Move Fast and Break Terms of Service

42:51We didn't even get the one singular view from the AI scraping our video as they literally just straight up took everything with nothing back to it and just scraped all the data, which later we're going to talk about is against the terms of service for YouTube. Scraping subtitle data is in there. You know, you can scrape the entire internet and there's all of this stuff about like you're scraping websites and people's writing and like the ethical implications of that and how that's messed up. But people don't write the same way that they talk. So if you're trying to make a chatbot that is the most human like possible, YouTube is actually probably the most valuable data set on the entire internet because people on there actually speak more like they normally speak and not how they write.

43:38um and i just wanted to bring up very very briefly i used to contract for samsung i did work for samsung and in college um and i helped them train a bixby model uh based on i'm so sorry yeah well i'm sorry so it's your fault david's ruined bixby because what they did was they were like we need bixby to like have more natural output so we need you and a bunch of your friends to like basically use this client to message each other a bunch of messages as if you're having a natural conversation like 10 000 times so they wanted me to message my friend like hey how's it going you want to go to the gym later but they wanted they were like make it as natural as possible but we need 10 000 of them by next week so they wanted you to make a data set yeah we did make it but the problem was it was based on like repetition and the amount that we did and not uh it was not based on like here use this chat app for the next month and we'll just take everything that you say it was like we just need this on this deadline so we were just pumping out fake conversations that are definitely not the way that humans actually really interact yeah uh so yeah i'm probably partially to blame for bixby but i'm just saying we'll continue to blame this is a much better data set but there's like so many so many red flags i'll never forgive you david so here's the devil's advocate point that keeps coming up that i think at least has some grounding in reality okay what's the difference between a human taking inspiration from a song they heard and then making new music and a robot taking inspiration from millions of songs that it's heard to make some new music can you within a couple hours scrape 180 000 songs word for word with picture perfect memorization of every single word and everything in there no but what's the difference in output so we don't know what the exact output of this is but if it's saying just word for word things then i would argue there's absolutely no it's just the exact same thing.

45:50I guess if the question is like my output that I'm asking for is I want a creative new blues song for whatever. Give me a three minute creative new blues song in the style that would go viral in 2024. And you ask a human to do that and he'll use what inspiration he or she will use whatever they know and whatever they've heard recently. And some of it's memorized and some of it's I kind of remember some stuff that went well. And if you ask the robot to do it both of them will take whatever they were inspired by whether it's 180 000 youtube transcripts or just the stuff that the human listened to recently and they will both output something genuinely new because they're told not to copy they're told to make something new and what's the difference between inspiration and scraping in a way that these models are turning that data into new stuff i mean do you want the physical thing right now that is like YouTube doesn't allow you to scrape off of its platform?

46:45It's like literally against the term service or are you talking more broadly? I think more broadly because yes, you're right. We can get into that part later. A human is allowed to watch YouTube videos and be inspired by them. Sure. And a robot is theoretically not allowed to do that. There's an aspect even in that where if inspiration comes too close to copyright law, it can still get in trouble. Yeah, remember when, who was it that sued because the vibes were the same? I thought Paramore and Olivia Rodrigo got a little too close in a song. There was a... Yeah, there's been a bunch of lawsuits.

47:16This has 100 % happened before and appropriate things have happened in copyright. Also, sorry... But that's judged on the output, not the input. I don't know if you can make an ethics claim based purely on the material of the output, but I don't think we should forget the scale and then the idea of like who actually gets to benefit from the work and you know what i mean like like at the end of the day like none of us have a billion dollars you know we we don't have access to data centers it we would all feel terrible about using an entire city's worth of energy in an afternoon you know like like nothing about this is like is like good you know And it's just a way for people who already have a lot of resources to steal not just resources, but the means of generating more resources from people.

48:16And then also, I don't think we're quite there yet, but I think we should all start preparing our brains in the next like five years to just conclusively say that like human beings matter more than computers. Right. Like that and that, in my opinion, and hopefully the robots don't kill me when they become sentient and like rise up or whatever. But it's like, I think at a certain point we should all be prepared to be like, this is better because it puts a human being in a place of power instead of a instead of a computer, which at the end of the day, it's a it's a silicon wafer that I could crush with.

48:54Oh, you know, I strongly agree with both those points, because if we were to, you know, if you have a multi-billion dollar company, nearly a trillion dollar, multi-trillion dollar company, and you have like all the singer songwriters that are just like trying to make a living, and then you just go, I'm just going to take everything you did and not learn how to play the guitar and write good songs, and then replace all of you with AI generated songs. You can only do that because you're a multi-trillion dollar company. And I know that there's like not like a necessarily legal precedent that makes this like legally wrong.

49:29But like, do we collectively as a human species want to allow that kind of thing to happen? Like in the reverse engineer situation where like a human being spends that tens of thousands of hours watching YouTube videos, learning how to use a camera, like learning to edit. At the end of the day, what they have accomplished is giving themselves a skill and they can now be a part of the conversation that is YouTube. You know what I mean? But when a company like insert company name here does it and then they can begin, you know, in theory, launching thousands of YouTube videos. All the slop that you're noticing through every social media platform.

50:07It's a very different paradigm. Yeah. Yeah. I guess I'm trying to find the because it's kind of a gray area between those two things. This entire conversation is a gray area. By the way, this I just want to like put that out that I don't think anyone here has the answer to this. Yeah. But we certainly have feelings on it. Yeah. Because existentially, like the human believes the human is very is valuable, obviously. So the human wants to hear the human music and the human wants to watch the human perform the skills, obviously. And so we don't think that we would respond well to like a robot creation.

50:39It wouldn't have the same attributes. But even if that's what I was going to say before to answer your question is how the human receives the art. I think that is the key point, because if you show two outputs that are the same, but you tell someone the human made this one the human is going to inherently value that one yeah right yeah that someone should do that blind test someone should do uh control the scientific method like give watch someone listen to a song when they are told that a human made it and then watch a bunch of people listen to the same exact song when they are told that an ai made it and then afterwards ask what do you think and if you get told the human made it you'll go oh that was really soulful i could hear the inspiration and if you get told the robot made it you'll go that sounded really bland and generic and uninspired.

51:22Yeah. I wonder if it's just because we believe that the human made it. Probably. But also, I feel like we just have to care more about the human generated stuff. We got to. Yeah. Because at the end of the day, even if you even if there was quite literally no difference, if if the blind test proved that nobody could actually tell the difference. Do we want to live in a world where nobody makes anything? well and like there is a world like it's the grayest there there already to me is an example of someone who scraped a bunch of data made a piece of art with ai that some people knew as ai some people didn't know as ai but everyone loved and it ultimately didn't affect anything because it was one human creator just contributing to the conversation that is art and what i'm talking about is the song of the summer, BBL Drizzy.

52:15Is that an AI song? Yes. That is someone who trained an AI on tons of different Motown and soul. Wait, that's not a Kendrick song? No, no, no, no. The beat where the singer's going, BBL Drizzy. That's an AI-generated voice. That's AI-generated backing tracks. Metro Boomin sampled that with his human skill into a hip hop beat. But yeah, so I would argue there is room for human beings to use AI, train their own data sets, scrape and steal and and not disrupt. I'm going to keep using this word conversation because I really like it to describe the exchange of ideas and concepts. I think a computer could exchange, could contribute.

52:56No, a computer can. A trillion dollar company that can drastically alter the entire environment in which we create. Can really, and I'm going to curse Ellis, bleep this out later, can really f*** your s*** up. You know, f*** everybody's s*** up. Yeah. Anyway, we got way off track. Yeah, well, sorry. That's okay. We can go to maybe a couple of things here that are in the still gray, but less gray area. which are middle gray middle gray just like yeah um let's talk about first of all scraping straight using the youtube api subtitles yes we have to look into this yeah i spent a david and i spent a long time yesterday going into this um and i found a couple different things or we found sorry what'd you find mostly you sundar and neilai talked on decoder about this was back when open ai was potentially scraping youtube data and allegedly allegedly sorry we're gonna have to say a lot of allegedly um he responded that the youtube team is following up and that there are some terms and conditions and that they expect people to abide by those terms and conditions so that was like a very vague way of potentially saying like we're looking into it and it seems to go against their terms of conditions but i found a much more precise quote from neil mohan um talking to bloomberg the ceo of youtube saying that if soar was using uh youtube content it would be a clear violation.

54:20He said, from a creator's perspective, when a creator uploads their hard work to our platform, they have certain expectations. One of those expectations is that the terms of service is going to be a buy-to-buy. It does not allow for things like transcripts or video bits to be downloaded, and that is a clear violation of our terms of service. Those are the rules of the road in terms of content on our platform. So that is a very specific, funny enough, this was before all this came out, but he even mentions transcripts right there, scraping transcripts and downloading them from YouTube. is against the terms of service sounds pretty specific so youtube has a case here of something um what i found interesting also though is we can all assume google has their own ai and google has this gold mine of content on their own platform yeah are they scraping um not even scraping just using or just using the stuff that they have already yeah mohan mentioned something in that interview that i'm still not totally sure so i will let us maybe figure it out because i couldn't get a precise answer and everyone else can think of it but he said that google which owns youtube does use some youtube videos to train its own ai platform gemini but only if the individual creators on the platform agreed to that in their contracts what i cannot figure out what that exact contract means whether that is just the like the terms of service you have to agree to to upload literally anything on their website yeah whether it's the youtube partnership program i looked at my contract contract which was my terms of service yeah i didn't see anything specific to it but we were talking yesterday it would just like it wouldn't make any sense for google to not do this like reddit for example sells its user data to ai companies as training data when you upload anything to reddit it is now the property of reddit when you upload any images to instagram those are now the property of Instagram Adobe to anything you do on the Adobe platform trains its AIs I think you can well there's a whole thing around that that allegedly they've said that they don't but it's a I don't know it's a whole thing regardless it's just it's one of those things that's like Neil very used very vague phrasing there and there's so many times when you check the checkbox that says I agree to the terms of service and in the terms of service is a thing that will give the company access to your information and your rights it's very I'm not going to say this is for sure but it's very likely that somewhere in the terms of service gives YouTube the ability to co-license as we saw in their terms of service the content on YouTube to other companies which you would assume they would do to Google because Google is YouTube and YouTube is Google I would assume that I'm going to assume that that's the case.

57:06We would love clarification on that for sure. Anyone that works at YouTube, Neil, if you want to tweet at us or email us, we'd love to know about that, but it's the, it's the same goldmine analogy. It's like Google has the best possible opportunity to train the best possible model because they have the best possible source of information. And if they weren't doing that from a business perspective, that would just be like stupid from a business perspective, even though I don't think they should be doing it. You know, So Google would have more of an argument too of being like, we're creating this platform that helps creators flourish through different partnership programs where they can make money.

57:41So like, you know, we're gonna also make some even more money on it. It's still this weird, I don't love it, but it's a way better explanation than Apple taking or NVIDIA taking this like random free thing that definitely broke terms of service to get in the first place. Yeah. I recently asked Gemini to summarize the latest MKBHD video, and it did. And there's an element of, you know how in fair use, there's an element of, like, replaceability? So my work is considered derivative enough if it doesn't replace watching the original work. Like, if I make a commentary on someone's video, but I don't use the entire video, and I add my own thoughts and it's transformative, then it's not enough to replace watching the original video.

58:34Therefore, it is fair use. But Gemini summarizing my latest video feels like it can replace my video. And in order to summarize my video, it needs to know about my video and be trained on my video. So I would argue that it's taking from me and replacing me in some way. This is kind of the reason that there's been this huge conversation in the last year or so around the streamers that just play people's videos and don't react, don't even really react to them. And many of them will just leave the room while the video is being played. Because then they're getting the benefit. And it is replacing you and going and watching the video because the thousands of people that are watching the streamer are not going to go to YouTube and watch your video.

59:20They're just going to watch it on the stream. Yeah, I've seen people do that to my videos before. Yeah, all the time. Which is not cool. And it would be that would be a pretty good use of like that. That's the line. There is some sort of copyright law that's been debated, I think, from OpenAI and actual lawyers about if some of the scraping data is considered fair use. And I'm not exactly sure where it is, but even still. Pick your option. There's like a hundred different cases. I'm sure there's a billion different cases going on. And I just want to throw that out there that the fair use aspect of scraping AI data and using it for chatbots is being looked at right now.

59:56But even still in this specific thing with the Luther AI that we're talking about is they broke terms of service. And that's far different from from. Does the terms of service say that you can't scrape no matter what or only if you're making money on it? Because that's always kind of been the question because you can upload a YouTube video that has a Taylor Swift song on it if you don't monetize it. It's true. So. I'm not totally sure. That's kind of always the line. I would assume most of it is less of it's always not allowed, but we're much more willing to go after the people making money. It would be my guess.

1:00:32Also, can YouTube even do anything about this if Eleuther didn't agree to the terms of service? Like they're not... That's also a great question. Yeah, that's true. Did they even agree to the terms of service? Why would they have? Is it more of just a legal thing? and also once Apple has already, let's say Apple and NVIDIA and others have downloaded this data, but once Apple already trains their data and trains their models on all of this data, and then we find out, oh, actually some of this was not acquired legally or whatever, how do you reverse that? Is that reversible at all? You have to retrain a new data set, a new model, which costs a billion dollars.

1:01:13Yeah, it feels like that's a huge part of it too. It's, well, it's already in the data, so not much we can do here. This is the next thing I wanted to bring up, in all of this is yeah what are our next steps here if they trained it already we just said you don't you have to train a whole new data set which is none of these companies are going to do so much extra carbon in the atmosphere yeah um but then it's like there's also the argument of what if you like apple didn't take it luther stole the the data and now apple's taking it but i just like did apple pay for the data from luther i'm assuming no i've not seen anything about it but it's a free open source non-profit so i don't even know if they even paid an open source set which means they probably didn't pay for it this is the exact same argument that happened with open ai when they were training jet gpt and um dolly was that they used all of these open scraped model like open scraped data sets online and so then they weren't like we didn't scrape it we just took this open available information i guess they get to say publicly available yeah that sort of thing right some companies are partnering like we saw because we work with vox media for ads on this podcast and vox partnered with open ai and they're doing to train their data set it was easy enough because we knew that happened we could talk to vox it's just part of vox media not part of their podcast network we're not included in that but that still is some sort of actual connection that they've made so companies do that do actually connect with other media companies i think a lot of the companies are just realized there's a really good interview between uh neil and nick thompson who is the uh i believe ceo of the atlantic or the editor-in-chief of the atlantic he used to be the eic for wired um but he has he gives a huge explanation about why he's partnering with open ai to give them access to the atlantic for training data and they have sort of like this back and forth where they both give each other things.

1:03:09And I think the deal with OpenAI is like, it's better for OpenAI to just make a deal with all these media companies because they don't get sued like the New York Times sued them. And they can kind of just give them credits and do all this different kind of stuff. Acquire with permission. Yeah. Yeah. Wow. What a concept. Yeah, what a concept. Some of these companies are really struggling. That would probably cost a lot of extra money. So if you want to hear like a good sort of breakdown from these publications perspective of why they may give their data to these companies, you should listen to that interview.

1:03:39It's on Decoder. I think with taking the Eleuther stuff, all the companies taking from there need to pay the due diligence to realize where the information is coming from. And they are all more than capable of doing that. And if that broke YouTube terms of service, they're pretty much just that at fault for not. If you steal something, I just - We were talking about this yesterday. Like make the analogy of like selling stolen goods on Craigslist. I brought something up. this is in New York, so I'm sure laws change state to state, but to be convicted of possession of stolen property, actual knowledge of it being stolen is not required.

1:04:11All that is necessary is that you should have known. That means the prosecutor must only prove a reasonable person would have known the property was stolen. If you're getting tons of data for absolutely free, you should probably know that there's something. What do you mean? I found this Rolex on Canal Street. If you buy a bike on Craigslist for$40, that's a$500 bike, you should probably know that that s*** is probably stolen. And like a Luther did not do this fairly. And all the companies that pulled from this and threw it into their training data, training data probably should have known something sketchy was going on or at least put the effort into figuring it out.

1:04:47Right. You can just make this analogy like you steal a watch from someone on Canal Street and you now just say it's yours. Like that's what these companies are doing. And we already it's it's already a problem when you rip off people's writing. Right. You can like take a big thing on Wikipedia, change some words slightly, and it's still plagiarism. This has been a huge conversation on YouTube in general recently because there's all these video essay YouTube channels that are literally just like reading Wikipedia or reading books verbatim and then like putting graphics over it and pretending that they wrote the whole thing.

1:05:19And they'll just change some small sections and they'll be like, it's not plagiarism. I just took heavy inspiration. And it's like, no. And if you're making a language model and your whole model is based off of other people's work, even if you're changing the words, that's still heavy inspiration. And that's most of the New York Times lawsuit against OpenAI is kind of focused around this because they have many, many, many examples where they'll ask a question about a New York Times about something that happened. And it'll basically just almost verbatim say the New York Times article, but it changes some of the adjectives.

1:05:54I guess my last question, and maybe we can take a break after this, is, okay, so we know that these companies still want to make AI models and language models and things like that. What is the actual landscape of options for training data to make a good model? And I think that might be something that takes a whole lot more research that we don't know enough about. but it kind of feels like there are a relatively small number of absolutely gigantic models. And if you're Apple rushing into the scene where they probably shouldn't be, but not really being able to find huge models with gigantic amounts of information that contain zero improperly acquired information, that's a question I don't know the answer to.

1:06:43I think all of these companies have the resources, or I shouldn't say all of them, all the ones that we're talking about, Apple, NVIDIA, have the resources to like be able to ask proper permission and have more options than they could ever imagine. And or just pay people. And pay, just pay people. Like if you're YouTube, if you're Google and YouTube, you can say, hey, we would love to like train our models using our YouTube transcripts. We will pay you 5 % more ad revenue if you're willing to let us scrape your transcripts. What do you think? If you're Reddit, you could do the same thing. If you contribute a lot, we'll pay you based on how much you contribute to Reddit and keep conversations flowing, the quality of your conversations, stuff like that.

1:07:23These are all trillion dollar companies. It's not like they can't afford to pay people. They're the greatest and most intense nexuses of information in the history of humanity. Like they don't have the excuse to be like, I don't know. It's like, you know, you know, as much as any entity has ever known ever. Right. If you're Apple, there's a reason that they're going to these companies to buy slash license the data sets instead of going out and gathering it themselves. Admittedly, Apple's in a much worse position than all these other companies because their entire brand is privacy. Personally, but I still think they can go do their research on figuring out data sets that aren't.

1:08:03No, that's my question is what options are available? is are there only 20 reasonably big data sets that they could train like train stuff on or are there bajillions of options i have no idea but i don't know the specifics of it but i'm sure there are plenty of options that have like are we sure i don't know i just hope so i'm sure they can find i'm sure they could afford to pay someone to make a data set that was interesting there's a before we we gotta probably wrap this up so before we go to trivia but there's a very similar thing going on in the art like the physical art world on the topic of provenance where a lot of museums especially in New York, are getting in trouble because most of their art is stolen.

1:08:41And yes, the Met over the past few years has had to return over a thousand pieces to various countries. And the museum's excuses, how are we supposed to know it was stolen? We bought it from a reputable art dealer who said it wasn't stolen. How are we supposed to know? And on the surface, it very much feels like, oh, that's very reasonable. If an art dealer got it from another art dealer who got it from another art dealer who bought it from a thief. How are you supposed to track that down? But the actual reality of the situation is almost never like that. Like there's this awesome article from a year or two ago on ICIJI, which is an international journalist consortium, where they talk about there was an artifact that was stolen from Southeast Asia in the 80s that appeared in the museum in the 90s.

1:09:30Like it only took 10 years from stolen to in the museum and the museum was still like how were we supposed to it's like dude you are the one of the biggest art museums in the world like if you don't know like doing your due diligence basically yeah it's like it's like at a certain point like you have to own up to the amount of cred that you have and do things the right way right well that yeah it also gets into so many like ethical boundaries of like i mean they have a bunch of egyptian stuff direct from egypt in the met and so there's all those questions of like well the british stole everything yeah so when the british eventually sold that stuff technically all of it is stolen marquez i i genuinely see where you're coming from and i don't have the answer to your question which i think proves your point to a large extent however i fundamentally in my soul refuse to believe that this is not something that, again, the smartest, most valuable, farthest reaching entity in the history of humanity can't accomplish.

1:10:34I agree. I think you have a really strong case and I agree that it would make sense to believe that the strongest entity in humanity ever should have the ability to solve any problem that humanity comes up with. But I still don't know the answer to, I would love to see someone make an expose with whatever information is out there about what the world of these data sets is actually like. Because there are the data sets that are used by OpenAI. OpenAI is a several bazillion dollar company and they have to go get data sets. Like Google, what are they using? When you're buying all of the content on Reddit and using Reddit information, what does that look like?

1:11:12And if you're Apple and you have no data sets, how do you train a good AI? Where do you get that information? I don't know any of the answers and I would love someone to find all the answers. Yeah, I hope that would be a great expose. I hope nobody watching this thinks that are strong points on either side. Makes us think we do know the answer. This is just all a lot of arguing. We're making an ethical argument and that these companies don't care at all. They do not care because they're going to make more money even if they get sued and they get caught. I mean, they want to look like they care.

1:11:47The amount of money. Sure, yeah. What's the say? Move slowly and keep things intact? No, I feel like that's not it. Move fast and break terms of service. Like, nobody, you know? Immediately what we're talking about with is the more connection to us of scraping YouTube videos is what probably will happen is if YouTube does anything, Apple or Luther or whoever will pay Google a bunch of money and then all of the YouTube videos that got stolen will see absolutely nothing of that. Yeah, I do have to say it is crazy surprising that Google has not done anything about all of these companies that have obviously been scraping YouTube and breaking their terms of service.

1:12:21It is wild. Yeah, the transcript data is exposed in the API and I don't know that there's any, I don't know what their method of protecting that information would be. I guess, wait, sorry. Now to go all the way back to did they agree to the terms of service if you use the YouTube API? You'd have to. Do you have to agree to terms of service by using that? I believe so. So that might answer that question, but. Yeah, I don't know. I don't know anything about APIs. the API they might just have built a bot that can like scrape. I'm not 100 % sure but I thought a Luther said they use the API specifically.

1:12:51I use the API for some of our data collection and yes you do need to agree to certain terms of service. Apple's going to email you. What are you collecting? Oh oh. We should go to trivia. That's for our channel. Anyway, companies don't have your best interest in art and they like to make money. More at 11. I guess that's where we should take it to I'm so sorry guys. That was pretty intense. The rabbit hole just kept opening. It's always fun when you go down in an ethical... The pod was supposed to go live 10 minutes ago. It was cold when we started this and now my hands are closed. I told you not to turn off the AC.

1:13:29I know, you're right. Second question. In 2013, Google launched their first consumer hardware device. What was it? In what year? 2013. 2013, they launched their first Google hardware. Consumer hardware device. Consumer hardware. 2013? 2013. Oh, I have an answer. I gotta write this down before. So, was 2008 and the Nexus S not considered a consumer hardware device? That wasn't Google. Google didn't make it. Oh. We'll see. I don't know if it's right. We'll brainstorm it a little more. We got more to talk about, believe it or not. I have an idea. Yeah. We'll be right back.

1:14:26When did making plans get this complicated? It's time to streamline with WhatsApp, the secure messaging app that brings the whole group together. Use polls to settle dinner plans. Send event invites and pin messages so no one forgets mom's 60th. And never miss a meme or milestone. All protected with end-to-end encryption. It's time for WhatsApp. Message privately with everyone. Learn more at whatsapp.com. This episode is brought to you by State Farm. Checking off the boxes on your to-do list is a great feeling. And when it comes to checking off coverage, a State Farm agent can help you choose an option that's right for you.

1:15:05Whether you prefer talking in person, on the phone, or using the award-winning app, It's nice knowing you have help finding coverage that best fits your needs. Like a good neighbor, State Farm is there.

1:15:19Lowe's knows how to help make your home holiday ready for less. Get Select Style Selection's vinyl flooring for just$1.99 per square foot and have it installed before the festivities begin. Our team can help you every step of the way. See a Lowe's Red Vest Associate or visit lowes.com slash holiday install to get started. Lowe's. We help. You save. Basic install only. Date restrictions apply. Subject to availability. Install by independent contractors. See associate for details. Contiguous US only. Alright, welcome back. I have one last thing to talk about. It's kind of random off the wall, but every time Canon comes out with a new mirrorless camera, they absolutely nail it.

1:16:01With every single new spec, they finally added the thing that we are begging them to add. except and then they mess up one thing that makes it critically flawed and kind of an issue they make amazing cameras i just have to say like we still use a lot of canon cameras i'm looking right at a c100 c300 we shoot c70s for studio we have r5s everywhere 500 c500s too i love these things right they're really really good but r5 you might remember had the overheating issue like the really good cameras great autofocus a whole bunch of awesome stuff and then like ah but it overheats when you shoot 8K. Or they have like a really great vlog camera that's finally smaller and finally has great codecs.

1:16:42And oh, but the camera doesn't flip around or the monitor doesn't flip around. The R5C was everything we wanted, but the battery lasts 20 minutes. And doesn't have, yeah, yeah. I would argue almost this happens. Ibis. Ibis, yeah. Can I argue this happens with just like mirrorless cameras? Because this happens with Sony too. That's totally true. They like do all these cool things and then the like flip up screen only flips up. So if you have an external microphone or then they fix that and flipped it to the side, but that's where the microphone audio jack was. So it's just in front. It's almost like they need it to be imperfect so that they can release another camera that you'll buy.

1:17:13Well, this brings me to the newest announcement. Yeah. And I'm looking at it, and I personally don't see the Achilles heel. Someone's going to point it out in the comments and break my heart. But as of right now, Canon's released two new cameras, the R1, but also the R5 Mark II. This R5 Mark II, I think, for 4 ,300 bucks, is gonna be pretty sick. 8K60. C-Log 2 got added. Full-size HDMI port instead of that dinky mini HDMI on the R5. 4K120 with audio. It has a cooling battery grip. So obviously there was a firmware update a while ago to improve the cooling on the R5. But a cooling battery grip to have longer battery.

1:17:57There's more specific batteries for this, but it shouldn't overheat. it has electronic image stabilization that works with the stabilization built into rf lenses i mean i'm going down this list and i'm like it seems like a pretty sick camera records onto micro sd i'm like oh my good no it still has all the fundamentals it's like it's still a good size camera it still has it's 45 megapixels it takes fast stills like all the things that you'd normally expect that of a camera so i'm worried about what might go wrong when reviews come out but as of right now i think r5 mark ii is is that camera i'm trying to confirm this but i think i may have found something i can't see a picture is the sensor triangle what's going on no i i really liked that joke this morning like that would okay so one of the coolest things i think about the r5 mark one that we have is every time you take the lens off the shutter shuts and it protects the sensor and i think every single camera should have that there's just a photo here and it looks like the sensor is just open but maybe he did that on purpose but if they took that away from this one no it has it still it still has it yeah i saw in peter's video okay good yeah i think every single mirrorless camera needs or every single dslr it's a good feature because it's so reds are mirrorless and they get little dust particles on the sensor all the time if you're changing lenses all the time it just makes you feel so much better i'm just saying canon people let me know what i'm missing because i think i think i'm gonna end up spending four thousand dollars on one yeah on one 42.99 specifically 4300 it's not i don't want to go buying a bunch of stuff but like that's it also has eye tracked autofocus so you can look at the thing you want it to focus on and i'll on that wait what yes and i want to point out that a film camera from canon actually had this back in the day and it was so when you're saying eye tracking you don't mean it's tracking the eye of what i'm shooting no it's using my eye and which autofocus point i look at to focus on the subject yes what's what's wrong with this camera wait i don't know if i like that something is going to be horribly wrong with this camera yeah you yeah you you basically just look at what you want it to focus on and it changes the focus to it but there are some times where i'm like looking at something behind the subject just to like watch it go out of frame or something like that so it's just going to focus on that yeah oh wait hold on hold on yeah sorry i need to confirm here so if you're looking through the evf what you're looking at yes okay i thought you meant like if i were in frame yeah that's and i like put something up in front of me and looked at it it would rack focus to that no that's really cool and they had this in the canon eos 5 also known as the a2 and a2e we have one of those film cameras oh yeah film cameras um yeah and it was super cool and now i imagine it is way way way better than it was back in the day but they call it uh iaf2 and i imagine the first one was iaf1 i just remember seeing this on the that film camera and being like why has nobody done this again sick and if it's bad you can just turn it off exactly Wow.

1:21:08Yeah. It's pretty awesome. I'm scared. There will be something wrong. Don't worry. I'm scared. We'll find out when Marquez gets his... I'm reading comments on this to see... It also says they have C-Log2. And for those that don't know, for some reason, the R5 has C-Log1 and C-Log3. Log profiles shoot very flat so that you have a lot of room to grade. Famously, C-Log1 and C-Log2 are not good. I do not like them at all. C-Log2, we like. C-Log2, very good. We like. And they've always... They've always kept those for some reason for the cine cameras. And I know there's a reason for it. Obviously, they don't want to cannibalize their own market.

1:21:46They are so worried about that all the time. So bringing that on to this, I think it's going to be awesome. That's what scares me because you would think R5C Mark II would have this. But the fact that they bring this to R5, I keep thinking, what did they nuke? Yeah. What did they do? Something's missing. Is it still too light? It's like walking up to a dog like, what's in your mouth? What's in your mouth? What did you do? I'm going to try to verify. I don't know what it is, but it's going to be crazy. Okay, well, you know, we might have to get one. Did you mention full-size HDMI? Full-size, yeah.

1:22:13The real deal. We just plug right into a monitor. I feel like we lose those stupid adapters every single time we get one. Or they break. They're so finicky. They're not durable. They also announced the EOS R1, which is$6 ,300. Is it like the flagship? Yes. The sports photograph? It is basically the mirrorless version of the 1DX. 1DX. And it does 40 FPS raw. Yeah. Which is crazy. It's 24 megapixel, but it has some in-camera AI upscaling thing that can apparently upscale it to a much higher resolution. Okay. So very interesting. We've been wondering for like a lot of years when our camera is going to start catching up to smartphones in terms of like the computational photography and processing.

1:23:01And it seems like that's finally happening. but apparently it can generate a 96 megapixel image i'm not as worried about that sucking because like a smartphone sensor and optics are so small that like you kind of need some computational assistance to make a great big image i mean you're you're i'm looking at a film person like the bigger the sensor the bigger the optics the more room you have to make good images and i'm not surprised that a full frame sensor with a huge lens can be upscaled and still look good yeah or like a crappy 12 megapixel camera phone photo yes help there's no light intake at all so like a fast sports photo like okay give me a give me less megapixels on the raw capture right then you can upscale and have a good looking image yeah 24 megapixels on a full frame sensor you're getting a quite a bit of light on each pixel exactly so yeah that's exciting i found something on the r5 mark ii that let me know if this is a problem oh my god new battery type none of the old ones i saw that i saw that i am willing to accept that because it seems like it should still because there's new grips and stuff it should still it should have better battery life and i don't have a ton of r5 batteries anyway so i'm not mad about losing that and if you're a new purchaser and didn't have the previous ones that doesn't affect you at all so that does suck if you're upgrading yeah but it feels standalone enough to not be i have like 30 r5 batteries or something.

1:24:27All right, I'll keep looking for a deal breaker. The cooling grip is$750. Jesus Christ. Damn! I want to know really quickly that they did put that eye tracking in the EOS R3, which is the APS-C camera that they made the lens for for the Vision Pro. Right? That's the R7, sorry. They put it in the R3, which I don't really know a lot about the R3, but apparently they put that in there first, so this is the second camera to have it. You know, they go the opposite direction of Audi models as far as, like, names versus size this is such a stupid comment why am i even saying why is this coming out of my mouth rs rs3 rs5 rs7 gets bigger but like r1 is the biggest one r3 is smaller r5 canon's always done this though right like yeah 1d 1d 5d yeah it's a big boy yeah yeah i don't know why i even said that anyway what is coming out of my mouth why am i saying i should stop and think first what a what language model am I being run on right now?

1:25:24Anyway, we've talked for so long, we should do trivia. Let's do trivia. Let's do trivia. I feel like this might be the longest episode. It might be.

1:25:36We're off from last week's episode still by like 20 plus minutes. Really? And that's with goofing around for 15 minutes in the beginning. Goofing around. Question number one. Trivia. Let's kick up the energy. Trivia, dude. Web crawlers We know them as web crawlers. When I say web crawler, everybody knows what we're talking about. But Google.com. Some people use different words. I have three of them. One of them is possibly fake. Which one did I make up? Hit it. A. Spider. B. Automatic indexer. C web scutter or D these are all real and I didn't make anything up at all before I thought you were going to say I say web you say scutter scraper get out of the gutter what have we got boys oh wow we all said different things and you're all wrong It was D.

1:26:48But you should read your answers anyway. All right. I wrote C. I wrote Spider. I wrote the AI one. Unfortunately, no. Spider was used by Scott Spetka in his early paper, The Robot, colon, Beyond Browsing. I remember that one. Early computer research paper. Automatic Indexer was used by May Kobayashi. And I forget his first name, but the last name is Takeda. In a 2000 paper sponsored by IBM called Information Retrieval on the Web. and web scutter is present in the FOAF official documentation paradigm which I think some of was written by Tim Berners-Lee but I'm not gonna say that actually I can't I think it might have been but I'm not really sure and D the correct answer is these are all real I'm just about right I couldn't come up with anything funny this week guys I'm sorry it's all right it's all right it's so crazy how David knew all of that and he still got it wrong I know damn why now every time every time i'm just trying to i'm my headache i'm not ahead so i'm trying to like give you guys yeah that's fair quick update on the score are you ahead yeah marquez with 14 uh andrew with 13 david with 14 oh ellis carrying the one oh i thought i was one point over no you're one point over andrew but you and marquez are tied up really got him all right right where i want to be second question in 2013 google launched the first consumer hardware device that they ever launched.

1:28:16What was it? I think. Therefore I am. I think I still have it. Really? Wait, really? Hmm. Wait, 2013? 2013. Trying to get a reaction to see if I'm right. Oh, no. Oh, yeah. Is it what I think it is? No. I don't know if I'd consider that consumer hardware. Oh, yeah. I think my thing is from before 2013. Okay, what do you got? David, flip it. Chromecast. Oh, good job. Andrew, what did you say? I wrote Chromebook. Marques? I wrote the Chromebook CR48. Nope. Their first ever consumer hardware device was the Chromecast. Wait, wait, wait, wait. When was that? 2013. But the CR48 was 2010. Who made it?

1:29:13Google. But wasn't the question in 2013? Well, I just happened to come up with the actual first question.

1:29:22You know what I mean? I feel you. I feel like I'm right. I only agree with Marquez if me just saying Chromebook also counts in that. Where did you get the answer from, Adam? The keyword, which is Google's blog. What did Google say? They said the Chromecast. They said the Chromecast is the first consumer source. The first consumer hardware device. This Chromebook? versus Google. Wow. That's weird that they would forget about their own shop. It, uh, yeah, it's all matte black. No logos anywhere. What if we both get points? Forget points. Holy crap. I, in real time, Marquez has unearthed a product that is older than the Chromecast.

1:30:01You're not shocked that Google forgot about one of their own products? No, no, no. I'm not shocked that they forgot about their own product. Petition for us to all get a point. Because we're all... I think we should all get points because we're all technically right. the answer that Google somehow thought was the right answer. And so you should get a point for that. I came up with the actual answer, which is their actual first consumer hardware product. And I stumbled upon it. But, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. But if we're letting the C48 in, then wouldn't just the G1 be the first Google consumer hardware product?

1:30:33Because that's as much Google made as yours. What I'm looking at is a 2013 Chromebook. That was an HTC. Yeah. It had an HTC logo on it. Yes, but yours doesn't have an Acer logo. No, it doesn't. It doesn't have a logo. It has no logo. But also, if we gave Andrew the point and didn't give it to either of you guys, you would all be tied at 14. And I think that makes the game really fun. No, what are you talking about? There's no world where David shouldn't get a point. I agree. But there's also no world that Andrew gets a point and I don't. Unfortunately, I think both of those worlds are the ones we currently inhabit.

1:31:10What are you talking about? This is insane. Is it that insane? Yes. It is insane. Okay. I have an idea. Also, low-key Chromebook Pixel was insane. I'm going to suspend the points from this week. What? And make a poll on threads and Twitter. Can you just do a YouTube community? Sure, YouTube community. YouTube community? Only YouTube community. Don't tell them who said which answer. I just want to say I did not expect this question to be so controversial. So contentious. Because I thought Google would have gotten this pretty straightforwardly right. But turns out their block is wrong. They must have used the AI-generated results to write this.

1:31:48Who wrote it? Actually, yeah. Can we confirm that this keyword post was not written by an AI? It was not, and I'm not putting them on blast. So go to YouTube community and vote on who gets the correct point, and I will update next week. What are you listing? All three and each of our names and everyone gets a point? Or just each of our names? just the answer. Chromebook? Chromebook. What was it? P48? CR48. CR48. Chromecast. Chromecast. Are you just letting people decide? Yes. Because I... Where does the Nexus Q fall into all of this? You can't just let people vote. Too late. You can't just do that.

1:32:26We live in a democracy, David. Anyway, final answer is the Chromecast. Vote in the poll. I hope it's like multiple choice so you can pick like two instead of just one. But anyway, we'll pause points till next week to figure that one out thanks for voting um yeah i guess that's it thanks stop the ballots thanks for watching thanks for listening we'll be back to regular length podcast next week i promise i swear we won't allegedly allegedly see you then wait for was produced by adam malina and ellis rovin we're partnered with vox media podcast network and our to try after music was vinso bingo make good choices make good choices and we didn't steal any of this i'm sticking

1:33:27We could make that into a paid service, you know. We come to your house, Fiber, TaskRabbit. We come to your house and just make Mario sounds.