0:00

Coming up on Ask the Tech Guys, Leah

0:02

Laporte is on vacation, but I, my co-sergeant,

0:04

have a great show planned for you. I

0:06

start off the show by talking about a

0:08

family friend who faced off against a scam

0:11

and won. So I provide some tips about

0:13

how you too can win against the scams

0:15

and make sure your family does as well.

0:18

Then we've got some great questions. Someone

0:20

calls in to ask about what version

0:22

of Linux they should put on an

0:24

old MacBook. We talk about

0:26

the changes that have come to the Apple Watch and

0:29

how it's left us with frustration,

0:32

how to capture the upcoming

0:34

eclipse with an iPhone or

0:36

other smartphone, and

0:38

why in the world

0:40

would a VPN block the connection of

0:43

CarPlay if I'm plugging in with a

0:45

USB cord? Plus, Rod

0:47

Biles, Spaceman, joins us to talk

0:50

all about the latest test flight.

0:53

And of course, I've got some questions

0:55

for him. And Chris Marquart shares

0:58

the responses to

1:00

the modern assignment as well as provides

1:02

some tips on how to crop your

1:04

photos. It's all that coming up on

1:07

Ask the Tech Guys. Podcasts

1:11

you love. From people you trust.

1:15

This is Twit. This

1:20

is Ask the Tech Guys. This week with

1:22

Micah Sargent, episode 2016, recorded Sunday, March 17th,

1:24

2024. The

1:29

Space Alchemist. This

1:32

episode of Ask the Tech Guys is brought to

1:35

you by Fastmail, a leader in email privacy for

1:37

more than 20 years. Make

1:40

email better. Fastmail is

1:42

moving email forward with new internet

1:44

standards and open source innovations that

1:46

power many other email services. Fastmail's

1:49

quick settings lets you choose

1:51

new themes, switch between light

1:53

and dark modes, change text

1:55

size, generate masked email addresses,

1:57

autosave contacts, set default reminders,

1:59

and more. Add or

2:01

buy a domain through Fastmail. They will set

2:03

all the records up for you so it

2:06

works immediately. You pay for free

2:08

email with your privacy. At Fastmail, your

2:10

data stays yours and you get better

2:12

productivity features for as little as $3

2:14

a month. It's easy

2:17

to download your old email's data

2:19

and import it into your new

2:21

Fastmail inbox. And remember, Fastmail has

2:23

better spam filters and absolutely no

2:25

ads. Fastmail also works with

2:28

password managers like our sponsor Bitwarden

2:30

and 1Password. And don't

2:32

forget to download the Fastmail app to

2:34

get the most out of your email.

2:37

Fastmail is the better email service. Quality,

2:40

it's worth paying for. Try

2:42

Fastmail now free for 30

2:45

days at fastmail.com/twit. That's fastmail.com

2:47

slash twit. Thank you, Fastmail, for sponsoring this

2:50

week's episode of Ask the Tech Guys. It's

2:54

time for Ask the Tech Guys. This

2:56

week with just Micah Sargent. That's right,

2:58

Leo Laporte is on vacation, so I

3:01

am the... Here, let me just... Cross

3:04

out the S and it's Ask the

3:06

Tech Guy this week. I

3:09

am excited to be joined today by both

3:11

Rod Pyle

3:13

Spaceman and Chris Marquardt

3:16

Photo Man at noon and one respectively.

3:18

But because it

3:22

is not those times yet, we of

3:24

course have the start of the show. Now, you

3:26

probably are familiar

3:29

with this show and if you're not,

3:31

well, welcome. I'm glad you're here. This

3:34

is a show where we take your

3:36

questions and do our best to answer

3:38

them. Now, it's not a, what is

3:40

it, Dear Abby or Chicken

3:43

Soup for the Soul situation. We typically

3:45

don't answer questions that aren't related to

3:47

tech, but we will gladly take your

3:49

tech questions. So if you have those,

3:51

you can get in touch and we

3:54

do our best to help out. There

3:56

are multiple ways to get in touch with us.

3:58

You can head to call.twit.com. That's the

4:01

URL that you

4:03

can go to on either your phone or

4:05

your computer. And that will

4:07

take you to a Zoom room. In

4:10

that Zoom room, you will hang

4:12

out and it's important that you do

4:14

something for us. Either from, again, from

4:17

your phone, from your computer. You look on

4:19

the screen and you find this little icon

4:21

of a hand or you find

4:23

the text that says raise hand and you

4:25

click on that. That lets us know that

4:27

you do, in fact, have a question that

4:29

you want to ask. And so we

4:31

know to bring you up on stage to

4:33

have your question answered. Because we do have

4:35

some fun folks who like to just hang

4:37

out in the Zoom, which is

4:40

totally fine. You're free to do

4:42

that. But that way we can kind of separate those

4:44

who are just there to hang out and

4:46

those who are there to have their question

4:49

answered. So remember to hit that raise hand

4:51

button. The other way you can get in touch with

4:53

us is 888-724-2884. If

4:57

you're outside of the US, you'll want to put a 1 in front of that.

4:59

So 1-888-724-2884. That's

5:02

also 888-724-attg. By

5:06

calling that number, you'll also secretly

5:08

be brought into a Zoom meeting

5:10

where you'll hang out as well.

5:13

And if you're brought on stage to

5:15

ask your question, you'll need to hit

5:17

asterisk or star and then 6 to

5:20

unmute yourself so that you are able to

5:22

ask your question. The other way to get

5:24

in touch with us, much simpler, atg.twit.tv. That's

5:26

the email where you can send your text,

5:29

you can send audio, you can send video,

5:31

all of those work at atg.twit.tv. Oh, and

5:33

by the way, if you call that number

5:35

888-724-2884 during the week while we're not on

5:40

air, you can leave a voicemail for us. We've

5:42

got several voicemails in

5:45

the pool waiting to be answered.

5:47

And so that is another way to get in touch.

5:49

Basically, we want to make sure that you have every

5:52

possibility of being able to reach

5:54

us so that we can answer

5:56

your question. I should also

5:58

mention that as we request. Before this show,

6:01

honestly didn't realize it, today

6:03

is St. Patrick's Day. I'm

6:05

sorry Patrick, who I adore.

6:07

I don't think he's a saint, but I'll have to

6:10

check in and see about his miracles he's performed. He

6:12

certainly performs miracles here at Twit. That's

6:14

Patrick Delahanty. But my socks

6:17

have some green in them, so

6:19

that works. And my watch strap

6:21

is green, so no one can

6:23

pinch me. So happy

6:25

St. Patrick's Day to those of

6:27

you who celebrate in whatever

6:30

way that means. I don't know, dying things green

6:32

seems to be typical. I think Chicago, I don't

6:34

know if they do it anymore. It's probably like

6:36

a natural disaster

6:39

sort of situation or something.

6:41

But I know different places will try to

6:43

use dyes to make their water green and

6:46

whatnot. Anywho, I

6:48

want to get into the show this week because

6:50

a family

6:52

friend of mine recently

6:54

faced an interesting attempt

6:59

at getting

7:02

access to her information. And

7:05

it was a moment of triumph

7:07

because quickly this friend

7:09

said, no, I know that this is

7:12

not real, but I

7:15

have to say that it was

7:17

relatively sophisticated in the multi-level

7:20

aspect of the

7:22

attempt. So I

7:25

want to explain this story. Family

7:28

friend who we will call Meg. Meg

7:33

received a call from a number.

7:37

And in the caller ID, the

7:40

number came up as Verizon, capital

7:42

V, E, R, I, Z, O,

7:44

and all capital letters. And

7:47

interestingly, when Verizon support

7:49

calls, the word

7:51

Verizon and the word support also show

7:53

up in all capital letters. So there's

7:56

the first thing, clever enough to realize

7:58

that they need to. make it

8:00

so that it's all capital letters.

8:03

And they were calling

8:07

saying that there were some issues that

8:09

they needed to figure out

8:11

some security concerns that were going on. And

8:14

luckily, the way

8:16

that Meg quickly realized something

8:20

was going on was that the

8:22

hackers mentioned the payment platform,

8:25

the payment sending service, Zelle.

8:29

And as soon as that happened, Meg's

8:31

hackles went up and said, no, no,

8:33

no, no, no, this isn't real. However,

8:37

once Meg hung up, because basically they

8:39

said Zelle and she said beep, they

8:42

called back two more times. And

8:45

after they couldn't get in touch

8:47

with Meg, who I should mention,

8:49

yes, is indeed a Verizon subscriber,

8:52

they called Meg's husband who

8:54

also has a Verizon phone.

8:59

In the meantime, Verizon itself,

9:01

Verizon support, ended

9:03

up closing down the

9:06

account to the phone line because of

9:08

a security issue. And

9:10

when this happened, they claimed that

9:14

they knew that

9:19

there was going to be a potential

9:21

breach that was going to cause issues.

9:24

These were the hackers that were saying

9:26

this and saying it was part of

9:28

the process, it was a security measure,

9:30

and that all they needed to do

9:32

to get everything reactivated was to use

9:34

Zelle to send a payment. Luckily,

9:37

the husband was near and had already

9:39

heard from Meg that this was going

9:41

on. The husband also didn't follow through.

9:45

Meg hung up the phone, as I mentioned,

9:48

with the hackers, called Verizon,

9:51

and once again, as I mentioned, they

9:53

showed up as Verizon support, but they

9:55

also showed up on Meg's phone with

9:57

a tiny little check mark next to

9:59

them. the name. So to the left

10:01

of Verizon support was a little checkbox

10:05

that is an actually legitimate way

10:07

that iPhones and now many

10:10

Android devices are using to

10:13

show you when you are to help kind

10:15

of confirm that you're speaking to who you

10:17

think you were speaking to.

10:20

And so this kind

10:23

of went on they they did

10:26

a good job in the whole process of

10:28

saying, hey we don't need you

10:30

to provide any identifying information over the

10:32

phone. You should never provide identifying information

10:35

over the phone. All they needed Meg

10:38

to do was just confirm

10:40

information they already had. This

10:43

is the part that freaked me out a little

10:45

bit. According to

10:47

Meg, they knew the

10:49

amount and the date of

10:51

Meg's last payments

10:53

to Verizon. They knew the last four

10:55

digits of the card and

10:57

they knew the last four digits of the

10:59

card used to make the payments. So again

11:01

what they said was, hello this is Verizon

11:03

supporter, whomever. We've

11:07

detected a security breach with your account and

11:11

we don't want you to give

11:14

us any identifying information of the phone.

11:17

A Verizon support member will never ask

11:19

for that. Instead please just confirm that

11:23

the information we have about you is accurate.

11:25

Here is the amount of your last payment, is

11:27

that correct? Here are the last four digits of

11:29

the cards used to make the payment, is that

11:31

correct? Here's the date on which you made the

11:33

payment, is that correct? But

11:37

despite providing that information then they went on

11:39

to talk about Zelle blah blah blah blah

11:42

where Meg said no no

11:44

no. I told Meg that

11:46

Meg should change

11:49

her email password immediately

11:52

because the

11:55

fact that they had that information meant,

11:59

likely meant one of two things. One, that

12:02

these hackers did, I think,

12:06

because it's not necessarily that they hacked. Perhaps

12:08

they just, these social engineers, these bad actors,

12:10

right? That's what we kind of call them

12:12

these days. They either socially engineered a Verizon

12:16

support member to get this information

12:18

or two, they had

12:20

access to Meg's email or Meg's husband's

12:22

email to get this information because

12:25

I couldn't find a way for

12:27

me to go online, for example,

12:29

because sometimes online platforms will have

12:33

simpler ways to

12:35

access your bill without

12:37

needing to log in. Xfinity is one example of

12:39

that. So you only need to have a little

12:41

bit of information and then they will give you

12:43

your bill. You don't need to worry about logging

12:45

in. So try to find something like that for

12:48

Verizon where maybe you only needed a password or

12:50

you only needed the phone number and

12:52

the last four digits of the social security

12:54

number, for example. I couldn't find anything like

12:56

that. So it led me to believe

12:58

that it probably was,

13:00

again, either social engineering

13:03

or it was

13:05

an attempt

13:08

at getting access to

13:10

the email. Now, on

13:13

top of that, the

13:17

security team that were the

13:19

hackers said that

13:21

Meg should change her password immediately

13:24

and that there was going to

13:26

be a request coming

13:28

through to change the password. And

13:31

so what was going to happen was basically

13:34

what they did was they went online, they tried

13:37

to change Meg's password, go through the forgot

13:39

my password process and trigger

13:41

that six digit code being

13:43

sent that then Meg

13:45

would authenticate, which would then give them access

13:47

to be able to get into the

13:50

account. Obviously, Meg said, no, no,

13:52

no, no, I'm not doing that. And

13:55

from there, did

13:57

not follow through with any of the

14:00

rest of it. But I

14:02

think as is always

14:04

the case, it's important

14:06

to be aware of the

14:10

different methods by which these

14:12

bad actors are attempting to

14:14

gain access to accounts. And

14:17

the fact that they had some of that information

14:19

and went as far as to do the thing

14:22

where they said now, listen, you

14:24

should never hand over your personal

14:26

information over the phone. And

14:28

so we are just going to confirm this to you and

14:30

have you confirm back. That

14:32

was a

14:35

pretty clever means of kind of trying

14:37

to lull them into a false sense

14:39

of security, right? Make them feel like

14:42

they were, that this

14:44

was a person who was safe and that

14:47

they were trying to help Meg through everything.

14:49

So good on Meg, of

14:52

course, for seeing that,

14:54

you know, the, oh, we'll get this

14:56

corrected right away. You just need to

15:00

send more money because your payment

15:02

wasn't fully processed or whatever. So

15:04

here's how you go about doing that. But for

15:08

everyone out there, there are a couple of

15:10

tips and tricks that I will provide. First

15:13

and foremost, it's

15:16

incredibly important that, and

15:19

you know, we've talked about this, Steve Gibson

15:21

and I spoke about this on security now.

15:23

There are, with

15:26

the means of access that

15:28

we have now, it is

15:30

safer and better to add

15:33

a two-factor

15:35

authentication step, some

15:37

sort of two-factor step to

15:39

your account and provide

15:42

even more of a means of security.

15:44

Turn on those security features, make sure

15:46

they're there, set those pins, do all

15:48

of that, and do

15:51

what Meg did in this situation, which

15:54

was, despite the fact that, you

15:56

know, this group was trying to kind

15:59

of Get Meg worried and

16:01

concerned and this is a security breach and oh

16:03

no and you start to kind of let your

16:05

guard down because you're Just trying to fix things

16:07

as quickly as possible Meg still

16:09

had some hackles up and said, okay. I don't

16:12

know if this is true I don't know if

16:14

this is the case So any

16:16

way that you can go about because those of you are watching

16:18

the show who are listening to the show Probably

16:21

not something that you Have

16:24

as an issue yourself, right? You're the

16:26

ones that are teaching your friends and

16:28

family in many cases about it and

16:32

So this is a great opportunity to kind

16:35

of talk about another scam

16:39

and kind of be aware of that scam

16:41

now, I want to

16:43

point out a couple of pages

16:47

the FTC Federal

16:50

Trade Commission has a

16:52

great Sort

16:54

of portal on their website

16:57

called consumer alerts and

16:59

the consumer alerts page here,

17:02

let me go full screen here is Constantly

17:06

coming out with new information

17:08

about different types

17:10

of Scams

17:13

of hacks of all sorts of stuff and

17:16

what you need to do to keep yourself

17:18

protected Now these go between just kind

17:20

of general bits of advice like

17:23

planning a spring break getaway. Don't let scammers

17:25

clip your wings So

17:27

do your research don't sign or pay

17:29

until you have specific details don't pay

17:31

with gift cards or cryptocurrency before you

17:33

travel Those are kind of

17:35

you know for some people obvious for some people

17:37

maybe not but then they also have specific situations

17:41

like a charity that

17:43

was a cancer charity

17:46

scam and Let me

17:49

see there was one recently where

17:52

there was a group that was in trouble for

17:57

Doing for kind of oh here we

17:59

go the FTC says that H&R

18:01

Block pressures people into overpaying for tax

18:04

prep. So in this case, they

18:06

are giving that

18:09

alert that, you know, the H, that H&R Block

18:11

might be in

18:13

trouble soon or actually

18:16

pressuring people into overpaying

18:18

for tax preparation. So

18:20

check out that consumer.ftc.gov

18:23

page to learn more.

18:27

All righty. That's

18:29

my quick little story to kick us

18:31

off for today. And I

18:34

think we will hear from

18:36

Leo for a moment before we continue on

18:38

with the rest of the show. This

18:40

episode brought to you by Robinhood. Did

18:43

you know that even if you have

18:45

a 401k for retirement, you can still

18:47

have an IRA? Robinhood

18:49

is the only IRA that gives you a 3%

18:52

boost on every dollar you contribute

18:54

when you subscribe to Robinhood Gold.

18:57

But get this, now through April 30th,

18:59

Robinhood is even boosting every single dollar

19:01

you transfer in from other retirement accounts

19:04

with a 3% match. That's

19:07

right. No cap on the 3% match. Robinhood

19:10

Gold gets you the most for your retirement, thanks

19:13

to their IRA with a 3% match. This

19:16

offer is good through April

19:18

30th. Get started at robinhood.com/boost.

19:20

Subscription fees apply. And now for some

19:23

legal info. Claim as of Q1 2024

19:25

validated by Radius Global Market Research. Investing

19:28

involves risk, including loss. Limitations apply

19:31

to IRAs and 401ks. 3%

19:34

match requires Robinhood Gold for one year from

19:36

the date of first 3% match. Must keep

19:39

Robinhood IRA for five years. The

19:41

3% matching on transfers is subject to specific

19:43

terms and conditions. Robinhood IRA

19:45

available to US customers in

19:47

good standing. Robinhood Financial LLC

19:49

member, SIPC is a registered

19:52

broker dealer. All

19:54

right, we are back with Ask the Tech Guys.

19:56

I am Mike a Sergeant hosting this week. And

19:58

as you know, this is the end. is the

20:00

show where we take your tech questions live on

20:02

air and do our best to answer

20:05

them. While

20:07

we because typically this

20:09

show when Leo's here doesn't start until

20:11

11-11 we start a little bit early

20:13

so we'll wait for those calls to

20:15

come pouring in. While we

20:18

do that I will head to the

20:20

email questions and

20:22

see what we've got there. We've

20:24

got Rod Pyle Spaceman coming up

20:27

at noon and Chris Marquart our

20:30

photographer extraordinaire after

20:32

that. Alrighty

20:36

so in my email

20:38

bin the first

20:41

question comes in from Mark

20:43

who writes in

20:46

with the email subject you have helped

20:48

me before now I have a different

20:50

problem. Says Micah I

20:53

am in a nursing home I have a

20:55

list of podcasts I like to listen to at night.

20:58

The problem is each one of them

21:00

is a different volume some come

21:02

on very loud. Yours generally is the

21:04

right volume level. Hey that's good to

21:07

hear. Burke is

21:09

celebrating behind the scenes. I am running

21:11

a Windows machine with the built-in sound

21:13

card. Is there any way I can

21:15

have all these come up at the

21:17

same level as I go from podcast

21:19

to podcast? Is there a program I

21:21

should be using to build the list? It

21:23

is a real tech audio card on the

21:26

motherboard. Thanks again I look forward

21:28

to hearing from you. Now Mark as

21:31

you know I am primarily a

21:33

Mac user and

21:35

there is a great program on

21:38

the Mac that would do just

21:40

this. It's a program called SoundSource

21:43

and with SoundSource you are

21:45

able to set specific audio

21:48

filters that will for

21:50

any type of output.

21:52

So for example I could

21:54

set audio filters for the output of my

21:57

Mac speakers or if you're listening with headphones

21:59

than that. and you could set

22:01

up an equalizer, you could set up a

22:03

normalizer, you could set up a leveler

22:07

essentially and what all

22:10

of those tools can do is kind of process the

22:12

audio coming in such

22:14

that when it's output it all is

22:16

coming, it's all kind of normalized and

22:18

sounds the same. So

22:21

I reached out to the

22:23

wonderful folks of ClubTwit, twit.tv

22:25

slash ClubTwit and

22:27

asked the Windows users

22:29

amongst us for their

22:32

suggestions for a tool

22:34

similar to SoundSource and

22:37

I got some

22:39

interesting suggestions, just

22:42

a couple and so I thought

22:44

I would talk about those and then the

22:48

option that I came up with because

22:50

actually before I get there, I do want

22:52

to mention there is one very complicated way

22:54

of doing this and this is the way

22:57

that I don't think is

22:59

entirely tenable and is not necessarily

23:02

a situation that I think would work

23:04

for you but it

23:06

is possible to use a

23:08

tool because I've actually had to do this

23:10

before. I used to work

23:13

at a company where

23:16

the video content that we created with audio

23:19

was at one point just

23:21

online and then we had a

23:23

distribution deal where it started appearing

23:25

on cable TV and because

23:27

it appeared on cable TV, it had to follow

23:30

certain rules from the FCC

23:33

including a certain loudness level

23:36

and in order to make that happen,

23:38

we basically had to create

23:41

a whole workflow where the

23:43

audio would be processed

23:45

through this system that properly

23:47

brought up the volume and normalized

23:50

the volume as was necessary and

23:52

I'm using kind of loose terms here because

23:54

the volume and gain and

23:57

all of that, the important thing to understand is...

24:00

sort of the way

24:03

that the audio comes

24:05

across when based

24:07

on its loudness. Okay and so

24:11

there is a way and it's a tool

24:13

that I have in my back pocket that

24:15

I sometimes pull out to

24:18

use Adobe Audition to

24:21

basically keep an eye on

24:23

a specific folder or folder

24:26

directory and

24:28

to anytime audio pops

24:30

up in that folder run certain filters on

24:32

it. So you could if

24:35

you wanted to go

24:37

through this very complicated process every

24:40

time a podcast got downloaded to

24:42

your machine Adobe Audition could then

24:44

automatically filter it but then that requires

24:46

a subscription to Adobe Audition. There are

24:48

some open source tools but I'm not

24:51

sure if they have that ability to

24:53

go and you know watch a specific

24:55

file or folder and so

24:57

that's very complicated. Instead I

24:59

thought let's not act

25:01

on the files directly let's do something

25:03

like what SoundSource does which is acting

25:06

on the audio output and

25:09

there is a tool

25:11

called Equalizer APO and

25:14

Equalizer APO is a parametric

25:18

and graphic equalizer for windows

25:20

that has more than just

25:22

parametric and graphic equalization options.

25:25

So in this case you would be able

25:27

to use this tool to

25:30

set up a number of filters that

25:32

would tell the system when

25:34

you're playing audio I

25:37

want it to all come

25:39

across sounding like this and

25:42

the person who recommended

25:44

Equalizer APO which

25:46

you can get from Sourceforge they

25:49

recommended that you also install

25:51

a plugin for Equalizer APO

25:54

called Peace Equalizer and

25:56

this provides a GUI a graphical

25:58

user interface for the

26:02

APO tool. So Equalizer APO

26:04

on its own is kind of complicated,

26:07

kind of difficult

26:09

to maybe make adjustments to. With

26:14

Piece Equalizer, this helps to also

26:16

bring that out. Now,

26:20

there was another tool that was recommended

26:22

called Ear Trumpet. And

26:24

you may hear other folks recommend

26:26

Ear Trumpet. But Ear

26:29

Trumpet is a tool that lets

26:31

you individually adjust the, it's great.

26:34

It's very clever, very easy. It's

26:38

in the Windows Store. And

26:41

it lets you adjust the audio

26:43

of individual applications. But Mark, your

26:45

problem is not wanting

26:47

to adjust the volume of individual applications.

26:49

You need to go one level deeper

26:51

and say, I want all of my audio

26:53

to sound the same across

26:55

the different devices. And so

26:58

I recommend a tool

27:00

called Boom 3D. Boom

27:03

3D is a tool made by

27:05

Global Delights. It's at globaldelights.com. And

27:08

I used to have this application for my Mac. They

27:12

have since come out with a version

27:14

for Windows. And

27:16

Boom 3D is a lot like the SoundSource

27:19

tool in

27:24

that it gives you the ability

27:26

to add filters to the audio

27:28

so that you can equalize it.

27:31

So that is going

27:33

to be my final recommendation, Boom

27:36

3D, to

27:38

basically take whatever

27:41

podcast it is that you're listening to, kind

27:44

of send the audio through this application

27:46

and then output it so that it

27:48

all comes across at the same volume.

27:53

There are now a few

27:55

suggestions in the Discord that

27:57

are popping up. And so I do want

27:59

to take. look at those. This is whenever

28:01

we've got two hosts and then one person

28:03

can kind of scrub through what's

28:06

available because one of the things that I

28:08

asked folks is please

28:10

don't just do a Google search

28:13

for best tools to do

28:15

this or best tools to do that. I

28:17

wanted to have people who've had an actual

28:19

experience with these tools because

28:21

of course I can do that Google search

28:23

myself and had done that leading up to

28:25

it. But

28:29

I am seeing, thank

28:31

you to one Brian who

28:33

writes, who shared

28:35

a link from Stack Exchange and

28:37

there's a person 12 years

28:40

and 10 months ago who basically

28:43

asked for the same thing. And someone

28:46

in 2014 suggested this.

28:52

It says, this is an old post

28:54

but I found a proper solution for

28:56

those with Windows. Using

28:58

control, excuse me, under control

29:00

panel, hardware and sound

29:03

and then sound, right click

29:05

your audio device, select

29:07

properties, enhancements,

29:10

then turn on the option loudness

29:13

equalization. You

29:15

can also change the release time by

29:17

clicking settings inside the properties enhancements tab.

29:19

The release times determine how long the

29:22

computer waits before raising a quiet sound

29:24

or lowering a loud sound. The shortest

29:26

setting is instantaneous while the

29:29

longest takes one minute before the

29:31

computer adjusts the volume. So

29:34

that was again in October 17th of

29:36

2014. I can't confirm right

29:39

now if that is still available but if it is,

29:41

Windows has a built-in tool for doing

29:43

this loudness equalization then you wouldn't need

29:46

to use a third party tool. And

29:48

then I'll quickly mention

29:51

one other tool that folks

29:53

shared, a free

29:55

and open source tool called Wail,

29:57

W-A-L-E, which collaborates with the cloud.

30:00

stands for Windows

30:02

Audio Loudness Equalizer

30:04

which does the same thing. It is

30:08

going to look at the different applications,

30:10

so in this case whatever tool you're

30:12

using to listen to your podcasts, and

30:15

provide equalization

30:18

based on your target peak

30:20

level. So now

30:23

that I've seen this tool I think I'm going to

30:25

start with Wail, Windows Audio

30:27

Loudness Equalizer, and the suggestion,

30:31

Control Panel, Hardware and

30:33

Sound, Sound Properties, Enhancements,

30:35

Loudness Equalization. As the

30:37

suggestions for what to try first, after

30:41

those don't work, then check out

30:43

Boom3D as an option that

30:46

you can try it out for free then you'll

30:48

need to pay for it after that. But

30:50

yes, this is why I love, love,

30:52

love our listeners who are here with

30:54

me to help answer some of these

30:57

questions. John it looks

30:59

like we've got someone calling. Yeah I was about to

31:01

say we could probably pick up on this caller. Let's

31:03

do that right now. Caller

31:09

you are being brought on air. In order

31:11

to speak with us you will need to

31:13

hit asterisk or star 6 to

31:16

unmute yourself. Hello.

31:21

What's your name and where are you calling from? I'm

31:25

calling from Portland, Oregon. My name is JR. Hi JR.

31:27

Nice to have you on the show. Thank

31:30

you. My problem is I

31:32

have a

31:35

2011 Mac book

31:38

that is no longer supported. I

31:41

want to put Linux on it. What can

31:43

I do and which one would be

31:45

best for someone who knows

31:47

Windows and Mac pretty

31:50

fluently. Okay

31:53

so you

31:55

are wanting to take for anyone who may

31:57

have had trouble hearing that. It's a 20

32:01

2011 Mac that is obviously out of service

32:04

wanting to install Linux

32:06

on it and is curious

32:08

about what flavor of Linux they should

32:10

use given their experience with both Mac

32:13

and Windows as Mac

32:15

OS and Windows as operating systems I am

32:18

going to turn to the chat a little

32:20

bit for the Linux flavor question Because

32:23

there are many a flavor

32:25

out there and of

32:27

course this ends up being a personal question I'm a I'm

32:30

a particular fan of pop OS

32:32

but for people who are

32:35

Shall we say power users?

32:38

They're not super Super

32:41

into pop OS personally. I like

32:43

it because it is For

32:46

as a Mac user. One of the things I like

32:49

about the Mac is that it's for a creative professional

32:51

and pop OS kind of Goes

32:53

down that route of still being a

32:55

tool for creative professionals So, you know

32:57

video editing audio editing photography

32:59

that kind of thing I

33:02

should also mention scooter X points out a suggestion

33:05

that we often give Which

33:08

is that although the your Mac

33:11

is technically out of

33:13

support You can use

33:16

a tool that is

33:19

That makes it possible for you to

33:21

install more recent versions of

33:23

Mac OS It's a tool called

33:25

open core legacy patcher

33:29

and I just wanted to point that out because

33:32

We have suggested this for quite a while

33:34

at this point and from everybody who's installed

33:37

it We have not heard it back that

33:39

oh, you know, I hate this. It's awful. It doesn't

33:41

work So if you don't

33:44

want to leave Mac OS you may check

33:46

out open core legacy patcher, of course you

33:49

know running a more modern operating

33:51

system on a Machine

33:55

that's a little bit older. You will have some slowdowns

33:57

and that's why I could understand why you wanted to

33:59

use something like Linux There

34:01

is a listener in our chat

34:03

who suggests that Zorin, Z-O-R-I-N,

34:07

which is based on Ubuntu,

34:10

or Ubuntu, excuse me, is

34:12

an option for those

34:14

who know Windows and Mac OS.

34:17

So if you kind of are

34:19

comfortable and familiar with those two operating

34:21

systems, this

34:23

is, yeah, yeah, yeah. And as I'm looking

34:26

at it, it does give you

34:28

that kind of feel of

34:30

Windows first and foremost, I would say, and

34:33

Mac OS secondarily. It

34:36

has the ability to kind

34:38

of switch between different grids and views,

34:42

and it seems to be pretty lightweight from

34:44

what I'm reading here. So

34:46

that, I think between

34:48

those, that's

34:51

a, those are some good options for

34:53

you. So Zorin OS, which is available

34:55

at zorin.com, or OpenCore

34:58

Legacy Patcher, which is

35:00

a way to continue to run Mac OS

35:02

on that Mac that's a little outdated at

35:05

this point, a little long in the tooth.

35:09

Thank you, those are both good options.

35:12

Awesome, well, you'll have to let us know how it goes.

35:14

We'd love to hear it. And of course, if

35:17

you have any issues with Linux, you can always give

35:19

us a call back. We

35:21

love talking about Linux here, and

35:24

especially so do our listeners who hang out in the chat. And

35:27

as I mentioned, Pop!OS is always a

35:29

backup if those fail you. As a

35:31

person who is not super

35:34

Linux-versed, I have

35:36

found that Pop!OS is great for

35:38

that, so. I'm

35:40

not into command line at all.

35:42

I barely, yeah, command line stuff

35:45

is not my forte. Understood,

35:47

yeah, well, then I think those options

35:50

we provided are gonna be the best way to go about it.

35:53

Yeah, Leo would probably be suggesting

35:55

some more complicated contraptions, so I

35:57

feel you there, I feel you

35:59

there. question and thanks for the

36:01

call. Welcome.

36:03

Love the show. Thanks guys. Thanks so

36:05

much. Bye-bye. All

36:09

right. Is

36:11

that another call? Yeah, you want to pick them up. Yeah, let's go for that

36:13

other call. Remember

36:15

caller star six to unmute yourself

36:17

when you are brought on air.

36:21

One second of that. All

36:32

right, you should be in caller. Alrighty caller.

36:35

Once you've hit star six to unmute yourself,

36:37

let us know your name and from whence

36:39

you hail and we will see what

36:41

we can do. Hey,

36:45

this is Tim in Minnesota. Hi, Tim from

36:47

Minnesota. Welcome. Hey,

36:51

club twit number here. So I should probably

36:53

be able to find this on your great

36:55

show, iOS weekly. Why not? You

36:57

haven't the archives on that yet.

37:00

I'm hoping you can answer this easily

37:02

today. It's an iPhone question. Okay.

37:07

I think it's software related. On the

37:10

camera, I have a 13 pro and

37:13

I think that should still be pretty good

37:15

for taking nice pictures. And

37:18

my issue is when I'm out at night, I

37:20

try to take a picture and

37:23

there's any colored lights like traffic

37:25

signals or signs or anything else.

37:29

The white light that I guess is

37:31

at the heart of the lights overtakes

37:35

the color of the light. And I only get

37:37

a slight hint of like the

37:40

actual color of any lighted

37:43

fixture that I'm shooting. So

37:45

it'll be like a blue light. But in

37:47

my picture, the

37:50

center of that blue light is overtaken

37:52

by the white brightness

37:54

of the light. And it just is like a

37:56

slight blue change around the sky. And

37:59

I just wondered, is there software, is

38:01

your setting in the software that I could change

38:03

the amount to make the color

38:05

and scene show for my

38:07

photo? Gotcha. So to clarify,

38:10

make sure I'm understanding you, you go

38:12

out at night and you, just as

38:15

an example, you happen to stop by

38:17

a traffic signal

38:19

and the light is red

38:22

currently. You take a photo of that

38:24

red light and when you look

38:26

at the photo on your phone, you expect

38:29

that the light is going to show up

38:31

red on your phone, but instead the light

38:33

is showing up white in the center with

38:35

maybe kind of a red ring around

38:37

the outside because it's,

38:40

as a photographer would

38:42

say, blown out. Yeah,

38:44

exactly. I just get the halo of

38:46

the color that I saw with my

38:49

naked eye and even through the

38:51

phone finder. The end photo is not

38:53

nothing like what I'm seeing. Now I've tried

38:55

different settings in the camera. I've

38:57

gone to, well I left the

39:00

exposure on automatic. Usually

39:03

we'll set it to like a three setting

39:06

and then I have to hold it still

39:08

until it finishes and I've

39:10

even read that the only way to really

39:12

get rid of that is to shoot it

39:14

in video in 60 frame

39:18

format. That doesn't tend

39:20

to work very well either. It's just

39:22

still reached out all the colors. When

39:25

I'm looking at a light, I'm only seeing the center

39:29

brightness mostly just with the halo

39:31

of the tint of the color

39:33

that I'm seeing. So I

39:35

just wondered maybe my camera's defective or I

39:37

know there's a lot of settings inside the

39:40

software to change the camera. I just wondered

39:42

what you would recommend or if there's just

39:45

maybe iPhones aren't good for shooting this kind of thing at

39:47

night. Maybe I need like a real

39:50

good camera. So this is a great

39:52

function. Yeah, I absolutely love this question

39:54

because I think a lot of people

39:56

use their cameras. their

40:00

phone cameras and they take

40:03

a lot of photos right and they end up

40:05

being unhappy with some of them but they just

40:08

kind of falls to the wayside and they don't

40:10

necessarily pay attention to it but there's always you

40:12

know opportunities to help with this and so one

40:15

thing that could be going on is that

40:18

because the

40:22

the phone is using

40:24

given that it's a newer device it

40:26

has the ability to kind of keep the

40:28

shutter open longer particularly in

40:30

low light situations and

40:32

when it's keeping that shutter open longer

40:34

it's possible that because it's letting in

40:36

more light that's kind of getting it

40:39

overblown and so I do wonder if

40:44

turning off the night

40:46

shift setting would be

40:48

helpful to kind of

40:51

capture the photo as you are wanting to

40:53

see it there

40:55

is let me see in camera when I launched

40:59

the camera and I

41:02

tap I can't

41:04

remember where this is now because

41:07

it moves unfortunately I don't

41:12

remember off the top of my head where

41:14

night shift settings are available so let

41:17

me actually look that up really quick to

41:20

disable night shift because

41:22

this is what I'm thinking or

41:24

not night shift night shift is the the

41:27

controlling the color retcon

41:29

you got me inspired by this so night

41:31

shift is controlling the color the white balance

41:33

of the screen but the tool that I'm

41:35

thinking of is sort of

41:37

the night photography on

41:40

the iPhone so

41:42

it's called

41:44

night mode and again

41:47

what it's doing is kind of taking these

41:49

very low light photos and a little icon

41:53

pops up that

41:55

appears in the top left corner

41:57

of the screen if

42:00

you're only listening not watching I'll kind of

42:03

describe but basically in the top left corner

42:05

of the viewfinder a little yellow pill shows

42:07

up and it has a Duration

42:11

it's typically one two or three seconds and

42:14

there's kind of a little moon Icon next

42:16

to it and that the seconds

42:18

corresponds to how long you're meant to hold your

42:20

phone still while you take a photo and During

42:24

that time it tries to keep the shutter open

42:26

while also tracking the movements that you were doing

42:28

those light movements You're doing with the phone while you're

42:30

trying to hold it still and then combines

42:32

all of that to make a photograph And

42:35

I'm wondering if that's interfering and so any

42:37

at any time you are able to Tap

42:40

on that little pill to turn it

42:42

off which will then keep

42:44

night shift turned off I

42:47

keep calling a night shift which will then

42:49

keep night mode turned off Which

42:52

should in theory let you take

42:54

a photo as you're seeing

42:56

it on your view screen The

42:59

second thing I'm going to suggest on

43:01

top of maybe turning because it's not in every

43:03

case that you're gonna want to do this Right.

43:05

This is when you're specifically taking photos of lighting

43:07

or kind of trying to make a moody photo

43:10

that has lighting in it I

43:12

understand that you would probably want night

43:14

mode turned on if you are taking

43:16

a photo of a person in And

43:18

it's a pretty dark room, but you want to capture

43:20

as much light as possible So there are reasons to

43:23

have it on and off another suggestion

43:25

that I have though is On

43:28

your phone under the in

43:31

the settings app under

43:33

photos options There

43:35

is a section called HDR high

43:37

dynamic range and

43:39

that setting shows view full HDR

43:43

and what that does is when you

43:45

are looking at photos that have A

43:49

very high dynamic range in the photos

43:51

app It will

43:53

adjust the screen so

43:56

that it shows you that full

43:58

dynamic range And

44:00

you may think this is counterintuitive if I'm telling you

44:03

to turn this off because you're not

44:05

getting the best, most wonderful view of

44:07

the photo. But it's

44:09

been my experience anecdotally that

44:11

every person who I've

44:15

told to turn off this feature or who has been told

44:17

to turn off this feature ends

44:20

up liking the look of their photos

44:22

a lot more without that high dynamic

44:24

range version turned on because it does

44:26

kind of it sort

44:28

of takes a photo that exists within a

44:30

smaller range with all of the colors and

44:32

the exposure and everything and it sort of

44:34

stretches it out and can make things look

44:36

pretty severe. And

44:39

so it could be something as simple as that. So

44:42

there are two options that I have for

44:44

you. One, try toggling off

44:46

night mode when you go to take a

44:49

photo. And then two,

44:52

consider toggling off the

44:54

view full HDR setting in

44:56

the photos settings on

44:59

your phone. If

45:02

that doesn't solve it at that

45:04

point, I would suggest reaching

45:06

out to Apple support

45:08

and seeing if it's possible that the

45:10

camera is defective. I doubt

45:13

that that's what's going on, particularly if you've

45:15

seen some other people complaining about it, but

45:18

it's a potential. And

45:21

then there's always also the option

45:23

of using a third party app.

45:27

We have, I test

45:29

lots of camera apps on

45:32

iOS today as you mentioned.

45:35

And so there are many out there. Halide

45:39

which is H-A-L-I-D-E is

45:42

the app I would suggest you consider using

45:45

because it's been my experience that

45:48

it does a good job of making it

45:50

so that the photo or that the view that

45:53

you're seeing on the view screen is

45:55

the same as the photo that ends

45:57

up being captured itself. Look,

46:00

there's gonna be a lot of tinkering you

46:02

can do with that app there are lots

46:04

of options for adjusting white balance adjusting exposure

46:06

of making changes

46:09

to focus of all of that

46:11

stuff, but If

46:13

you do use a third-party Camera

46:16

app sometimes you do as you mentioned

46:18

there are more fiddly controls that exist

46:21

with the camera that aren't exposed in

46:23

the default Camera app. So that's an

46:25

opportunity Potentially for you to be able

46:27

to get that photo that you're after

46:29

because yeah you should be able to

46:32

take a photo at night of a Really

46:34

pretty blue light and have it show

46:36

up as blue not white with a

46:38

blue outline around it That's

46:40

not what you were seeing That's not

46:42

what the camera shows you that it

46:45

is seeing and so for it to

46:47

not appear that way in the photos

46:49

app Afterwards is very frustrating and I

46:51

totally feel that Thanks

46:56

so much for your time. Yeah, thank you

46:59

for your call and best of luck and

47:01

happy photo taking Wish you

47:03

all the best great All

47:06

see you next time man. I was yes.

47:08

Yes. Thank you for thank you for listening

47:10

to iOS today I appreciate it and for

47:12

being a club twit member also twit TV

47:15

Club twit to those of you who are

47:17

interested in signing up All

47:20

righty folks We are

47:22

just around the corner from having

47:24

our first of two Guests

47:27

today rod pile so

47:29

I thought I'd head back to the emails

47:31

real quick we got

47:34

an a question in again, you

47:36

can email us at G at twit TV

47:38

a question in from Jason who writes

47:41

with the subject wireless carplay

47:44

adapters It says hello,

47:46

Leo and Micah love the show

47:48

I have a couple of questions

47:50

about wireless carplay adapters both cars

47:52

We own have wired Apple CarPlay

47:55

and we'd love to make them

47:57

wireless I've seen adapters out

47:59

there from companies like car link it that

48:02

people have used with mixed success. Are

48:04

these adapters safe to use? Is there

48:06

any chance of them damaging my phone

48:09

or the car stereo? What type of

48:11

data access do they have to my

48:13

phone? Why aren't bigger name manufacturers making

48:15

these adapters? I'd feel a lot better

48:18

buying one from Belkin or even Apple.

48:20

With reports of future iPhones being portless you'd

48:23

think this would be an issue Apple was

48:25

interested in solving. Thanks for all the great

48:27

content. I'm a satisfied club twit member and

48:29

this again is from Jason from

48:32

Rockford. Jason this

48:34

is a fantastic question and

48:37

I will have to be honest with you that I cannot

48:40

answer all of these questions with 100% certainty to your

48:42

or my satisfaction.

48:46

But what I can do is answer to the

48:49

best of my ability. So

48:52

let's start with are these adapters

48:54

safe to use? The

48:56

car link it is an

48:58

option for third party wireless

49:02

CarPlay and I've got a

49:04

link somewhere. There we go. This

49:07

is a little device that you plug into

49:10

your actual car

49:13

and then from here the car link

49:16

kit will let

49:18

you connect to it as

49:21

the CarPlay device and then

49:23

it kind of passes all that information through

49:25

to your car so that it can properly

49:27

do wireless CarPlay. Now I

49:29

will say this I know a number

49:31

of people who sort of who are

49:34

tech podcasters who use these. I know

49:36

a number of Apple

49:38

journalists who use these. I

49:40

know quite a few folks who

49:43

are just everyday folks who use

49:45

these devices specifically from CarLink It.

49:48

To ask if they are safe

49:50

to use I would say that

49:53

they are generally safe to use. What I

49:55

mean by that is frankly

49:57

everything that you touch and everything that you

50:00

interact with is not

50:03

with 100% certainty, safe to use.

50:05

There's every chance that the iPhone

50:07

that you get could be defective,

50:09

right? You could buy

50:12

an iPad and it has a bad battery and

50:14

then it's not safe to use. So I'm not

50:16

going to give this the sort of full 100%,

50:19

there's never going to be an issue. But anecdotally

50:22

speaking, and from reviews that

50:24

I've read about this, this thing is safe

50:27

to use. Is there any

50:29

chance of it damaging your phone or the car

50:31

stereo? There's very little chance of it damaging your

50:33

phone or the car stereo. For

50:35

one, with your phone, it's just

50:37

that Wi-Fi access point that's taking

50:40

place there. And then

50:42

for your car, it's

50:45

just passing along that information to the

50:47

car. What type of data access

50:49

does it have to my phone? Anything

50:51

that's CarPlay related. But keep in mind

50:53

that this device itself is not connected

50:56

to the internet. So that's

50:58

the kind of cool thing about CarPlay

51:00

is that CarPlay is

51:03

either wired or wirelessly. It is

51:05

all from the phone. It's not

51:08

from your car. So it's not

51:10

as if you get in your

51:13

car and your car has Android's

51:16

version of CarPlay. I can't think of what it's

51:18

called, Android Auto. And CarPlay is

51:21

built into your car and when you plug

51:23

in your phone, it activates it. No. Your

51:26

phone is actually projecting the CarPlay

51:28

experience to the screen of your

51:31

entertainment system. So everything's coming from

51:33

the phone. This device

51:36

doesn't have any kind

51:38

of access to what's out there. It is

51:41

only providing the means of connecting

51:44

to your car to give it

51:46

that access. So technically,

51:50

there's a chance that it

51:52

could be taking the audio

51:56

choices that you're making and saving them to the

51:59

car link kit. then I don't

52:01

know if it somehow gained access to

52:05

The internet in again in some way that

52:07

I can't think of then it

52:09

could pass that information along but From

52:12

everything that I understand about it from every person who's

52:14

ever reviewed it and from as long as it's been

52:16

on the market That's never been the case. So I'm

52:19

answering these questions, you know in in

52:22

good faith because I understand that concern

52:25

But I don't think that that concern is necessary now This

52:29

is the great question that you have

52:31

next why aren't bigger name manufacturers making

52:33

these adapters This is

52:36

where I go into theory mode not

52:38

theory mode, but theory mode my

52:40

theory is that Apple

52:43

and Perhaps

52:47

some of the other competitors or some

52:49

of the other companies out there that

52:51

already make Different

52:54

adapters and and and car

52:56

tools may have kind

52:58

of agreements with these car

53:01

manufacturers because think about this if

53:04

There are let's say there's

53:06

a company called. There's

53:08

a car manufacturer called BCW

53:12

and BCW makes cars right

53:14

and there's a model of

53:16

a BCW that Has

53:19

wired carplay and then there's that same model

53:22

that has a better trim

53:24

that has wireless carplay Why

53:27

would BCW

53:30

want Apple to provide

53:32

a way that would cost less money

53:35

to make that BCW with

53:37

wired carplay wireless That's

53:40

not that's not good business for

53:42

BCW and Apple of course needs

53:44

to have a good relationship with

53:46

BCW So that carplay

53:49

is still provided as an option within

53:51

the vehicle because as you know Apple

53:55

carplay is not available in all cars and

53:57

we've heard from a number of car manufacturers

53:59

who have slowly started to

54:01

remove CarPlay from their

54:03

cars, remove the access to CarPlay from

54:06

their cars. So that's

54:08

my hunch for why Apple

54:10

doesn't give you a wireless

54:13

CarPlay adapter. And then Belkin, it

54:17

could be just marketing, understanding,

54:20

it could be because Belkin also,

54:22

as I mentioned, makes other

54:25

tools that you can use in the car. So maybe

54:27

they've got agreements, who knows? But again,

54:29

that's just a hunch for why they don't. I

54:31

agree with you that it'd be great if Belkin

54:33

or Apple made those. Oh, and that's the other

54:35

thing that I just thought of, is

54:37

that third party head units

54:40

have CarPlay built into them. In many

54:43

cases, you can buy third party head

54:45

units. Belkin offers a

54:47

lot of times fit kits and other

54:49

things that work with those third party

54:52

head units. So again, it's that thing

54:54

of if Belkin starts offering a tool

54:56

that drops out the market for third

54:58

party head units, those companies aren't

55:00

necessarily going to want to do business with Belkin because

55:02

now Belkin is more of a competitor instead of a

55:05

partner. So that's its popitalism

55:08

is my hunch for why there

55:11

aren't bigger name manufacturers.

55:14

Now, as far as all of that

55:16

goes, I do recommend the Car

55:18

Link It. There are some others that

55:20

people recommend, but I have not heard

55:22

as many good things as often as

55:24

I have when it comes to the

55:26

Car Link It option.

55:28

There is the site that you can

55:30

go to, the Car Link It site.

55:32

I recommend ordering these from Amazon. I

55:38

don't know the return policy for the first

55:41

party site that they're sold on. I

55:43

don't know anything about that, but with

55:45

Amazon, it's easy to buy, get it in

55:47

two days and also to do returns

55:49

if you decide you don't like it. There's

55:53

a 3.0 version, a 4.0 version

55:55

and I believe it now goes up to 5.0. I

55:57

recommend 4

56:01

or 5.0 as

56:03

your car link it

56:05

option. They

56:08

work with both Android Auto and

56:11

CarPlay as the

56:13

means of connecting to your

56:16

vehicle. And I

56:18

got to tell you as a person

56:20

who has wireless CarPlay,

56:22

it's so handy to just be able to

56:24

get into your car and never even have

56:27

to pull out your phone and have it

56:29

automatically connect to CarPlay. So

56:31

Jason, a fantastic question frankly

56:34

and hopefully I've done a good job of

56:37

answering those questions to

56:40

the best of our ability

56:42

here. Again, there are

56:44

some caveats there. Alright,

56:47

have we connected with

56:52

our caller? Well before we get to

56:54

that, let me take a quick break

56:58

so I can tell you about

57:01

Wix Studio who are bringing you this episode of

57:03

Ask the Tech Guys. Now, I've only got one

57:05

minute to tell you about Wix Studio. So let

57:07

me get into it. It's a web platform for

57:10

agencies and enterprises and here are a few things

57:12

you can do from start to finish in a

57:14

minute or less on Studio. Adapt your designs for

57:16

every device with responsive AI, Wix

57:19

Studio's pre-made solutions with back-end and front-end

57:21

APIs. Generate code and troubleshoot bugs with

57:23

a built-in AI code assistant. Switch up

57:25

the styling of hundreds of web pages,

57:27

that means fonts, layouts, colors, all in

57:29

a click. Add no code animations and

57:32

gradient backgrounds right in the editor.

57:34

Start a design library. Package your

57:36

code and UI and reusable full-stack

57:38

apps. Oh, and one more big

57:40

one, deliver everything your client needs

57:42

in one smooth handover. Time's

57:44

up, but the list keeps going.

57:46

We love Wix Studio. We love

57:48

that it's such a full service

57:50

tool that is great for both

57:52

developers and designers that you can

57:54

customize as much as you want.

57:56

So step into Wix Studio and

57:58

see for yourself. Go to

58:01

wix.com/studio or click on the link

58:03

on the show page to find

58:05

out more all

58:08

right with that we are

58:10

back to the show and that means it's time

58:12

for Rod

58:15

piles Spaceman I really

58:17

want a nice echo effect for that. I

58:19

just think it would sound so good Sorry,

58:22

that's that's on the budget. Dang it. We

58:24

got to up the budget here Rod. Welcome

58:26

to the show Rod. How you doing? Thanks,

58:28

how are you? I'm good. Oh, I am

58:30

peachy keen so happy to get to talk

58:32

to you about space stuff I gotta tell

58:34

you you're making me more of a space

58:36

Enthusiast than I ever have been so I

58:38

always appreciate getting this chat with you This is

58:40

like our conversations with ant who used to go

58:42

on and on and on about how much? More

58:45

important throwing a little bag of air

58:48

around was than spaceflight. You

58:50

know, I can't come on He

58:53

still writes me every now and then saying

58:55

I'm still not into space but well that

58:57

was kind of interesting I Yeah,

59:01

it's all accomplishments. It's not even

59:03

necessarily that I Find

59:06

anything else more more important.

59:08

I just I don't know for some reason. I

59:10

never got the space bug so to speak And

59:13

maybe it's because it just feels so

59:15

distant from me Well, I think

59:17

it's also partly a function of when we

59:19

were born, you know because I'm a crusty

59:21

old man I got to see the Apollo

59:23

program happen, which was incredibly exciting When

59:26

you were young the shuttle was going up It was going

59:28

in orbit and they were starting to build the space station,

59:30

but I think it was a little less Magical

59:33

in a way. Yeah, I think you're probably right

59:35

about that. Yeah, absolutely By

59:38

the way, I pardoned the background here.

59:40

I'm rejiggering the studio, which is a

59:42

little tiny room. So it's kind of

59:44

a mess Well,

59:46

I didn't notice so, you know So

59:49

cluttered all the time. So by

59:52

the way, do you drive a BCW? I

59:54

do not drive a BCW Okay,

59:57

I have the one of those $90. Wireless

1:00:00

card played displays. Wait,

1:00:03

Car please. Apple right? Yes,

1:00:05

I'm. The. Kind words.

1:00:07

But as I think you're alluding to

1:00:09

every time we get the car he

1:00:11

gonna hook it up. It hijacked the

1:00:13

audio so then you have the punch

1:00:15

around all these settings and Chinese to

1:00:18

figure out how to get it back

1:00:20

on the the main speakers and it's

1:00:22

no fun. But Yeah is so having

1:00:24

a Twenty seventeen Jaguar with electronics from

1:00:26

the nineteenth century and vacuum tubes, I

1:00:28

think it's just miserable. It takes. It

1:00:31

takes my my Gps display good twenty seconds

1:00:33

to update every time I try to move.

1:00:35

No way. oh it's awful. yeah that does

1:00:38

not some fun at all now so I'd

1:00:40

die like at the you discuss your solutions.

1:00:42

will have to go back to listen to

1:00:44

it. more depth as I gotta do something

1:00:47

this is described me bad yeah that would

1:00:49

die. How would it be rather frustrating for

1:00:51

shirts are to tell us what's going on

1:00:54

in space the says my friends. So.

1:00:56

We got too big stories in

1:00:58

a third of we end up

1:01:00

having time of course though. the

1:01:02

one everybody was watching this week

1:01:04

was the Starship Test Flight number

1:01:06

three and fingers crossed you know

1:01:08

come on Ilan Spacex guys let's

1:01:10

let's go and.it did launch successfully.

1:01:12

all thirty three engines lit up

1:01:14

a didn't destroy the so second

1:01:16

successful time. With that are tested

1:01:18

this new hot staging system they

1:01:20

have where they start the upper

1:01:22

stage ages before releasing the lower

1:01:24

stage. Which. Hasn't been done much to

1:01:27

the U S, just a couple of by

1:01:29

C B Ems back in the sixties. Russians

1:01:31

it is successfully so that worked with as

1:01:33

good. As they did

1:01:35

separate, they staged in the upper

1:01:37

stage, continued on to quote orbital

1:01:39

speeds which is not quite getting

1:01:41

into orbit. Are They did

1:01:43

a by to test. when they were coasting above

1:01:45

the earth, they opened their little payload bay door

1:01:48

that they've. Designed for the

1:01:50

thing and that a critically they

1:01:52

tested. We sank with called inflight

1:01:54

fuel transfer which is moving fuel

1:01:56

from one take to another way

1:01:58

or hurdling along and or. Because

1:02:00

they need to figure that out to

1:02:02

be able to make this thing do

1:02:04

Lunar landings for Nasa in a couple

1:02:07

years. I'm however the lower stage did

1:02:09

not quite make it back to it's

1:02:11

it's so called soft landing in the

1:02:13

ocean that they are planning. Ah,

1:02:16

it broke up. About. Fifteen hundred feet

1:02:19

above the ocean which is five minutes

1:02:21

it to fulfill this mission. It was

1:02:23

a success. The upper stage show started

1:02:25

rolling around and that means of the

1:02:27

heat shield was not properly oriented towards

1:02:29

the air's is coming back down. It

1:02:31

broke up high up space so this

1:02:33

don't want to work to do so.

1:02:35

The the the big question now is

1:02:37

how many flights can they do this

1:02:39

year? Next year. To. Try and

1:02:41

work out the bugs missing because before

1:02:43

they can put astronauts on it and

1:02:45

send them to the Lunar surface with

1:02:47

the Artemis program, they gotta do at

1:02:49

least one maybe. fingers crossed to robotic

1:02:51

landings there to make sure the thing

1:02:53

works. So the big snag here is

1:02:55

getting the F A A to give

1:02:57

them permission to launch more frequently cause

1:02:59

I got a bunch of these thing

1:03:01

standing in a row ready to go.

1:03:04

So. It's a little bit of a got Turner.

1:03:06

Here's the reentry footage. We'd never seen this before.

1:03:08

He is he the plasma building up in the

1:03:10

lower end their i'll look a good for a

1:03:13

while. There. Sir to roll a bit.

1:03:15

Which. You know, They've model of

1:03:17

this thing to death and computers but you

1:03:20

really don't known to apply and want to

1:03:22

start a role. It turned into a torch.

1:03:27

South as exciting but at the same time

1:03:29

it's like come on you guys, come on

1:03:31

We've done. We've done a lot of this

1:03:33

stuff at least once before and now this

1:03:35

case. this is all new and others or

1:03:38

visibility come apply it again thing other than

1:03:40

the shuttle is kind of knew you'd see

1:03:42

it's starting to. To: I'm.

1:03:44

Really? Get. Get. Hot now. The

1:03:47

bottom and started to melt and then

1:03:50

pretty soon the camera goes away and

1:03:52

so it was a conditional success. What

1:03:54

has got. This. Is

1:03:56

so if you talk to for about

1:03:58

how. When. We

1:04:00

went to the Moon. It was. That.

1:04:03

Basically a blank check. And.

1:04:05

Years now. Private

1:04:07

companies. And many cases are

1:04:10

working to make this happen, but it's

1:04:12

far from a blank check. Yeah, do

1:04:14

you think that. If.

1:04:17

If it was. Blank.

1:04:19

Cheque Today. We.

1:04:22

Would be. Further,

1:04:25

Along at this point like what

1:04:27

what what a blank check provide

1:04:29

to dance Given that we have

1:04:32

you know that the shoulders of

1:04:34

giants to stand on right. That's.

1:04:38

That's a really good question and I think

1:04:40

he or if there was more money being

1:04:42

thrown at it. On the one hand, you

1:04:44

could say well, obviously things that move faster.

1:04:46

because we already mastered this technology the past,

1:04:48

we could do it again. On the other

1:04:50

hand, we are throwing not as much as

1:04:52

we did an Apollo, but we're throwing a

1:04:54

lot of money at Boeing to build the

1:04:56

Sls. And. It

1:04:58

took them depending on how you

1:05:01

look at it between ten and

1:05:03

twenty years actually recreate a slightly

1:05:05

less capable versus a Saturn Five

1:05:07

which was developed and but five

1:05:09

years and you know it's really

1:05:11

expensive is gonna be something like

1:05:13

four billion a flight. So. I.

1:05:16

Don't know that more money is

1:05:18

really the question now. Starship has

1:05:20

been developed primarily with humans. money.

1:05:24

And I suspect we'll have further along

1:05:26

the pin bought that certain social media

1:05:28

less. Which

1:05:30

is kind of a waste of energy

1:05:32

and time but okay to the pin

1:05:34

in so you know it's it's kind

1:05:37

of amazing that it works at all,

1:05:39

but term he does now have a

1:05:41

couple billion from Nasa to to fiddle

1:05:43

with his part this Lunar Lander program

1:05:45

but when you look at what they

1:05:48

spent on the Apollo program in today's

1:05:50

dollars is probably no edging up towards

1:05:52

hundred eighty two. hundred billion bucks

1:05:54

so yeah this is a lot

1:05:57

cheaper and at it or be

1:05:59

impressed we make it by 2029 and

1:06:01

of course if you're in Congress your

1:06:04

big concern is yes but the Chinese will get

1:06:06

there possibly by 2029 and my question for them

1:06:10

although it's an unpopular sentiment is

1:06:12

well we were there a long

1:06:14

time ago was the rush but there is

1:06:17

a rush apparently. So that's interesting because I

1:06:19

was gonna ask too if you felt like

1:06:22

things were a little bit more lackadaisical

1:06:25

this time around because there isn't

1:06:27

that sort of space race mandate

1:06:31

and that maybe it didn't feel like

1:06:33

hurrah hurrah we're trying to beat the

1:06:35

other countries but it sounds like

1:06:37

Congress wise there is a little bit of

1:06:39

that do you think that they feel that

1:06:41

in these private companies as much as if

1:06:43

it was NASA as

1:06:46

a whole doing it that maybe that hurrah

1:06:48

hurrah sort of sentiment would come back I

1:06:51

just yeah it's almost like and I

1:06:53

know this is a hard thing to

1:06:55

do but if you could be a

1:06:57

space alchemist what ingredients what

1:07:00

ingredients are missing to turn this lead

1:07:02

into gold this time is there just

1:07:04

less yeah overall excitement about it and

1:07:06

that's what's maybe play it you know

1:07:08

maybe the the one person whose job

1:07:10

it is to put those rivets in

1:07:12

is just maybe five seconds slower at

1:07:14

putting the rivets in and it's all

1:07:17

just so you know everybody's kind of got

1:07:19

that okay we'll get to it where that

1:07:21

didn't happen in the past. Well so it's

1:07:23

interesting that you interview people from

1:07:25

the 1960s that worked on

1:07:27

these things of the first space race and to

1:07:29

a person they will tell you it was a

1:07:31

mission it was like being in

1:07:33

the military you know we had to get this

1:07:36

done we had to bake now of course back

1:07:38

then we had a martyred president

1:07:40

right president Kennedy is assassinated in 1963 a

1:07:42

year after finalizing the Apollo

1:07:45

decision so if you don't get

1:07:47

this thing done by the end of a 1969 not only

1:07:51

does the Soviet Union win the space

1:07:53

race but you've let down this martyred

1:07:55

president so that was a very

1:07:57

powerful motivator which kept people from the

1:07:59

opposite The party, even the some of

1:08:01

the really wanted to be shutting down

1:08:03

the program now. You. Know, I think

1:08:05

if your private company new smart you you

1:08:08

use this at this competition is a lever

1:08:10

you say? Yeah, we can't let them get

1:08:12

their first snow is very any validity to

1:08:14

that point of view. On the one hand,

1:08:16

it's raw nationalism and the Chinese or a

1:08:18

nationalistic about what they're doing to so that

1:08:21

goes for both sides. On the other hand,

1:08:23

there is concern. I. People

1:08:25

who study the stuff that whoever reaches

1:08:27

the resource rich areas of the moon

1:08:29

in this case we think the South

1:08:31

Pole first time he gets to set

1:08:34

the rules and we don't want to

1:08:36

be locked out of a debate about

1:08:38

who gets to use the water on

1:08:40

the South Pole. So that's really the

1:08:42

big motivator out You could conceivably claim

1:08:45

that use take to have to put

1:08:47

a stake in the ground with robots

1:08:49

there, but symbolically it seems to be

1:08:51

important for a of people including Bill

1:08:53

Nelson, the nastiness traitor. To get

1:08:55

people there. So. Yeah, I've

1:08:57

I've long had kind of a theory in

1:09:00

the back of my mind that at some

1:09:02

point the meeting of the Un, the Chinese

1:09:04

delegation was gonna come up and hand the

1:09:06

civil faded white flag over the Us delegation

1:09:09

to say hey, you guys left the sun,

1:09:11

the moon and I to Sixty Nine. With

1:09:13

that, we bring it back for it, but

1:09:15

that hasn't happened yet. Who suits suits? I'm

1:09:17

wow. So. Well

1:09:20

sorry I just had a there's. It's

1:09:23

all very such a big cover. Say ideas

1:09:25

exact, that's that's one of my Santa. It

1:09:27

is a big conversation. ah. What's.

1:09:33

What does a different goals kind

1:09:35

of right now. That

1:09:38

are. Sort of agreed

1:09:40

upon the from Nasa and everybody

1:09:42

who's doing so. How much of

1:09:44

it is? Ah, I'm just commercial

1:09:46

space travel. How much of it

1:09:48

is getting satellites into orbit? How

1:09:50

much of it is actually trying

1:09:52

to go to the moon? Is

1:09:54

there? Still talk about visiting More

1:09:56

are like trying to to colonize

1:09:59

Mars. What are the

1:10:01

current? Overall targets in

1:10:03

goals that are sort of actively

1:10:05

and realistically being worked on. So's.

1:10:09

It depends on who you ask, of course,

1:10:12

Air Nasa. We had him Melroy, who's the

1:10:14

Deputy Administrator of Nasa on the As this

1:10:16

week a space podcast a few weeks ago,

1:10:18

and she was pretty frank. It's he said,

1:10:21

look, you know our goal. On. The

1:10:23

human spaceflight side. Is to

1:10:25

get people back on the moon and start learning

1:10:27

more about the moon and use the resources on

1:10:30

the moon to help us get to Mars which

1:10:32

is the big target. No.

1:10:34

One could ask why Mars is so

1:10:36

important when it so far away and

1:10:38

such a hostile place to be. But

1:10:41

then you get into this. With.

1:10:43

This mix discussion have done the one side

1:10:45

your Spacex saying? Well, we have to have

1:10:47

a backup for civilization and there's a real

1:10:50

there's an actual business model for going to

1:10:52

Mars which I think is pretty weak. On

1:10:54

the other hand, you have the more philosophical

1:10:56

discussion of the you know we want to

1:10:58

go beyond the next mountain and into the

1:11:01

next frontier and all that no matter how

1:11:03

much it costs. And a question which costs

1:11:05

a big discussion of yeah, Spacex sir under

1:11:07

one hundred billion if you ask. Friends of

1:11:09

mine who have studied. Various.

1:11:12

Plants are going to Mars of the decades. it's about

1:11:14

a trillion. South know

1:11:16

some ass the human spaceflight part but

1:11:18

a but the more to the point

1:11:20

in immediate terms. We. Want

1:11:22

to get privately funded or or com

1:11:25

funded between private industry and Nasa. replacement

1:11:27

up the space station. cassettes can be

1:11:29

coming hour and bus six or seven

1:11:32

years has it's own in order to

1:11:34

be thirty years old. so sorry sorry

1:11:36

sorry weight off so I'll wait since

1:11:39

the one hundred that the Hawk and

1:11:41

cover San Jose State is coming I've

1:11:43

always I don't Okay see I do

1:11:46

like space. I just forget to pay

1:11:48

attention because the space a shit is

1:11:50

the coolest thing Me as. i'd like

1:11:53

and wow as i could it's a

1:11:55

limited basis in laos so what you're

1:11:57

saying is in six to seven years

1:11:59

there's a plan that the whole space station

1:12:01

needs to come back to Earth so

1:12:03

that they can put a new one up there

1:12:05

or so they can take the one that exists and make it better

1:12:08

and then put it back up there? No,

1:12:10

no. So they're going to, as I understand

1:12:12

it, although the plans are so in flux, they're

1:12:14

going to take the modules off one or two

1:12:16

at a time, send them back down the atmosphere,

1:12:18

will it burn up? Because it's done.

1:12:20

I mean, it's old. More than

1:12:22

half their time up there now is spent

1:12:25

on maintenance and repair. So these things just

1:12:27

wear out. I mean, as big as it

1:12:29

is, it's very lightly built because it has to be to fly.

1:12:32

So Blue Origin, which

1:12:34

is Jeff Bezos' Amazon

1:12:37

co-company, and Axiom

1:12:39

Space and a couple of others are

1:12:41

working on these small, independently built,

1:12:44

privately built replacements that'll go up, fly

1:12:46

in tandem with the space station, we hope,

1:12:49

for a couple of years. And then when it's

1:12:51

time to take the old space station apart, these

1:12:53

things will become their smaller logical

1:12:55

replacements. It's depressing to me,

1:12:58

though, that it has to be private instead

1:13:00

of... That's so capitalistic.

1:13:02

That makes me so sad. It's a lot

1:13:04

cheaper. So by NASA's

1:13:07

own estimates, working with SpaceX has saved them

1:13:09

between 60 and 90% on, for instance,

1:13:13

flying people up the space station. So when you look at

1:13:15

it from that point of view, it's like, well, yeah, this

1:13:17

makes a lot of sense.

1:13:19

We just wish it would move a little

1:13:21

faster. But because they are working with fewer

1:13:23

resources, because you're right, I mean, back in

1:13:25

the past, it really went full

1:13:28

bore on this, along with the US government, and

1:13:30

the price was no object. I was giving a

1:13:32

talk down in Ecuador two weeks ago, and somebody

1:13:35

asked me, how many times did they have to test

1:13:38

the Saturn V engines before they stopped blowing up? And

1:13:40

the answer was over $3,600. Wow.

1:13:44

And that's expensive, you know. I

1:13:46

do have another story I'd like to go to if we

1:13:48

have a few more minutes. We've got plenty of time, but

1:13:50

before I do, actually, I am... Not

1:13:53

to be sort of sappy, wide-eyed, and

1:13:55

rose-tinted shades, but there's always this aspect

1:13:57

for me of despite

1:13:59

the fact that we've all, despite whatever

1:14:01

is going on down here, knowing

1:14:04

that up there in that

1:14:06

space station, well,

1:14:08

and you'll have to correct me if I'm wrong

1:14:10

if this is not currently the case, but at

1:14:12

least for a while you had European, American,

1:14:16

Russian, and maybe

1:14:18

Chinese. No

1:14:21

Chinese, but Japanese and other Asian countries. So

1:14:24

many people from so many places in

1:14:26

the world all cooperating together to stay

1:14:28

alive on this space station. If

1:14:30

it goes private, is that going to

1:14:32

go away? Well,

1:14:35

I don't know. So

1:14:37

I did another talk about

1:14:39

a year ago about multiculturalism at this

1:14:42

Pan Arab summit, and

1:14:44

it's a really interesting question. So I think the thing

1:14:46

that impresses me the most, so we had our first

1:14:48

bit of international spaceflight cooperation

1:14:50

back in 1975 when

1:14:52

an Apollo capsule in Soyuz capsule linked up and

1:14:55

the American crew and the Russian crew shook hands

1:14:57

and smiled and ate some

1:14:59

borscht out of a tube at the end

1:15:01

of the day, literally. Then

1:15:03

space station comes along. First crews go up in 2020. It's

1:15:07

international from the start. And

1:15:09

the, in theory anyway, the

1:15:11

Russian side, because the Russians build a lot

1:15:13

of the hardware, is sovereign

1:15:15

property, and the American side is

1:15:17

sovereign property, and everybody else kinds

1:15:19

of shares. Throughout

1:15:23

this conflict in Ukraine, which is an awful

1:15:25

thing, even though we're not at

1:15:27

all happy with the Russian government, the

1:15:30

two mission controls are still cooperating

1:15:32

properly, and the crews are

1:15:34

cooperating properly. So you're right. I mean, it's

1:15:36

a really wonderful kind of shiny example of

1:15:38

what we can do when we untie

1:15:41

our shoelaces and get out of our own way.

1:15:45

But will that happen with the private stations? Plans

1:15:48

are, I believe, for that to be

1:15:50

the case. Now on top of

1:15:52

this, we have this thing called the

1:15:54

Artemis Accords, which is this international agreement

1:15:56

to cooperate in the American Moon Program,

1:15:59

and of course the Chinese. these and the Russians very

1:16:01

quickly after that said, no, no, we have our

1:16:03

own accords you should come sign these. But

1:16:05

so far 36 countries have signed on to

1:16:08

the American Artemis accords, the idea being that

1:16:10

there will be multinational cooperation

1:16:12

on this moon program. How

1:16:15

that's going to be done is not yet clear because

1:16:17

let's face it, if you're you

1:16:20

know Zimbabwe you may not have a lot

1:16:22

to contribute except for a certain

1:16:24

amount of human capital and then brain power you

1:16:26

know but in terms of hard technology and big

1:16:28

budgets it's going to be a far reach. So

1:16:32

we don't really know and part of why I was

1:16:34

in Ecuador was to talk to them about the Artemis

1:16:36

accords because they signed about a year ago and you

1:16:39

know they're kind of wondering okay how can

1:16:41

we really roll in on this and have

1:16:43

a meaningful impact and it's a good question

1:16:45

that is happy

1:16:47

trouble answering for you. Yeah. So anyway

1:16:50

I don't think using rose-colored glasses I

1:16:52

think that's a really valid point of

1:16:54

view and you know

1:16:56

multiculturalism as we do

1:16:58

move further out and have more countries cooperating

1:17:00

is going to become a more

1:17:03

important conversation because you

1:17:05

know let's look at the Antarctic you've

1:17:07

got different countries in these different bases they come

1:17:10

together at the South Pole to work together and

1:17:12

then they retreat to their sovereign territories

1:17:14

if you will. So where you went once you

1:17:16

go back to your base you can eat the

1:17:18

food you want and talk in the language you

1:17:20

like and observe religious practices

1:17:22

the way you see fit and all that when

1:17:25

people are of different backgrounds and cultures

1:17:27

are forced to be together for a

1:17:29

seven-month transit in a

1:17:31

very small spacecraft to Mars and

1:17:34

then live there for at least a year

1:17:36

before they come home yeah it's a little

1:17:38

more friction so yeah that's a good discussion

1:17:40

we're gonna have to happen soon. Yeah. Alright

1:17:43

tell us about your other story. Okay

1:17:45

so apologies to people that already listened to

1:17:47

the This Week in Space podcast but it's

1:17:49

so exciting I couldn't help myself so our

1:17:51

old friend Pascal Lee who's a

1:17:54

planetary scientist with the Ames Research

1:17:56

Center NASA's fields that are up

1:17:58

in Northern California and the SETI

1:18:00

Institute who has been laboring

1:18:03

for decades on different,

1:18:06

he writes papers about landing zones

1:18:09

on Mars and geology of Mars and this has

1:18:11

been his career. He's a few years younger than

1:18:13

me studying Mars. So when

1:18:16

we were up in the Arctic about a year and a half

1:18:18

ago, watching him scroll through

1:18:20

Mars porn on his computer for hours

1:18:22

and hours and hours, I said, what

1:18:24

are you looking for? Sorry, to clarify

1:18:27

for those listening, Mars porn just means

1:18:29

photos of Mars. Yes. Okay,

1:18:31

sorry. Yeah. So, groovy

1:18:33

pictures from orbit, you know, and there's

1:18:35

hundreds of thousands of them. So,

1:18:39

he continued doing this

1:18:41

and about a year ago discovered this

1:18:44

old glacier formation near the equator.

1:18:46

Now, is that world shaking? Not really,

1:18:48

but it's pretty cool because we always

1:18:50

assumed they'd be a higher latitude. So,

1:18:52

that was neat. But in the process

1:18:54

of doing that, he and his associates

1:18:57

in one afternoon about six

1:18:59

weeks ago realized

1:19:02

that this glacier was part of a

1:19:04

larger formation that was one of the

1:19:06

largest volcanoes they had ever seen on

1:19:08

Mars. Now, we haven't really found a

1:19:11

new geological feature of any scope on

1:19:13

Mars since Mariner 9

1:19:15

orbited the planet in 1971 and

1:19:17

set back the first clear pictures. So,

1:19:19

it's kind of a big deal. This thing's the

1:19:21

size of Wisconsin at its base. It's

1:19:24

about 30,000 feet high. But

1:19:26

the weird part is it's been sitting

1:19:28

there in plain sight for decades and

1:19:30

nobody spotted it until Pascal did. And

1:19:33

I said, how did they miss it? You know,

1:19:35

I mean, you know, tens of thousands of people

1:19:37

have poured all these images and he said, well,

1:19:39

it's really worn and beaten up and glaciers slid

1:19:41

down the side and chewed it up. So,

1:19:44

it's like one of those things where you have to

1:19:46

stand back 10 feet to

1:19:48

spot it. You go, oh, look,

1:19:51

there's a ring there. I see it. And

1:19:53

I think we've got an image to put

1:19:55

up if John can

1:19:57

grab it. Yeah. So,

1:19:59

when you see the elevations and that

1:20:01

picture on the right, sorry for

1:20:03

those listening on audio, it just

1:20:05

looks like a big bird dropping on Mars. It does,

1:20:08

yeah. But you can kind of see where that

1:20:10

white circle is and then as you move out from there

1:20:12

you go, oh this is kind of a concentric thing. What

1:20:14

makes it confusing is it's in this

1:20:17

area called labyrinthus noctus that's really torn up

1:20:19

and full of valleys and it's on the edge

1:20:21

of Valles Marineris which is the biggest canyon of

1:20:23

the solar system and so on and so forth.

1:20:26

So there's a lot going on there so the eye

1:20:28

is kind of popping around looking at this whole visual

1:20:30

mess but then you kind of squint and you defocus

1:20:33

a bit and you go, hey that's

1:20:35

a circle. So I

1:20:37

just thought this was the coolest story because

1:20:39

like how often does this happen? Well kind

1:20:41

of like never. So

1:20:43

the upshot of this is, you know, why

1:20:45

is it important? Well

1:20:48

it makes for a great landing

1:20:50

zone for the future because parts of it

1:20:52

are at the right elevation. You can't be

1:20:54

too high because your parachutes won't slow

1:20:56

you down enough and you can't be too low so

1:20:59

you want to be at a certain range of

1:21:01

elevation and it's near the equator which is easier

1:21:03

to get to and there's a lot of interesting

1:21:05

stuff there because you've got all

1:21:07

these cuts into the surface, mostly

1:21:09

water erosion and glaciers so you can walk

1:21:11

over to any rock wall and go, oh

1:21:14

look at all those layers. Hey there's a

1:21:16

dinosaur femur in there, wouldn't that be a

1:21:18

great one? Wow. So

1:21:20

that's cool. Because we think also

1:21:22

probably sub-surface ice deposits so you've

1:21:25

got water to drink which is

1:21:27

good and one of the neatest

1:21:29

things is if this

1:21:31

area is still thermally active, so if

1:21:33

there's still a magma chamber under here

1:21:35

keeping it warm and if there's lava

1:21:37

tubes and caves and overhangs and scarps

1:21:39

and so forth, there's a

1:21:42

better than fainting

1:21:45

chance that there could be kind

1:21:49

of a warmer, steamier environment inside one of

1:21:51

these caves because you've got water, ice and

1:21:53

heat and where you've got water, ice and

1:21:55

heat, You have water vapor. And where you

1:21:57

have water vapor, you might have life. Microbial

1:22:00

Critters on Mars. This would be a

1:22:02

good place to look. Maybe. So

1:22:05

that was the part I like the most.

1:22:07

Cycle: This is where we might finally find

1:22:09

our minds. Trilobites. That

1:22:12

is very cool. Ah that. yeah

1:22:14

exciting and again just the idea

1:22:16

that. You know a good

1:22:18

day that was miss and you've got us.

1:22:20

There's gotta be loads of that and fact.

1:22:22

I remember reading a story just recently. It's

1:22:25

a Beer on Earth about us. Somebody

1:22:28

looking into the ocean and

1:22:30

finding ah, a suspect. see

1:22:32

Mount Rainier? Yeah yeah, I

1:22:34

was like a human constructed

1:22:36

wall saying that. They. Had

1:22:38

been miss absolve as a mouse. Okay

1:22:40

be a different story Recently i think

1:22:42

is hop cause northern california they found

1:22:44

to see mount that was. Suits

1:22:47

you know, coming up to within our

1:22:49

know a quarter mile the surface or

1:22:51

something nobody has spotted before. You

1:22:54

missed the things you know at the end

1:22:56

end. in this case. I think part of

1:22:58

it. It's a romantic and me. but here's

1:23:01

the solo operator. He's been working in parallel

1:23:03

with that kind of outside of Nasri years.

1:23:05

I mean, they cooperated in this arctic base,

1:23:07

but he's you know, he works for himself

1:23:09

and for the Seti Institute. and you know

1:23:11

I've watched him sit there and look at

1:23:14

the stuff for hours and hours. Were a

1:23:16

devoted guy. so it's kind of like in

1:23:18

on the nineteen fifties. I fi movies with

1:23:20

the the old guy in his garage building

1:23:22

as moon rocket enough assess. Assess and.to

1:23:24

discover this thing sorted solo. He's

1:23:26

working with a couple of associates,

1:23:28

but but essentially you know that

1:23:31

the to person team. It

1:23:33

it just don't hear that much anymore. You

1:23:35

were bad Banks of Ai in. there are

1:23:37

one hundred people working thousands of hours and.

1:23:40

And here's this guy who says he looks. As

1:23:43

a big volcanoes so I just

1:23:45

enjoyed that a lot. I'm.

1:23:48

Friendly. Poor. voyager

1:23:50

one sixteen billion miles from earth gets

1:23:53

confused start sending backs gibberish and trash

1:23:55

messages to nasa as a minute text

1:23:57

or twenty two hour for a radio

1:23:59

signal to go one way but we're

1:24:01

getting very worried that we might be

1:24:04

about to lose it. Now, you know,

1:24:06

it's coming up on 50 years old in a couple

1:24:08

of years so it's not like it hasn't done its

1:24:10

work but we get attached to

1:24:13

these things sentimentally, right? So

1:24:15

it was sending back all these messed

1:24:17

up messages that didn't make a lot of sense

1:24:20

and it's got three computers on board that work.

1:24:23

It's still using a tape drive for

1:24:26

data retrieval like a half inch of

1:24:28

tape. Can you imagine magnetic tapes scraping

1:24:30

back and forth over a

1:24:32

head for almost 50 years and it's still working?

1:24:34

That's incredible that it's still working. I

1:24:37

was better than the 8-track in my

1:24:39

old Sunbeam Alpine. So

1:24:41

they were kind of, they being

1:24:43

the JPL folks were kind of like, well, this,

1:24:46

you know, we may be reaching mission end here.

1:24:49

And bear in mind, you know, this program's

1:24:51

been up there so long at this point.

1:24:53

Literally, mission control is a couple of banquet

1:24:55

tables, a couple of old Sun workstations and

1:24:58

maybe 12 people. So it's not like you've

1:25:00

got mission control, you know, it's like mission

1:25:02

control with just a few people there. But

1:25:05

they did finally, on March 1, they

1:25:07

were able to send a message up to kind of poke it

1:25:09

and say, hey, wake up. And they got

1:25:11

back at least one message that they think

1:25:13

is a computer response saying, okay, I'm doing

1:25:16

a memory evaluation. I'll let you know. Defragging?

1:25:19

I guess. I mean... I'm kidding.

1:25:22

I think it was before defragging. This was built

1:25:24

in like 1976. Oh,

1:25:28

so this is more like, please

1:25:30

wait while I blow on the tape. Yeah,

1:25:34

I think, please wait while I pour

1:25:36

ice water on my process. Yeah, I

1:25:38

don't know. I mean... Just

1:25:41

let me die. We

1:25:43

didn't even have, I don't think

1:25:45

back then, standard chipsets, right? Everything was

1:25:47

kind of bespoke. Right. And

1:25:50

in particular, Because they're

1:25:52

passing past Jupiter and Saturn before

1:25:54

they went out to interstellar space,

1:25:56

they were these really radiation saturated

1:25:58

regimes. So everything

1:26:00

advice shielded under little metal a caps and

1:26:03

and so and thin sheets of lead and

1:26:05

so forth. And in fact, but certainly for

1:26:07

it launched a talkative one of the bandages

1:26:09

on the program years ago you said not

1:26:11

too long before these are you supposed to

1:26:14

take off one of his assistants walked in

1:26:16

the said we have a problem is a

1:26:18

what nice and all this wiring in here

1:26:20

and radiation is gonna cause a major problem

1:26:22

with static electricity. In the short out the

1:26:24

electricity. What? Would you do?

1:26:28

What? What I do. Yeah. Was wearing

1:26:30

a static electricity? Yeah, I'm. I

1:26:34

don't see. I mean as well as

1:26:36

a human the way to get rid

1:26:38

of static electricity is to like cats

1:26:41

are ground myself like an atlas Yeah

1:26:43

would he do in space Swell So

1:26:45

they have this potential. You. Know

1:26:47

thirty million dollar problem on redesigning

1:26:50

the probe, but John Cassoni's a

1:26:52

brilliant engineer who was charged with

1:26:54

that point said, okay, don't talk

1:26:56

to anybody. Go. Down the

1:26:58

Ralph's by some Reynolds wrap. bring

1:27:01

it up and rap all the

1:27:03

cable. Yeah, well, that's also for

1:27:05

about a dollar thirty five. They

1:27:07

save the program. That's beautiful. Pretty

1:27:09

cool Gabi out with and happen

1:27:11

more often. Enough of that. So.

1:27:14

Yeah voyager one don't leave

1:27:16

us yet Ah ah it's

1:27:18

so gun need hit good

1:27:20

for it. well we'll see

1:27:22

as evil see how of

1:27:24

things as shape up and

1:27:26

fingers crossed rod pile always

1:27:29

a pleasure ah as I

1:27:31

was just telling some people

1:27:33

about how they are working

1:27:35

to redesign or I guess.

1:27:37

As. Freely remake that the

1:27:39

Space. Ah I'm saying and you

1:27:41

know I'm I'm eagerly awaiting more

1:27:44

on. that's ah. You are of

1:27:46

course the author of Space Two

1:27:48

Point. Oh, the co host of

1:27:50

this Week in Space right here

1:27:52

on the twitter not work editor

1:27:55

in chief of Ad Astra and

1:27:57

you can be found at Space.and

1:27:59

As. Anything you want

1:28:01

to plug before we say goodbye to you for today?

1:28:04

I just think the last few

1:28:06

episodes of this week in space

1:28:08

have been such fun. We had Alan Stern on,

1:28:11

who was the chief scientist on the

1:28:13

New Horizons mission out to Pluto and

1:28:15

recently flew in Virgin Galactic, so now

1:28:18

he's an astronaut, quote unquote. We

1:28:21

had, as I said, Pam Elroy, who's like number two

1:28:23

at NASA on. That was a big

1:28:25

feather in our cap. And then more recently, we

1:28:27

had Pascal talking about his pet volcano.

1:28:30

So we're just having such a good

1:28:32

time there. Oh, and I posted on

1:28:34

Facebook this morning, my

1:28:36

life with TWiST has had

1:28:38

a seismic shift. I

1:28:41

don't know how many of the episodes

1:28:43

you've seen, but I love to give

1:28:45

Tarek grief about his chair because he's

1:28:47

got this really cool Star Trek chair

1:28:49

that was given to him because he's

1:28:51

the editor-in-chief of space.com, which I

1:28:53

don't have. But the wheels kept falling out.

1:28:55

He's not the most mechanically inclined guy, so

1:28:57

he fell out of the chair about three

1:28:59

times in mid-episode. This is over the year.

1:29:03

And unfortunately, he finally, at

1:29:05

my urging, ordered a new

1:29:07

seat in Texas. So

1:29:09

I had to find something else to chip on him about

1:29:12

it. No, that's work. That is

1:29:14

hard to do, yeah, to find

1:29:16

the do thing to pick on him. Well, you know,

1:29:18

I'm trying to sort of—you and Leo are so kind

1:29:20

to each other, and I thought, you know, I got

1:29:22

at the stakes a little bit. So,

1:29:24

by the way, how is this vacation going? I just

1:29:26

see the Instagram stuff. So far,

1:29:28

it seems to be going so good. I

1:29:31

don't think any of us have received any more details

1:29:33

than anyone else, so

1:29:35

we're all just taking it in via

1:29:37

Instagram as well from time to time.

1:29:40

But they're still having fun,

1:29:43

enjoying interesting—what is that?

1:29:45

Gastro—what is that called? Gastronomica?

1:29:49

Gastronomy, yeah, molecular gastronomy

1:29:52

stuff. Yeah, watching

1:29:54

them try and figure—what is the game with the

1:29:56

drink with the bubbles? Are you trying to drink

1:29:58

it without popping the bubbles? I

1:30:00

think it's supposed to be, it's sort

1:30:03

of like a smoky, it's probably a

1:30:06

mezcal-based margarita

1:30:10

and so it seems that what they're doing is

1:30:12

they're putting some smokiness inside of a bubble. So

1:30:14

you literally are supposed to pop it and have

1:30:16

it kind of go

1:30:18

into your senses before you drink the beverage.

1:30:21

Yeah, it's like, ooh, if it's vaporized

1:30:23

alcohol, that's scary. We

1:30:27

have Burke behind the scenes writing vaporized alcohol

1:30:29

question mark. If it is, oof.

1:30:32

Open flame moment. Yeah, exactly. Well, that's

1:30:34

cool. Well, Rod Pyle, thank you so

1:30:36

much for being here. Thank you for

1:30:38

this week in space and we'll

1:30:40

see you again soon. Thanks. Take

1:30:43

care, pal. Bye-bye. Alrighty. Should

1:30:46

we take another break or should we

1:30:48

head into more questions? Let's

1:30:51

do one more question. We haven't done a voicemail yet.

1:30:53

I would love to do a voicemail. Alright, let me

1:30:55

get that look. Hello,

1:31:01

Leo and Micah. This is Micah

1:31:03

from Charlotte, North Carolina. Proud community

1:31:06

member. I'm reaching out to you

1:31:08

all today for a quick question or inquiry and

1:31:10

I hope you all can give me a little

1:31:12

insight and guidance. My question's about

1:31:14

Apple Watch. I've had every

1:31:16

single version of the Apple Watch over the

1:31:18

years. I've loved it. At

1:31:21

some point, it became the kind of device that if

1:31:23

I ever dropped it or it broke, I would probably

1:31:25

just go buy another one the next day. So

1:31:28

I couldn't be happier with it as a personal device that

1:31:31

I've used for many years. I

1:31:33

have to say, after the latest major

1:31:36

refresh of the operating system, I'm

1:31:38

continually frustrated with it. It's

1:31:41

strange because I used to be delighted with it

1:31:43

every day. So I'm just

1:31:45

wondering if you all have had equal frustration

1:31:47

with the software, particularly with the

1:31:50

remapping of buttons and the moving of things

1:31:52

that used to be muscle memory, because

1:31:55

I'm finding myself less delighted

1:31:57

with something I used to love. to

1:32:00

your thoughts and comments and appreciate the show,

1:32:02

love the show and a

1:32:04

proud member of the community. Bye-bye.

1:32:06

This is such a great question

1:32:08

because it gives me an opportunity

1:32:10

to air my grievances. Mike,

1:32:13

you're not alone. Not only are

1:32:15

you not alone as far as I am concerned,

1:32:17

but you are also not alone as far as

1:32:19

almost everyone who I've talked to who has an

1:32:22

Apple Watch feels as well. For

1:32:24

folks who don't know, it used

1:32:27

to be that you could swipe

1:32:29

up from the bottom, for example,

1:32:31

on your Apple Watch to access

1:32:33

some of the kind of quick options for

1:32:36

its essentially control panel on your Apple

1:32:38

Watch. These are the options to ping

1:32:41

your phone, to turn

1:32:43

on or off notifications, to put the

1:32:46

Apple Watch into silence mode, to change

1:32:48

the current focus mode. They

1:32:50

moved that to pressing the side button

1:32:52

to activate that, which

1:32:55

also meant that accessing

1:32:58

different aspects of the Apple Watch

1:33:00

have changed as well. So

1:33:03

now when you swipe up from the bottom of

1:33:05

the phone, it goes into this sort of glanceable

1:33:08

widget screen and

1:33:11

that just wasn't the case before. You

1:33:14

swiped up to access that information.

1:33:17

Because that muscle memory

1:33:19

has existed since almost

1:33:21

the beginning of

1:33:23

the Apple Watch, that

1:33:26

is why some people are frustrated because

1:33:28

for me and Mike

1:33:32

and many others, yes

1:33:34

indeed it is frustrating that

1:33:36

the muscle memory we

1:33:38

have had for so long has changed. So

1:33:41

when you're not really putting all

1:33:43

of your cognition into the moment

1:33:45

and looking at your

1:33:47

Apple Watch with all awareness and hitting the

1:33:49

side button, knowing that that's going to bring

1:33:51

up control center as opposed to how it

1:33:53

used to work, you end up going into

1:33:55

a different menu than you meant to and

1:33:57

that's frustrating. So it's just a little bit

1:33:59

of fun. frustration but those little frustrations

1:34:02

add up over time and when someone

1:34:06

feels like they have control over

1:34:09

a situation and they feel like

1:34:11

they have knowledge of a situation

1:34:13

and then that control is taken

1:34:16

from them that knowledge shifts people

1:34:19

don't want to feel that way.

1:34:21

It's frustrating, it is confusing

1:34:25

and it causes some level of

1:34:27

consternation and so that is the

1:34:30

case here. Totally understand particularly

1:34:33

because yes as someone

1:34:35

in the chat has pointed out people hate change.

1:34:38

People will, I've heard plenty of people say I

1:34:40

love change, I thrive in change, change is great

1:34:43

but thousands

1:34:46

and thousands and thousands of

1:34:48

years of being

1:34:54

human beings has taught

1:34:56

us to see change as something that

1:34:58

is dangerous to us and so because

1:35:00

of that I don't care

1:35:03

if people say they love change they're

1:35:05

lying. People

1:35:08

may claim they love change and they may adapt to

1:35:10

change quickly but change is like

1:35:12

at our very base just something

1:35:14

that we have to adapt to

1:35:16

and we have to handle and

1:35:19

so it may take longer for others

1:35:21

and it is a frustrating thing nonetheless

1:35:23

and so no the

1:35:25

watch has not been around for thousands of years but

1:35:30

our instincts to avoid

1:35:33

change and to see change as something

1:35:35

that's dangerous to us that's

1:35:38

been around for thousands and thousands and thousands of

1:35:40

years. So anyway my point

1:35:43

is Mike you're not alone that is

1:35:45

something that a lot of people experience

1:35:48

both anecdotally and in

1:35:50

you know

1:35:52

from the complaints that

1:35:54

I see to you which I suppose are

1:35:56

anecdotal in their own way. Yes I feel

1:35:59

the same way I hope

1:36:01

that it is the case

1:36:04

that Apple is listening

1:36:07

and is considering making a

1:36:09

change here. Otherwise, I think we have to get

1:36:11

used to this new way of doing it. I

1:36:14

think my problem is I don't access

1:36:17

those menus enough

1:36:19

regularly for the muscle memory to

1:36:22

click into place. And

1:36:24

so over the course

1:36:26

of having the every single

1:36:29

model of Apple Watch, during

1:36:32

that period I would have

1:36:34

accessed the menu enough

1:36:36

in this one way that

1:36:40

it's locked in and then now

1:36:42

I have to probably going to need to

1:36:44

have enough Apple Watches in this new way for me to

1:36:46

be able to get it. Yeah,

1:36:49

I don't lose my iPhone enough

1:36:51

but I know that if I did then pinging

1:36:55

my iPhone would be the thing that

1:36:57

would cause me to form that new

1:37:00

muscle memory. So Mike, thank you for your

1:37:02

question there. There's

1:37:07

actually someone hanging out in the Zoom call we

1:37:09

want to try to pick up on. Excellent, let's

1:37:11

pick up on our Zoom call. Remember you can

1:37:13

head to atg.twit.tv

1:37:18

is the URL that you can go

1:37:20

to to have your question asked and answered.

1:37:23

Welcome to the call caller. What's

1:37:25

your name and from where are

1:37:28

you calling? How

1:37:30

you doing Mike? It's Jeff from New City, New

1:37:32

York. How's everything going? Hi Jeff, things are going

1:37:34

well here. I hope they're going well for you

1:37:36

as well. How can we help you? Good

1:37:40

question. I might have gotten the answer but I didn't

1:37:42

have a chance to listen last week. That's on my

1:37:44

to-do list. But with the

1:37:46

upcoming clips coming, do

1:37:48

you recommend, how we recommend

1:37:50

we capture that on film or picture

1:37:52

with our iPhones or actually the other

1:37:54

camera. This time, you know, my

1:37:56

system's excited and stuff like that. Okay,

1:37:59

so... Yes, you're looking to

1:38:01

capture the eclipse with your iPhone

1:38:03

and how to go about doing

1:38:06

that. This is a great question.

1:38:08

So, there are

1:38:10

some different apps that exist out there,

1:38:13

including an app in the

1:38:15

App Store called

1:38:17

SolarSnap. And

1:38:21

SolarSnap is specifically created to

1:38:23

help you take

1:38:25

a photo of an eclipse and

1:38:28

it has a little

1:38:30

tool that you buy from the

1:38:33

eclipseglasses.com website. So

1:38:40

on the eclipseglasses.com website, which

1:38:43

is one place that

1:38:45

folks go to get eclipse glasses, there

1:38:48

is a little filter that you can buy.

1:38:51

And that filter is SolarSnap Eclipse App. Goes

1:39:00

over the top of the camera, providing the necessary

1:39:02

filter that you would need to be

1:39:04

able to take a

1:39:06

photo of or video of the

1:39:08

eclipse. Looks like it's available for

1:39:11

$17 on the store. I

1:39:16

would, though, even just getting something

1:39:18

like this, getting the proper kind of

1:39:20

filter and using the

1:39:24

standard camera app, it's more about

1:39:26

having that filter, right? Because that's

1:39:28

going to let the camera actually

1:39:30

properly capture the eclipse

1:39:32

without it being completely blown out. We had the caller

1:39:34

call in earlier about it. So

1:39:38

as long as you have the necessary equipment,

1:39:40

I kind of wish that we still had

1:39:42

Rod Pyle on the line, as

1:39:44

Rod has suggested in the past, where to

1:39:46

get eclipse glasses from. And

1:39:48

I wish I could remember. Maybe somebody in

1:39:50

the chat will remind me where Rod

1:39:53

has suggested you buy your eclipse glasses. So

1:39:56

regular glasses for it. I

1:39:59

know Warby Parker. The store is

1:40:01

having free by the way April

1:40:03

1st to the 8th for us to

1:40:05

wear. But I was, thank you for the filter. Yeah,

1:40:08

they're offering it if you can walk into the store,

1:40:10

they're giving away pairs from April 1st to the 8th.

1:40:12

But I thank you for answering the question with the

1:40:14

app because I want to put a filter on my

1:40:16

phone. Right, but I appreciate

1:40:18

that. Thank you. Yeah. So

1:40:21

SolarSnap, which again, it's specifically designed.

1:40:23

So it's got built

1:40:25

in zoom exposure and focus options so

1:40:27

you can really dial it in. And

1:40:30

they're all right there in the app as

1:40:32

opposed to kind of being all around

1:40:34

the place. And so you

1:40:36

can quickly and easily do that capturing that you

1:40:38

need to do. And

1:40:40

then paired with the filter that's necessary to

1:40:43

properly capture it, you're good to go. And

1:40:45

I'm being told on Android, one

1:40:48

Brian says there's an app called

1:40:50

Pinhole Solar Eclipse, which can

1:40:52

help as well. Thank

1:40:56

you very much. Have a great day. Yeah, and

1:40:58

good luck capturing the eclipse. All

1:41:02

right. Want to head back to email?

1:41:04

Yeah. All

1:41:06

right, cool. So this email comes

1:41:08

in from Judy

1:41:12

who has the subject

1:41:14

Mac question. And it

1:41:16

says, I used to be able to

1:41:18

provide remote tech support for my friends from

1:41:20

my Mac via the Messages app. I would

1:41:22

go to the station heading, I would

1:41:24

pick asks to share screen. After

1:41:27

recent OS updates though, I can't do

1:41:29

that anymore. I get a message that

1:41:31

says the person isn't available, even if

1:41:33

he or she is sitting and waiting

1:41:35

for the prompt, any tips or resources?

1:41:38

So this is a great question. Yeah, it

1:41:40

is a possibility. And don't show

1:41:42

my screen just yet, but I'm going to pull

1:41:46

up the Messages app here

1:41:48

in just a moment and

1:41:50

I will pull up a specific

1:41:52

message. And

1:41:54

then, okay, so now you can

1:41:56

show my, well, hold on one sec. Yes,

1:42:00

you can show my screen. So in

1:42:03

the, and can you zoom in? Cause I don't have that. I

1:42:05

don't know how, how Leo does that

1:42:07

on his. Um, but

1:42:09

in the messages app, I

1:42:11

hit the eye icon, the