventy five pounds frommy all time high. But you know,

(01:12:38):
when I was at my all timehigh, I'm a huge fan of
donuts and oreos and cookies. Somuch food I enjoy. That's the problem
is, like I think this foodtastes so good that it probably shouldn't be
legal. That's that's the point onthat is, like we act like donuts
are these like innocent, like simplething. But you know, drugs and
alcohol those are bad. Those arethose cause a lot of problems. Don't

(01:13:00):
do drugs. It's like, ah, but does this not cause just as
much a problem? I mean,it's less in your face, you won't
get like, you know, adui from eating donuts while you're driving,
But you know, long term,the damage that donut can cause is arguably
just as much as some of thoseillegal substances. I do love a good

(01:13:25):
donut, don't get me wrong.I'm just of the belief that this is
I probably shouldn't be able to tastefood this good. That's a problem,
and it's also a much more difficultthing to manage and maintain because unlike alcohol
or unlike drugs like heroin or cocaine, you can't cut with food. You

(01:13:45):
can't cut it out entirely, youcan't give up on eating. You have
to eat. Should unhealthy food beforced to taste bad? Well, that's
the problem with taste bad. That'sall subjective, right, I actually haven't
had much food I don't like.I'm the opposite of a picky eater.

(01:14:06):
I love vegetables, I love fruits, and I love all meat. It's
really I'm not picky at all.I love Brussels sprouts, I love you
know, tomato soup. I loveyou know, just about everything I've tried,
I've liked. There's not a lotof food I've ever tried I don't
like. And you know, I'vehad a street food from the Philippines with

(01:14:29):
like you know, anchovies and fish, and I've had snails cooked snails.
Of course, I've tried all kindsof food and I've alway I've always found
it delicious. But I know alot of people that don't think that way
and only like to eat a certainamount of foods. I think I've eaten
two donuts in the last year,never passed up a donut when offered too,

(01:14:51):
but also never bought any. Yeah, I think that's the That's the
best recommendation I can have is justdon't keep it around the house, because
if you have have bad food foryou around the house, then you're probably
gonna eat it. But trying tocook more from home and just buying affordable
groceries that are more whole foods.I'm lucky enough to like how several vegetables

(01:15:15):
taste. That's true. Getting thosethose vegetable and whole food flavors down at
an early age if you have kidsare thinking about having kids, getting your
kids used to those flavors very veryyoung, I think is one of the
best things you could do for them, even though they may not like it
at first. And it's very hardto get a kid to avoid trying processed

(01:15:35):
sugar, especially with those birthday parties, and when you're trying to teach a
kid or motivate a kid to youknow, be good or you know,
follow your instruction or you know,potty training. It's easy to motivate them
with the cookies and the sugar andstuff. But if you get them used
to and comfortable with some of thosemore raw ingredient flavors, then that's better.

(01:15:58):
Because if they grow up with sugarydesserts and that's all they're used to,
then they'll have a much harder timeadjusting when they get older. I
hate being a picket eater. Flavorusually isn't the problem, but texture,
on the other hand, Yeah,I've heard that one too. Texture I'm
usually living is both good and badfor your own Yeah, it's a whole

(01:16:21):
sub thing. But man, we'renot even talking about tech anymore. What
happened? I guess this is whatyou guys want to talk about. Maybe
I should do a video on lifeabout this, But anyway, I gotta
get going. I've got a videocoming up on Telo's of ev about the
layoffs, so I'm gonna publish thatand then I'm gonna head out here.
But kind of like sower Kraft anyway, I appreciate you all for your super

(01:16:44):
chats and for tuning in. It'sfun topics and it's cool to see where
your guys' headspace is at. HopefullyApple does something interesting here so we have
some more tech stuff to dive into. But it's fun to talk about food
and stuff. And I hope youguys have an excellent rest of date and
I'll see you all again very verysoon. Bye bye