Google Stays with Chrome | Tech Field Day News Rundown: September 10, 2025

Atlassian in the cloud at last T-Mobile's, Skyhigh wifi under the red c Salesforce's lofty hack. Cisco and Vast are gonna team up is Midjourney at an end and we take a closer look at Google's shiny new Chrome case in this episode of the Tech Field Day rundown. Hello everyone and welcome to the rundown for September the 10th.

My name is Tom Hollingsworth and I hope you're enjoying some Turkey and what are allegedly croutons for lunch because it's national TV dinner day. That's right. All of your friends at Swanson would like to remind you that those are in fact croutons.

If there was ever any doubt in your mind, uh, what there is no doubt in my mind about is the wonderful thing that we have going on today. We call the rundown. Uh, it is also National Swap Ideas Day.

I didn't swap any ideas though I swapped my co-host this week because the al's out at uh, AI Infrastructure Field Day. But joining me instead is Mr. Ned Bevan.

Ned, welcome back to the show. Oh, thank you Tom. It's great to be here.

And I had no idea that those were croutons and they sure don't eat like it. Yeah, I think that's the thing, is it it according to the package, they are, but according to my taste buds, they are in fact not. And uh, the other thing that I wanna make that everybody knows is that the stories that we have are probably even crunchier than those croutons because they are some of the highest quality pieces of news that we could find this week.

And I want to jump in and talk about everyone's favorite company Atlassian, because they've announced that they're retiring their data center products. Yes, that includes Jira, confluence, and Bamboo in favor of something they're gonna be calling Atlassian Cloud with Bitbucket, of course being exception through a hybrid license because of some very sensitive, so source code issues. Sales of new data center subscriptions end in March of 2026.

Your existing licenses will be expired in 2028 and everything is gonna be done by 2029. So there's your signpost folks. Get it done soon.

Organizations can migrate using self service tools for smaller teams or using the fast shift program for larger ones. Some customers, particularly those pesky US government users that have something that they are supposed to comply with called FedRAMP are gonna face a lot more challenges. Atlassian, of course, highlights potential cost savings with the cloud.

If you talk to experts though, they're gonna say that most customers could see up to 28% or more on an increase. The announcement has of course, frustrated users who previously transitioned from server to data center and now they're gonna have to migrate to the cloud again. Ned, do you think ending this in favor of doing cloud stuff is going to be a boon for Atlassian?

Or do you think customers are gonna get mad? Yes and yes. Yeah, I mean, like you said, they'd already end of life to their server offering in favor of data center.

And it was really just a matter of time till they also end of Life Data Center. They were clearly moving to a cloud only model. And their claim is that currently almost every customer, new customer, they get signs up for cloud only.

So obviously that's what everybody wants. There are two big benefits that Atlassian gets out of this. The first one is a vastly simpler support model.

They no longer have to maintain a version of the software that runs on-prem and deal with all the weirdness that people have in their on-premises environment. So that's a big boon to them. I think it's something that Microsoft would love to copy with their, uh, exchange software.

They'd love to stop supporting that on-prem and they probably will at some point. The other thing they can do is charge more for features nobody wants. And that's a pretty common tactic across all of the SaaS companies that are out there.

And now that they'll have everyone locked in to the cloud only platform, they can force whatever features they want on those people and say, Hey, we're charging an extra $2 for our new AI widget, whatever that widget might be. I look through some of the subreddits for Atlassian. People are not happy about this predictably.

Some were talking about the fact that they literally just finished a migration from server to data center and now they are going to have to undertake that migration all over again. And if that's the case, maybe it's easier to migrate to a completely different platform. But I think all Atlassian has to do is make the migration to their cloud platform slightly less painful than migrating to another product.

And people are just going to deal with the change. The big question is, can they support FedRAMP? They're promising to have an Atlassian government cloud available in the near future.

We'll see how that goes. That is, um, easier said than done. Let's say Southwest Airlines and T-Mobile announced a partnership to offer free unlimited wifi for all Southwest Rapid Rewards members starting October 24th, 2025.

Ooh, so close to my birthday. Not they know they could gimme a present. Southwest will become the largest US airline to provide free wifi on every flight available to all members regardless of their wireless carrier.

Both companies emphasize their commitment to customer experience with Southwest investing in reliable in-flight connectivity and T-Mobile expanding its history of free in-flight services to millions more travelers. Customers can sign up for a free rapid rewards account before or during their flight to access the benefit, no word on whether they need to queue up in line to see who gets the best wifi first. Do you have some thoughts on this, Tom?

Uh, we're way past that down, Ned. We don't do that. We're like everybody else.

We get on the plane and 19 boarding groups. And if you're double elite super unobtainium, you get to go on first. And all Southwest people that I I talk to are, are cringing a little bit right now.

Um, I I actually welcome this. Uh, one of the reasons why is because I am now of the belief that wi free wifi should be something that is being offered as a perk to get people to wanna use your airline. For those who are not familiar, um, a-list preferred, uh, status members and above have already had the opportunity to get free wifi on planes.

This effectively is saying T-Mobile is paying to allow a-list, which is their, their first tier of status to get, um, uh, free wifi. Uh, yes, it's available to all rapid rewards members. Why would they want to do that?

Oh wait, I know they want to collect all your information. Yeah, so, so you guys know that that's, that's the reason why they want you to sign up for the account, right? Is because they wanna be able to track you and to be able to do all these things.

Because it turns out that most people who fly Southwest don't have a status program that they belong to because up until about six months ago, they didn't care because they were using Southwest as a low cost carrier. They're not Frontier and they're not, uh, you know, um, oh Spirit. Uh, they are slightly better than that.

They're Spirit Plus, or at least they were. And now Elliot Capital Management, the bane of everybody's existence, uh, believes that they should be more than that. But the problem is, is that in order for that to happen, Elliot either needs to nickel and dime everybody to death, or they need to create value somewhere.

Well, how would I do that? I know I'll get T-Mobile to pay us a small fortune to be able to offer free wifi. And because you have to have a rapid rewards account to be able to access it, we're gonna be able to collect data and send you ads through the portal and email you stuff all the time.

Oh wait, that's right. I just booked a Southwest flight today and whenever I clicked finish, I got one of those fun little post-purchase prop popups. Hey, would you like to try two free months of clear on us?

Hey, do you know that you can get 50% off of a Sam's Club membership? Folks, the handwriting's on the wall and it has nothing to do with free wifi. It has everything to do with Southwest continuing to try to, to create customer stickiness in order to get people to stay with them because they're starting to see the customers are leaving.

Those of us who have been flying Southwest for a very long time or who have a corporate mandate to use Southwest, I don't know that things are gonna change. I do like the fact that I can now check my wifi, but the problem is, is now that everybody else on the plane can check their wifi, they're gonna have to do a little bit more on upgrading those things. So we'll see what happens.

But until then, bring me, uh, the non peanut snacks and a ginger ale and I'll be ready to go. Undersea cable breaks in the Red Sea disrupted internet traffic in the Middle East and South Asia, slowing some of Microsoft Azure and other services on Asia to Europe routes. Microsoft was able to reroute traffic to keep their services online, but higher latency could continue until repairs on the key cables are finished.

That could take a few weeks while the cause is unclear. Similar incidents have happened before. And if you know that Red Sea area, you can probably guess where those cable breaks happen.

Most businesses aren't heavily affected, but if you're one of those companies that has latency sensitive services, you should probably check on your systems. They're not okay. This event underscores the importance of network redundancy to keep the internet running during outages, but I think as we've talked about in the past, it also underscores the fact that some of our infrastructure is uniquely vulnerable to anchors being dragged across the sea floor or, um, unfriendly people in certain countries deciding to just destroy those cables.

Ned, do you think Azure could survive a hit like this again? Or do they need to get that thing fixed really quick? I think they absolutely need to get it fixed pretty quick.

But Microsoft, along with the other major cloud providers have built out their own backbone of fiber all across the world. So they could probably stand to lose a few more cables and still be okay routing traffic. But I think you bring up a good point.

The fact that it does increase latency because now your packet, instead of going to point A to B is now gonna go to point A, C, D, F, G, and then maybe B. So it does have to pass through a lot more routers and in effect travel farther than it did before. And when everybody has to do that, the overall latency of the internet suffers.

That's the sort of thing you can see on net blocks. Who confirmed the outages initially that happened, uh, impacting Microsoft as well as everybody else who was using those cables. Now Microsoft does have some cables that are private to itself, and in those cases, if that cable breaks, it only impacts Microsoft, but it's gonna have to route that traffic somewhere and that somewhere might end up being the dumping ground of the public internet.

So being aware of that and having regional presences that won't get disrupted if your cross region traffic gets cut off or is highly latent. And also having edge presences might be something that you might want to look into as a company, especially if you have satellite offices or customers that are remote to you. And especially around this region.

Having an edge data center that's close by that's not affected by a cable cut like this would probably be a wise investment moving right along in August. Google's threat intelligence group reported that a hacker group known as UNC 63 95 stole OAuth tokens from the SalesLoft Drift apps Salesforce integration to bypass authentication, including MFA. Ooh, that's not good.

And they used it to extract large amounts of data from hundreds of Salesforce customers. That's worse. The attackers deleted query job records to hide their activity and targeted sensitive credentials such as AWS Keys, passwords, and snowflake tokens with the stolen data.

But of course, everybody is using dynamic credentials these days that expire after a few minutes or hours, Right? Tom? Ha ha ha.

No, no, that's not the case at all. Uh, also props to the, uh, the hacking group for almost being the USS Thunder, thunder child from Star Trek. You, your, your registration number was almost there.

I I don't actually know what you were going for on it. Um, this is going to be the biggest, uh, area that we're gonna start seeing. A lot of these, uh, breaches happening in is not kicking in the front door.

It's tailing the, uh, contractors in through the smoker store, if you will. Um, one of the things that we saw with the Snowflake problems is that a lot of companies were having data breaches. And I use the Quo fingers there because what was actually occurring was, is that Snowflake wasn't secured, right?

Well then it was not incumbent upon these companies to, uh, you know, secure themselves 'cause they couldn't because it was Snowflake that was causing the problem. So now what we've got is a third party add-on to Salesforce that was breached, that was able to connect back into the system and start harvesting this data. And yeah, this is one of the things that we know that these companies love.

Things like, uh, you know, AWS uh, API, keys, uh, passwords, any kind of tokens, I mean, I used a token harvesting attack to get in. Those are very valuable because even if they are following practices and expiring them quickly, it does not take me long to get a foothold. In fact, as we learned at, uh, one of the presentations all the way back at security Field day one from CyberArk, um, if you accidentally paste an A-W-S-A-P-I key into the wild, anywhere on GitHub or anything like that, just assume it's compromised because those things are gone almost instantaneously.

And that's what we're probably gonna be seeing here, is that a lot of these tokens are gonna be attempted to be reuse. Don't assume that these things are valid, just expire them and move on. But I will tell you the reason why I know this is a thing, is because a friend of mine sent me a text message and it basically said, this was my weekend.

How was yours? And it was dealing with the fallout from this because all of these systems being as tightly integrated as they are, whether it is, you know, upselling them into a new license class or my other favorite thing, uh, hey, let's, uh, let's see what AI can do with all of this. We just need access to the entire system to be able to munch all this data.

Uh, we're now starting to see the limits because if, uh, if your AI agents can go do this, guess what else can too? The secret dirty KGB agents of the attackers or something like that. So, uh, change your passwords, expire all your tokens, um, uh, do not pass.

Go trade all your tickets in it, chuck the cheese, whatever you've gotta do, just go out there and fix this because your life will be significantly less miserable if you do. My friends over at Cisco are partnering with Vast Data and NVIDIA to make it easier for IT teams to run AI applications at scale. By adding Vasts Insight engine and shared everything storage to Cisco AI pods with Nvidia GPUs, the platform enables fast real-time data access for advanced AI agents.

Of course, this is what helps organizations standardize their AI infrastructure, but challenges like legacy systems, skill gaps and high costs still remain that's gonna be pushing IT leaders to balance cloud fees with a new expense of on-premises hardware. Ned, I know that you have probably immersed yourself in all of the wonder that is ai, but I have a question. Will being able to add these features to AI Pods really encourage people to start investigating ai or is this just another thing that a few people wanted and they figured they'd put it on the truck?

Hmm, good question. I'm not sure. I'll ask chat GPT and let you know.

Seriously though, I think that if you are an enterprise that's championing, championing, that's a word, AI right now, one of the things that you're trying to do is supplement the existing models with the information that exists inside your organization. And that's usually done through RAG or retrieval augmented generation. That is something that makes AI notoriously data hungry.

It wants to vacuum up all these data sources, but it can't, you can't just point it at a file share or a database or a repository of objects and say, go look through all this and tell me what you find. It actually needs to transform that data into something that AI is able to incorporate into its existing model. And that's done through Vector databases.

What Vast is offering here is not just a storage platform, but also the data pipelines to do that transformation of structured and unstructured data into vectorized databases that can then be incorporated into the AI model. And so it's this tight coupling between vasts storage, its operating system, they call it an AI operating system. And its insight engine tying back into the GPUs, the Nvidia GPUs that are gonna be inside these UCS chassis supplied by Cisco.

So I think Vast is the, is the secret sauce here. I'm not gonna say that Cisco doesn't make cool hardware 'cause they do, but it's really like Nvidia and Vast and Cisco supplying the box that they get to party in. That's what we're looking at here.

If you're in the market for this integration of your enterprise data into AI models to try to surface some additional intelligence or something along those lines, this might be very attractive to you, especially if you're already a Cisco customer. Dell and HP already have similar products that implement similar features and I think the big thing is probably the GPU and and the storage and less so the compute that sits behind it. Warner Brothers, speaking of ai, Warner Brothers has sued Midjourney joining Disney and Universal in accusing the AI company of profiting from image models that generate copyrighted characters.

The complaint claims midjourney let users recreate characters like Superman, Batman, wonder Woman, Scooby-Doo, bugs Bunny and Rick and Morty in any scene violating their intellectual property rights. No word about scrappy do though Warner Brothers argues that Midjourney knowingly removed copyright protections, continues to produce countless infringing images and must face a permanent injunction injunction to stop the studio also seeks profits Midjourney allegedly earned by exploiting its characters following the infringements, intentional and ongoing. As someone who has managed to use various AI tools to create copyrighted material, this is definitely a thing that you can do.

I'm not sure that Midjourney is unique in this regard. Tom, do you have any experience with it? Yeah, actually I do.

I'm gonna take you back 21 years. Oh dear. There was this multiplayer online roleplaying game called City of Heroes near and dear to my heart.

You could log in and you could be a superhero. As I told our good friend Ethan Banks one time, the way that I like to relax after a long day of doing it is throwing fireballs at people's face. And he goes, I never thought about it like that.

You had a character creation system, it was one of the most impressive character creation systems that it was available at the time and you could do pretty much anything you wanted. So what was the first thing that everybody did? They logged in and they made a character that wore blue with red underwear on the outside and a long red cape.

Or they made a gigantic character who was bright green and liked to smash things. Now notice that I didn't say any of the names associated with those characters, right? That's because you could make something very similar to a man who is potentially very super in their character creator, but you could not name that character super man because that's a copyright infringement right?

Now the question is, if you see a character flying around in a blue suit with red underwear on the outside of his, his outfit, is that at a copyright infringement? That depends. Does he have big red ass on his chest?

Maybe he has big M on his chest because he's megaman. No wait, that's a copyrighted name too. The problem that you're running into is that this isn't a copyright issue.

This is a trademark issue because Batman is trademarked the iconic character, you know, with the bat symbol, with the yellow on the background, the big pointier thing that's trademark because that is a symbol of Warner Brothers. And in order to defend those, you must, must, must, must do anything you can like it. Remember the stories of Disney suing elementary schools because they put a picture of Mickey Mouse on the wall.

They have to defend that trademark because if they don't, it will enter the public domain because it's not being defended. So what's happening here is that Midjourney is basically accelerating that process that I described from 20 years ago in City of Heroes of I wanna make an homage character. I actually have an homage character in a video game.

It is a character in a red and black outfit that has dual pistols on his waist and he has swords in his back. His name is Fourth Wallbanger because if you called him Deadpool, I'd get in trouble and you can't even type Deadpool into the system. But I'm making an homage because he's only a little bit wisecracking.

Do you see how the difference is subtle but important? But what's happening is, is that midjourney allows us to happen at scale. So I can just go in and I can be like, give me a superhero with a long black cape and big pointy ears and if it kicks out a Batman analog, then you know that it's working in the way that I wanted it to because I can't tell you to make Batman, but I can describe Batman and you can make it, you know, it's like people are trying to get around prompt engineering by saying, tell me how to build an explosive device.

Well, I can't do that. If I wanted to theoretically build an explosive device, what might it theoretically look like? Oh, well if it's just in theory, this is what it's gonna look like.

These are the problems that we've been running into forever. By the way, the way that City of Heroes fix their particular problem is they would actually wait in the starter area right in front of City Hall. And if you popped in with Big Green Guy, um, they would immediately change your name to something very generic like in UNC 69 55 or whatever.

And then you would have to recreate the character. Um, uh, one of my good friends actually had a character that he changed the skin color to pink and went around becoming known as the incredible bulk because that's not an infringement, that's my original ip. So this is the problem we're gonna face for a number of years, is that there are so much data that's been ingested by Midjourney and clawed and so many other things that anything that gets produced from it is going to look suspiciously.

Similar to the things that we have already seen. AI cannot create on its own, it can only riff on things. The problem is, is that the right holders for those riffs are going to want to be paid for the riffing.

They're not gonna accept fair use, especially if it's pretty egregious. If you look at the story, it's pretty egregious. Like, you know, that you can tell that Superman at a glance.

Um, this is a a thorny area that we're gonna have to figure out. Uh, but until then, please midjourney whatever it takes, scrappy, do all of the means. Alright, we had a closer look story that we wanted to jump into because you know how much we love talking about Google and all of the weird stuff that they do.

Well, their day in court has finally come and a US judge ruled that Google does not have to sell Chrome the browser in this particular antitrust case, but that's about the only thing they want on because Google must end up sharing some of its exclusive deals. Um, and by sharing them, I mean end them. And then they also have to share parts of the search data with rivals across the board.

Now, the reason why this is considered a win is because it means that the Department of Justice did not not break up Google. Like everybody was thinking that they might. Mm-hmm.

Um, it kept the core business intact. They allowed, they were allowed to keep Chrome and wouldn't, you know, it it boosted alphabet stock price. Go figure.

I'm shocked. Um, I wanted to dive into this one with you Ned, because I know that we talk a lot about kind of how Google is basically have a stranglehold on the internet today. Um, a lot of people wanted Google to sell Chrome.

I think that that was the wrong remedy for the particular situation. The judge in this case actually did dive into a lot of topics very closely and I was wondering if maybe you could kind of give us your take on it 'cause I have some thoughts, but I wanna hear what you have to say first. Yeah, I mean Google was found guilty of having a monopoly over advertising and search.

That was the, the finding from last year, I think sometime in August of 2024. And so now it was up to what's the remedy? What should we do about that?

And a lot of people including the Department of Justice were pushing that Google have to divest from Chrome and Chromium and also potentially Android. The judge who was looking over what we should actually do said, while that is a potential remedy, they did not feel that it was necessary and that it would have the intended effect of breaking up Google's monopoly and allowing other entrants into the search. Although search is driven through Chrome and Google does set up Google search engine as the default search engine on Chrome, forcing them to divest from Chrome wouldn't necessarily change that fact.

And it would also force a worse user experience on the customers who are using Chrome today. And generally the yardstick that's been used for Monopoly is what is the impact to customers, not the market as a whole. If you're negatively impacting customers by the presence of your monopoly, then then something needs to change.

But if you have a nice monopoly and your customers are doing great, then the Department of Justice has mostly turned a blind eye to it. And so the finding was stripping them of Chrome that's not gonna do anything in terms of this monopoly. Instead they went for other remedies like barring them from having exclusive arrangements for search and advertising.

Now that doesn't mean that Google is barred from making payments or offering other consideration to their distribution partners or even preloading the placement of their Google search. They're still able to do all of that. It just can't be exclusive in the contract.

It can be exclusive in practice, but it won't be exclusive in the contract. Do I think that this is enough to actually end Google's monopoly on search? Not even close.

I don't think anything that they're doing in this decision is actually going to materially hurt Google in the long term because it has extended such a lead in terms of search monopoly. There would have to be a sea change for that to occur. And I'm curious what your thoughts are on what would actually need to be, need to happen as a remedy for this situation.

I think the judge realized that the remedy to fix Google searching problems is already happening and she can't do anything about it or he can't do anything about it. I forget who, who the judge in this case was. So I absolutely agree with you.

Chrome is not the problem. Chrome is the most visible, um, expression of what goes on because we use it all the time. But I see this problem on Firefox, on Safari, on edge, whatever The problem is not that Google has control of the browser, the problem is is that the browser effectively uses Google services for everything else, right?

Gmail, search, web ai, there's your problem. The way to unseat Google is the king of search is not to break up their monopoly. It's to find a different way to search.

'cause if you go back in time long enough, Google was not the king of search. I have used Alta Vista, I've used Ask Genes, I've used tons of things. What ended up happening was is that Google got better than all of them.

It was only when Google was in the front that had decided to use that power for their own ends. The only way to break that is to find a different paradigm, a sea change, if you will. And I think that's what AI is because that's one of the reasons why Google is scared right now.

They're seeing dropping ad revenues because people aren't clicking six pages deep into a Google search anymore. They're not even clicking on it. They're going to that box and saying, typing in their question.

And AI is returning the result at the top. So nobody sees these ads, nobody sees this product placement. And the judge said, well, I'm not gonna slap your hands for paying $20 billion to be the default search engine for an iPhone.

What I'm gonna say is, is that that can only be the case if you continue to pay. There has to be a way for other people to be a part of that. And I'm gonna try to level the playing field.

This goes back to a story we talked about, uh, it was either last week or the week before where uh, a certain um, uh, rocket ship maker and electric car manufacturer was very mad that, um, oh, his competitor AI Pro platform was the one that was the default in iOS. And my response was, well then why aren't you paying to be on the list? That's basically what they're saying is you can be on the list if you're willing to pay.

And if you remember from my rant from back then, my rant was Internet Explorer in and of itself was a really crappy browser. It just so happened it was on the desktop in Windows 98. That's why it became the dominant browser.

When you had to go out and download Netscape Navigator by using Internet Explorer to find it, it kind of became a no brainer. One of the reasons why I still use Safari on my Mac is because it's included in the operating system. Yeah, I use Chrome for a lot of other things too, but I am a person who's gonna switch back and forth to use what I need.

Most people don't. They pick one and they go with it. When I install my mother-in-law's computer for the 45th time, I'm gonna put Chrome on it because it's what she's familiar with.

Google is not the enemy. What Google did to the services on the backend is the problem. And like you said, monopolies are only useful if they benefit society.

Google monopolizing ads, you can argue it didn't really benefit society, but you can't break that up legally. The legal remedy just means they're gonna find a way to transform what they're doing. And then the two pieces are gonna become competing companies that are just gonna get bought again later.

Don't believe me. How many phone companies do we have in the US right now? How many phone companies do we have in the US In 1982, all of the baby bells are reassembling to become Bell Voltron again and Ma Bell is getting back together sooner or later because that's how all of these things work.

That is how capitalism works. We reward the people who find the best way to make the most money and Google did. And now everybody's mad because they don't have $20 billion to pay Apple or Google to be the top search engine result.

So I don't know how we're gonna fix this, but I also don't know that it needs to be fixed because the paradigm shift is happening as as we speak. And I think AI is the way that is. That whole thing is gonna be broken up.

I think the problem with the monopoly was they didn't really address the core issue is the fact that Google owns both sides of the ad business. There's the selling ads to those who want to present them, and then there's the presentation of ads. The, the auction that happens every time a page loads that has Google ads on it.

Those are two separate products, two separate offerings. They used to be separate companies that Google bought and brought in house and then they were able to set up this agreement between the two businesses basically locking everybody in and punching those who tried to go outside of their walled garden. I think the Department of Justice could have forced Google to break up those two portions of the business and saying these two portions now need to spin off and become their own distinct organizations.

Kinda like breaking up Ma Bell into the baby bells. It would've been extremely disruptive and the court basically said breaking up or hurting Google might harm customers. And since the court cannot predict the future, it is opposed to making these sweeping changes that would disrupt the the market, which is still currently a monopoly.

So if you think monopolies are bad, then the court didn't go far enough because it failed to break up the monopoly. If your perspective is, are customers going to be more hurt by this disruption in the short term? I say probably would there be a bigger benefit in the long term?

I can't say for sure, but I generally don't think monopolies are good for capitalism, the free market or for customer experiences over the longer tail of, of a particular service. Fortunately, I think you're right. Slowly we're gonna see search replaced by Gen AI once it gets at least a little bit better and the way that they choose to serve up ads is going to have to change along with it.

Right now chat GPT doesn't serve me up ads. There's good they'll they will find a way to monetize it, but right now it does not. And I'm one of those weirdos who pays to uh, coy for my searching.

So I'm actually paying for a search product anyway. So I don't see the Google ads as much, but I think yeah, Google's gonna have to fundamentally shift the way that they make money within the next 10 to 15 years. But it's gonna be a slow shift as the new generation comes into its own and adopts these other ways of searching the internet for whatever it needs.

I think we're gonna be talking about this story for a few more months to come 'cause we haven't heard the end of this now, but you also haven't heard the end of Tech Field day yet either, because as I mentioned at the top of the show, my regular co-host, Mr. Alistair Cook, is out in Silicon Valley right now doing AI infrastructure Field Day. com for the next couple of days to learn all about the cool stuff that he's talking about.

Then you get to hear from me in just a couple of weeks because I'm gonna be out in Silicon Valley doing Security Field Day. We have a great lineup of presenters including first time presenters, one password and Square x. Make sure you head over to Tech build do com to see a lineup of who's gonna be a part of that.

Then I have a special event coming up on October the ninth. We're gonna be doing a special exclusive event with Microsoft where we're gonna be doing a virtual discussion about Microsoft Sentinel, which is, uh, you know, exciting, uh, security, kind of focused in the cloud, doing some other cool stuff. Um, they're gonna be talking about it on September 30th at one of their events and then we're gonna get them the next week to talk more about it.

So make sure you stay tuned and be ready for that. Then Cloud Field Day is taking place October 22nd and 23rd. Um, Alistair's gonna be talking to some great cloud companies and having a lot of fun.

And then at the end of the month, get your costumes ready and all of those spooky things because Steven is gonna be talking AI at AI Field Day on October 29th and 30th and I can't wait to see what he has in store for that. I'm sure it's going to be scary. We're not scary though because we're always here for you on the rundown and we wanna thank you very much for watching today.

Catch our episodes every Wednesday on YouTube on our website if you wanna read the show notes or in your favorite podcast application of Choice. The rundown is also being streamed on Techstrong tv and you can catch us on other Techstrong or future group programs. I'm now happy to say that I'm gonna be on Techstrong gang, uh, offering my perspective on things and maybe an opinion here or there.

You you never know. Uh, don't worry about us though. We're gonna be back next Wednesday with all of the great IT news that happened in the past week Until then for myself, Tom Hollingsworth Al Cook, and for Ned Bevan today, thank you very much for tuning in.

We sincerely appreciate it and we hope that everyone of you out there has a great time, has almost a great time as we had making the rundown today. We'll see you next.