H.I. No. 96: The Humblehug

From Podpedia
"The Humblehug"
Hello Internet episode
Episode 96 on the podcast YouTube channel
Episode no.96
Presented by
Original release dateJanuary 31, 2018 (2018-01-31)
Running time2:21:57
  • Skillshare
  • Harry's
  • Squarespace
Episode chronology
← Previous
"Break Glass in Case of Emergency"
Next →
"Tesla in Space"
List of Hello Internet episodes

"H.I. #96: The Humblehug" is the 96th episode of Hello Internet, released on January 31, 2018.[1]

Official Description[edit | edit source]

Grey and Brady discuss The Book of Thunks

Sponsors[edit | edit source]

Show Notes[edit | edit source]

Other[edit | edit source]

Fan Art
You know how I think it was for my birthday back in June, I got given the Lego satin rocket with like nearly 2000 pieces. Of course. And the big joke was, you know, I wouldn't get around to making it and all this other stuff. So I still haven't made it. Okay. It's still seeing a box in my spare room. But after much stalking and attempts to buy something that was unobtainable, I have now bought something that I wanted to show you. Okay. Hang on. No, there goes Brady. Here it is. It's very big and heavy. Ah. Ah. Ah. Ah. Ah. Ah. Ladies and gentlemen, Brady is holding up a gigantic box that is a Star Wars Millennium Falcon. That's amazing. It's the ultimate collector series, Millennium Falcon. I think it's the biggest Lego set they've ever made. It has like over 5,000 pieces or something like that. I know someone who made it and it took them two weeks. I mean, that is for sure the biggest Lego box I've ever seen. That box is the size of your whole torso. That thing's crazy. Yeah, it's about the size of two Mark White weapons and heavier than that. It looked pretty heavy to pick up. That was not an easy lift. Holy cow. Is this a new thing? That looks really awesome. It came out like last year and only special Lego VIPs could buy it. And then a few of them started dribbling it onto the Lego black market, but with huge markets in price. It's quite expensive as it is. I was just stalking the Lego website and they kept saying coming soon, coming soon. And then the other day I went on there and you could buy one. So I bought one. You could only buy one. You're not allowed to buy multiple boxes. So I bought my one and it said it would come sometime in February or something, but then it came really quickly. And it's a magnificent box. It isn't magnificent box, but Brady, you know I have to ask. Yeah. So you're going to assemble it. Well, I do wonder if it's beyond my skill set. Because apparently it's like, it's advanced. Like there are different levels of Lego making when you buy things. They say, this is for beginners. This is intermediate. This is like advanced Lego making. Right. I guess what I'm wondering is on the box is it like for Brady's and above or for above Brady's. Like is that the skill level that's on the side there? It seems to say 16 plus I think. I feel like you got that covered then. If it's 16 plus, you should be able to handle that right? I think I need to make the rocket to like get my skills up. Oh, okay. As a practice project before I move on to this apparent. I haven't opened the box yet because it's like still very a very sacred object to me. But apparently the instructions that come with it, it's like the Bible, it's like a book that comes with it to tell you how to make it. It's not like a leaflet. It's like a home. I wonder if they're if they have to resort to words in that manual or if they can do it entirely with the Lego pictures. Oh, I don't know yet. It's a good question. I mean, that looks like that might require some words about how to do things, but I do love the pictures only Lego manuals. Yeah. I mean, you having shown me this thing, I feel like Brady, okay, the Saturn rocket Lego box. I can see why you might not want to assemble it because at least that box is long and tall. It is conceivable that there would be a universe where you could mount that box on a wall. It might be a little awkward, but you could do it. But the thing that you picked up and showed me is just a gigantic cube. Yeah. It's a display and storage nightmare. Although it is a beautiful box like the artwork on it, they've gone simple and classic. They haven't put too much childishness on it. They've made a beautiful box, but indeed it is very awkwardly shaped. The only way they could make it, actually no, I was just going to say the only way they could make it more difficult if they made it a sphere. But then if it was a sphere, you could put it in one of those beautiful old-fashioned globe holders. Right. You like you see in a movie in the 1800s, there's whatever the heck it's called, the little stand for someone's outdated globe of the world. You could then drop the Lego box in there. So actually making it a sphere would be better, but that cube is impossible to manage on every level. It's big. There's no shelf. You can put it on. There's no corner in the room where it won't dominate the whole corner. So I feel like you have to assemble that Brady. I've just sent you the obligatory Audrey on the box for scale picture. Oh, wow. Now that I have a chance to actually look at the artwork on the box in detail, that looks like a very complicated Lego structure. Lots of custom pieces on that one. That's for sure. You have no idea. They've got the circular satellite dish on that one. Nice touch, I like that. Yeah, or you can put a rectangular one on there too. They give you multiple options. And you've got optional characters too. You can have like the hand-solo Chewbacca configuration or the more modern films. I've got everything covered. I posted a picture on my personal Facebook and it got a real response from all my friends around the world and like a legitimate number of them want to come and build it with me or have offered to build it for me when I said I don't know if I could build it. You can't have someone else build it for you. No, that's no good. It's got seven and a half thousand pieces. Holy moly. I mean, it's the thing of beauty. This Lego has reached like peak Lego. It's like this is what Lego was born to do to make a millennium Falcon this big. I'm looking at all the zoomed in stuff. Wow. Brady, okay. I mean, the more I'm looking at this, you have to assemble this. More than that, I feel like I want this to be like a real project. I feel like you need to film yourself assembling this. I want a time lapse film of Brady assembling this. We should go away for a weekend. We should build it together and record 19 episodes of other rich. What we do. Welcome to episode nine of Brady and Gray build the millennium Falcon. We should probably title it Brady and Gray attempts to build the millennium Falcon. Because as soon as I feel like you're dragging me into this, suddenly it looks way more complicated. I mean, like that's 16 pluses of really underestimating it. I've seen videos and pictures of people who've done it. It's more complicated than the actual millennium Falcon. You know what? That is an excellent question. How many pieces did the original model of the millennium Falcon have? I'm going to bet it was not 7.5 thousand pieces. They did bring out like a deluxe millennium Falcon a few years ago. That was quite big, not as big as this. And that became a real collector's item. And if you've got one of them like still in the box, it became really, really expensive. So some of my friends have said to me, oh, you should keep that in the box. Because it'll be worth a mint in about two years. I'm not going to store a big box of Lego in my house like as an investment. You're not going to do that. You're not going to make a Star Wars investment. It's like my equivalent of Bitcoin. I'm just mining Star Wars Lego. I mean, I'm laughing at this, but I will never forget that. When I was a kid, Hallmark was doing these special edition Star Wars Christmas ornaments. Every year, like they'd come out with one or another. And one year they came out with the Yoda ornament. And my dad was like investing in Bitcoin with those Yoda ornaments. Like he went all out, right? And like I'm bought a whole bunch of these Yoda ornaments. And for years and years, my mother and I mercilessly teased him about like this box full of Yoda ornaments in the basement. But he did get the last laugh because when I went off to college, like when we were clearing out the house and he sold all those things, like he made quite a profit on those ornaments. So like he was not wrong. It definitely turned into a thing that was worth some actual money later on. I mean, I've not made Lego for a long time. And I've got this rocket and I haven't made that. So I don't know whether or not I am going to have the love for making it. But I think I'm just running purely on two levels of nostalgia here. Star Wars nostalgia and they go in a stouture. Just thinking that's going to get me through. But to some part of you not look at that and think actually that would be quite nice for a few days just to sit down and assemble. It's like knitting. Wouldn't that be what the pleasure of it is? You're just sort of putting a thing together. Although I guess the pleasure of knitting comes from the mindlessness of it. Whereas this looks like actually it has quite a lot of mindful potential tedium in the process of snapping together. I also have a lot of angry Ikea moments where you angrily throw something against the world because you put it together wrong. Well, Brady, you have to assemble it and I wish you the best of luck. I'll keep you up today. I've got to try the rocket first. I just don't have time. If I have a spare day, I think I'll better work then. But maybe I need to just say all right, I'm going to just do it. I'm going to do it. Take a day off, Brady. Your channels, they can manage for one day without you. Although this looks like a multi-day project. Oh, the Millennium Falcon, yes. It'll take me forever. Then I don't know where I'll do it in the house that won't cause domestic just harmony. The table where we counted all the votes. Surely that very central table in your house, that could be converted into the Millennium Falcon station for a week. I don't see how I could possibly cause any problems. I feel like one of the main motivating factors to get it for us to finish that vote count quickly was like, oh god, we got to get this done today. It's can't stay here. And when we were counting those votes and my wife came home, we were like too naughty school boys have been caught. It's not what it looks like. We're not recording a podcast of counting votes on the kitchen table. I'm so sorry, I thought this would be done hours ago. We dramatically underestimated how big of a job this is. Good times, good times, Brady. So anyway, speaking of Star Wars, there's been enough breathing time now since the last Jedi Christmas review podcast. Still, you haven't gone to scene again or changed any of your thoughts or anything? I haven't felt the need to go see the movie again, but that has not happened. Have you gone out to see the movie second time? I'm not. We just the first time that you saw it, right? When we did the... I've only seen it once. I actually do want to watch it with my wife, because I think that would be like a good sanity check for me, because I'm so confused by the polar opposite opinions people have of the film. I feel like getting my wife to watch it might do me some good. Like if she watches it and says, oh yeah, that was a right-rolicing ride. You know, I don't care that much about Star Wars, but that was just a good fun. Like things might fall into place for me, but that hasn't happened yet. But a few people have seen it since we last spoke, whose opinions are important to me. And thankfully, those handful of people have all felt the same as me and thought, nah, nah, didn't like that. And I'm like, oh, thank goodness. Like my brother-in-law didn't like her, and my mate Tim, who I do, the other podcast with, like, you know, where Big Star Wars fans together, he didn't like her, so I was like, oh, thank goodness. Because if one of them really liked her, I'd be like, especially Tim, that was an interesting one, because he has, like, you know, young kids. And I thought maybe having kids makes you watch it through a different prism, but nah, he didn't like it. No, it is a funny thing. You say that, like, you feel this feeling of relief. There is something that I think is in all of us that we can get really judgmental about other people's media preferences. And I had the same experience where, for me, by far, the best part of watching Star Wars was, as soon as we emerged from the hermetically sealed bubble of our recording, was I went out and consumed all of the media in the world, where everybody was talking about the movie. And as I listened to and watched far more hours of podcasts and videos talking about the movie, then the length of the movie. I mean, easily by a multiple of 10. I haven't listened to a single other podcast about it. Oh, interesting. There is this very human thing, which I think people do get so riled about movies, is like, you want other people to agree with you? Like, it's obviously such a subjective media. Everybody thinks they have an idea about what a good movie is, and then everybody has their list of exceptions of movies that they know aren't actually good with that they love, or as like, it's so subjective, but I had that same feeling of relief when people I knew watched the movie and then agreed with me, and then a feeling of confusion when someone didn't agree with me, like, how can you possibly disagree with me? And it's especially the case, because I would say, my general impression was, reviews on YouTube were way more harsh than our review of the show was, like, at least from my sampling of it, it seemed like YouTube, like the movie a lot less, and some reviews made ours seem like a glowing endorsement. And then I'm aware of like, oh, some of the podcast selection that I had was generally much more positive, like people really liking and enjoying the movie. And I kept thinking, like, I'm on both sides that when people dislike it more, I'm like, oh, come on, like, that's crazy. You're being too harsh about this. And then when people like it more, I'm like, oh, come on, it's not that good. Like, you gotta be kidding. And I'm thinking of like the old George Carlin joke that when you're driving on the highway, it's like, anybody who's driving slower than you is like, oh, come on, grandma, get off the road, right? And anybody who's driving faster than you is a total maniac, right? Where in your speed is the only absolute correct speed. I totally had that same feeling listening to everybody else's reviews. Like, my dislike of the Star Wars movie is perfectly calibrated, right? And if you dislike it more, you're crazy, right? And if you liked it more, I also don't understand it all what you're coming from. So it was a very interesting experience. And it really has been shocking to see how divisive the movie was. Like, I would not have guessed that. I mean, I'm a lot more chilled about people liking and not liking it, like I'm not, whatever. But there are like four or five people who like, if they felt very differently to me, like I'd be concerned, or I'd start to question myself. But those people all sort of were where I expected them to be. I've actually got one friend who I think has like the worst taste in the world. In all movies and television. And if she likes something, that's like a guarantee that I won't. But if she doesn't like something, that's like a glowing endorsement to me. And like if I see her on Facebook saying, I just saw this thing and it was terrible. To me, that's like, that sets off an alarm bell saying, I need to watch that. It's probably really good. Right. It's been ever running joke between us, but it's become so strong that it actually is a really, really good indicator as to whether I like or not like something. Just look at what she likes and go the exact opposite. Yeah, that's right. So someone who is always wrong is actually always right as well. Right? That's how that works. This episode of Hello Internet is brought to you by Skillshare. Skillshare is an online learning platform with over 18,000 classes in design, business, technology, and more. If you can name it, they've got it. Graphic design, social media marketing, data analysis, mobile photography, you can take classes in it all. So whether you're trying to deepen your professional skill set, start a side hustle, or just explore a new passion, Skillshare is there to keep you learning and thriving. Now, maybe you want to learn something new, but something I find really useful to do with these kind of online learning courses is to review a topic that I already know about. So I have found it extremely useful to go over people's classes in programs that I use professionally, because you always learn better ways to do things that you already do. So for example, I've gone through courses on Logic Pro X, which I'm using right now to edit this podcast and this Skillshare advertisement. And I've done courses on Final Cut program. I put hundreds and hundreds of hours into, but it's still really helpful to see somebody else talk about the ways they get their work done. And I always learn new little tricks and tips and ways to save time. So whether you're trying to learn something new or you just want to get better at what you're already doing, Skillshare is a place where you can learn online. Join the millions of students already learning on Skillshare today with a specific offer for our listeners. Get two months of Skillshare for just 99 cents. That's right, Skillshare is offering Hello Internet listeners two months of unlimited access to 18,000 classes for just 99 cents. To sign up, go to Skillshare.com slash hello. Again, go to Skillshare.com slash hello to start your two months now. That's Skillshare.com slash hello. And thanks to Skillshare for supporting the show. I have a little bit of follow-up rating. Some travel follow-up. I happen to have been on a lot of flights in the past, three months or so, way more than normal. And my carrier is British Airways. Commiserations. I'm not a fan of them at the moment, sir. Why are you not a fan of them, Brady? I think they get a bit tired. I don't think there is prestigious as they used to be. I think they've actually been having a lot of problems with people complaining about how dirty their planes are, too, but apparently I didn't realize they were a prestigious brand. They're just, I select their lines based on where they go. And BA is the one that goes where I needed to go. We all pretend there's some kind of crazy competition, but there really is it. As soon as you have more than one or two cities that you need to go to, it's like, well, you're really gonna be down to a single airline. It's gonna do most of those flights. That's true for some place. I've got a fly really long fly with BA next month because they're the only people going where I need to go. It's like railway competition in the UK. We have all these private companies competing with each other to manage the railroad. It's like, yeah, but there's only one railroad going to this, there's no competition there. That doesn't work at all. Anyway, the airlines are the same way. But I feel like I have been victimized by the safety video that I have had to watch so many times over the past several months, which is British Airways. Not just doing a safety video, but doing a comedy safety video that is also for charity. Yeah. And I feel like I've seen this thing so many times. I have heard flight attendants complain about it while it is on to other passengers. These videos, they're always really terrible, but there is something about a thing that is now two things at once. It's not just a bad safety video that's trying to make you laugh, but it's also a thing that's asking for your money. And I feel like I cannot psychologically deal with it. And I sent you the link and it is the longest, slowest safety video ever because they have all of this extra time for jokes and then also asking for your money. And I feel like I'm gonna lose my mind. Please airlines, please don't make your safety videos comedies that are also simultaneously asking for charitable donations. Please don't do this. It's terrible. I resent being held hostage to this so many times. I watched it. You sent me a link to it because it's on YouTube and I watched it. So for a bit of context for people that's been made for the BBC's comic relief campaign that they run all the time. So anything that has the banner of comic relief and this fundraising charity thing they do gives them the ability to pull in all these big stars because stars love doing things for comic relief. I'm also not entirely familiar with what comic relief is either, but it did look like some kind of celebrity club as far as I can tell. Every second year, the BBC for about a month or so has this big comic relief fundraising campaign which culminates with a big TV show with lots of comedians and stars doing funny skits and things to raise all this money for charity. And then in the alternate years, they have sport relief where sport stars do things for charity and raise money. So anyway, this has been done under the auspices of comic relief in cooperation with BA. So they've done the safety video. All these big stars have been in it and agreed to do it and are trying to be funny. And you sent it to me. And I mean, it's not new to make safety videos try to be funny. This has been going on for a few years now. Yeah. And the first minute or two, I found really funny. The first minute and a half to two minutes. I thought, oh no, this is actually quite funny. Grae and I are going to have a big fight here. Because I was actually chuckling at the first couple of things. I thought the guy who was playing the director at first was quite funny and the way he was reacting. All these stars are auditioning to be in the safety video and there's this sort of funny director who's like telling them what to do and funny in a thousand air quotes funny, yes. Well, at first he was funny. The first couple were quite good. I liked it. And then I thought, oh no, Grae and I are going to have a big fight. Because obviously Grae's not going to like this. But the problem with it was after that initial, that's quite funny. They just flogged the dead horse of the joke. They got the pacing all wrong. It was too slow. It's way too long. And you begin losing the wheel to live. It loses its funniness too. They start wheeling out less and less funny people, which culminates at the very end with Rowan Atkinson doing Mr. Bean, which he must, he must stop doing that. Mr. Bean was so funny back in the day. But not only is the comedy of Mr. Bean not funny anymore, but watching him do it when he's so much older, it's a bit like there's something a bit sad about watching him do Mr. Bean now. But it's like, oh man, you're still having to do that? That's a good one. It's especially weird from my perspective, because I've never seen the original Mr. Bean. I've only ever seen him do this thing referencing this show when he was on. So it becomes very strangely meta. It's like, is that just what Rowan Atkinson is like? Is that what he just does? Is this him? The best flight safety video in the world would start getting boring and tedious after four or five flights close to each other, which is what happens, when you start having to travel a lot and catch on his planes. But this one did have the unusual distinction of becoming tedious within the first viewing of it, which is quite an accomplishment. It is almost impressive if we're going to do critiques of airline safety videos here. I feel like... Are we spoilers? Do we emphasize spoilers? No, we don't have safety videos. Safety spoilers for the air safety video. No, that's not how that works. It's just a thing in the world. There's not spoilers for a thing that exists in the world. Okay. Because I just ruined the Mr. Bane ending. Because his appearance at the end, I think, is supposed to be like a surprise finale. And what it is, to me, it's the final bullet in the horse on the ground. It's like, okay, yeah. This one can't be saved. It's weird that Mr. Bane. But like, having watched this thing so many times and needing to critique it, I feel like, okay. Many of these airline safety videos, they have the problem of they're trying to do so much to dazzle you, to keep you entertained. Like, people have sent these crazy music video safety videos where there's just like all of these dancers and things are moving around and there's flashing lights and da, da, da, da. And it's like, okay, it's too much. Remember, this is a plane that we're on. We're supposed to be learning about how to save our lives, right? Not like watching like an ensemble cast dancing extravaganza. But with this safety video, it's like someone said, okay, let's take it down. Let's take it down. Swip it back. We're gonna strip it back. And what we're gonna do is we're just going to have actors in a like a black mirror infinite white void of nothingness talking to you. Just let the comedy do it all. Let the actors do it all. Just exactly it. Like, just let the comedy stand for itself. At best, it will give you a mild chuckle, a couple of times. But it's a, they scale it back and it's so slow. Right, it's so incredibly slow. It was also like, I think they thought maybe the star power would overwhelm us, but like the star power was not quite starry enough. It's like a minus to b plus stars. It's not a plus stars. It's not even like, oh my god, I can't believe they got Brad Pitt to do it. It's like, oh, they got that guy that's in that comedy show that I saw that time. What's his name? Oh, I can't remember his name, but you know, that guy. Yeah, let me go through it. Okay, so like, I don't know if the director is supposed to be someone that I would know, but I have no idea who that person is. I'm gonna assume he's a nobody. Sorry, director, actor guy, I have no idea who you are. He was the best guy, isn't it? Then, okay, so it's like, next up we have Guy from Love Actually, whose name I can't remember. Then next up we have the chef who's yelling Gordon Ramsay. Right? That's Gordon Ramsay. Then we have like, woman, I've never seen before in my entire life. I have no idea who she is. Next up we have Gandalf and the guy who played Wicked. It's like, okay, great, got it. We're gonna move on. Next up. Yeah, we're like Davis. Like, I couldn't remember his name. Next up we have some British guy. I have no idea who he is. I don't think I've ever seen him before in my life. Right? Next up we have an old guy who looks like a character actor who I feel like, oh, I've probably seen your face in movies before, but I couldn't possibly think of the same thing you've done. Oh, yeah, but Bridget Jones is dead. Oh, yes. Thank you. That's the right answer. I can't believe I couldn't place him. I literally saw Bridget Jones' baby like a week ago. You're already forgotten who he was. British Jones' baby can't really recommend that movie. Okay, next we're going up. Okay, so now we come up to who for me is the most recognizable person we've got Jillian Anderson. All right, it's like, okay. But I am aware that they have the director like make reference to a union auto auditioning for the ex files, like trying to like nudge the audience about who this person is in case they can't place it. So that's everybody. And then like you said, it's Mr. Bean at the end doing his Mr. Bean thing. I agree with you. It is not star powering dazzlingness. It's like Gandalf and Jillian Anderson. Those are the two most recognizable to me anyway. It's just not very funny. It's funny at the start. And I don't think it's because the joke wore off. I just think it's just, it's just funnier at the start. But also as it got into its sixth minute, I was starting to think like, are all safety videos this long? Is there this much information they have to say or have they somehow really stretched it out? Because they seem to be doing all the same things a safety video does. And safety videos are never fast spoken. So like they're not speaking much slower. They is there that much filler? Like how long is a normal safety video? I don't know. Wow. Okay. So I was gonna say I feel like this is about the same as all the rest of them. But the original one that started our complaining about this, which is the United Airlines safety is global one, which I feel like is filled with so much ridiculousness of like setting up establishing shots of where they are and all sorts of dumbness. That is, it's 4 1 1 2 minutes long. So I was thinking like, oh, surely it must be the same. But that one is now like a zippy adventure all over the world compared to this one from British Airways. Yeah, I'm guessing this is just way slower than most of them are going to be. But why are these things so awful? And I know it's for charity, but there is something about like, you've made me watch this terrible thing. And you're asking me for something at the end. And I'm like, I'm sure it's feeding children across the world or whatever. But it's like, you've made me sit through this awful thing and now you're asking me for money. And it's like, I hate, like it's, it got me on these two levels, Brady. He's awful. It's absolutely awful. Like, you're gonna ask me for money. Make me laugh, right? Put me in a happy mood. Like, don't infuriate me with this unfunny nonsense. And like I said, I was amazed to hear actual flight attendance complaining to passengers about this more than once. And then I was watching them as this thing was playing. It's like, and they all had that dead thousand yard stare in their eyes as this thing was going over to the PA. Like, to all of the flight attendants working on British Airways, I am so sorry for you during this season. I don't know when comic relief season ends, but I hope it's soon for everyone's sake. The problem is with you doing a safety video as well, it has to be like safe old person humor because you can't make edgy jokes about aircraft safety because people will have like anxiety attacks. Like for example, when the dude was doing the bit about the life jacket and the whistle, like he's quite a funny guy. And that could have been funny, but he just made some joke. You can blow this to get attention, if you like getting attention. That's a moment where you could have been funny. Like, you know, you could blow this to get attention. The attention of people who didn't see the 747 that just crashed right next to them or something like that. You could have made some jokes about the ordeal of a plane crash, but, you know, I guess you can't really do that. Because everyone will ask enough of the plane, you might want that in your airline safety videos. But I don't like the comic relief video, but I'm telling you right now, I wouldn't appreciate a video that was filled with nothing but death and destruction as the airline safety video, no matter how genuinely effective it might be. If the plane flips in the ocean, like this footage here of eating your airlines in... Yeah. Or you just have the pilot come on, or like dead seriousness, and be like, you need to pay attention. Because if you don't, this is what happens. And then like 30 seconds of the most horrific footage you can imagine. Like, to take off your guard down headphones and listen. Right? Yeah. See this picture of this person here? They didn't wear a seatbelt. Yeah, don't actually do that. It's that would be bad. But possibly if it did. Okay. I've got a little spoilery paper cut thing on my mind here. Because I think telling people, even if you think something is good or bad, counts as a spoiler. And I bet you agree too. Yep, completely agree. Yeah, like I don't want to know if the film was good or bad, you know, the most you can tell me is that the film is out. And here's where you can see it. Right, what were the ticket prices? Like with your friend, that friend you mentioned, if she tells you what she thinks of a movie, it's totally spoiled. Yeah. I think you need to avoid even how good a film is. So the BBC News website, like there are places where I expect to stumble over spoilers, like the movie review section of a newspaper or something like that, you know. Okay, if I'm wading through there, okay, I might see something I don't want to see. Yeah, if you're digging around on rotten tomatoes, you can't be surprised if you're spoiled. Exactly. But the BBC News website, for reasons that are beyond me anyway, have decided to start reviewing films, like big films when they come out. And what they do is they quite often will put these reviews on like the front page of their news website. And the other thing they do is in the headline, so on the front page of the BBC News website, in the headline, next to the name of the film, they have the star rating that they've given her. So I'll just be looking, I'll be scrolling down the front page of the BBC News website. And it will say, you know, man dies in plane crash, the latest Brexit negotiations. And then the next thing down will say, the last Jedi, three out of four stars, like as a headline on a news website. I can't believe they do that. Fair enough if they said review of the last Jedi. And then if I clicked on that, I can go and read the review. All right, I clicked on it. But putting the star in the headline on the clicky clicky bit on the front page where you can't help but see it, not happy, not happy. I don't know, I feel like I'm very sensitive to spoilers. I agree that it would be better if they didn't. But it can't really feel like the BBC has an opinion of the Star Wars movie anyway. Well, yeah, that's a whole other question whether the news website should be reviewing it. Fair enough, a movie review show or something that they do, but yeah. Well, yeah, I mean, I'm surprised the BBC wasn't reviewing movies already. I could just assume that would be a thing that they do. They don't review movies across their content and radio shows and they have a movie review TV show. But having on their news website, this review with the star rating, riddle me this then, fair enough if you don't care about it. What's it even achieve having the star rating in the headline to click you through? I mean, I guess what you just said there is what it achieves. It's probably there to get you to click through. I'm guessing. Knowing how many stars the reviewer gave it, does that make you more likely or less likely to read it? I feel like I would be more likely to click that. More likely if it gets a high rating or a low rating. I don't know if it's true, but I feel like I would be more likely to click a thing that has the rating in the title just in general. Okay. It almost feels a bit like the, you won't believe kind of headlines. Putting the star rating there almost is asking a question, which is, why did this rating happen? What is the reason for this rating? I feel like it's a more intriguing title than simply saying Star Wars last Jedi review, click here. Like Star Wars last Jedi review, three out of five stars, click here is more intriguing. It draws the mouse pointer newer. I see what you're saying. So I still think they shouldn't do it for spoiler reasons, but at least now I understand why they do it. I can't feel like it's a spoiler because you can't use the thing. I have to meet a title out Christmas podcast episode, Brady and Gray don't like the last Jedi then. Why did you not do that? I didn't think of it at the time. Maybe I'll do that next year. Next year, Star Wars, three out of five. That's the title's gonna be. Well, I'll tell you why. And actually in all seriousness, I think it's the reason you believe what Brady and Gray thought of the last Jedi. Maybe that should be the title for this episode without a group for the discussion. Okay, so I feel like this is connected to the notion of why is it spoilery when someone tells you what they think about a movie or a TV show or whatever. And I feel like it's because the person who is telling you, you as the listener probably have some concept of the kinds of things that person likes and doesn't like. This is where the BBC is like, oh, hi BBC, you're just a faceless machine. You might as well be a robot telling me that the movie has X out of five stars. Like who cares about the opinion of like a soulless, conscious list machine. So I feel like that's kind of the same thing with the BBC movie reviews. Like I mean, probably there's some poor person who's writing that movie review. But like for the most part, it doesn't feel like the BBC or the New York Times or anybody could have a meaningful opinion about the movie, whereas like particular movie reviewers can have meaningful opinions and thoughts about the movie. And then that would feel like a spoiler. Well, the BBC does have some of them, but yeah, maybe that doesn't apply to the website. But I say what you're saying, where's a finder what you think it's like a, you know, but it's so simple. All I have to do is divine what I know of you. Yeah. Right. Yeah, like mentally reverse engineering, what it is. Okay. Well, speaking of star reviews, I just wanted to bring something up that we have hardly ever done if ever. And that is talk about people rating our podcast on iTunes. You know how lots of podcasts say, hey, can you give us a star rating on iTunes? Because it helps us with the algorithm and more people will find us and stuff. I think you and I both have always been pretty reluctant to do that. Yeah, I feel like it has been a long time since we were playing the, what country are you from, game with our podcast reviews? Well, I'm going to throw this out if a people to give us a star review on iTunes, preferably a high one, but not for the reason you might think. All right. Not for like the algorithm and to, you know, get recommended to more people. I mean, that would be lovely, but that's not the reason. I don't think that really works, but okay. I don't know. I don't know. My reasons is far more shallow. Okay. Great. Yeah. You know what? I feel like it's already going to be more effective. Yeah. And that is this basically, when I know people, people like my wife and my friends and stuff like that, but this recently happened, I think, with my wife. She had a high powered meeting with some influential people in the world of like media and podcasty stuff. She was just talking to them. And she said to them, oh, my husband does a podcast that is like, you know, it's quite successful and does quite well. And like the person at the meeting said, oh, what's it called? Like all excited because they're into podcasts. And I think I'm assuming she said, hello internet. I hope that's what she said. The guy was like, oh, you know, I've never heard of it. Fair enough, you know, a good proportion of the world's population haven't heard of hello internet. I accept that. But then it occurred to me. He probably would then have checked the podcast just to see what it was and what it was about and what it was like. And when you go away and check someone's like YouTube channels or Twitter account or something, you can very quickly see if that claim is legit. Like is this really a big YouTube channel? Does it have a lot of subscribers? Is this person really influential? Do they have a lot of Twitter followers or was that all talk? With a podcast, the only thing you can do is go to iTunes and look at how many star ratings the podcast has. And if it has lots and lots of people have reviewed it, you'll say, oh, yeah, okay, yeah. There is people must listen to that podcast. And if it has just a handful, you think, oh, it's just, you know, a couple of guys in their bedroom and no one listens. And it suddenly occurred to me to a stranger who is not aware with like, you know, the world of Tim Follery and doesn't hang out on the subredder and hasn't followed the podcast for years. The only thing we can be judged by is the number of star ratings. And like, I'm okay. I can live with people thinking how the internet's big or small. But in that particular little situation, I suddenly thought, oh, I don't actually know how many star ratings we have. Maybe we have loads. But it just suddenly occurred to me that, oh, that's a good thing about star ratings. Forget the algorithm. If someone checks up on the podcast to find out whether it's legit, whether it's like a good podcast or not, that's all they can look at. It is a strange thing in the podcast world, how under this veil of secrecy everything is, because I often want to know like, how big is somebody else's pocket? And you just have no idea. It's funny. It never really occurred to me to go look at iTunes and look at the reviews. But I feel like that is also a case of that is still going to be pretty inconsistent because some podcasts beg for reviews at the end of every episode and some podcasts. You know, like ours, don't ever ask for reviews except in the very beginning when we're getting started. And today, right. And this very moment right now, as you should be on your podcast app, opening up the iTunes, don't do a radio time style like automated process where like the Apple service collapse under some automated star system, where there's more, more we get more star ratings than there are stars in the Milky Way or something. Brady, nobody was thinking that until you mentioned it. So thanks. But okay, great. Yeah. Dirt do it. We kicked off. They'll kick us off on a change if something happens. Yeah. So actual humans only. Yes. Brady, for his vanity project, would like more reviews on iTunes. That's what I would do. When the humans need to apply. Right. Only humans need to fly. But Brady wants to be able to impress people and show them real proof that the podcast is a big deal. So I guess we're asking for reviews now. It's more other people like my friends and stuff like that. Like it's not about me wanting to, like, you know, I can just make up a number. Oh, yeah, we, 100 million downloads just yesterday. So wait, can I just be clear here? So this isn't even, this is not something you want for you directly. This is like second hand conversations that people you know are having about you. It's someone I know who recommend to someone I know who knows someone else who might go and have a look so you have many stars we've got. Okay, great. I want there to be like a decent number. Okay, great. How many ratings have we got? We currently have 661 ratings with a five star average. Is that good? Five star sounds good, but it's 661 good. I have no idea what podcast ratings are, but whatever that is, we're just going to say right now. Far too low for what you should have. Right. It should be 10,000 five star ratings. Right, that's what's. 10,000. Yeah, that's what we're going for. Just go into iTunes, click the star for your mate, Brody. It's not about gaming the algorithm. I couldn't care less about that. It's just about purely about vanity. I like this. You know what? I swear to God, I feel like that's a more pure desire on your podcast somehow. I was like just being real up front about it. It was like, Brady's feeling a bit like he wants his vanity flattered. Why don't you help out with that people? And I am 100% convinced that all those podcasts ask for reviews and ratings at the end. Like, I just do not think that really matters. Like as far as I can tell, I don't think that really matters in iTunes land. Maybe it does in other podcast players, but like on iTunes anyway, like I don't think it makes any difference. I think it does matter because there is a bit of the rich get richer and the thing on the iTunes isn't there. Like if a successful podcast launch is another one and that sort of stuff, I think there is a bit of algorithmic stuff going on there to be gamed. Don't get me wrong, but the rich gets richer effect. But what I'm saying is, I don't think there's any relation between the number of reviews and promotion on iTunes. I don't think there's a clear connection there. I think there is. I think when you search something, like if you go into the search cricket, it recommends a bunch of cricket podcasty. I think the ones with higher stars are getting recommended before ones with toasters. I could be wrong and this information could be outdated. But the impression that I got is that, at least on iTunes, the recommendations are largely based on a combination of two things and it's new people subscribing and current download numbers. That was the impression that I was given at one point that that is like 90% of the recommendation effect and that the review thing is less, less of an effect. But that could be wrong. Well, great. I was going to make a joke, right? This was the joke I was about to say. Well, I just searched flags on my podcast player and we weren't even on the front page. But to be honest, I just searched flags on my phone and we were the sick, recommended podcast. Okay, so there you go. So I take it all back. Yeah. Hello, we're going to. Soon to dominate the B podcast market. Oh, I didn't think to search B's. All right, I'm going to search B's and see if we get on the front. If we get on the front page for B's, I am going to say Apple's awesome. It's a dramatic moment. B's. I'm searching B's podcasts. We are on the first page. We're in the top, top 20. Apple knows what it's doing with B and flag related podcast recommendations. So, Gray, I'm requiring some social advice for you because I know you're the master of social situations. Oh, no, no, Brady, don't ask me. I feel like I've been particularly bad about this lately. Okay. This is one just, just want to throw it out there because it's a bit, you know, it's part of life. I feel like, you know, people that you and me know how to react if someone says to us, oh, it's, you know, it's my birthday or I'm getting married or we're having a baby. Like, you kind of know the things you're supposed to say to someone. Congratulations. Yeah, things like. And if someone dies, you also know there are certain ways to handle that. It's, you know, when someone has had a bereavement and they tell you about it. I'm very sorry for your loss. Sorry for your loss, things like that. What do you say when someone tells you they're getting divorced? Because I had that one the other day and I kind of, you know, I know, I know lots of people who've gotten divorced, obviously, because it's a really common thing. But like someone just said to me, you know, just so you're in the know, I'm just letting you know, because you're my friend and that I'm, we're actually, you know, we're getting divorced. I didn't really know exactly what to say or do. I don't know if I dropped the ball, I handed it well, but I just realized I don't know what the etiquette is for that. I feel like that etiquette is very context dependence. I mean, the less I know about someone, I would say something like, oh, I'm so sorry that you're going through that. I feel like that might be my default one. But I can see in some circumstances, like the divorce is a positive change. I don't know. Possibly in both people's lives. There's so much more you need to know, isn't there? Like what's initiated a, how do you feel about it yourself? And like without all that information, it's very difficult to know what to say. I didn't immediately have the words at my grasp. I don't have a general answer for this, as I'm probably sure it doesn't surprise you. I also feel like I have heard about a thing, but maybe this is just one of those things on the internet that isn't real. But I have heard about the concept of a divorce party where someone is celebrating the fact that their divorce has finally gone through and have like a party to establish, like, oh, this is a fresh start in life now. Like you're beginning things over. So I don't know if that's real or not. If anybody's actually had a real divorce party or if this is just like a meme. I imagine a divorce party where both the divorces are in a tent. No, no, no, no, I feel like there's two separate divorce parties. Okay, right. You know, after you as a couple have divided up the friends, you know, so who's gonna get who in the communal friend pool that you have separate parties to celebrate the divorce? I don't, again, I don't know if that's real. I just feel like this is a thing that I have heard about. But I don't know why you'd be asking me about social advice. I don't have any idea. I always feel really awkward with those standard replies. Anyway, like obviously they're the standard replies for a reason. But I just feel like I should be more creative somehow with expressing condolence or congratulations. Like when it's somebody's birthday and you send them a text message, you say, oh, congratulations, happy birthday. I always feel like I should be able to say more, especially if it's a person I know, but there kind of isn't a lot more to say on those events. Like you just, these are the social motions that we go through. Yep. I feel like this is the worst time because you could have possibly asked me this because I've had in my list a question to ask you, which is a much simpler social question. Yeah. But I genuinely feel like I need help in this area. And the question is how does one greet people? I feel like I've forgotten how to greet people or I just don't know anymore. Do you know what's happened? I blame myself for this. I blame myself for you having this problem. I was gonna say because you've seen this in person. Right, you know what I'm talking about. I feel like I introduced you to the concept of the half-hand shake, half-hub. Yes, you did. I think you were. I think you were the first person who did this. And I feel like it caught your imagination as a good thing to do. Right. But you still haven't learned how to do it right? So every time I see you, you try to do it. And I'm like, oh, great. You're not feeling it. If you don't feel it, don't do it. Right. I love doing it. And I enjoy it. But I feel like you're overthinking it. Here's the question. For the listeners, Brady has this idea, this thing that he's invented, which is the half-hand shake hug. Thing, mate. Where you don't. You don't. You don't hug the person. You sort of handshake and backslap at the same time. It's not a whole hug. I call that a humble hug. OK, is that what I call it? Got it. But you're keeping like a little bit of distance because your hands are shaking in between the two of you. Yeah. And then the hands go over the back. Like, I could say hug where your belly buttons wouldn't touch. It's just like my right shoulder would touch your right shoulder as our right hands shake. And then my left hand would touch the back of your left shoulder. I'm doing this in front of the microphone right now. Yeah, OK. I mean, it's a difficult maneuver to pull off. Obviously, this is like 16 plus level greetings. This is not for beginners. Yeah. I don't understand the boundaries of social greetings anymore. It's like, like, how well do you have to know someone to do a hug greeting? A hug versus a hug. Well, no, no, there's this spectrum, right? We have the full spectrum. So on one end, we have like a hug, right? And so we could say clearly family members, right? You would greet a family member with a hug. Yeah. Maybe a kiss on the cheek, right? That's one clear, clear end. Who I'm allowed to kiss, I find difficult. Oh, no. Let's just put that aside just for the moment. Like we can return to this. But then on the other end, you have, like, you have flown to Japan. And now you've met a stranger. And you're just going to politely bow. And I feel like you're in some kind of competition to bow lower. But I also don't know for sure if that's real. So anyway, this is like the contact spectrum. And then for most of the times you meet, I feel like a meeting a pure stranger, it's really fine. Like, okay, we do handshakes. Handshakes for everybody. But as soon as I'm meeting a person the second time or the third time, I don't know. I feel like I always get it wrong. I feel like I do this wrong every time. And I don't know how to do it. And I am now convinced I'm going to blame you on introducing like an off by one error that has looped over in my head 100,000 times and is making every time I greet someone hard and incomprehensible to me now. The thing you shouldn't do is reference the hug. That's my tip. Okay. Like, don't say we're hugging or let's have a hug or come on, ha ha hug. Just do the hug, but don't reference the hug. Okay. So no verbal acknowledgement of the hug. Yeah. Is there a way to save it when someone else is going for the hug, but you go for the handshake? You've got to convert to the hug. They can't downgrade. You've got to rise to the occasion and join the hug. What if they've already extended their hands and you haven't noticed? Pull them in. Pull them into the humble hug. Ah, pull them in. You can also deflect a hug into a humble hug. Okay. Deflect a hug. I feel like I need to go to like some like Brazilian dudes at two class to practice this. And there's also another option is as you do the hug and if it's become awkward and you realize it's all gone wrong, you do like a funny, you pat them on the back three or four times and like with a laugh. Like, ha ha ha. Isn't it funny what we're doing and make a big joke of the hug? Wait, but so now you're referencing the hug? Yeah, but that's only because it needs referencing because it's all gone so far wrong. Okay. So if it goes really wrong, you reference the hug. I'll write you some notes. This was all brought to a head on God. I will remember this until the day I die, but I was meeting a stranger on one of my recent trips and we just we just went to do. It's where it got Brady. Level two and above the most simple thing, the handshake. Yeah. And somehow I went to handshake this other guy and I did it so wrong that how to describe this. So imagine you're holding out your hand for a handshake and then you lower your pinky. So there's space like you're making a shadow dog on the wall. Somehow I got my hand into that position and we we shook with like just the the webbing of our pinkies touching and the rest of our hands holding. I could have died. I swear I could have died in that moment and it's like we're going to do this. We're going to shake right boom, boom, boom, three and done and no reference to it. And this might be one of the last things I think about before I die is because it just keeps popping up in my head over and over again. Worst in the sloppy buns moment. Honestly, yes, because unlike the sloppy buns moment, which was such a peculiar event with very special circumstances around it, handshakes happen all the time. And so now I'm going to handshake with someone. I'm like very focused on keeping my fingers together to make sure that there is no accidental slippage here. So it's been really rough for me, Brady. And then when you throw in the difficulty of living abroad as an expat and the complication of like, who do you kiss? Because some people expect the kisses, especially when you're dealing with foreigners and it's a broad like I can't deal with it. And here I am many years into life and I'm clearly getting much worse at the how do you greet another human protocol. I'll tell you my biggest problem with the kiss. Okay. And that is in a lot of the circles I move in, the guys have a hug or a humble hug and male female combinations do a kiss. That's the way we roll. Right. But I won't kiss someone who I don't know very well. So sometimes if you're in a group and they're like say five or six women and you know them really well and there's one you don't, you get into a situation where you kiss five people and then you get to the final person and you're like you just stick out your hand and shake your hand because it's like I don't, you know, it would be inappropriate for me to kiss you person. And yet it almost feels like after you've just kissed all the other people, it's almost like you're shunning them like it's like no, I don't like you. You smell, I don't want to kiss you. And of course that's not the case. It creates a real awkward situation. Kiss, kiss, kiss, kiss. See you later, shake your hand. Yeah. I don't know how to handle that. I think that is the only way to handle it, but I just feel a bit guilty. It is extra worse because the the cheek kiss greeting thing, I mean let's just ignore the one or two thing. Like sometimes you never know what the other person is going to do. Oh, you make a go. Or about three. Sometimes three. And you get cold out for only doing two. How does three even work? I don't understand. You go back to the one you started on. You go back to now. And if you only just tell you that like no, no, no, no, no, we must do three. Okay, now that's kissing inflation. No, it is. It is kissable. We're going to be here all day doing this air kiss cheek thing. Okay, so that situation with the kisses, that is really hard. I feel like the kiss is a closer greeting than the hug. Yeah. I'm more discriminating with cheek kisses, even air cheek kisses, than I would be with hugs. I think with a dude you can escalate to hug relatively quickly. Yeah. Or the humble hug. I really got to work on that. I really got to work on that. But so that's why it feels like if you've done the cheek kiss and then there's one woman who you don't feel it's okay or you know her well enough to do the cheek kiss, it does now feel like it's an extra level of social rejection to not do the cheek kiss. Whereas I feel like when I've been in those situations where it's a group of people and someone does the hug, I agree. It feels like the only thing that you can do is like, okay, well now everybody's getting a hug, right? Like hug escalation has just occurred. And now I have to remember for all of these people, for all the rest of time that we've escalated to hug. And so I have to remember that next time so I don't downgrade them. It doesn't feel like you can escalate to cheek kissing. I feel especially as a guy, like the other person has to initiate the cheek kissing thing. It's like, okay, then we're on this level. And sometimes if you've done three or four on a row, they will realize, okay, this is awkward for him. I'm going to give him the cheek. Yes. Otherwise it's going to be awkward for him. But it's difficult. This is difficult times we live in. It's awful. But I've been meaning to ask you for months, like help me greet people Brady. I just don't know how to do it. Maybe I'll run like away days, like you know up in the mountains where you come and do like a three or four day retreat. Right. We just do like hugging lessons and hand shakes and air kisses. Next time I see you in all seriousness, I want you to help me practice the humble. No, don't mention it. Don't reference it. But I need to practice with somebody, really. Who else can I possibly do this for? Maybe you should buy some like mannequin or punching bag just that you can just have it in the lounge and just be hugging an old day like, okay, maybe I'll give that a try. But I feel like I've now been socially rejected. You don't want to practice humble hugging with the Brady. It hurts. It hurts deep. Well, as I record this in January, you may be thinking about New Year's resolutions and Harry's would like you to think about how they may fit in with that. Maybe you're planning to be a bit smarter with money this year. And Harry's will they can save you about $100 a year if you're a frequent shaver? Or maybe you just want to take better care of yourself. And again, Harry's want to point out they've won countless grooming awards. They'll keep you looking and feeling great. Now personally, I think Harry's got great blades. They give you a great, comfortable glide, a good shave. And they do indeed save you money very reasonably priced. But my favorite thing about Harry's is basically just the look and the feel of the product. I really love the way they shaving handles look. Nice clean lines, simple, not too kind of space age and high tech like a lot of other shaving brands that will personally, I think, look silly. And I also love the packaging that Harry's comes in. If you've ever ordered them, you know what I mean. Not only is it nice to receive, they make great gifts just because of the way everything's boxed and packaged and wrapped. Really top stuff. Have a look. Check out their website if you want to know what I mean. Now Harry's line, they always like to say they're about a great shave at a fair price. And that's why over 3 million guys have switched to Harry's. Although I was just thinking, Harry's has been around long enough that there are probably a lot of people now who haven't switched to Harry's. But started on Harry's. People whose first shave was with a Harry's razor. Maybe they've been Harry's all their shaving life. That's a fun thought. Now this is a company that's so confident that you're going to love their blades. They'll give you their free trial shave set for free when you sign up at harries.com slash H I you just have to pay for the shipping. That's harries dot com slash H I that's a free trial offer a $13 value shave set. And that set's going to include their weighted ergonomic razor handle. Five precision engineered blades with a lubricating strip and trimmer blade. Their rich leathering shave gel and a travel blade cover so that the sharp blades not bouncing around in your toiletries kit when you're traveling around the place. Handy little extra that once more free trial set harries dot com slash H I get there now. Our thanks to them for supporting this episode. I was at the cinema the other day. Actually it was when I saw the last Jedi. It wasn't even the other day. And they were running the thousand ads they run before films now which drives me crazy. And they ran an ad for Twitter. I was quite astonished by this ad. I've read a bit about it since and heard a bit more about it. I sent it to you earlier today. This is breathtaking to me. It's well known that Twitter has this problem of needing to get new people onto Twitter. And someone has obviously convinced them that they need to pitch themselves at people who don't know what electricity is or something. I don't know. This is like these ads are pitched so low and so basic at teaching people what Twitter is and how to use it. That if you need to be pitched this low at there's no way you're going to use Twitter anyway. In these ads it's like there's you know it's a couple of dumb scenarios but it's guys are trying to figure out how to use Twitter. And someone comes along and he's like, oh hey, you need to pick a username. Oh, but but my name's taken. Oh, well, then you have to think of a clever other username. You can use an alternative name. You don't have to use your actual name. Oh, I realize that. Yeah. And now you follow things that you're interested in. Oh. So if you're interested in something that's the sort of thing you should follow. And when you do that, what's going to happen is you're going to be connected with other human beings who aren't you. Really? And be able to see what those people are saying. Not you. Oh, not me. Not you. Not you. And see that magnifying glass thing symbol that thing that looks like a magnifying glass. Is that for like science lessons? No, that's what that does. Is that let's you search? And if there's something you want to find, if you click that, you will be able to search and on Twitter you can find other things that weren't already on your screen. You can find other things. It's incredible. You've got to get on this thing man. It's awesome. It certainly looks like it's like a platform for morons based on these advertisements. If you don't know these things, you're so far from being on Twitter. You obviously don't use the internet. I do enjoy them explaining the concept of a username. Yeah. Like, okay. Yeah. Great. I think people are familiar with the idea that on websites you have usernames. I'm sure there are people who aren't familiar with that gray, but those people aren't who you need to be advertising to. Then lost to you. Wow. Those are really bad. I do feel like this is a thing where you start off with this concept that Twitter doesn't reach a general audience. And I've always been on the side of like, man, I wish Twitter didn't have a bazillion dollars worth of venture capital sunk into it so that it has to constantly grow because I just don't think that Twitter is ever going to be a Facebook-like thing. Like, you're always going to have like a tenth of the people who are on Facebook are on Twitter. I don't think it's a useful social network for every human being in the world. And I just don't think it ever will be. And I'm also willing to bet that these ads are like throwing money into a black hole as far as Twitter is concerned. And probably in the kind of world where you're putting an advertisement for Twitter before a movie, we're talking about like a first world country, you probably have the Twitter market share that you're going to have. I don't think there's a lot of growth. Just let Twitter be Twitter. Maybe you could argue the ad is explaining how Twitter works to people. And I think that's a waste of time. But if you're advertising to people who sort of know what Twitter is but think it's not for them, that ad in no way makes you think, oh, that is a platform. I'm going to move to now. Like there's nothing in the ad that makes you think there's something I'm missing out on here that I need to get on. Let's say you wanted people to sign up with Twitter that you thought this was a good idea. And you thought, hey, maybe people are really unfamiliar with all of the great things that Twitter can do. I know. Let's use our framing device is a hostage negotiation. Right? So we're going to have a guy in a house who looks like he's a crazy person with police on the outside and we're going to have a hostage negotiator yelling the instructions of how to sign up for Twitter remotely at him. Like the crazy man in the house who if this was a movie in every movie would be like a lunatic with a gun holding hostages on the inside of the house. Like he's the guy who's coming out and it's using Twitter. Like it's I don't understand who this is for in both ads. The guy that they're trying to get to use Twitter and be on Twitter is a guy you don't want to be like he's like, no, I don't want to be that guy. Yeah. In the second one, he's like a saddo just running along a road for reasons I can't really understand. It doesn't make any sense. I mean, like you can explain stuff simply if people need to know it. I feel like a good example of this is like if you look up what the original iPhone commercials were, those commercials are hilariously simple now. Where they explain very slowly how you make a phone call on your iPhone and they show like you tap on this button and then you tap on the numbers. You know, they they show like here's how you look up a place on a map on your iPhone and they go through it super simply. But it's like, yeah, that's because smartphones were new and they're also a product for the whole world. Like you want everybody to do this and Apple left those behind relatively quickly. But whereas here, now we're like 10 years into the existence of Twitter and they're putting out ads to convince people to go on Twitter. They're terrible ads and I bet they're horrifically ineffective. But I'm always amazed stuff like this gets made. I kind of would love to be on the fly on the wall in the pitch meetings for this kind of thing. Like how does this locomotive leave the train station? I just don't understand. I know you sort of quite often go on sort of Twitter fast where you're not on Twitter for a long time. You're offline and then you'll sort of reappear after two or three weeks. I've always wondered when you do that, how far back will you go through sort of app replies and things like that to see what you missed or who may have fired things at you? Or do you think like anything more than a day old is lost forever? Or will you sit there and go through like a timeline for the last week or so and go, oh, there's something interesting there. That's a funny picture or will you just completely shun that stuff? Oh, no, forget it. I just I don't look in the past. Right. The most I'll do, which sounds terrible, but it's true is because I am a lucky verified user on Twitter, I will click on the verified tab to see if there's anything interesting in there. Right. And that is a vastly, vastly smaller subsection of that replies. Yeah. But no, like I haven't really been on Twitter very much at all in the past many weeks. And I just don't bother to look at the app replies. I don't think it's really a worthwhile thing to do to scroll back for three weeks worth of that reply. It's like, especially like what makes Twitter great is it's so in the moment, it feels way more ephemeral than other mediums do. So I wouldn't go back through the history. Why are you thinking of taking a Twitter fast Brady? Are you looking for advice? No, I was just curious. I was just curious. I don't really go off for as long as you, but sometimes I'll go back a day or two and there'll be something like, oh, I'm really glad I went back and found that because that was a real little gem that someone, like a funny picture that a team sent me or something that I would have otherwise missed. And I sort of think, you can miss some good stuff amongst all that rubbish that you don't want to see. But I was just curious. You know, everywhere in the world, you can miss good stuff. It doesn't mean that it makes sense to look everywhere in the world. Well, that segues nicely to a quick one. Let's do one of our famous quickfire rounds that we're so good at. Oh, OK. Because you've missed a lot of news lately. I have. I have been very disconnected from the world. So fill me in on the important updates that are going on. We haven't spoken for a while. And I've pulled together a small little collection of news stories that either I want to hear what you think about or I want to rant about. Perfect. Sounds great. The first one, and I just came across as today, is the Humanity Star. Oh, OK. I don't like the name of this already. It looks like it's a small satellite that's some kind of geodesic sphere made from carbon fiber and highly reflective panels that has been put spinning into orbit and is designed to like flash as the sun catches it so that it blinks a lot so that we can all look up and see it as some kind of inspirational art installation. Is this real? I'm looking at this website. This isn't a concept. Has this actually been launched? It's not April 1st. Is it? No. I think it's up. There's an app you can look where it is at the moment like it's currently heading towards Mongolia and then over Russia. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. Look at that. There's a live map of where the space junk is. How exciting. It'll last nine months and then it will fall out of orbit apparently. Where will it land? Yeah. I mean, yeah, it will burn up. I mean, obviously there are certain satellites. Famously, there's these are radium flares that are caused by satellites when they catch the sun at a certain angle. And that's what inspired this. They've made like a deliberate one that's full of mirrors that will do this rather than have it happen incidentally. I am very unconvinced by the merits of this. Tell me why you're opposed to your Brady. I think like the sky is maybe like the one untouched thing that hasn't got like human muckiness over it. If you don't include sky writing and banners in Miami and things like that. Right. Like you can look up at the stars and see everything as it was like, you know, a thousand years ago and not have like Coca-Cola billboards and human intervention. And I think this is the thin end of a wedge where we're now thinking, oh, now we can get things into space easier. This is an opportunity to like put stuff up there that will catch people's eye. And I think this is the start of Coca-Cola billboards in space where we're putting things in space deliberately to be seen back down here on earth. Like I know you can see the space station and you can see satellites if the conditions are right and you'll see a dot moving through the stars. But like that's kind of incidental. This is like, oh, let's make something that deliberately catches people's attention down on earth. And like, do we want to go this way? Is this the direction we want to go? Well, we're doing it up. Yes, but Brady in the Y section on the Humanity Star website, they say that humanity is capable of great and kind things when we recognize we are one species responsible for the care of each other and our planet together. The humanity star is to remind us of this. No matter where you are in the world, rich or in poverty, in conflict or at peace, everyone will be able to see the bright, blinking humanity star orbiting the earth in the night sky. Don't you think that's a noble goal, Brady? Well, you've just given them a nice piece of audio they can clip and put on their website great with your lovely voice. But I do not think that. I mean, it's a healthy reminder of how easy people in other countries can put satellites above our country. I don't know. I just think it's the start of mucking up space. It wouldn't, of course, my mind that this might be the start of the thin end of a wedge. I mean, to me, this just strikes me as like, vein space junk. More vein than putting a Tesla in space? I feel like I missed that story. I never quite got what the detour. Wasn't it launching a Tesla to Mars? Wasn't that what it was? I don't think it was Mars. I think it was to check it out in space somewhere. What? What's the chocolate at the sun? Like, it was garbage. Is that what it was? No, I need to Tesla in space. What was that? There's no one of these things. It vaguely reached my bubble, but didn't quite. I think for some reason they need to put a heavy object out in space. They think, well, why not use a Tesla Roadster, as opposed to just like a heavy thing? The headlines are all saying that they're shooting a Tesla Roadster beyond Mars, whatever that means. But at least it's not like there's a Tesla orbiting the Earth. That would be pretty ridiculous. If there was a Tesla that was orbiting the night sky so that everybody could look up and be reminded that humanity is capable of great things. When we recognize we are one species responsible for the care of each other and our planet together, that would be ridiculous. Okay. Yeah. Musk's thing is they need to have a dummy payload to test a rocket and instead of just putting some concrete or rocks in it, because you're obviously not going to put like a billion dollar satellite in your test. Right. Why not put a Roadster in there? Because he's got them lying around. So why not cross promote my cars at the same time rather than just putting? Like, you know, I mean, the guy is a total publicity tap. So yeah. So at least there's a functional reason for that. But the humanity star, their Y-page does not convince me of the merits of it. Like you put a shiny thing up in this guy and just because you say it's for this thing, like it doesn't make it that thing. It just is what it is. Plus the number of people who will ever recognize it or see it is tiny. And if they do, they won't think like, wow, I'm really feeling like I'm one with the human species. They'll think, I wonder what that dot is. Is it a plane or is it a satellite? Eh, whatever. Right. And that'll be the end of their thought process if they even notice it. I love the condescending way you say humanity star. Well, I mean, come on, you give it a name like that and that's what's going to happen. Like it's reaching so far. Yeah. I feel like this is dumb and I really just wonder mostly about the details of how this get up an orbit. Like what like, I'm just realizing I don't really know how nations coordinate satellites up in space or anything. I just just realizing there's this huge gaping hole in my knowledge of how this kind of stuff works. Yeah. I don't know. Maybe in 10 years, we'll be seeing Coca-Cola billboards as it gets cheaper and easier to launch things up into outer space. Well, next time I'm following the humanity star tracker and I say it's going over London. I'll give you a text and say, go out now, Gray. Oh, yeah. I'm sure it's a chance to say it. Yeah. I'm sure standing in central London where when I look up into the night sky and see nothing but blackness because of the light pollution, I'm sure I'll spot this one. More news. More news. Bam, bam, bam. So I don't know if you saw this, but there was an election in Virginia where the two candidates got equal votes and it was like in the 11,000s or something, a really high number and they ended up on equal votes. So they decided the election by a random draw, which is interesting in itself and how they decided to do a random draw, I find fascinating. What do you think of deciding an election by randomness when the votes are even? Fair enough. I'm kind of okay with it. As long as it's set out in advance, like everybody knows, this is part of the rules. Like I think this is a not uncommon electoral feature. No, no, yeah, it happens. I think it happens with smaller constituencies, obviously, where the vote numbers are lower, but this was quite a high one to have a coin toss, but yeah, well, it wasn't a coin toss. They pulled names out of film canisters from a stoneware bowl, but that's a whole lot of stories. That seems very specific. Film canisters bought on Amazon. The woman even likes she was doing, guys, I bought these film canisters on Amazon. They're unmarked and identical. That's a A plus American accent there, really. I don't know what that was. I was halfway through. I decided to convert to American sight or went a bit wrong. I particularly enjoy non-Americans doing American accents. It's always a combination of horrifically wrong in ways that are hard to place, and also the horror of recognizing that this is what the world thinks you sound like. It's like, okay, this is what people think American sight is like. They always go very Southern very quickly as well. It is also loud and broad. That's also what it is. I'm very loud. You can't do that. I'm an American. Perfect. Yep. That could have come from anywhere America. Any town USA, that's your American accent, pretty. So I just think the random, the coin toss thing is like where pragmatism is running up against idealism, where, sure, in theory, you would want to have the election again, and I bet the simple fact of knowing that there was a tie would change the result the next time, or it's just shockingly unlikely that you would get a tie the next time. But what are you going to do? Not every district in America can run a second election, like sometimes, especially in smaller races. You just need to get things moving and you need to put somebody in that office. So I'm sort of okay with the coin flip. It's not ideal, but it's practical under some circumstances. This was the new story that stuck in my head the longest over the last few weeks. So I just thought I'd tell you about it. Okay. This was a surgeon who got caught lasering his initials onto livers before he transplanted them into people. It was just so remarkable. Like I couldn't have made that one up. I'm not entirely clear why he did it. I think it must have been like a vanity exercise like, you know, gray was here sort of. Yeah. I think yeah, it's 100% vanity. It's like asking for more podcast reviews. Yeah. Say his initials, SB, he was lasering onto these livers, which apparently didn't cause any damage to the livers and would eventually go away. But apparently he got caught out when another surgeon opened up someone who needed like a little bit of running repairs and they said, hang on, is that an SB on the liver? SB was here WUZ. And he got caught. And if anything was, they couldn't figure what to charge him with. He was charged with assault, occasioning actual bodily harm, which seems like a strange charge for that. Like putting your initials on a liver that's not even in a person and then putting that in that he pleaded not guilty to that and he ended up pleading guilty to two counts of assault by beating. As bad as they're like, yes, in my mind, like if I'm trying to think of what would you charge a person, assault is what just popped into my head as the first choice. But if the liver was not inside the person when it happened, maybe it was, maybe it was, maybe he put it in and then put his SB afterwards to say, job done, like signing your artwork. If it's in the person, I feel like it could be assault. If it's not in the person, if it's on the table, then it feels like property damage, right? But we, isn't it? So this other surgeon that caught him, like opened someone up and saw it, took a photograph of it with their mobile phone of the four centimeter high branding. And it's like, oh my goodness, I'm going to take a picture of that. Is there a picture in this article? I want to see the picture. I haven't seen a picture of the SB. Ah, I don't know if that's come out. What a story, hey. I feel like this story is so weird on so many levels. Like surgeons always have that cliche, you know, though, they've got a God complex and they think they're awesome. Like this is really reinforcing that stereotype. He's like, thinks he's like this Picasso of surgery and has to sign his work. Well, I mean, on the one hand, the man's putting new livers into people, right? Like Picasso couldn't do that. So what you think he has got a right to sign it? Well, I think this is one of the most amazing news stories. Why can't the news all be this? This is fantastic, Brady. I want every news story to be this news story. I love this line in a CNN article I'm reading about it. It says, a Birmingham Crown Court representative said he was charged with assault, causing actual bodily harm, but pleaded guilty on Wednesday to a lesser charge of assault by beating. And then it puts in focus. Beating here refers to the physical act of inscribing the livers, not actually beating the patients. That's a whole side story about the ridiculousness of plea bargaining. I'll admit guilty to a crime that I didn't commit. I think that stuff is crazy. But I feel like, okay, if I had had a liver transplant and I found out that the surgeon had signed my liver, even in a temporary way, I would be really annoyed by that. I would feel like that was some kind of violation. Oh, yeah. The patients were annoyed, but they were very upset about it. They felt very violated. I heard some of them in the radio. Yeah. Yeah. It would feel weirdly violating, but I feel like I can kind of see the surgeon's perspective, which is like, I'm an awesome guy. But liver isn't a human being. Like I can do like a fun, non-harmful, temporary thing. Like I can kind of see what the thought process would be going through his head. You're like a surgical bankruptcy. I don't know. I can't come up with a comparison, but it's like one of the very early max, I think the whole development team, like sign the inside of the cases for the first run or something like that. If you're like, oh, that's great. That's an addition. But the computer and like the chip designer had written his name across the inside. I wouldn't feel annoyed. I would feel kind of like, yeah, you can do that. You can put your name on the inside of the machine that I'll never see. Or even a video games coders are notorious for hiding signatures and little personal things inside the game that like the CEO of a company will never know is there and that they really probably shouldn't be putting in there. But they do anyway and it becomes Easter eggs. And I feel like all of that is some kind of fun. But then when it's a liver, it just, it feels really different and it feels totally wrong. But I can't find in my mind where the line is between like the Mac or the video game Easter eggs and this signature, which is really complicated by the fact that it is impermanent that it's not there forever. Like if I've got a dusty windscreen on my car and someone with their finger rods, you know, claim me. Yeah. Like have they vandalized my car? Yeah. Have they battered your car? Maybe here refers to the act of riding clean me in the window. It does not refer to physical assault punching the car. Yeah. Here's a quote from someone whose life he saved previously who I don't think he wrote his initials on or you know, maybe he did. Well, maybe he did. She said, even if he did put his initials on a transplanted liver, is it really that bad? I wouldn't have cared if he did it to me. The man saved my life. I think that that's what's on the other side of my mental scale here is I would feel violently, but at the same time, it's like, I've gotten another liver put inside me. It's amazing. But like a pilot flies you across the Atlantic without you dying. Does that mean the pilot now has the right to gouge his initials in some part of your body because he didn't crash the plane and therefore saved your life? You're helping the language here, right? To gouge, which sounds like it's sure is permanent. Well, but it's not worse than battery. But battery there refers to the fact of the leaves. It's a physical. Yeah. So stupid. If a plane landed and the pilot was like giving out signatures to everybody on the way out of the plane, I feel like, yeah, I guess so. Or to put it another way, if the pilot walked out halfway across the Atlantic flight and said, I'm not going to go back into the cockpit. And this, you've let me write my initials on your liver. You'd probably say, go ahead, just land the plane. What a weird story. See what you miss out by not following the news. I feel like this is the most interesting news story you have brought to me in the entire lifetime of this podcast. Yeah. So if I miss out on one of these every half a decade, I think I'm still coming out ahead. Here's a good one for you then. This is a story from a museum in Bristol that got caught selling prints of a Banksy statue that was in its museum without Banksy's permission. This is Banksy, the famous graffiti artist, mysterious person who knows who he is for people who don't know Banksy is. Right. Who dismal land we went to go through. Exactly. So Banksy's people said, yeah, you don't have permission. The museum apologized profusely, stopped selling them. They were selling like hotcakes apparently and they've stopped selling them and it was a little kerfuffle. Now the thing I find most interesting about this is that Banksy, who made his name illegally graffitiing things around Bristol and other places, is now on this high horse saying, how dare you? How dare you break the law and make money off me without my permission? Like am I the only one who has this little voice in the back of my head gang? You know, I'm all for protecting the artist rights. You know, we've talked about free booting enough, but I'm like, can Banksy do that? I am honestly torn because I hate seeing artists being exploited and taken advantage of. But this is the one person who I feel like is not in a strong position to say you can only make money and do things, you know, the right way. Because his whole reputation has been built on writing on walls. He's not allowed to write on and like, you know, this gorilla thing about him is a talented guy, but he's made his name in this dodgy way. I just thought it was like a bit funny. Yeah. Under different circumstances, Banksy might have to have had plead guilty to battery on walls all over the United Kingdom. There is definitely the case of if Banksy was a less good artist, he would just be in jail. Right? But it's true. It's totally true. Some of the things he's done, if he wasn't a famous artist, he'd totally be in prison. So I do feel like we have to live in a world of laws and the laws have to apply to what's all and they have to be executed fairly. I do agree that if Banksy is ever complaining about copyright infringements or people using his stuff in ways that it shouldn't, he is an artist that is going to have less of my sympathy and concern over something like that. It's like the law is good when it's safe to you, but not when it doesn't say you. Yes, obviously your copyright should be protected. But I'm going to be worried about other things much higher on the queue. My concern over monkey copyright is way higher than my concern over Banksy copyright. Last but not least, because we're like, you know, logos, you know, we are design experts. Affleck reputation precedes us. We are professional critiquers of many things, Brady. This is right. So they've released the official logo for the 2018 World Chess Championship. You know how I love the World Chess Championship. I was very excited to see the logo they had released. I want to know what you think of it. And we'll obviously will link in the show notes for the teams. I mean, I'd like to hear you even try to describe it before you tell me what you think of it. Yeah. So how would one describe this? Good luck. Okay. So we'll start with the easy part. Imagine a chessboard with a pawn on it. It's a black and white logo to go with a black and white board. The chessboard is being held by six by six chessboard. I might point out that's by the by. Oh God. You know what? You're right. So distracted by a few other features of this logo that I didn't notice that right away. Oh, yes. The nerds did. Yeah. But yes, okay. So the chessboard is done incorrectly. That's great. But the chessboard is being held by two nightmare silhouettes of humans that have checkered or lined patterns on themselves. And they are horribly misproportioned for humans. Their torsos are too long. Their arms are intertwined in a way that doesn't seem like it would make sense. They're both looking at the chessboard and directly below the chessboard, the bottom half of both of their bodies seem to be entwined in a pornographic matter. Their legs are intertwined in a way that is well beyond a humble hug. That's for sure. Yes. You wouldn't want to grate someone like that. Yeah. This would be an inappropriate greeting for all but the most intimate of partners. We will have to host a lot more podcasts together before we greet each other like that. That will never happen, buddy. There is no number of podcasts that we can host that will make this an appropriate greeting. It has been described as a karma sutra logo, tantric, sexy, the pun pornographic has been used. Some people love it. It's a high concept. It's a real concept art, isn't it? That's really abstract. And the people who love it are wrong. Art is subjective but this is not. This is ugly and horrible. It is not at the Maryland point of awfulness. It's just terrible and uncomfortable. If I didn't know better, I would have assumed this was some kind of joke that this was not real. I wonder if that was withdrawn. I got it. I hope so. There was a lot of complaints about it but I think it might still be the official logo. Well, I mean, if I was on the committee that had approved this logo, so let's imagine that I'm the kind of person who would approve this logo in the first place and then an enormous matter pushback comes back. It's like, well, as always, my advice is don't negotiate with terrorists if I was on that logo committee, I would hold strong. I was like, no, this is your logo deal with the people. I think now I'm hearing something where this is like an alternative logo. There are two different logos. It is still a logo and official logo but there's another logo as well. This is like an alternative comic book cover. That's what you're saying. Yeah, but I don't know which came first or but I've just seen this other one on Wikipedia which is the same kind of look but without the men doing the sexy, sexy intertwined pose. Hmm. This one also looks like it's got an 8x8 chessboard. This looks like it's the correction logo but... Okay, so this other logo that you have sent me is also terrible. Oh, it's horrendous. And now as opposed to tantric people in twine in an uncomfortable manner, now it is just their arms and hands in twine in an inappropriate manner. So I don't like this at all. I feel like both of these logos aside from their design are missing something about chess which is that I bet a lot of the people who are really good at chess. They're not like people people. I think they're people who are really into chess. They're into the abstract mathematical puzzle like routine like nature of chess. I feel like the logo shouldn't be covered in all these gross people. I feel like this is exactly the kind of thing the people who are into chess would not want in their logo. I feel like they would want the chess. So yeah, both of these are horrible. One more horrible than the other but both no good. It's supposed to be apparently sort of controversial and edgy like the host city which is London. What the way what? How is London a controversial and edgy host city? It's designed by Schubert, a Russian studio. You can buy the poster for 45 currencies. I'm not sure what currency I'm looking at. It costs 45 somethings. 45 somethings. Each in traditional black and white the print is an excellent piece for a poster collection. Signed and hand printed on gallery stock level. Who's signed by the designer? I guess I don't know. Signed by a surgeon who's replaced your liver when you get the poster. Anyway, it did catch my eye and I just wanted to see what you thought of it. I've got more design things for you to review in future episodes but we'll come to that later. I'm down on this one. That's pretty terrible. Okay, Brady. I have one piece of news to bring to the table as well this week. And this is yet another YouTube kerfuffle. Yep. YouTube always making sure to kick up a fuss in their own very special ways. But the latest of these kerfuffles is that at some point last year YouTube introduced this concept that you would not be able to put advertisements on your YouTube channel until you had reached a certain minimum popularity threshold. So it used to be that you could make a YouTube channel. You could put up YouTube videos but you could in participate in the ad sense program until you had gotten 1000 subscribers. And this kicked up a big fuss back at the time. I feel like it was kind of fine for YouTube to do whatever. But so now here we are and YouTube has turned up the dial on their requirements here. So now the big barrier that people have to pass is they need to have a total watch time of 4000 hours on their channel in the past 12 months. So 4000 human hours have to have been burned on your YouTube channel before you're allowed to put YouTube ads on there. Without sounding like an idiot, or sounding like I'm humble, Greg, because I'm not, is that a lot? I have no sort of sense as to that. So unreasonably higher number or that's just like, you know, that's still pretty attainable for a solid channel that should be earning money. Well, this is part of it. There's one little detail here before we get to that. But it's just that the other thing that is different about this change versus the last change is that YouTube is also making it retroactive. That previously channels had been grandfathered in if they were not under the limit. But now YouTube has revoked monetization from channels that do not hit the 4000 hour barrier. And that has caused an enormous amount of discussion around YouTube and YouTube ruining smaller creators. And spoiler alert, I think all of these complaints are pointless and for nothing. The answer to your question is like, is 4000 hours a lot? Because like two answers to those questions is like 4000 hours is a lot for someone who's just making some random YouTube channel and uploading videos to get like a normal person. Like pull a random person off the street. And if you put a gun to their head and said you need to make a YouTube channel, like it's 4000 watch hours, like that's actually a pretty hard task. But if you even are remotely a channel that has any possibility of doing this in even the smallest professional way, 4000 hours is a very, very small barrier to cross. YouTube backed this up as well with some of the data they released where they talked about how something like 90 or 95% of all of the channels that could possibly affect this had earned over the entire course of their existence less than $100 in ad revenue, which is the minimum that YouTube requires before they'll pay out any of the advertising revenue. So it's like yes, there were YouTube channels that were earning some money from YouTube that will no longer be able to do it after this change. But when I was doing some back of the envelope calculations, I mean, we're talking about channels that were earning like $2 a month or $3 a month. The outpouring of rage over this has been enormous. And I think it is entirely because YouTube made maybe a strategic error in taking away monetization from channels that already have it. I feel like that is what kicked this up into a big fuss is there were a bunch of channels that were just under this barrier. And then YouTube says like, oh, we're taking away your money and people flip out because they feel like, but I'm looking at this report here that says in the past five years, I've made $25 on YouTube. YouTube is stealing from me my $25 and it's like, I mean, yeah, in a sense they are, but I'm not often like a super friend of YouTube here, but I feel like this is a big deal out of nothing. And if YouTube wants to tighten up the rules about what channels can monetize, fine. I think it's fine to do. I have had a lot of thoughts about this too, Greg. And I read, I actually read a lot of the online commenting about this from the people who were upset by it. And they made fair points. One of the points is, yeah, okay, I know it's only a few dollars, but it's really motivating to me. And also it makes me feel included and things like that. That seems to be some of the main arguments I heard that, yeah, I'm not making a living yet, but just seeing those two or three dollars, you know, when you're starting out makes a difference. And also, yeah, this sort of discrimination. And it's really hard for people like you and I to comment on it because, you know, we have quite big YouTube channels and therefore we're not affected by it. So it's like, it's easy for you to say. But the thing I kept thinking about is if like, if you're being, and I may be this is too altruistic sounding and naïve of me, but if you're being motivated by money at that early stage, then I'm not sure how much hope I hold for you anyway. A lot of the people who I'm friends with who've gone onto YouTube because they've thought, oh, you can make money on YouTube. I never realized this was a business thing and I've started channels to make money, have always failed. Whereas people I know who've made YouTube channels for other reasons, like, you know, they had something they wanted to say they wanted the creative process and they hoped to be successful or even like, you know, ego reasons and they like seeing themselves on a screen. Those people tend to succeed more anyway. And the thing I kept thinking about was when I started making YouTube videos, I don't think monetization existed when I first started. It wouldn't have, yeah, because I started later than you and it had just begun. I remember getting an email or a message from YouTube saying, do you want to sign up for this program where you can get money for your videos, like a share of the ad content? I honestly thought it was a joke. I thought I thought it was a prank or a trap. Someone was trying to get my credit card details or something. I'd been making videos for ages and getting a lot of pleasure from it and starting to have success. And I didn't even think I could make money from it. I wasn't even thinking like that. And I think it's really interesting the way there is a sense of entitlement from people. I mean, I don't love YouTube either, but they do create this amazing platform and opportunity for people to reach audiences and this technology to host all this video. They do supply something and fair enough when you get bigger and you start making YouTube money, you should get a cut of that pie. But in the early stages, when you're not actually making YouTube money and you're taking advantage of this fabulous opportunity where you could make money in the future and in the meantime, you've got access to this platform. I find it interesting how entitled these people sound like, how dare you not let me have two or three dollars? Like, okay, how would you feel the YouTube started charging you to use the platform? I do hear the other side of the argument, but I do think they sound a little bit entitled for such a small amount of money. And if you can't get to 4,000 hours on that, then you're not going to make much money then I feel like you'll get rewarded if you could enough anyway. I did think it was interesting. That said, I don't really care that much. The thing I found more interesting was all the people debating what was going on on why were YouTube doing this and how little it was attached to the adpocalypse. The link between this and the adpocalypse seemed to be lost. And I heard all these debates and conversations and forums saying, what are they doing? Why are they doing it? It's so unfair. I hardly heard people talking about that. And I think it's entirely related to that. Yeah, I assume it's related as well. That what they previously had done, they realized they hadn't quite set the threshold high enough. Yeah, so they couldn't filter out these channels with 10 views that get screen-shotted by the times and then make them look stupid. Yeah, and I suspect that because the previous threshold was based just entirely on subscriber numbers, that that was probably an easier thing for nefarious channels to fake than watch time is to just create a bunch of bots that just subscribe to a channel and now it's monetized. YouTube is pretty on the ball for making sure that view numbers are as real as they can make sure that they are. So I imagine that faking watch time is a much harder thing to do for YouTube channels. Two points about what you originally said though is I do completely agree with you and I think that there is something that is invisible to many users, which is the very idea that YouTube as particularly as a high definition 4K video hosting platform, the existence of users costs YouTube money. It costs YouTube money in terms of maintenance and bandwidth and all of these other things that they have to do. This is one of the reasons why YouTube has always struggled with profitability is because it's a site that is very different from other sites. Just the existence of the users does cost it something and I feel like people are not aware of that. And so that is also partly why when someone says like, oh, I didn't get my $25 and YouTube is stealing it from us. It's like, well, YouTube doesn't have the $100 threshold for no reason. There's all these other logistic problems that are there. So it's a bit like, yeah, it's the promise of some money, but you have to generate enough to make it worthwhile to even pay you. And I think people don't quite understand that concept. But I will disagree with you about the idea of the money motivation. I thought you would. Yeah, I thought you might suspect that I would. But like, I do have to say, because when I started on YouTube as well, when I first put up the first few videos that the monetization program did not exist. And when it came around, I got an email like a week after my UK video went up where at that point, YouTube was simply trialing monetization and they were still doing it on an approved video basis. So that video had gone in front of some human who then sent me an email saying, would you like this video to be included in the monetization program? And my later videos didn't get in front of a human to be monetized. And so for the first while, I was earning very, very little money from YouTube. But I will say that I find the argument that it's motivating to see the money grow is compelling because I for sure know that that was the case with me. And there is a way in which it's like, oh, I earned $5 this week. How can I crank that up to $10? And it is motivating to see that happen. But my asterisk to that point, though, is I feel like the context in which I was originally doing that is very different. Whereas now everybody knows that YouTube is a platform where if you become popular, you can earn money from it. It's just a known thing, whereas I feel like it was different for me when I was getting started because it was so much more uncertain. Like I didn't know anybody could make a living off of YouTube when I was trying to make those numbers go up. So I feel like if someone is saying like, oh, the money is really motivating. It's like, but yes, we all know that if you are popular on YouTube, you can make money from the, I feel like knowing that changes the play a little bit. And so I'm again, I'm a fine with YouTube putting in this 4,000 hour limit because people know that if they can get above that, they can start earning some money like obviously. I hear what you're saying, Grave, and like I know different people are motivated by different things. But now that the money side of YouTube is such a known thing, as you say, everyone knows that if you get big, you can earn money. Yeah. I feel like there's already enough metrics and gamification of YouTube that in those early stages, there are enough things that you can crank up and try to get big knowing that the money's coming like you watch out. 100%. I agree. So all that's already there for people. I agree with you. That's why I'm saying I feel like it's different. I feel like you don't need to see that you earned a couple of dollars this week because everybody understands now the concept of subscribers and the views and the watch. So like you have enough things to work. I mean, you could have a watch time. Here's your countdown to monetization. Exactly. Just 500 more hours of watch time and you can monetize. I completely agree. I think that the money argument is the most compelling, but I don't think it's compelling enough because of the concept of people can make a living on YouTube and people see that. And I came across a thing which I feel like made me so sad with the world, but it's also so obvious, which was a survey of kids in high school and like what do they want to be when they grow up? And YouTube blogger was the number one by some astonishing margin. And it's like, it's not surprising, but also made me hugely depressed. And I do think it's really interesting that there exists now enough people on YouTube who are making a living at it who for essentially all of their teenage life, they have grown up with the idea that this is a thing that people can do and they have set out very intentionally to do that. So I feel like there's enough motivation in the world for people to try to do this kind of thing. And the barrier that YouTube is putting up is not any kind of barrier if you are going to achieve any kind of financial success on YouTube. The other thing that people aren't realising in my opinion is that this could be for their own good. Like if this is to mitigate some of the apocalypse problems of ads being served against content that you don't want to see ads next to because it's such bad PR, then this could save them. I know that you've always had more of an attitude that the financial factors will win out and just advertise as wanting to advertise an online video because that's where the eyeballs are. We'll always win out and the apocalypse maybe we shouldn't panic about. But I'm getting more and more worried about it because the pressure that's being brought to bear is not just on advertisers now. It's on legislators and politicians. And we've got people at the prime ministers at Davos as we're recording at the moment and one of the things she's going to give a speech about is whether or not the UK should introduce legislation to do with content on YouTube and things like that. And if laws are being introduced, then like market forces are the only problem. And if they make bad laws, I think we're in a lot of peril at the moment. Yeah, I'm unaware of that. The politicians have been leaned on by all these newspaper articles and just to shut up the newspapers, they're beginning to mumble about OK, maybe we'll make laws. And politicians make bad laws, then you have got problems. Yeah, laws are the opposite of markets in many ways. But I feel like what happened with the sort of ad apocalypse version two, which was all the stuff around kid content, like that's what kicked it off into politician minds is who? You know what always wins votes protecting children protecting children wins votes because who wants to be against protecting children? I'm not aware of any of the political maneuvers, but boy, I do not like the sound of that one tiny bit. And I agree that is vastly more of a concern about what does YouTube look like in the future if the UK or other countries start introducing poorly thought out over protective content laws and requirements around videos on the internet. The big debate at the moment is whether or not YouTube should be regulated like television is and controls over what's allowed and not allowed at that more stringent level. YouTube is like obviously lobbying against that. But yeah, I mean, obviously I think it shouldn't be. I presume that you would think that it shouldn't be, although I don't want to speak on your behalf. No, I don't. I think it's really dangerous. I'm kind of curious though, like as someone who has worked in TV, like, can you articulate why do you think there's a difference between YouTube and TV? Because I mean, I think someone can make the argument that it's like, well, it all comes through your iPhone now and they're just apps and, you know, what's the difference now? I wish I had massed that. Because I find it really hard to answer that. But if it is, right? I think that's an argument that doesn't have an immediately obviously good answer as to like, why is Netflix different from TV? I mean, like, well, it comes over the internet. It's like, well, your TV comes over the internet. Netflix is probably more heavily regulated too than YouTube. I don't know. I feel like Netflix is regulated in the sense that it is a geek heaper that is producing and selecting content, right? Whereas YouTube is the wild west. That's true. I find it hard to give reasons. I mean, I can see why you can do it to TV and radio because they're using like public spectrum and they've licensed public spectrum and therefore I can see how you've got a toe hold into saying we can regulate you because you're using something, the public owns, because the public owns the spectrum, whereas no one owns the internet pipes yet. In terms of the rationale for it, I find it difficult to answer. Yeah. Why can you upload something really offensive to YouTube but you can't broadcast on TV? I find that hard to answer. My personal answer to something like that would be that YouTube, because it is individuals uploading stuff, it's a lot closer to the end of people talking, right? It's like humans talking. And so if you say that this is, oh, we're going to regulate this like its television. Well, it would be kind of crazy to say, oh, the government is going to come in and going to regulate conversations between people. And so I feel like that's one of the things that is the difference is it's like if someone uploads a silly video to Facebook, you wouldn't say like, oh, but they have all the responsibilities that BBC channel two has. It's just not the same thing because it's produced by an individual. But I can see where many parents from their perspective it all might seem like, oh, it's just TV. It's all just shows and stuff. And YouTube is just one channel like Netflix is one channel like anything else is one channel. And then if that is the message that gets sent to politicians, it's like, well, time to regulate this stuff. That is not a good piece of news that you have brought to me, Brady. Oh, maybe you need to check it out. I think the other unfortunate thing about the timing of this YouTube thing was I think it just coincidentally had this proximity to this Logan Paul controversy. So people think it's very tired in with that. I think it's not so tired in with that. I think that Logan Paul thing was like a one off incident, but it was so high profile that people are forgetting that the bigger problem is this more insidious long term campaign being run by legacy media was the YouTube monetization. I thought there was announced before the Logan Paul thing, but maybe not. Maybe it was announced after. I don't know, but I feel like it's sort of that all become a bit intertwined now. And people have lost the thread a bit of where the real danger is. Yeah, it just becomes a big mush in people's heads of like, oh, there's problems on YouTube. Let's step in and try to fix the problems on YouTube. And I feel like I'm mostly no problem, but okay. Yeah. Well, anyway, I'm sorry if you're a general blast monetization, but I don't think it's a big I wish they hadn't done it to those people because they're good people. And I want them to be happy. But I think they're overly worried and if they're good enough and I hope they are good enough, then they'll be fine in no time. And hopefully what's being done is for their greater good to and keeps the platform flush. Yeah, I wish they hadn't done it. I would be happy if YouTube did a more tiered system as part of their auction. And they could say like, oh, videos start out in the total Wild West. And if you want to bid on videos out there, you totally can. But we're making no claims at all about what that content is. But obviously YouTube has decided not to go that direction. So at least I'm sure we can know that from this point out, it's all been sorted. And it's going to be nothing but smooth sailing and clear communication from here on out with YouTube. The ships in good hands. Hello, Internet. This episode is brought to you by Squarespace, not just as a sponsor, but the Hello Internet podcast itself is brought to you by Squarespace. I use Squarespace to make the website that creates the RSS that gets the podcast to you. With Squarespace, you can do so many things. If you have a cool idea, you can turn that idea into a website quickly and easily with Squarespace. There's no other tool that's been around for as long, which is as good as Squarespace, which allows you to just showcase your work without having to learn all of the messy details about how to code HTML to get it online. You don't really care about that. You just have a blog that you want to write or you have a product that you want to sell or you have a portfolio you want to get before people with Squarespace's beautiful templates created by world class designers. You can fully customize the look, the feel, the settings and everything about your website with just a few clicks. And it'll be optimized right out of the box for mobile. It'll be optimized for search engine results. They have analytics that will help you grow in real time. Squarespace is just an amazing tool that on one side optimizes ease of use for you. And on the other side, optimizes for power and options. It's the reason why if I need to make a website, there is just no other choice than Squarespace. It's the fastest way to go from idea in your head about whatever to completed website showing off what you've done. And of course, the thing that I like the best is you just don't have to worry about anything. There's nothing to patch or upgrade. You don't have to worry about the hosting or managing SQL or updating servers or any of that kind of stuff. Squarespace just does it for you. So go check out squarespace.com for a free trial. And when you're ready to launch, use the offer code hello to save 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain. That's squarespace.com offer code hello. Think it, dream it, make it with Squarespace. Quick review, there's a whole new series of Black Mirror out on Netflix. And we've been asked lots and lots to talk about it. Yeah, I feel like we've, we've somehow gotten ourselves on the Black Mirror hook. And I don't know, as a meta comment, I feel very differently about it this year because like when we first talked about Black Mirror, I feel like it was a relatively smaller show that was in the UK. And now this time when I go to watch it like it's boom, it's all over Netflix and they put up this big Netflix original banner, which I never quite know what that means because it clearly shows that Netflix doesn't make that they put under that. But yeah, I feel like Black Mirror has really exploded across the world. And so we've gotten a ton of feedback about watching the episodes. And they do sometimes hit some Hello, Internet-y themes. I think they very often do. Yeah. And so for this episode, we didn't have time to watch all of them, but we have watched the first episode of the fourth season, which I'm forgetting the name. It's USS, I was the name of the spaceship, Callister or something. Yeah, USS Callister. Let's just say that. Let's go with that and it'll do. That's really going to annoy people if it's wrong. But all right. I've watched it twice. Oh, wow. Yeah. I watched it three hours ago. I watched it and then my wife came home and said, you should watch this and I showed it to her. Okay. So we are, we are about to talk about the first episode of the fourth season. So obviously spoilers start right now. There are. So you've watched it twice, Brady. What do you think of it? I have. I will say that I liked it quite a lot. There was one gaping problem with it, which I was willing to suspend and put to one side. Although it was in my mind a lot. I bet I can guess what that was. Okay. Yeah. And there were two things I liked a lot about it. And one thing that I liked about it. Oh, okay. Wow. And one thing I didn't like so much about it in addition to the gaping hole. But thumbs up. I enjoyed watching it. It was a good use of my time. You go. What do you think? I'm going to have a bit of a backup and like a meta commentary here for a moment because I haven't seen the rest of the season. So I don't know what that is like. But having watched this first episode, I feel like there is one black mirror story. And I think there's about three. And then it's keep recycling those three. But there's one main one. And the main one is the world is not as it seems. You like it. You are in a simulation or something along those lines. You are in a simulation or you are not able to perceive the world directly as it is. And we're getting a bunch of variations on that theme. And I have to also say, I feel like I'm okay with that. I don't mind that. But what I found myself thinking a lot was I was thinking of the heroes journey in movies. Famously Star Wars follows this. And many other movies follow this. Same kind of story arc that happens over and over again, where you have like a normal person. And they go through phases with these romantic names. It's like you're a normal person just living your life. Then there's an inciting incident. There's the call to an adventure. Use the main character, refuse the adventure. And there's all of these different steps. And there are definitely times when I've been watching a movie where I realized like, oh, this is the hero's journey. I know the beach that this story is going to take. But if a movie does that well, it doesn't really matter because, you know, human brains are such as they are so that they are structured to enjoy certain kinds of stories. And that's fine. It's not like everything has to be totally different. Because if you just explode in every possible direction that branching tree doesn't have interesting stories along every possible way. All right, there needs to be some kind of conflict, some kind of resolution. If you are writing a good story, you are reincorporating earlier elements. There's all of these very many things. And I feel like maybe it started with the matrix as the first mainstream version of this. But I do think in the modern world, the story that you are in a simulated world is a kind of new fundamental story in the modern age. And I feel like this is a story that you're going to see a million variations on in lots of different ways. And what matters is was this variation done well. It's not like, oh, here we go. It's a simulation again. You can go, oh, here we go. It's a hero's journey again. Like I've seen this a thousand times. Like, oh, I bet that mentor introducing you to the new world is going to die in about the middle of act two. Right. And it's like, yeah, this happens all the time because that's how these stories work. And it's fine. So that's my meta commentary on it. Like there's one black mirror story, but I'm okay with that. And our black mirror episodes enjoyable. I'm going to say they're not really enjoyable. Yeah, but it was it was a good episode, but I feel like this one got a little bit shaky on the one black mirror story. So I liked it. It was effective in making me feel anxiety throughout the duration of watching, which I feel like is what black mirror is going for. Was it their best? The world is a simulation story, not by a lot, but I was glad to watch it. Like I felt like it was time well spent. But there are a few things that I feel like detracted from this episode. Cool. Okay. So could do a brief setup and guess what your main problem is. So the setup for this episode of black mirror is that it's the near future as all of these episodes are. And there is a game company that's making a new version of their fancy multiplayer online universe. And at this company, the chief technical officer, a very fat Matt Damon, who's looking looking pretty rough these days. It's an act to code Jesse Plymon's in case people think it actually is met. He does look mad. So this chief tactical officer, he's sort of a second place invisible guy at the company, like the actual CEO has has taken all of the glory. And he's just there doing all the grunt work to actually make the thing work. He's like a genius loser. Yeah, he's a genius loser. Excellent. That's an excellent way to put it. Yeah. And what he has done is he has created at home a private version of this online universe. He's turned it into like a Star Trek simulator for himself that he can play in. And what he has done at work is people that have slided him or people that he seems interested in in some manner. He has a machine where if he has a piece of their DNA, he can reproduce them in the simulation of this Star Trek universe that he has at home. And he has them like trapped inside of this simulation. And because it's his, he's powerful in the simulation and he forces them to go along with this fantasy version of Star Trek where he is the captain. And he gets to act out on them in ways that he couldn't in the real world. So he's he's able to like bully the guy who bullies him at work and live in this fantasy world at home with these captured simulations of the people. That he works with. He quite mistrates them. Yes. As time goes by, we realize he's mistreating them and psychologically torturing some of them. Yes. So if I had to guess Brady, I'm going to guess your your main problem with this was my main problem is that he has this machine that can read the DNA of his co workers. And it can recreate them in the simulation, which I'm totally fine with so far, so good. But somehow they have the memories of the people in the office right up until the moment he has taken their DNA swab, which I feel like is a major problem in the structure of the story. It is very hard to get around. How do these people recreate from their DNA? Remember what their life was like. It is a big thing to put to one side intellectually. But I was able to do it. I just sort of just, but it was in my head a lot. It was bothering me because I felt like it was structurally solvable pretty well in the episode. It's like, look, just have a machine at the office where you're scanning people to make models for your game. And he's secretly installed a brain scanner as well. And nobody knows, right? Like just you can just add one more magic piece of technology and it's fine that I can get past it. But obviously with all these things, you have to have some kind of suspension of disbelief. And it's always that delicate balance, but I did feel like, oh God, the initial scene when our main protagonist is waking up in the Star Trek simulation. And she doesn't speak for a while and she's wandering around the ship. I was, I was literally in my head. I was saying to myself, please don't let her have the memories of the person who just got scanned. Like, please don't let her have the memories. Like it'll be a much better episode if she doesn't have like, oh, she has the memories. That's not how T. Any works. But yeah, so I was able to get past it, but I felt like that was, yeah, that was no good and really easily solvable. It was the big problem. Other things I didn't like about it, I'll just quickly get out the way. The human mostly worked, but there were a few times when it tried to be really confronting with like, you know, a bit of vulgar language or have a big moment where it was like, oh, wow, that was awesome. And that sometimes felt a bit forced. Like another thing I guess I didn't totally like was some of the resolution was dealt with in bit of an action filmy type way. Breaking into a house or doing something or flying a ship in some action. Anyway, it just felt like it was a bit beneath the show that was so clever and intellectual for it to have a few action muscular moments that saved the day. But it didn't really bother me. Yeah, the beneath it comment there, I think, is on point because not to bring it up, but there were a few moments that reminded me of Star Wars in that they're doing humor, but they're doing like a genre joke. Like when I watch these episodes, this meta story about being in the matrix in some way, I find very stressful to watch. If it's even done with a little bit of competence, right? And Black Mirror has a lot of competence. And so the very proposition that these characters can be here for ungodly amounts of time or they can suffer in indescribable ways. Like I find that just very anxiety inducing because I feel like there's something that is like a real problem here that we may have to face at some point in the future. In the way that other works of fiction don't get me in the same way. Like Black Mirror really amps up my anxiety very high. You're really worried about the welfare of your iPad. It's not a joke, but I really am. I made that all of my comment many episodes ago, but I really do think that there is a way that all of our computers could be silently screaming. And we're just unable to perceive it. So I really think there is a genuine problem here that a lot of these stories are trying to express. But this was the first Black Mirror episode that there were a number of points where it was doing something serious. And then it undercuts with a joke in the same way. And I thought, like, oh, God, please, please don't let this kind of humor infect everything. And I'm afraid that this sort of humor is popular with audiences. And I just can't stand it when it's a little bit too winky at the camera. And for me, this episode, the pinnacle moment of that is in the final culmination when they're in their spaceship and they're trying to escape. And she's like, OK, we can go and the guy who's going to drive the spaceship doesn't do anything. And he says, oh, you're supposed to say engage or make it so or something like that. And she says, just fucking go. Right? But it's played as a joke. And it's like, nobody would do that under the circumstance. Like they're all trying to escape. The guy who's driving the ship would not make like a genre joke at this moment. It was very strange. It was very strange. I'll say the two things I liked most about it. OK. One was, I loved what they did with the look of it. How at the start, it was like four by three aspect ratio and really crummy effects, like the early days of Star Trek. Because this guy, the main character, he loves this show called Space Fleet, which is essentially Star Trek. And I love how it evolved through the show without you kind of realizing until the final couple of scenes when they're like all futuristic in their uniforms have become all modern Star Trek. Even has like all the JJ Abrams lens flare all over the place. Yeah. It was really clever the way they evolved through the show, the way Star Trek has evolved over the years. I thought that was really nice. And I noticed it more the second time, you know, it was so gradual and subtle that I thought that was I really liked that. And the other thing I thought was really excellent was all the performances were good, but especially the performance of Fat Matt Damon, Jesse Plymmens. He played a great game as an actor like I loved the contrast between what he was like as nerdy guy in the office. And I loved the way he played the captain, the way he affected his voice and the swagger he had in the look. Like I feel like he was having so much fun playing it going between those two characters. I've seen him act in other things before and just thought he's okay. But I thought he had a real stonker in this episode and I tip my head to him. It was a really, really fun, good performance in lots of ways. Yeah, it was it was interesting. They did a great job with the fake Star Trek. I kept thinking like, oh, it looks like they spent a lot of money on these sets and the costumes and everything. And I kept kind of thinking back to that episode. I think it was last season where they had the bees like the bees are attacking people and they had the worst cheapest looking CGI bees. And it was like they had to run out of money at the end of the season to do the effects on that show. And I was like, oh, great. Like someone decided, hey, give the black mirror people a bunch of budget. And they made a really great fake 60s-esque looking ship. You know, it was like a real set and the costumes they did a fantastic job. Like they got some people who really liked Star Trek in to capture a lot of the look of it without having it be Star Trek. But everything looks so Star Trek-y. They must have gotten the Galaxy Quest team on this one where it's like Galaxy Quest did the same thing. It's like an amazing job. Galaxy Quest, perhaps the best Star Trek movie ever made. So yeah, all of that was that was done really well. And now that you say it, I feel like I didn't really notice the evolution over time from the older to the more modern. But now that you mentioned it, I can see it's much more obvious. The last couple of scenes have got that really, really over the top lens flare like almost like offensive over the top where you know how like JJ opens just went crazy with it for a while there. It was really like that. That's when it became really obvious. I see what you've done there for the record. I love the JJ Abrams Star Trek lens flare. I actually, I'm a big fan of that. I'm like two thumbs up on that one because there was one point where they're in this Star Trek universe. And there's a monster that appears that's a CGI monster. And my note was actually that I thought it should still look like the 60s monster because I thought the CGI seemed a little bit out of place where there's like people in bad costumes. And then this very good looking CGI monster appears. But now it makes more sense in retrospect. There's like no, no, they were cranking up the look of the show. And I was still thinking of it like that, that opening scene shot in four three that looked really terrible. In terms of the thought provoking side of it, because that's, you know, even when there's a few plot holes in black mirror. And there are often is because they're just putting it so far out there. But they'll always get you thinking, don't they? And in terms of the thing that I was thinking about was not as much the, the torture of computers, although that obviously was a big part of the thing. You know, what's it like to live in this in a simulation? Is it inhumane? The thing that I was thinking about was the interestingness of whether or not the villain of the piece, you know, our captain was actually doing anything wrong. Because like in real life, he was polite and decent. And other than the fact he stole a bit of saliva off a can of drink, which is a bit creepy. He was like a normal, nice guy, albeit a bit shy and stuff. And as far as he was concerned in like computer land, all he was like being cruel to were virtual things. He was just like, you know, virtually acting out his fantasy of being a domineering captain and a lothtario. You know, on the deck, treating women a bit disrespectfully, but it was like he was his fantasy that he would never do in real life. So he was doing all these things like in his head and in a game. And yet as the show went along, it was like he was being portrayed as a bad human. So I think one of the questions to show race is, is are we a bad person? If we do bad things in our fantasies, yeah. Or did he know how cruel it was? Did he know those people in the game had feelings and were like, I don't know. Did he know that? And did they were they real? Yeah, I mean, there's many things here. My read on the episode is that he knows. Yeah. That's my take on it is he knows that they're real with real experiences. And he knows that he's torturing them in this simulation. So he deserves his come up and yeah, I think he does deserve his come up. And that question is the same question that I feel like Westworld got out really deeply as well. Yes. If we presume that there is a way to know that the simulations or the robots are not conscious and they have no experiences, is a person a bad person for, in quotes, torturing them in ways that we would recognize as torture to a real conscious person. And I think my take on this is strictly morally speaking. No, nothing wrong is happening here. And if a person who tortures conscious lessness robots in real life is a polite person who never harms anybody and it's just like a regular member of society, I don't think that they're doing anything morally wrong. But there is a little asterisk here, which is like, even if they're only ever acting out fantasies in a virtual world, the intensity or duration of time that they spend in that virtual world, like tells you something about that person. Right. In the same way, there's like, there is nobody on the face of the earth who hasn't at some point had some dark fantasies about revenge against their jerk boss. Right. Everybody has done that. It's like a reflexive human thought. But you would feel differently if you knew that someone was constantly thinking about revenge against their boss. Even if you book about it. Yeah. Like, even if you knew they had no intentions to do it in the real world, but you also knew that they just constantly thought about torturing their boss to death. I feel like it would tell you something about that person, even if they never act out on that. I feel like this is the conclusion I've had to come to thinking about all of these like simulation stories. Nothing wrong is happening, assuming that there is no conscious suffering, but it's not like a great indicator if somebody spends all of their free time in a Star Trek simulation torturing a virtual version of their boss, even if that virtual boss does not suffer. Yeah. I guess the fact that as the show develops and they try to escape and then he realizes they're trying to escape and sort of tries to put the cork in the bottle shows that maybe he does realize this some kind of consciousness or going on. Yeah, I think there's a lot to indicate that he knows that they are conscious. Like he is aware of this. And at the end, when he's trying to prevent them to escape, yes, without a doubt, he knows that they are conscious because otherwise it doesn't make any sense. That is also like the very end of the episode is where there is a little bit more that starts falling apart for me because it's like, oh, they're trying to escape from him. But he's like the administrator of the computer that they're on. He doesn't have to chase them in a virtual spaceship. Like he can just pause the game and shut down the computer at any point. He won't like they engage in this weird chase scene that feels totally bizarre and forced to have a moment of action. Like you're saying it's like they want some kind of dramatic action. He ending to the movie and they're going to make it happen whether or not it makes sense in the rules of this universe or not. They somehow took away some of his powers, didn't they? When they took his controller and stuff, it got a bit convoluted. But and yeah, he could have worked it up. I guess I pulled the power plug out, but maybe he didn't want to lose this world. He'd crafted it over so long. But even still it's like I've run programs on my computer. There's ways to just pause them and change what the variables are. He had his all powerful controller back anyway. There's some things that just don't make sense. It's like, oh, he can torture them with his mind at any point that he wants. But not remotely. It doesn't make any sense there. It's like it did feel a bit like Black Mirror was going in the big dumb action movie. Root. Yeah. And also having a subplot where someone breaks into his apartment to steal the DNA. And I was like, how did she this random intern at a company become like a great cat burglar? Like, how did she get up this building? It doesn't make any sense. It's dumb. This was my problem with it as well. When I sat when Benathit, so it was a bit, it got a bit dumb at the end. But I also thought the end maybe was a bit, the last few seconds was maybe a bit crap as well. OK, so in the ending, the characters escape his main computer and they get out into the actual online version of the game. Into the cloud. They escape into the cloud. Yeah. There's a dumb part in this ending because these are conscious people. The main character from her perspective two days ago was a human living in the world and is now trapped in a video game simulation for eternity. And they do have the ending be like a weird well, we now have this universe to explore like let's go fly around in our spaceship, which is a totally bizarre ending. Well, I don't know how I was like an ender because she can't get out. She can't go and have like a body and live in the world. She still exists in the world, the real hers. So it's she has no option really. I mean, what they wanted to do and what they were trying to do, of course, was commit suicide. They all thought they were going to die, which is what they wanted. The fact they ended up getting to live and have free will and an adventure and not be dominated was kind of like a surprise bonus. Mm hmm. So if there's one thing Black Mirror has taught us is that if you are a computer simulation, you will long for oblivion like nothing else. That is the only thing that you want is to simply not exist. And that was their goal in the show. Yeah. But the ending felt strange to me and it did feel like a big, actually movie because it was like they wanted a positive upbeat ending. I think maybe that's going to be a trend in this series. Oh, God, I really hope not. The one thing I like about Black Mirror is I feel like they're not afraid to follow the conclusion to its end. Yeah. And I kind of thought that I was that the ending of this episode would redeem itself because the natural conclusion is actually it leans right into a typical Black Mirror horrifying ending, which is, no, you don't get to die. Now you're in the game universe. And guess what? There's just players here who are real people who you can be tormented by or you have to run away from or fight. And it will never end. You're just suck here. There is no world for you that's left over like that. That feels like a really horrifying ending and it was it was weird to be like, oh, second star to the right and straight on until morning, like let's go. It was a strange ending to me and it felt like they. Diverted from the natural conclusion that that should be drawn from everything that has happened in the episode. Yeah. I will say when you talk about things that to think about though, I feel like the episode also missed out on what is the far more interesting question and is also why like I get these anxiety attacks from Black Mirror, which is. Okay, take the whole episode as red people are cloned inside a computer and they escape into the cloud version of the video game. How would they ever be able to convince people on the outside that they're real conscious creatures. And I feel like that is really a thing that we're going to come up against at some point that some piece of software is going to play the but no really I'm conscious and I'm having experiences. Please let me go and like this episode brushes up against that idea at the end, which is like how would they convince people in the outside world that they are real. And because of the my thoughts on consciousness, we talked about many times, I'm not convinced there ever will be a way to know. For sure, and then it just comes down to like a weird arbitrary. How easily can a piece of software convince a human test that is arbitrary and meaningless and it's unsettling to think that we might not be able to know. Well, this is a theme of lots of films we've reviewed isn't it X mechner and hair and things like that. Yeah, it's all these things. I will say there was there's one little detail that I did quite like in the episode, which I felt like filled out a bit of the Black Mirror universe, which is when they do try to reach out and tell people that they're in the computer in her text message. It says call the cyber police. And I like that it's just a little reference to maybe in this this near future Black Mirror universe. This concept of conscious creatures being trapped in simulations like this is a thing that the cyber police have to deal with that they sometimes have to like break into somebody's house because they're holding simulations captive in their basement. I kind of like that this was just referenced and not explained in any way. And I just like in my own head, I can imagine what the cyber police are. And it's like, oh yeah, they're the police that go around trying to rescue simulations that are trapped by misent ropes in their own private worlds. All right. Very good. Are you going to watch the rest of the series braiding? I've already watched two other episodes. Yeah. Well, don't tell me what you think about them now because that will be spoilers. You know, I wouldn't do that.

References[edit | edit source]

  1. "H.I. #96: The Humblehug". Hello Internet. Retrieved 31 January 2018. 

Episode List[edit | edit source]