 Yep. Let's do it. Oh, you got mucho and you didn't get mucho for me? I would have gotten you mucho. I am so hungry right now. Mind you, people would have been like even more mad if we were both eating on the show. Well, I'm gonna try to like off screen it as much as I can. I'm not even gonna show, notice how it's not even on camera. They can't even, so I'll just randomly like, you'll be talking, I'll be like nodding and then suddenly just- That is so cringe. Fading out. Like that is so cringe. Wait for it, wait for it. Do you want something even more cringe though? I thought of a joke while I was upstairs getting my power adapter for my laptop. Oh no. What is the weapon of choice for the most certain ninjas? The shuriken. Oh. Oh! That must have been the intro. Okay, you need- Nope, nope, you're done. You need, no, no, I'm not saying this negatively. You need a kid's book. I need a kid's book. That has like kid friendly art and there's like a little ninja with a shuriken. And jokes for kids. And you just have like the little saying right there. Jokes for kids books are like pretty popular I think. I'm not even kidding. I think that could be pretty good. One of the things that like I would potentially do at some point in the future is a kid's book. Savage Jurgie. Because quite frankly, it looks like the easiest thing ever. Squarespace. And if you just leverage your fame, then a bunch of people will buy it and you will make a bunch of money. Like it just looks like the most obvious way to cash in on like having internet fame. And if a bunch of people buy it, then it'll go up in like Amazon rankings and stuff and then other people will buy it. Exactly. And if it's decent, like the shuriken joke, totally good enough. And like if it goes along with like a frame of art, which is like kid friendly ninja dude. Yeah, yeah. And just, it's like a like blown up zoom in on the shuriken. And it could be like, you know what? We could probably sell even more if we build it as like a educational tool. Teaching kids about puns, double entendres. Yeah. So, oh, explain why it works. That's right. That's right. Fantastic. You could take Nintendo Labo's approach and make it so that the shuriken can be like popped out. Yeah, we could make it like a phonics lesson. Yes. You know, why sure and sure are the, oh, they're the same. They say them the same way. And they have two meanings. Ah ha ha ha. Ha ha ha. Ha ha ha. So we've got a great topic. Great topic. We've got a great topic for you guys today. And then we've got a bunch of other rubbish. It's about shurikens. Apple is bringing out, apparently, bringing apparently 38 billion dollars back to the US of A. Samsung has begun production on the industry's first 16 gigabit GDDR6 memory. AT&T is under pressure to cut all ties with Huawei. Am I saying that right? Yes. And there has been pretty major changes to the YouTube Partner Program. And you might care or not. Actually, I don't know. I think a lot of people care about this. It's a funny thing because it only really affects content creators. And yet, whether it's because there are so many indie content creators now, or whether it's the loyalty of fans towards these content creators, it feels like there is a disproportionate amount of outrage over this. Because we're gonna break down who it actually affects. And the impact is arguably quite small or arguably a huge flippin' deal. Depending. So why don't we... I'm excited to get into that one. Do you wanna start with that? Do you wanna start with that? Or should we make them, should we pull like a more on this at 11? More on this later. From the YouTube creators that have been in the game for a long time and started really small. You know what, let's do it second. Cause I wanna talk about the AT&T thing. I was actually at the Huawei press conference. And I didn't know. Because like the CEO was like on stage and unhappy about this, right? Yeah, it was actually super weird. Yeah. So we were there as part of a sponsored deal. I'm gonna share this in the chat. Yeah, thanks. So we were there as part of a sponsored deal. This was posted originally on the forum by Nina360 and the original article here is from Android Authority. So here you go. So we were there as part of a sponsored deal. And there were actually a bunch of other influencers there as well, including Zach from JerryRigEverything. He was there. Yeah, yeah. Just trying to think who else was there. I believe Keaton from Techsmartt was there. What's that? I'm trying to give you a hint on someone that I think was there. No, I don't think he was there. Oh, okay. I like how that worked though. I think Shubner was there. Okay. Yeah, I can't remember. I ran into all these guys like two to five times each over the course of the week. So it was actually kind of- Well, you're at that event or maybe this other one. And the whole thing is a blur anyway. Anyway, the point was there were a bunch of influencers there, which means that Huawei was spending a bunch of money on influencers specifically with the North American reach. And Huawei, it was boasting that they're now the number three smartphone brand worldwide. But I think someone like you or I would look at that. And unless we've seen an infographic and some kind of data to back it up, we'd kind of go, really? Yeah. Well- Like, really? Not really, actually. Like not really, because who else would be bigger? Yeah. And that's a great question. But it does take a sec. There's a little bit of pause where you're like, ah. Because they don't get, like I wouldn't say that in North America, in the media, in the kiosks, in your telecom store, I wouldn't say that Huawei gets more attention than someone like an LG, for example, whose market share is actually abysmal. But over here gets treated like a top tier brand. So anyway, he goes on stage and he's talking about this whole thing. He's like, yeah, we have won over the trust of consumers. We have won over the trust of carriers worldwide. And we have, you know, we, you know, and he sort of seemed to lose his composure. Like I don't follow mobile news as much as I perhaps should other than our topics for WAN show and when I'm working on a review of a device or whatever the case may be. Yeah. So I did not- In your defense, it's been a little boring for a while. I did not know about any controversy or any of the plans that Huawei had made with AT&T about bringing the device, not just into the US, but into AT&T stores. Because something to the tune of, this is according to the Android Authority article here, something to the tune of 90% of smartphone sales in the US are done on contract with a subsidy. And this isn't the case in a lot of other markets where people do tend to buy their devices outright like they would any other consumer. But I'm not surprised due to how contracts work in North America. Exactly. And they don't work that way everywhere. And they don't work that way. Like in North America, buying a phone on contract is actually not stupid. Yeah. And with a lot of contracts, with some contracts it is. Some of them it's dumb. But yeah. But like back when I was first getting into cell phone ownership when I was in like high school, I absolutely just bought on contract because- You get the zero dollar phone. You get the zero dollar phone. And back then, a lot of the carriers, at least the one I was on anyway, so some carriers, I'll say some, the one that I was on didn't give you a discount for bringing your own device. So you were actually an idiot. Yeah, yeah, yeah. If you didn't just get hardware. Now you had to sign a contract. That was the drawback. But there were what? Two carriers at the time. There was Rogers and there was Telus here. I don't think Bell was available here yet back in like 2002 or whatever. You're talking like sliders and stuff, right? I don't wanna talk about it. Flip? No, this is pre-flip. Bricks. I hate you. You're talking about bricks. I hate you. Okay, so I wasn't in the game at that point. I hate you. Wasn't allowed to have a phone at that age. What was the, what was that phone that I had? It was, I don't remember, V-Box. I got a phone pretty late. Okay, this was- Oh, nice. This was my first phone. Yes. Oh, that's amazing. So I got it because my mom's hard of hearing and- Okay. So this was, I believe this was like the first text-centric device out there. But this came around at a time that bricks were the norm. Right, so she reads lips. So if you wanna call her, it's not really gonna work that great. That's right. I never even thought about that. That makes sense. Yeah. Okay. Because you've met her and you probably didn't notice. Because she's really good at it. Yeah. But anyway, so that was my first phone. And right, so the only drawback was that you had to sign a contract, which didn't really matter that much because quite frankly, where else were you gonna go? If you wanted to have a cell phone at all. So as long as I knew I wanted a cell phone for two years, it was no big deal. And then during your two years, you would accumulate credit towards your hardware upgrade after a couple of years. The upgrade cycles weren't so fast. Like to my knowledge, Apple kind of pioneered the new phone every year come hell or high water upgrade cycle. Because there wasn't that drastic of improvements. And I wasn't an enthusiast at all about phones. They placed calls and in this case, they were really good for typing text messages. But that was about it. So I was like, yeah, whatever, who cares? So anyway, back to the whole AT&T thing. So he was like visibly upset on stage when he started talking about how some carriers and some countries with all of this work that we've put into consumer privacy and security are treating us with the appropriate respect while others are not. And like he kind of sat, like he didn't say respect, I don't think, but it kind of had that tone. And I was sitting here in the audience kind of going, wow, this is a really weird way to talk about your big push in the US. And the reason is that it's not happening. So while Huawei does move some phones in the US, they only have access to a tiny 10% of the market because 90% of consumers are buying on contract. So it fell through at the last minute and now a new report has suggested that it was US lawmakers pushing AT&T to cut ties with Huawei over national security concerns. So senators and house members are encouraging AT&T to ditch even any potential plans to work with Huawei on standards for its 5G network. AT&T is expected to roll out that network at the end of 2018 and is competing with Verizon to become the first carrier to offer high speed service to the US on 5G. So, Senate and House Intelligence Committees sent a letter to the FCC raising concerns over Huawei's alleged ties to the Communist Party as well as China's intelligence and security services. And there have been other historical moves like this by governments to restrict Huawei's competitiveness. So Canada, for example. Which isn't really surprising. I think like five years ago, six years ago, five or six years ago, Canada actually disallowed, I don't know if it's still in effect, but they disallowed the use of Huawei telecommunications gear on the backend of carrier networks. I can totally see why. So your take on this then. Cause it seems like you got an opinion here, Luke. Okay, the very bottom bullet point on this, and there's a lot of information on this, is Senate and House Intelligence Committees sent a letter to the FCC raising concerns over Huawei's alleged ties to the Communist Party as well as Chinese intelligence and security services. There's also a lot of articles online about how Huawei's backend equipment, specifically, is specifically designed to allow the Chinese government to tap into it. Also just being owned by the Chinese government and going up against it. Or having ties to, to be clear. On paper, maybe there's no ownership whatsoever. I actually don't know, but go ahead. I looked it up a second ago, but none of them are sources that I'm gonna give 100% credibility to. That said, there is ownership. But again, I don't know, cause I wouldn't give 100% credibility to those sources. But anyways, with the current administration in the US, and it being a, to some degree, ties with Chinese government corporation, I can probably see why there might be some influence from the government being like, no, no, no, let's not do this. I can definitely understand not wanting the backend equipment, holy crap. The phones in general, I think is more of a, yeah. That's more just like out of, I guess out of... Well, because, okay, this is kind of a weird insight thing that I'm gonna take a tangent on for a second. When you travel to a lot of other, so for North Americans, as we are, as you travel to a lot of other countries, it's a little weird with the purchasing habits and the stuff that you see around. Cause in North America, you see whatever. When you go to a lot of other countries, not all other countries, but a lot of other countries, you see that country's thing. I mean, that's particularly common in Germany. Germany is huge for it. Japan is huge for it. Korea is huge for it. Samsung, everything. You'd be amazed what kind of things Samsung makes. Toilets, elevators, insurance. Like, whoa. And there's a much more, and I might be using this word incorrectly, sorry. I'm not super good on political stuff, but there's a much more nationalistic approach to purchasing where you wanna purchase your own country's things. Of course, Made in America, Made in Canada are both things. Yeah, well, like we don't mind. Yeah, like it's kind of cool, but it's not the same. Particularly for Canadians, I think. The truth of the matter is that you don't really have the option to buy Canadian. Yeah, we don't make enough stuff. Like if I wanted all of my personal grooming products to be made in Canada. Nope. Good luck. Yeah, like I could probably find some stuff. I'm sure you'd be able to find, especially some beard-based things. I'm sure I'd be able to find some Canadian beard care products. Not that that would be a major concern for me, since this is about as much of a beard as I can grow, but thank you for bringing it up. The only reason why I said that is, like, around the world, there's a lot of small homebrew kind of companies that do beard stuff, because you can make your own beard oil. Yeah, sure, whatever, backtrack. Anyways, it's not nearly as much of a thing in North America, but I could see how current administration in the US might be pushing to make it more so. Sure. And would be pushing against, especially, companies that have ties to the governments of other countries that are being purchased in a nationalistic sense from coming more into America. Where there's no commitment upfront to say, okay, yeah, we're gonna bring X number of jobs into the United States, because the potential here, and again, we don't know, okay, so we don't know what involvement, if any, the US government has already had in the negotiations. Yeah, not sure. But if while we were to come to the table with the US government and say, okay, yeah, we're committing to assembling some percentage of our devices that we sell within the United States in the US, if they were gonna come and make some kind of a deal, then I suspect it. It would be more likely. It would be more likely, but right now, I guess I can't think of a great reason for them to be gung ho about this. Also, this part, senators and House members are encouraging AT&T to ditch any potential ties to work with Huawei on standards for its 5G network. Again, that's them trying to get into the backend. Yep. And I'm super not surprised that that's not the thing. Max just quietly walks off stage. I'm super not surprised that that's not a thing because of ties to the idea of their backend being tapped by the Chinese government. So to be very clear, we- Allegedly. Yeah, we don't know what is or isn't happening. All we know is what's going on. We know the US government is uncomfortable with it. We know Huawei is super unimpressed with what's going on. And presumably, AT&T would be as well because by most accounts, they make really good devices. It's just not necessarily affordable if you rely on contract subsidies in order to buy your phone. And it won't be competitive when you can walk in and buy an iPhone for $200. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Quote unquote. Versus a Huawei device for $800 because you have to buy the whole thing up front. Yeah. All right, why don't we jump right into the changes to the YouTube Partner Program here. This is posted by HeyYo on the forum. The original article is actually straight from the YouTube blog. So this is a pretty big deal. Do we wanna do kind of a short recap of some of the other changes that YouTube has made towards creators this year? Sure. So the biggest one is referred to as the Adpocalypse, and there have actually been a couple of different stages. Yeah. This I think is considered by the community to be wave three. Oh, okay. I think something along those lines. I don't, okay. I wouldn't entirely agree with that, but sure. There's been, okay, I saw it referred to as that. Whatever the community said, yeah. Would you call it two? I could maybe bundle this in. I think it's kind of a separate thing. Yeah, okay. The point is that the Adpocalypse is sort of used as a generic term to describe changes that Google or through YouTube has made fundamental changes to the way that content creators monetize on the YouTube platform. And so some examples have been pulling monetization from potentially touchy or controversial subjects, even if the video in question is a mature conversation about said controversial topic and contains no community guideline infringing content. Like if it's, you know, if you're having a- Unless you're a news, a TV news organization. So that's been another, you know, problem with this whole controversy is that there seem to be channels that are getting their videos pulled just for having knife in the metadata. Yeah. Or, you know, like a perfect example was when we had the monetization pulled from an unboxing of the razor blade or the switchblade, switchblade interface. That was the issue. So because it had that keyword in it, it got the monetization pulled. So it seems like some channels are very susceptible to this while some mainstream channels, like I believe- It's Late Show with Colbert, right? I believe Colbert has been pointed at as someone who has had controversial topics in the titles. I think it's basically all the Late Show hosts because they, a lot, okay, this is super generalizing, but a lot of the Late Show TV programs put snippets and clips onto YouTube. Yes. It's really popular. And- John Seth Meyers does it. They get quite a few- I believe so. I believe that John Oliver does it very occasionally. I don't know, man. But they get a lot of views. Yep. And they're really heavily promoted by the platform and they're not struck down in any way. Right. Okay, so that's been- Strictly. That's been a big part of the problem. Then there was the whole issue that was kind of tied into monetization slash preferential treatment where Logan Paul posted that extremely controversial video in the suicide forest in Japan. And the perception among the community, I'm not gonna make a judgment call here because I wasn't sitting in the war room that I'm sure existed at YouTube when they were trying to figure out what to do about this. Yep. I wasn't present there. Those gotta be crazy meetings. Nor was I present with Logan Paul when he was thinking about how he was gonna react to the community's reaction. And I wasn't sitting in the rooms of the people who were watching those videos. I'll be honest with you guys, I haven't watched it. I have no desire to see that. And actually we sort of didn't address it at all because my general policy on something that I don't agree with is to just not give it any attention whatsoever. But in the context of our news topic today, it's sort of important because what it appeared to spark was a conversation where the perception was that YouTube was treating Logan Paul vlogs, that's the channel, preferentially in not removing this content or dealing with presumably what would have been a fair number of community reports. And in fact, at first anyway, had appeared to not penalize the channel or the user in any meaningful way. Like many days. For days, not just for like a couple hours. Yeah. And then making matters worse, there were instances of YouTube pulling down reuploads of the original video because they violated community guidelines while the original was still live. Okay. So this blog post is sort of about how 2017 was a tough year. In fact, you know, let's just sort of discuss some excerpts from it. 2017 was a tough year. What do they got here? Despite the issues, more creators than ever earning a living on YouTube, blah, blah, blah. Major focus is protecting our creator ecosystem, ensuring your revenue is more stable. Now we wanna prevent bad actors from harming the inspiring and original creators. We wanna do this, we wanna do that. So basically what they've done, seemingly as a response to these issues, is they have changed the previous eligibility requirements for the YouTube Partner Program, which going way back. So should I do another history lesson here? Yes. Okay. I think it's important for this section. So when I first started out on YouTube, I think it might have been pre-monetization. I think I was pre-monetization, I'm not sure. So when I started out on YouTube, it was either pre-monetization at all, or it was shortly after the Partner Program had been introduced, and the only way to get into the Partner Program was by specifically being invited. So really early guys like Phil DeFranco were in it well before I had access to it. After that, there was an application process. That was when I got in through the NCIX Tech Tips channel. I'm not sure if Linus Tech Tips existed yet, although I actually, I think it did. So that was when I got in, actually no, I'm actually quite certain that it did, because there was already revenue to show for the YouTube program back at NCIX when Linus Tech Tips was created, because I remember negotiating a bonus around it or something. Okay. Okay. Then YouTube basically opened up the floodgates, and they went, okay, we're just gonna put monetization on all the things, because we've got this inventory of videos, and anywhere there's eyeballs, Google wants to put an ad. That's their MO. That's how it works. So anyway, fast forward quite a bit. In April of 2017, they set an eligibility requirement of 10,000 lifetime views. The idea was to have some kind of a history to look back at for a given channel to make sure that it wasn't just blatant reuploads of copyright TV shows, for example. Which is? Still all over the platform. Oh yeah. And lots of other issues, like music and movies and whatever else. Yeah, but the idea was so that they could, they'd have at least 10,000 views worth of time to weed out the ones that were just blatantly not real content. And then here's the followup. That threshold provided more information to determine whether a channel followed our community guidelines, but it's been clear over the last few months that we need a higher standard. So starting on the 16th of January, which is three days ago, and the blog says starting today. Like they're like effective now. There's a little aggro in that regard. Yeah, they changed the eligibility requirements for monetization to 4,000 hours of watch time in the past 12 months, and 1,000 subscribers. So basically it appears as though if you're a one hit wonder who doesn't have any subscribers, you might not be able to monetize. And if you run your channel as kind of like a hobby and you don't actually get a ton of views or a ton of hours of watch time, but you actually have a decent number of subscribers who wait for your videos that you maybe publish very infrequently, you could be affected by YouTube's attempt to crack down on potentially inappropriate videos for monetizing. Now, right off the bat, I'm not actually working off of my notes here, but right off the bat, I can identify a couple of problems here. Number one is that that whole Spider-Man Elsa thing was going on for over a year. Yeah. Like for a freaking long time. And these requirements would have done absolutely nothing to stop. Not a thing. They got way more hours and way more subscribers than that. The issue with the Suicide Forest vlog. Wouldn't have stopped that. Wouldn't have stopped that. What I'm trying to figure out right now is what this move has to do with anything the community's upset about. Oh no, I think this has a lot to do with stopping things that the community is not particularly upset about, but YouTube and advertisers might be upset about. I think it will directly help stop things like people monetizing movie, song, episode, all those kind of uploads. Because a lot of those accounts will get banned, but will get payouts. And will get payouts based on content that they ripped from someone else. And they might just create a new account and then get paid out on that account, create a new account, get paid out on that account. So I think they're trying to hammer down on that. I don't think it's really gonna solve much else. Another thing that I wanna throw into the ring that some people have brought up is if you have a thousand subscribers, if you have less than a thousand subscribers and less than 4,000 hours of total watch time over the last 12 months, how much were you making? So, okay. This is where we get into the conversation that goes, is this a big deal? Yeah. So it is a big deal in the sense that YouTube is kind of spinning it as a benefit to the community when actually this has, as far as I can tell, everything to do with the blowback that they're getting from advertisers for having that wide open, we're gonna put monetization on everything, then advertisers realizing that the brand was getting, I forgot that part of the history lesson, unfortunately. So advertisers realizing that their brand was getting placed next to content that they found objectionable. Like literally terrorists. Which we've talked about before. And I think this is just follow up on that. And I think that the suicide forest incident has nothing to do with this. Remember, no, it does, it does, but not on the community side. Yeah. What it has to do with is that he was a preferred channel. Yeah. A channel that YouTube specifically goes out there and pitches to advertisers. Like we're a preferred channel. Preferred channels are, to an even greater degree, I would think, expected to abide by the community guidelines. Which, by the way, doesn't necessarily mean that you can't drop a shit bomb in your video occasionally. It's spelled out pretty clearly. I mean, egregious profanity, I believe, is covered in the community guidelines. I'm not sure, I haven't looked at them lately. Egregious is kind of a specific term. It's a very sort of gray area, actually. But, so there are things that are covered. Well, no, it makes it so that probably what you just said isn't gonna get you owned. No. You'd have to go pretty ham. It's still gray, but you'd have to, but I don't know how they'd make it less gray. You know what I mean? So here's the community guidelines. Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Nudity or sexual content, harmful or dangerous content, violent or graphic content, hateful content, harassment and cyberbullying, threats, spanned, misleading metadata and scams, copyright, privacy, impersonation, child endangerment and additional policies. A big issue about all this is like, I can even think off the top of my head of one or more examples that I've seen of at least every single thing in there. Yeah. So, a vulgar language is actually bundled under additional policies right here, and it specifically says here that sexually explicit language or excessive swearing in your video or associated metadata may lead to your video being age restricted. So excessive. So what happened here was, and in this case, I don't even think there's really anything in here. I mean, you could call it graphic content actually. Violent or gory content that's primarily intended to be shocking, sensational or disrespectful. Okay, it's definitely covered there. That's exactly what it is. So anyway, the problem here is that, as far as I can tell, YouTube got yet another round of blowback from advertisers for specifically promoting a channel that blatantly violated their community guidelines, and then the content was just left there, presumably with ads still running on it. And I think if it was dropped super fast, it might've been a different reaction from the advertisers. Yes, and from the community. Yeah. But ultimately, that's what's going on here. The collateral damage is mostly channels that, and YouTube lays this out in their blog post, mostly channels that made less than $2.50 last month. Okay, this is what I was saying. And less than $100 in the last year. If you're relying on that, whoa. Yeah. There is probably other ways that you can make money on the internet easier. We're pretty sure there are, or even we mowed lawns. And that was definitely more profitable than that. We mowed lawns? We sold berries? That wasn't profitable. Yeah. Yeah, anyway. The point is that- You could just go work at the place that- There's a lot of outrage about this, and I'm putting myself, I won't bundle you in with me, but I'm putting myself in a position- I'm on it. To say something kind of unpopular. Yeah. But I actually don't think this is that big of a deal. I'm with you. Because okay, the first thing I did when I read this was like, at the very beginning, before you get really deep into it, I was like, wow. They're screwing over the little guy. Why would they do that? That makes no sense. And then I saw their thresholds and I was like, this isn't gonna make a difference to anyone's major bottom line. So anyone that small, speaking YouTuber to YouTuber, I would recommend you turn off your ads anyway. I was just gonna say, you will get more traction with people and they will share it more and they'll watch more of the video if you turn off the ads anyways, and you'll be seen as a good guy and more people will watch your stuff. Because you gotta understand that there's always a trade-off between monetization, and we'll get into our sponsors for the line show in a moment here. Heck yeah. There's always a trade-off between monetization of your existing audience and audience building. We could upload videos every day that are pure ads and our audience would stop growing. Or we could dial back all of our ads entirely and sponsors and all that stuff, turn off everything, and we could grow faster. And every creator out there is trying to find that happy medium where they are satisfied with their level of growth and they're making good money. When you're making two bucks a month off YouTube, you need to focus on growth. It's probably worth focusing on growth, especially because at that point in time, growth is way harder to get. With all of that said, I'm coming at this from sort of a, maybe not unique, but sort of an unusual angle in that the adpocalypse has not had a significant negative impact on our ad sets. And this is something that I was gonna address at some point, but at the end of the day, you don't get, it's called a fill rate. So the number of impressions that you serve versus the number of ads accompanying those impressions. If you had one ad on every video that you showed to someone. AntVenom just said the same. Oh, interesting. Hi, Ant. So if you had one ad in front of every single video view that you showed someone, say it's a perfect world where nobody has ad block and YouTube's ad sales is like going gangbusters. They can sell more ads than YouTube can serve views, which is like, really? Yeah, yeah. Okay, that would be a 100% fill rate. Now, if YouTube's ad sales program completely shut down and there were no ads, that would be a 0% fill rate. Nobody has a 100% fill rate. So what it means for family-friendly content or non-controversial content is that your fill rate and your CPMs, because you might get access to the more premium ads as a YouTube preferred partner, for example, your fill rate might go up and your CPMs, which is the amount that you get paid per thousand views or per thousand ad views, that can go up too. So our January this year, our viewership will not be higher than it was last year, but through a combination of YouTube Red being more popular and through the adpocalypse, stripping advertising away from many, many, many, many, many, potentially hundreds, hundreds of thousands of very, very, very small channels, that will contribute to a higher fill rate and potentially higher CPM for us. We are actually going to make more in AdSense this January than we did last January, which is good because we have like five more people than we had last January. But that's not anyone else's problem. It's just, if you guys were concerned, like a lot of people do express concern at the way that we hire and the way that we like build sets and buy cameras and all those things. Cops are doing business, you gotta do things. We are, don't worry, we are planning for the future. We're watching all of these trends. These are things that even though we don't necessarily talk about all the time, we have eagle eyes on every day. If you're on something like YouTube and you're not moving, you're screwed. You gotta do some stuff sometimes. And that's another thing I wanna jump back to for the like, if you are a smaller creator, and I'm using the terminology of below a thousand subs and below 4,000 watch hours in the last, what is it? 12 months? I think it's the last 12 months. Yeah, you can't now, but don't monetize. And you might not wanna monetize for a little while. You might eventually get brought into the partner program and you might wanna stay, not monetize. And then when you get there, you will get the benefit of YouTube not paying out a bunch of tiny amounts to a bunch of creators that might never even reach the threshold where they're gonna get a check. Effectively giving YouTube 100% of the ad payout. So this may, oh, that's interesting. This may actually hurt YouTube's bottom line if they are only feeding ads to people who are actually gonna get a payout. I think YouTube right now is way more worried about making advertisers happier so they can get more big bids. Oh, I know, but this just, I don't know. I think in the extremely short run it might hurt it and I think this is a more longer term play. But yeah, I would focus and maybe if you're like, I need to focus on this YouTube thing more, I need to cut back hours at work. That's when you monetize your videos and you just tell your audience that. Hey guys, I'm gonna monetize my videos because I wanna focus more time on making the great content that you guys enjoy of basket weaving with RGB lights. And I'm gonna keep, I'm gonna keep doing it, I'm gonna go hard, I'm gonna spend at least four hours a day weaving these lights together, making sure all the power strips are going all properly and you can have glowing fruit bowls. Yeah, I don't know. Just communicate that to your audience and that will serve you a lot better doing it later on down the line once you have an established core audience because then they won't leave, they'll keep sharing it because they're an established core audience and you can actually survive more properly. Question for you, this was a great question in the chat. I forget who asked it. Would you allow Logan Paul on Float Plane? Would you? I don't know, would you? You're the lead of partner management, whatever. That's true, I am, but I'm curious to know what you think. Knowing what you know, let's say that he goes, you know what, let's say he didn't post an apology that was super sincere. Let's say that he was just like, you know what, no, I'm gonna film dead bodies whenever I come across them. Don't worry about it. You're the public front. Okay, well, you know what? I have an opinion, I'll throw my opinion. I wanna cheat and hear what you have to say first. Sure, no, no, no, no, you already, yeah, you gave away your hand. What, no? Yeah, it hit me with your opinion. Nope. Then you said you have one, you have to do it. I don't really care. Okay. Because in my opinion, how this should all be handled and how I think things in general should all be handled is I don't personally, in my personal morality, whatever, like the idea of the governmental hand coming down and slapping. Okay. I would prefer that he joined the platform, people saw that video, and everyone unsubscribed. And everyone stopped giving us money and stopped giving him money. Here's the lead of partner management answer. The answer is absolutely yes. He would be allowed on the platform because here's the thing about the YouTube community guidelines. So Float Plains guidelines are basically along the lines of legality. Yeah. And there's nothing illegal about walking in that forest and filming something that you saw there. Well, you're not allowed going off trail. I don't think it's illegal. I think it's just there's lots of signs advising you not to. Okay. Yeah. So, as far as I can tell, he didn't actually do anything illegal. Because that's one thing you guys have to understand is when running, sorry, I'm gonna interject for a moment. When running Float Plain, that's one of the reasons why it's its own company. Yes. Is because our opinions and Linus Media Group's opinions don't matter. We're running the platform. I think it's gross. I don't like it either. Not cool with it. Me neither. But that is not my call to make. And if Float Plain's objective is to be the not evil overlord, then ultimately we have to allow, okay, because Float Plain itself is not going to be a broader community in the same sense that YouTube is. Correct. Float Plain will be individual creators with their own communities. And if his community is fine with it, which fascinatingly- Seemed to be. They seemed to be. It wasn't until this went viral and kind of spread beyond his subscribers that people started sitting up and taking notice of how effed up it was. And if his community is cool with it, then ultimately we can just not watch it, not look at it, and kind of hope for the best. And like one thing about Float Plain, if you're subscribed to this dude and you're like, wow, I really don't like that. I don't respect him anymore. I really dislike this content and you don't want to see it in your feed anymore, stop actively giving that person money and it won't show up in your feed anymore ever. Nice timing. Yeah. That was good, hell yeah. Because that's how the platform's done. We aren't gonna make Float, I'm going to actively pursue people coming on the platform and I have that I like and that I respect because I want them to be on the platform. So people are asking if we would advertise it. That's a great question. So Float Plain is not designed with a suggested algorithm. In fact, we do not intend to implement one. Users would have to opt in, they would have to browse creators in order to get suggestions from us. There won't be like a you finish watching a TechQuickie video and then it's like, hey, you might also like tech deals. Here's a sample of tech deals. Go subscribe to tech deals. Totally arbitrary example. We haven't talked to him at all about joining the platform. Sorry, had something in my eye. Anyway. So there's no mechanism for that. So no, we wouldn't have to advertise it. And honestly, if I was in charge of that judgment call, which I'm pretty sure I am, I wouldn't. Yeah. Yeah. And there's, yeah, anyways. So essentially, yeah. Funny, because our opinions don't. Zahey, Zahey, funny enough, TechDeals is a real channel. I didn't know that. Whoa. What? Holy. Huh. It's like you were referencing something really specific, but without even knowing it. How about that? Oh, darn. Okay. Anyway. Okay, you know what? Okay, do you have anything else to add here? No, essentially our opinions won't govern what ends up being on Float Plain. Hopefully our opinions will drive certain people to join because we're like, hey, we like you, will you join? We want to support creators that we feel are doing great stuff. But eventually the door is gonna be somewhat open to creators that join if they want. And yeah. All right. The platform's not live yet, LOL. Speaking of monetization, Squarespace. Yeah. Woo. Squarespace is the place to go if you want to build your own beautiful website. It starts at just 12 bucks a month. You get a free domain if you buy Squarespace for the year. They've got 24 seven support via live chat and email. And all of their gorgeous templates feature responsive design and a ton of other great features, including commerce. Every website comes with a free online store. Cover pages, the ability to set up a beautiful one page online presence in minutes. Their logo designer, the ability to publish content in Apple news format directly from the Squarespace blog module and more. So start a trial with no credit card required and start building your website today. Then when you decide to sign up for Squarespace make sure you use offer code WAN so that they know who sent you and so that Squarespace keeps sponsoring the WAN show. Yeah. Heck yeah. It's helpful. I'm all about being upfront. Let them know. You know? It's like, we're getting paid by Squarespace. Have you thought about doing another honest answers? Why is that not working? I don't know why that's not working. Another honest answers on maybe how AdSense is going right now? Cause everyone has been talking about it. I don't know. I don't know if it's as interesting. Yeah. I don't know. I don't know if it's like. It's not as punchy as some of the other honest answers. Yeah. And I kind of have another one planned about sort of how we handle sponsored content. Cause I think there's been a lot of misunderstandings that people have had. So we've had people get upset about a sponsored review and I kind of look at it and I go, well this didn't say review anywhere in it. It wasn't structured like a review. And we said right up front, by the way, this is sponsored which you should assume whether it's called a review or not that anything sponsored is not a review. So that was something that I kind of wanted to talk about. In my opinion. In, yeah. I think that's the next episode of honest answers that I have planned is how do we handle sponsor relationships? Cause we have a lot of sponsors, Intel, Corsair, AMD, Nvidia, Asus, like the list, MSI, the list goes on razor. The list goes on and on and on of companies that we've worked with. Fresh books. Money has exchanged hands and we cover their products. Even companies that are good at managing the exchange of money. Yes. Like FreshBooks. Yes. So FreshBooks is the super simple to use invoicing tool that actually does a lot more than just help you create and send slick looking invoices. It helps you track your time with their time sheet function, manage your expenses and keep track of who owes you what. It allows you to take payment on your terms including the ability to take deposits. Like let's say if you were a painter, for example and it also has a feature that tells you when your client has seen your invoice for the first time putting an end to the guessing games. There are mobile apps available for Android and iOS have all the functionality of the desktop version. So you can take FreshBooks with you wherever you go. And if you have any questions, you can reach out to their support staff on the phone where you will speak to a real person. No phone tree, no escalations, no return calls, just real honest help. So go to freshbooks.com slash when, whether you're a small time computer repair shop or you run a plumbing business on the side, you teach dance classes, whatever it is you do as a small business owner, a freelancer, FreshBooks can help you focus on doing that instead of pulling your hair out dealing with complicated accounting software. Go to freshbooks.com slash tech tips, excuse me, slash when and enter when in the, how did you hear about a section? There's a 30 day free trial and I'm just going to do this which did that for some reason. I don't know what just happened right there. I'm going to put in an HTTP colon slash slash so that the URL works correctly. And then I'm going to move on to Savage Jerky. I am so sad right now. Where's the box? About this sponsor. I know what's in the box, but where's the box? Look at this, look at this. Here's my notes. Savage Jerky, where is the box of jerky? Did we eat it all? Savage Jerky is so delicious that if Colton doesn't hide the box, if Colton doesn't hide the box in between WAN shows, people find it and they eat it all. Even though they know they're not supposed to eat it because we're supposed to eat it on the WAN show. Savage Jerky is made with the best ingredients without nitrates or preservatives. The goal was to create a snack that's full of flavor and spice, but isn't bad for you. And it normally is when we have the box. I know, 13 different flavors of jerky. My personal favorites are the, what's the, the maple buffalo bacon. Mojo, man. I love the mojo. Mojo's like top tier. The cracked pepper and sea salt. My favorite two both have mojo in the name. The original. Standard mojo and mojo habanero. And they've also got super hot stuff made with like Carolina Reapers, Ghost Peppers, all that kind of stuff. They also make barbecue sauce, hot sauce, and a spice rub. And so their Carolina Reaper hot sauce uses one of the hottest peppers in the world. So go check them out. Use offer code LTT over on Savage Jerky and get 10% off on all of their jerky. Heck yeah. All right. So what else, what else we got here? Oh man. Is this more bad OnePlus news? You gotta be kidding me. Okay. So posted by Walthar on the forum. OnePlus had, it appears to be a credit card breach. Update, January 19th, update number two. Thank you for your comments. We're reading each and every one and we appreciate your feedback. We do wanna clarify, only potentially affected users will receive the email. But in a nutshell, OnePlus has emailed nearly 40,000 of their customers to inform them that their credit card data may have been compromised. Here's what I wanna know. Like we've discussed this because back with Linus Tech Tips, other than subscriptions on the forum, there was no reason for us to ever need people's payment information. One of the reasons. Whoa, hold on, even then we didn't hold it. One of the reasons that we opted for PayPal was that it allowed us to take payments in a recurring fashion without holding the customer's payment information ourselves. Because we don't want that responsibility and why would we need it? We got owned once. Did we? Like remember a long time ago. Oh, that thing. Yeah. And like that was okay. And there was no payment information. And there was no full-time developers on the site and stuff, which is part of the reason why we got owned. But there was no payment information. They didn't get anything. Yes. So I'm looking at this going, like, okay, so right, we've discussed it with Flowplain. We found other solutions. But still on Flowplain, we will hold no payment information. I don't want it. I don't want any of it. I don't want that liability. Screw that. That's horrible. That's horrible. Because then we might have to send out this email. Then the Level One Tax Podcast might be talking about Flowplain Media and their breach of 100,000 customer credit card. I want them to talk about Flowplain Media. Yeah, but not our customer credit card breach. Yeah, no. No, no, no, we don't want that stuff. Other things. That's terrible. Why do they want this? Why are they keeping it? Because who buys from OnePlus in a recurring fashion? Like, are we talking the world's most forgetful people who lose their Dash charger all the time, and they just have like a, you know, oh, wow, a Dash button. And they just have like a OnePlus equivalent of a Dash button to get a new Dash charger. And I'm like, why would they want this? Are those still a thing? I haven't heard about Dash buttons in a long time. Yeah, yeah, they're a thing. I don't know if they work in Canada, though. Oh. So one of their servers was infected with a malicious script affecting the payment page code, collecting credit card info while it was being entered. Oh, okay, so that whole rant was over nothing because it was while it was being entered. It operated intermittently, capturing and sending data directly from the user's browser, and it has since been eliminated. So anyone who entered their credit card on OnePlus.net, wow, that whole rant, I wish we could cut it out. Between mid November 2017 and January 11th, 2018 could be affected. Credit card info, including card numbers, expiry dates and security codes entered. Like what is the point of that security code anymore? When pretty much everyone online makes you enter it. The thing about it is like, you know, that from having worked at a retailer, we don't need it to process. It costs more to process without it. Oh. Yeah. Yeah, baby. Interesting, huh? So that's why every single person takes it. So that's why everyone takes it, even though the whole point of that is supposed to be that it's like a second factor, proving that you have physical access to the card. Anyone who paid via a saved credit card should not be affected. Okay, so that's what you get for saving your credit card on websites, don't do that. And users who paid via the credit card via PayPal method, those won't be affected because their credit card is abstracted through PayPal. No, no, no, they're saying users who paid via a saved credit card should not be affected. Should not be affected, oh, wait. Oh, right, because it's only when you enter it. They're not entering it. Sorry, okay, okay. Why do we even, well, you know what? Why do we even do news? We should just banter, forget it. Yeah. So they're working with payment providers to implement a more secure credit card payment method and they're offering one year of credit monitoring for those affected. That's nice, because that's not cheap. Like I have had to deal with credit card theft before. And me too, very recently. Yeah. Sucked a lot. It's like a big bummer. And then all the accounts that you have auto subscribing are like, everything is canceled. This is posted by AG1233 on the forum. Nintendo announces cardboard Switch controllers. Wait, what? No. A labo for Switch. It's not Switch controllers. Build it yourself, cardboard kits, sorry, excuse me, cardboard kits compatible with Nintendo Switch. So. Okay. Sorta, not a great title. A lot of people in my opinion have been misrepresenting this. You get a game, you get software on the Switch and then you get a cardboard kit to build something that goes along with that game so that you have interesting types of physical interaction with the game. You get a game. Okay. Everyone's like, oh, they're just selling cardboard. No. Okay. So here's an example. You could make a functioning 13 key piano cradle Yeah. Switch console. You make a functioning 13 P piano that cradles the Switch console and the right Joy-Con controller. The IR motion camera and the Joy-Con detects which keys are pressed and plays each note through the console speakers. And there's other stuff. You can take control of your very own motorbike by constructing a functioning set of handlebars with a Joy-Con inserted in each side and the Switch console in the middle. So just to add a caveat here too, you might not be into it and that might be super fair, but so many people are just like, oh, they're just selling cardboard. No, there's games that go with it. I misunderstood. I thought it was a controller in the sense that there was cardboard and stuff, but you just use your Joy-Con and the Switch as the stuff. Got it. Yeah. Okay. Sure. Why not? I mean, I'll confess. I went out there and I bought one of those, one of those steering wheels for the Wii. You should check out, terrible, it's the worst experience. You should check out the, yeah, it's, you should check out the robot one, the robot suit. There's a video for this. That's like really good actually. Robot kit, Nintendo, sure. Let's pull that up. I'm sure we're going to end up with a strike. Should just, oh, oh. Do you not want to watch it? No, no, it's fine. Let's just, let's just do it. You could just YouTube Nintendo Labo. There it is. Nintendo Labo. Okay. Let's pull this, let's pull this baby up. Let's at least mute it for our best chance here. Yeah. So this beginning bit is them just printing, it's a little bit further in. So there's a fishing reel there. Here's the, oh wow. Oh wow. Oh wow. Here's the key. Hashtag flow plane. There's the piano. Yeah. There's a house thing. I don't know what that does. Yeah. There's, oh, it just like vibrates and runs around. Okay. It's like those little toys. Adorable. That's the motorcycle thing. This is a fishing rod. I believe this one's available now. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. So yeah, you actually have to like reel in and like fight with the fish. I don't know. I don't understand what the house does. I never understood that part. Lagging. Where's the robot one though? Cause it's crazy. It's before this. It's somewhere around here. Is this it? This is it. Okay. Oh, I think you're slightly past it. Yeah. Yeah. You're slightly past it. Okay. You know what? Okay. Forget it. It's cool, right? Here's a guy. There's part of the backpack thing. Yeah. You want to see when she takes the thing off the back. So yeah, hold up. Shotgun. Yeah. There. Okay. Oh, but you don't get to see the construction part. Wait, wait, let it go. Let it go. Let it go. I already watched this part. Cause she takes off the back and it shows you how it works. No, no, no, no, no. Just wait. Just wait. Yeah. Okay. Okay. Cool. So he has a Joy-Con on each of his ankles and he has a Joy-Con in each of his hands and they're connected by strings through that box on the back and those switches go up and down. So it knows he's moving and his movement in real life goes into the game. It has four points of, it's actually kind of cool. It's kind of cool. They're all mini games. Hopefully VR gets better and cheaper enough that we can just do it that way pretty soon. But I guess this is a- So that's one of the criticisms that I think is relatively valid is it shows the two kits there at the end. They're like 69 and $79. So 70 and $80. And I believe the games that are gonna come with it are gonna be pretty mini gamey. Right. Whereas they could have done a lot more with it, but then we also don't know what the games are like. Sure. So there could be more to it. I suspect the piano one is just gonna be a piano that you can key into. I don't think there's gonna be like mini, like a lot of mini games with it and stuff, but we'll see. So last topic, we had a lot of people really upset with us about one of the videos we posted at CES where we said there was an undisclosed number of cores in a laptop. Why do we get flack for that? We got flack for that because people were like, well, here, there was a comment that, where did I see it? I like just saw it again. Someone in the chat. Maybe on the floor or something. You're paying $70 for cardboard? Oh my God. I'm gonna have an aneurysm. An aneurysm. The software. Anyway, someone was really upset. They're like, if it's too embargoed to say how many, then you just shouldn't post it. And I'm like, what? Would you not get excited about like cool unreleased tech? Anyway, in unrelated news, there's a rumor on chiphell.com that Intel will be bringing six core processors to mobile. Six core, 12 thread processors. Word on the street is that we're gonna see an i5-8300H all the way to 8850H. And that would be a 2.6 base, 4.3 boost. Oh, wait, sorry. Oh, this is, wow. This is really unclear. Apparently there may also be, what, an i9HK? What? That does up to 4.8 boost? Six core, 12 thread? Sick. Wow. That sounds awesome. All right. Cool. So this is Coffee Lake H. And that was it. Not that I saw anything. In unrelated news, did we talk about the Apple thing? I don't think so. Which one? At the very top. I don't remember. And the Samsung thing. Yeah, that's kind of boring. Faster memory and Apple's bringing some money back over to the States. Because the States was like, new laws on taxes. And they were like, okay. Leo Laporte's company is suing Twitter. Oh. Because apparently they reached an agreement back in like 2009. Because Leo Laporte was concerned that Twitter was going to start serving audio visual content. And that their trademarks were too similar. And that Twit was audio visual. So he was like, well, we can coexist as long as you guys don't serve audio visual content. But then now Twitter serves video. So he's suing Twitter. So that's interesting. I really do wonder where that lawsuit goes. Because. Isn't it an acronym for This Week in Tech? Not a word. But it doesn't matter. Because the trademark Twit is theirs. So yeah, I mean, I don't personally think that most people even know what Twit is. But. I mean, if you're on, I believe Air Canada flights and you go to the podcast section. Wow. I believe there is a Leo Laporte thing about something. The savagery is real. Yeah. And on that note, thank you for watching. We will see you guys again next week. Same Bats time, same Bats channel. He does have a fair point though. Like they did agree not to do it. And they are doing it. So I don't know where this is going. Especially if there's an agreement between them. I don't know where this is going, man. He probably has a lot of clout. But then Twitter might just have enough money to just be like, no go away. Or maybe they don't. I don't know. Depends. I don't think they make money. Yeah, they don't make money. So it depends if someone will give them money to give to, anyway. Yeah. Bye. But yeah, I think because he has an agreement, he's gonna get something. I think it's kind of ludicrous that that's a thing at all. But he has an agreement. So, cool. Apparently I always look like I'm having a really bad time doing this. I like the WAN Show. I don't think you do. I think you do. I'm enjoying WAN Show. I want us to talk about Meltdown. You guys talked about it the other week, right? Oh, like AMD getting sued? Yeah, I mean. Yeah, it was one of our topics. It's related to that thing that I brought up the last time. Yeah. But now AMD. No, like actually. Oh. Oh, okay. Yeah. Oh. Well, maybe next week. Bye.