Just as some songs have parental advisory stickers, some songs are calling for a new system to tag AI-generated songs.
How will songs be tagged correctly? And how can the process be uniformly implemented?
You could say that staying cool this summer has been a hot topic. Air conditioning has the potential to save lives, but it also accounts for nearly 10% of global energy usage.
We’ll learn how passive cooling techniques can be used to reduce heat in buildings without using energy.
The Federal Communications Commission, just issued a new ruling against "advanced robotic devices.” This includes most robot vacuums. The ruling might affect the popular company, iRobot that makes the Roomba.
We’ll also hear about new open design headphones, Spotify’s running mode and some new emojis.
It's all coming up on this week's Tech Tuesday.
Guests:
- Kristin Robinson, senior writer, Billboard
- Mat Santamouris, architecture professor, University of New South Wales
- Russell Holly, director of commerce content, CNET
Transcript
This transcript is generated with AI. To ensure its accuracy, review the audio file.
Amy Juravich: Welcome to Tech Tuesday from All Sides with Amy Juravich. This is a show where we share stories about science, technology, and the future of our environment. Just as some songs have parental advisories, stakeholders in the recorded music industry are calling for a new system to tag fully and partially AI-generated songs. How will songs be tagged correctly and how can the process be uniformly implemented among the different streaming platforms? Joining us now to talk about AI labels on songs, we have Kristin Robinson, senior writer at Billboard. Welcome to All Sides, Kristin. Thanks for having me. So first off, who is behind this initiative? Who wants the AI label?
Kristin Robinson: OK, so this is the recorded music industry, which means the record labels. So all the big record labels are supporting this, and it's really coming from them. And so far, we haven't really heard much from them, so this why it became such a hot topic in the music industry over the last couple weeks.
Juravich: And when you say you haven't heard much from them, you mean you haven't t heard much from them on AI, is that what you mean?
Robinson: You know, the major music companies have been pursuing litigation against some of the big AI music generators. Suno and Udio are two of the biggest players, and they have been sued by the three major music companies. But we haven't heard much about what the labels specifically would like to see happen on streaming services. Streaming services have been the ones that have been most vocal about trying to figure out, what do we do when AI music inevitably does end up on something like Spotify or Apple Music?
Juravich: How much AI music is there out there? I mean, do we even know?
Robinson: It's hard to know, but we do have some ways of trying to piece together how much is out there. Deezer is a French streaming service. They have been very vocal about AI on their platform, and they recently reported – this is very shocking – that as of peak levels in June, as much as about 50% of daily uploads to their platform have been fully AI generated songs.
Juravich: Um, and then, you know, I was like, wait, half? Oh no. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, yeah.
Robinson: And I mean, I will say that every single day, there's a different number of songs that are uploaded. And it varies a little bit. But the deluge of songs are uploaded to streaming services already is a huge number. It's over 100,000 apparently. So this is a lot of music, and a lot of it is apparently AI now.
Juravich: So, okay, so if the music's not coming from a major record label and it's just a random person uploading music, in the past we would have just thought, you know, people are making music. But now we have to like look at it with a side eye and say, when people are making music, it could be AI. Is that what you mean? Yeah.
Robinson: Yeah, I mean, the problem is a lot of this AI music is coming from those independent distributors here, the places where DIY upstarts, people with big dreams about uploading music. The AI music is coming through those channels, but you don't want to shut down those channels and eliminate the possibility of having an independent artist get their first shot and upload their first song to Spotify. So it's been a really hard issue for everyone to figure out, how do we make sure that everyone can still upload their music to streaming services Well, also... Maybe curbing some AI music. But then there's also debate over, does it even matter if something is made with AI?
Juravich: So, yes, okay. Very complicated. Do some streaming services already have an AI label? Because you're seeing now more and more Instagram videos where you have that little thing at the top that says AI generated, you know? Do some of them already have this?
Robinson: Yes, there's a couple. So TIDAL is the most recent one to join in. The only ones that have it so far are much smaller. So TidAL now has tags for fully AI-generated content. And that is done either through the artist disclosing that they used AI in the creation of the song, and also they have AI detection systems in-house. Deezer, that French streaming service I mentioned, they also provide tags visible to users on Deezers of what is. AI generated and that is whatever is picked up by their in-house detection system as well. But we're not really seeing that from Spotify and Apple Music and these kind of big players that most of us are using.
Juravich: So who would be responsible for adding the labels if this becomes a thing?
Robinson: So what I thought was interesting about this proposal from the record labels is that they did not mention detection at all. I have been kind of asking around with people about how detection works right now and how good it is. And there is a lot of concern, it seems, about false positives. You'd hate to tag someone's new song as AI on accident, and then it turns out that's not true. Because that's kind of like a scarlet letter for the song. But, yeah, so I mean, for this proposal... It would be voluntary. So it would up to the artists and the individual labels to disclose when AI is used. But I mean, honestly, how many people are going to do that? That's the big question.
Juravich: This is Tech Tuesday from All Sides on 89.7 NPR News. We are talking about adding AI labels to songs with Kristen Robinson, a senior writer at Billboard. Is there a way to differentiate between maybe an AI assisted song and one that is fully AI made?
Robinson: Yes, so in this proposal by the record labels, they do have two different types of tags that they would like to add. One that's like an uppercase AI to denote something that is fully AI generated, and then something that is lowercase AI to denotes something that's AI assisted. The AI assisted part is something that is much more controversial in the music industry because there are quite a few professional songwriters and producers who are using AI as part of maybe as a very small part of a songwriting process. And under this new idea, would that mean that they also get revealed by using AI?
Juravich: I've seen some comparisons to AI being used in music production. I've been comparisons to when synthesizers came out in the 70s. So the use of synthesizers used to be considered poor form, but now everyone uses them in production. I mean, they're very commonplace. So do you think that more AI is just gonna be inevitable?
Robinson: I do think that AI is going to be pretty inevitable. I do you think people have really done a lot of comparisons of what's happening with AI-generated music now and what's happened in the past. Synthesizers is always one that people bring up. Drum machines, eliminating jobs for drummers, digital audio workstations, like when people could make music at their homes. So there's always been some resistance to change in the music industry. But the difference with AI is that most of these AI models are trained on unlicensed songs from the artists themselves. So it's much more controversial, I would imagine, than what happened with synthesizers or drum machines, because these models have ingested and learned from the artist's work that are going to ultimately end up using it. But we're seeing a lot of adoption. As much as people are outraged, there's also behind the scenes a lot people who are using it, that are not. Telling a lot of people about it. Right.
Juravich: Can you compare this system to the parental advisory system that I mentioned in the introduction? Because we all know, we all have seen that little sticker. You know, if we're old enough to remember buying a CD, there's a sticker on it that says, you know, parental advisory. So like, how does that system work, you know, to know whether it's safe for a kid to listen to?
Robinson: Yeah, so I think that's a really good way to look at it because visually it would be very similar to when you see a song that has explicit listed next to it or parental advisory. So that is a really Good framework, but there have been some differences. I think the main one that I thought about when when writing about this is the explicit stickers, the parental advisory stickers are really about protecting children from stuff that is harmful. Whereas the AI-generated tags, one could argue. Like, there's maybe nothing wrong with the AI song. It just might be weird and distasteful to someone, but it's not really a concern for children to listen to an AI-generated song, necessarily. So that's a little bit different. And also another big difference is that when the parental advisory sticker was being proposed, there was a lot of opposition among artists for that measure. And it ultimately ended up becoming a thing, anyway. Bye! With this, we're not seeing as much pushback from artists. I think artists are pretty fed up with this kind of stuff, too. But behind the scenes, people will tell me more about how they are actually using AI low-key, and they don't really want to be revealed, especially for these AI-assisted tags. So I think it's going to be much harder for them to pass the AI-Assisted tag idea, but the fully AI-generated tag idea might be more palatable for artists.
Juravich: But will people still have to self-report? Or is there some sort of, like, a detector? Yes, a detecter.
Robinson: Yeah, yeah. So I mean, right now the proposal that we got is just about voluntary labeling. I think a lot of people would say it needs to go further than that if it ends up getting implemented. But like I said, there's definitely some concern about false positives with AI detection systems. They're not totally foolproof. Some are very, very good. So I don't know. It's going to be interesting to see. But the biggest challenge with AI systems is catching AI assisted work. Fully AI-generated work is much more cut and dry. So I think it will take a while before we can really figure out AI-assisted detection systems. But maybe for fully AI- generated songs, a detection system could be a very good tool.
Juravich: So we mentioned Spotify, Apple Music being the biggest players here. Do they have to get on board for this labeling to actually work and be a thing?
Robinson: Yeah, that's a good point. So this is just a proposal. This just might not happen, for all we know. So this was a proposal by the record labels. The streaming services would be the ones who have to implement it and create. The system internally. I don't know how difficult it would be to add like a you know a button or a tag next to all of these songs and roll that out at scale, but they do need the streaming services to sign on. There is a trade organization for the streaming services called DEMA, and they did provide a quote to me in support of this measure and said that they want to work with the record labels to figure out the best system. But it's very possible that before implementation, some things change as streaming services and record labels start to talk internally about how could we actually use this proposal in practice.
Juravich: Would there be a punishment if an artist did not disclose the AI use?
Robinson: Good question. I don't know. I think that they haven't really thought that far. So I think this was kind of more so stating the position of the record label establishment, if you will, than it was about figuring out all the kinks and potential issues that could come up and actually implementing it. So this could be a very long road ahead before you and I actually see it when we are scrolling on our favorite streaming service.
Juravich: Yeah. Do you have a general feeling of how artists feel about this? Because you said that the record labels are kind of leading the charge on this and wanting the streaming services to play along. How do the individual artists feel?
Robinson: I mean, artists, it's so hard to say exactly how artists feel because they're not a monolith at all. There's so many varying perspectives on this. You have some artists who have really embraced AI. It might not think that there's any need for people to know whether or not AI was part of the process. They probably take the opinion of, do we need a tag that there was a synthesizer used on this? Do people really need to know how it was made when they're consuming it? If they like it, then they like. But then you have a lot of other artists that are very frustrated right now about the amount of AI-generated music that is on these services and essentially competing with them for royalty dollars. And that's not even getting into the copyright ability of AI music too. So it's the big can of worms. But yeah, artists are very mixed. But I haven't seen any artists really speaking out about the idea of this specific tagging system as of yet.
Juravich: So the next time we talk to you, we're gonna talk about artists suing, like, OpenAI or Claude or something like that for stealing their, like, rhythms and beats. Is that what's happening next?
Robinson: I'm sure that'll come down the road. But yeah, I mean, it's really hard for individual artists. It's so expensive to file these lawsuits. So what we're really seeing so far are the record labels kind of acting as a stand-in for the artists and representing their interests and going after these companies themselves. But we have seen some class action lawsuits from smaller artists. So it'll be interesting to see how that evolves.
Juravich: All right, well we've been talking about whether or not there should be AI labels on songs and we've talking with Kristin Robinson, senior writer at Billboard. Thank you for joining us today. Thank you. And coming up, staying cool this summer has been a hot topic, but air conditioning may not be the answer. We're gonna hear about passive cooling technologies and techniques. That is when Tech Tuesday from All Sides continues on 89.7 NPR News
You're listening to Tech Tuesday from All Sides with Amy Juravich on 89.7 NPR News. This is a show where we share stories about science, technology and the future of our environment. You could say that staying cool this summer has been a hot topic. Air conditioning has the potential to save lives, but it also counts for nearly 10 percent of global energy usage, which in turn increases greenhouse gasses, contributing to the overall trend of climate change. This paradoxical relationship calls for more cunning solutions to cool indoor spaces. Passive cooling techniques can be used to reduce heat in buildings without using energy. Joining us now to talk about air conditioning and passive cooling, we have Mat Santamouris, an architecture researcher at the University of New South Wales. Welcome to All Sides, Mat.
Mat Santamouris: Thank you very much for the invitation.
Juravich: So, staying cool in the heat is a hot topic, as I said. There's been a lot of heat waves this summer, all over the world, actually, and air conditioning can be helpful for people who are at risk in the extreme heat. But what are some of the large-scale drawbacks of traditional air conditioning? Tell me why air conditioning can be bad.
Santamouris: Air conditioning may save lives, as you said before. It is extremely important when ambient temperatures are very high and it may, let's say, protect the vulnerable population and all those that they need. So air conditioning is a great real technology. But during the very last years, there is a very important research carried out on alternative cooling techniques than techniques which are. Usually known as passive cooling techniques. And these techniques have to do with advanced solar control devices for buildings and open spaces, ventilation systems, systems to protect the building envelope, and many new, let's say, technologies. These technologies are so mature now that we can really design buildings with minimum air conditioning. So passive cooling can be, you know, the first defense against, you know, air conditioning. So it's not necessarily to rely completely 100% on air conditioning really to decrease temperatures indoors. We have first to design, you know, buildings and cities the proper way. And this may decrease, you know, the cooling demand up to 60, 70, 80%. You have to think that actually in the tropics, for example, in Singapore, we have buildings, for example, this. School of Architecture of the National University of Singapore, operating without air conditioning. So I think that this is the message. Air conditioning is a fantastic technology, may save lives, but now we have other technologies that may work together with air conditioning, decreasing the cooling needs.
Juravich: Let's get into the passive cooling in just a moment, but I wanted to come back to air conditioning for a minute to talk about the pressure it puts on the power grid, because putting pressure on a power grid can leave vulnerable populations at risk, right? Because if the power stops working, I mean, that's a bigger problem. Tell me about the the pressure air conditioning puts on power grids.
Santamouris: Yeah, there is a tremendous pressure, you know, especially on the grid. We have to understand, for example, that in the United States during the very last years, we have, you now, an increase of the grid failures by 151 percent, and thousands, thousands or hundreds of thousands of people, they stay for many days, you, know, without air conditioning. So the number of fatalities, especially heat-related mortality and morbidity is Increase incrementally. Not only in the United States, all around the world. This is number one. Second, low-income population and vulnerable population, they don't have the means really to support air conditioning. We know very well that low- income population all around world, either they cannot really support air-conditioning or they operate air-contitioning just for one hour per day. Third, very important, air- conditioning because of the exhaust heat is increasing the ambient temperature. For example, in many cities like Tokyo, it increases the ambient temperature by two degrees. So in this case, you know, the increase of the ambient temperatures compensate really the impact of air conditioning and may, let's say, increase the cooling demand. There are many other issues that are related really to the adverse use of air-conditioning.
Juravich: Yeah. So air conditioning, ironically, makes cities hotter. Is that what you're saying?
Santamouris: Absolutely, absolutely. And unfortunately, we have data from many cities showing really that air conditioning is increasing temperature by one or two degrees. These oblige utilities to build additional power plants to satisfy the demand during heat waves. But these power plants, new power plants may operate just for some days per year. So the cost of these, let's say, power plants is extremely high. And this increases the cost of the kilowatt hours. Just to understand what's happened, for example, the last years in India, where we have really a tremendous increase of the use of air conditioning because of the heat wave. You have temperatures above 50 degrees for one week or two weeks. So everyone is buying an air conditioning, even in slums. This increase, the peak electricity demand in India in one year by 15.2%. There's no country. That can face such an increase. 15% more power plants in a year, it's impossible. It has a tremendous energy cost, a tremendous environmental cost, a tremendous financial impact. So you understand that the increased use of air conditioning without really improving the building environment, it's a solution that really is not sustainable at all.
Juravich: This is Tech Tuesday from All Sides on 89.7 NPR News. We're talking about air conditioning with Matt Santamurras, an architectural researcher at the University of New South Wales. All right, so let's talk more about those passive cooling methods. How is passive cooling different than a mechanical air conditioner that we know and love?
Santamouris: You know, the cooling demand is a fraction of the heat that enters the building and also the heat which is generated in the building. So by passive cooling, we try to decrease as much as possible the penetration of heat from the ambient environment to the building, so first, we use sending devices. We cannot have a glazed building where we allow solar radiation to enter the building and then we spend electricity to put it out, it's completely crazy. Second, you know We can protect the building envelope, especially the opaque elements, by using reflective surfaces. And now we have really super cool materials, which reflect about 98% of the radiation and also provide subabian temperatures. And so we protect the envelope. Then the excess heat which is generated indoors may be dissipated by using advanced ventilation techniques. Or new techniques which really extend the comfort zone, like the very advanced ceiling fans, for example. At the same time, we have a new, let's say, heat amortization and heat dissipation techniques like radiative cooling, evaporative cooling which are very mature and may provide surface temperature up to 10 degrees below the ambient temperature. To understand, our test has shown that Under the Australian desert conditions, when the ambient temperature was 40-42 degrees, the surface temperature of these materials were really 30-32 degrees. So you understand that these are natural air conditions and the cost is really minimal. So these materials, for example, used in, let's say, low-income houses here for the nation people in Australia have decreased the indoor temperature by 12 degrees. So instead of having people living under 40, 42 degrees, without any cost, you can really reduce indoor temperatures down to 30 degrees and save lives.
Juravich: Yeah, and I can't convert from Celsius to Fahrenheit in my head real quick, but I believe like 40 degrees is that, do you know what that is in Fahrenheit, or I can look it up? Yeah, well, so because I know it's like, in the 40s, it's like the 90s toward 100 and in the Fahrenheit temperatures. OK, so but let's can let's hone in on some of those strategies you talked about. It's a big it's a Big thing in America. A lot of the buildings that we build have a ton of glass. Everyone wants these big windows with so they can see out and they want all this light from the windows. But you're saying basically that's a bad idea.
Santamouris: No, it's not a bad idea. Depends on the type of glazing we're using and depends on the kind of shading we're doing. Now we have glazing technologies which allow a minimum penetration of solar radiation while this glazes allows daylight to penetrate first. So we can have you, we can daylight without really the additional heat. Second. It is absolutely necessary to protect the envelope of the building, especially the transparent facades, glazing, by proper sending devices. And this is very important. If not, as I mentioned before, we really allow solar radiation to enter the building and then we have to spend electricity, increase CO2, increase the temperature, all these, let's say, problems and drawbacks, in order to put this solar radiation out. This is not, let's say, so clever and so intelligent. Perhaps during periods where energy was really cheap would be, let say, a solution. But now, you know, under climate change and the very high prices of electricity, we cannot really afford to do it anymore.
Juravich: And my producer did look it up for me, just so we can be accurate here. 40 degrees Celsius is 104 degrees Fahrenheit. So I learned that formula back in high school, but couldn't remember it. Okay, you also mentioned better ceiling fans. Tell me about a better ceiling fan.
Santamouris: The new generation of ceiling fans, according to the standards, for example, there is an ASRA standard in the United States, so really that we can achieve comfort at temperature up to 27, 28 degrees. So it's not necessarily really to operate the building at 22, 23, 24, 25, depends on humidity, of course, but we can really increase the operation of the, let's say, the set point. So, in this case, we decrease tremendously the cooling demand. By using ceiling fans, especially ceiling fans of, let's say, novel technology, innovative ceiling fans we can have really tremendous improvements of indoor thermal comfort and a very, very significant decrease of the cooling demand.
Juravich: What about a major concern in places such as Europe? You know, Europe is having some historic heat waves this summer, and a lot of those really old buildings in Europe are just not suited for air conditioning. Historic facades also don't allow sometimes AC units to be popping out of the windows because of historic code. Can passive cooling be adopted into really old buildings like that are all over Europe?
Santamouris: There are some limitations, but there's always possibilities, for example, to have solar control. Solar control is allowed. We can have solar control. Also, we can have now with the new technology of reflecting materials, we have an exterior coating which fits completely with the exterior, let's say, facade of the building, which really is very reflective. So yes, there are solutions of ventilation. You can apply any kind of ventilation in this kind of buildings. And we have excellent, let's say, results and excellent demonstration projects where passive cooling techniques have been implemented in traditional and heritage buildings in Europe. And we had an increase of the cooling demand by 50% or 60%.
Juravich: Tell me tell me more about the the school you mentioned in Singapore where it has You know it can cool by that by so much and it has more like open air spaces. Can you tell me about it?
Santamouris: Yeah, this is a building which is designed, I think, about Twenty years ago in Singapore, this is the architectural school of the National University of Singapore, and it was designed in the tropics without having any conditioning. And it's a zero energy building. It has photovoltaics on the roof, so produces electricity, but it is based on advanced solar control devices, they are good shading. Advanced ventilation systems, including, let's say, innovative ceiling fans and other ventilation techniques, smart control, trying really to improve as much as possible the use of renewable energies and of the other cooling resources. So this building is zero-carbon, zero-energy building, and is not using air conditioning at And, actually, you know, it operates at temperatures close to... I'm sorry, 25, 26 centigrade, you know, I'm sorry. Yeah, that's okay. And, you know, without, and, you know, several, let's say, questioners and, let's say, researchers that have been done regarding Comfort conditions, you know, most. Let's say of the people, about 95% of, let's say, the people working there, they report that they are in the perfect comfort, you know, at these temperatures.
Juravich: What would you say would be a good incentive for developers to create new buildings with passive cooling in mind? How do we convince developers to learn from this?
Santamouris: Yeah, I think that this has to do also with, you know, the, let's say, the local, the national legislation, legislation should really ask for the implementation of these techniques because it's a benefit, you now, of the nation, it's the benefit of, you know, the people, it is the benefit for everyone, it will win. Second, you know, it very important that this, you Those that... Let's say, increase CO2 in the atmosphere and also increase the temperature in, let's say, the urban environment, they have to pay for this cost, because this has a cost, has an energy cost for everyone, has a health cost, as an environmental cost, it has different type of cost. So it is not fair that everyone is paying, you know, the lack of knowledge or the difference of the developers. But they have to pay for the additional cost that really they create. In this case, all the resources which will be collected can be used to help, let's say, a vulnerable population or low income population or really to compensate those that they decrease the temperature in their developments.
Juravich: Well, we're going to leave it there, but one more calculation for you. You mentioned that the Singapore School runs at 26 degrees. That's 78 degrees Fahrenheit. So a zero carbon school with no air conditioning but can stay at 78. That's pretty amazing. We've been talking about air conditioning and passive cooling with Mat Santamoros, an architectural researcher at the University of New South Wales. Thank you so much for joining us today, Mat.
Santamouris: Thank you very much. Thank you.
Juravich: And more Tech Tuesday in just a moment when All Sides continues on 89.7 NPR News
You're listening to Tech Tuesday from All Sides with Amy Juravich, a show where we share stories about science, technology, and the future of our environment. The Federal Communications Commission just issued a new ruling against advanced robotic devices. This includes most robot vacuums, and this ruling might affect the popular company iRobot that makes the Roomba. We'll also hear about a new open design for headphones, Spotify's running mode, And, there's some new emojis coming! Joining us to discuss these new tech stories is Russell Holly, Director of Commerce Content at CNET. Welcome back, Russell.
Russell Holly: Thank you.
Juravich: So let's start with the FCC ruling against robotic devices. It was originally interpreted to be about humanoid robots, but now it can apply to robot vacuums. So what changed here and why are vacuumes being regulated?
Holly: Yes. So the ruling that came out last week was a little on the vague side. It was very much against robots and it labeled humanoid, but it also had some other vague language about what other robotic platforms this would come from. And then there was a clarifying statement released on Sunday that made it clear that. Any advanced robotic device capable of moving around, avoiding obstacles or navigating things on the ground that was more than 4.4 pounds, I don't know why that specific number, is something that would not be able to be imported into the U.S. Moving forward.
Juravich: Okay, so this ruling is specific to products from foreign countries. So why is that? Are the ones made in America just fine?
Holly: Yes, this is an attempt to encourage these to be built entirely in the US, which is something that there is at least one confirmed company that does when it comes to robot vacuums that is Shark. There are a couple of other companies that do assembly in the U.S., but not all of the parts come into the U S., and they have not yet responded to statements about whether they agree with the justice department or with the FCC rather that they are a part of this platform. But either way, it doesn't impact anything currently being sold in the US. This is not like the Wi-Fi router band that we saw a couple of months ago. This is aimed entirely at new products that would come into the US, so if the FCC has already authorized a product that is on the shelf that your local Best Buy, it's not going anywhere. But in January, when that company goes to release the next version of that model with new features and things like that, it likely will not be available in the US until that company can completely build a manufacturing system that would allow it to be built and assembled here.
Juravich: Hmm, okay, so tell us how this impacts iRobot, the creator of Roomba, because it is an American company, but do they not build them all here?
Holly: Correct. IRobot is, in an interesting case, and there is some further clarity that that company appears to be asking for right now, because there is quite a bit of assembly of iRobots tools that happen here, but not every part comes from the US. And so there is a very real chance that iRoboT, as an American company, will need to very quickly change its manufacturing habits. And that's not likely to happen in the span of four months. When these products typically get announced for the beginning of the year. So it's likely that what we would normally see in January at the Consumer Electronics Show will be very different when it comes to things, not just robot vacuums, but robot lawnmowers, those little pool cleaning robots, the delivery robots that you see all over a bunch of larger cities. Those are all also considered as a part of this group of products that new versions of not be allowed to be brought into the states.
Juravich: Okay, so we're going to quickly figure out what's made in America and what's not then.
Holly: That's exactly right.
Juravich: Um, you mentioned the four pound thing and, um, that's interesting to me. I know you said you don't know why, but there are toys like little robot toys that are definitely under four pounds. So this isn't going to apply to those toys.
Holly: It will it will not apply to all of those toys I think that when it comes to the the language around things like obstacle avoidance or Independent locomotion and things like that that those can apply, you know to a to a broader variety That 4.4 pound limit seems to apply mostly to the thing that like when it is connected for charging for either a robot vacuum or lawnmower or something like that, so when all of its hardware pieces are combined, it cannot be more than 4.4 pounds, which most, especially when it comes to things like robot vacuums, are well above that weight.
Juravich: Yeah. Okay. So is the bottom line here though, the FCC wants to make sure that all the robots that clean our homes and our pools and our lawns are made in the U.S.
Holly: That's exactly right. And while that is certainly something that these companies will decide how exactly that's going to work, building the necessary infrastructure for that is something that is going to take quite a bit of time.
Juravich: Okay. And why do we want to make sure they're all built in the U.S.? Is this a worry about China invading our homes or something like that? Or is this a, you know, we're going to make America great because we're gonna build everything here situation?
Holly: I think it depends on who you ask there is an argument to be made for equipment that has the ability to listen and is connected to the internet being something that the FCC should take greater, you know, care of and take a closer look at you know the the ability to record that information and send that information away as something that a lot of these devices have. And so being able to take a closer look at some of that technology and refine that in such a way that is more limiting for how much of our personal information kind of gets sucked into the ether. But at the same time, this is very much a push to encourage US manufacturing at just about any cost.
Juravich: All right, I was I was picturing China, India or Russia caring a lot about whether or not my Roomba can fall is going to fall down the stairs.
Holly: Less about it falling down the stairs and understanding, you know, Roomba's, you know, one of the first things that it does when it scans your house is it does a full map of the area in which it can vacuum. And you know you can see that in your app is, you know, a full floor plan of your home.
Juravich: Yeah, crea- CREAT-
Holly: Which is something that everyone may not be cool with sharing with, you know, the internet.
Juravich: Creepy and helpful. I don't know whether it's a fine line there. I guess Our next topic is headphones. So we're gonna jump into J lab has launched the JBuds open wireless and CNET calls them funky in your review So tell us about these new headphones and what is open about them
Holly: I am fascinated by these, because if somebody was walking towards you on the street and you saw them, these would look like pretty normal, over-the-ear headphones, and you wouldn't expect that that person would be able to hear you, because they're fully covered, they're probably listening to something. As that person gets closer, you can see that the kind of shell that would normally go around your ears is gone, that there is a speaker that is producing audio into your ears. But the actual casing that goes around your ear is hollow and there are exposed sides that go in. I'm a big fan personally of open ear headphones as a genre, as someone who cycles quite a bit and is in places where I want to be aware of the world around me. I also don't want to stop listening to my audio book. Then having that ability is something that I appreciate quite a lot. The downside that you run into with most But not all open-ear headphones is to have this be just audio for you and not be sharing it with someone on the bus who is sitting next to you or on an airplane or something like that.
Juravich: It's called it's called sound leakage, which yeah, right, right
Holly: Yeah, we call it sound leakage. And it is, you know, you can, there are varying degrees of intensity for that sort of thing. And the way that you're looking at this entire, you know, setup is, this is a really great setup for someone who loves the comfort of having an open ear headphone for someone who doesn't love having earbuds in their ears, but still wants to be able to hear the world around them. That is certainly not everyone. There are a lot of people who put on headphones like this explicitly because they don't want to hear the world around them and would prefer to do something else. So this is probably a limited audience, but it's also they're really comfortable and because JLab is a company known for kind of budget-friendly headphones, they come in at $100.
Juravich: Yeah, so basically as long as you're not listening to something too loud and you're it because if you're in a quiet space it could you know someone could be able to hear what you're listening to right just just because of the openness of it.
Holly: That's exactly right. If your volume is all the way up, you are probably sharing the sound with somebody else, especially if you're in an enclosed space. If you're out in the open, walking around town, then it's probably quite limited because the sound of the world around you, these aren't giant speakers that are being pushed outwards. They are very much sending audio in towards your ears. But if you are in a house with someone, if you were sitting in a quiet space, and they're listening to something even at above, say, 60% of its volume, there's a good chance that somebody around you can hear it too.
Juravich: Do you think this product is kind of for someone who walks around with only one earbud in, right? So they want to hear what they're listening to, but they also want to be aware of their surroundings.
Holly: I think that's right. I think this is really good for someone in that environment, but wants the kind of comfort of having those big headphones instead of having earbuds in.
Juravich: This is Tech Tuesday from all sides on 89.7 NPR News. We're talking about some recent tech stories with Russell Holly, director of commerce content at CNET. Our next product to talk about is, it's a similar note to headphones, and runners just got a new feature on Spotify. Tell us about the capabilities of this new feature. It's called Spotify's Running Mode.
Holly: Yeah, so running mode takes your existing Spotify playlist and kind of mixes in a fitness coach. So if you are jogging around a track or you're running in segments and you're trying to listen to your favorite soundtrack while you're doing that, this audio feature allows what is essentially an AI coach to come in. And give you information about your run as you're running. So you don't need to pull away from Spotify. You don't to open an app. You don't need to look down at a watch if that's the kind of thing that you're doing. If your heart rate is outside of the zone that you want it to be in, the coach will let you know from segment to segment. If you are slower or faster from one segment to another, then it will come in and kind of coach you along for that process without massively interrupting your Spotify playlist.
Juravich: And so the playlist changes automatically. So you don't have to worry about hearing the same songs day after day. So is Spotify making the playlist or are you making the playlists?
Holly: It's a combination. You have the ability to provide songs and genres that you would prefer to be in playlists, or you can say, you know, kind of mix it up. I want it to be something different based on the things that I have listened to in the past. You can set these up to either be 30 minute or 90 minute duration, or up to 90 minute, I should say, durations. And these are designed to, you, know, play a song. And as the song ends, it's almost like a DJ that comes in and tells you how you're running and then moves on to the next song.
Juravich: And I also read that it's trying to, it can find a song to match the beats per minute to the tempo of your run, right?
Holly: I have yet to test this, and I don't know that there is a variety of songs within my personal audio catalog that would, you, know, give me a good idea of how this is going. But yes, the idea is that while your heart rate is just really going, like you're above 130 beats per minute, that Spotify will intentionally try to pick songs that you like that are you know, really high tempo to keep you motivated. And to keep that going, you know, it's unhelpful, depending on the kind of person you are, for a slower song to come in when you're really kind of in the zone. And so it's interesting that Spotify sees this as an opportunity to make sure that the music and the pace are as closely matched as possible.
Juravich: Yeah, what usually happens to me when I have it on shuffle and I'm in a workout is a kid's song will come on and it'll just like make me laugh because I was like, oh, that's unusual. Like now Daniel Tiger is playing in my ear.
Holly: That's right. Yeah.
Juravich: Now I'm kind of a slow runner though, so this beats per minute thing, I'm not sure about that, it'll match my tempo and I'll be listening to Power Ballads or something.
Holly: That's it. Yeah, I think it will very much depend on person to person. And this is something that I'm sure being a new feature from Spotify will, you, know, evolve to support as many different people as possible. But this very much seems like it is initially aimed at, you know people who really enjoy running at, at, you know fairly intense clips.
Juravich: Okay, and Spotify, just one more thing about them, they're also in partnership with Peloton, so is Spotify trying to become a fitness company too?
Holly: I think Spotify really wants to make sure that it is in as many places as its audience is as possible, and that doesn't always mean being in a place where you have the Spotify app available or where the Spotify app is the dominant app that you would have open on your phone. So, you, know, for a lot of runners, that would mean having Strava open on your phone or having, you, know, run for something or, you like that and and those Services are very focused on delivering information to you in a visual format while you're going and doing that running. Spotify isn't necessarily trying to become a fitness company so much as it really doesn't want you to open any other app than the Spotify app.
Juravich: Okay. All right. And then our final topic today, last but not least, we're getting new emojis. Do you want to run through the list of the emojis or I can list them off?
Holly: They're all incredibly important. So make sure that you've got a pen and paper to write these down. We are getting a net with a handle, as though you are going to capture a butterfly or something, an eraser, which I genuinely didn't know we didn't already have, a meteor, a lighthouse, a monarch butterfly, which, I assume, goes with the net and the handle, a both rightward and leftward thumb sign gesture, which kind of evokes the kind of hitchhiking gesture. And a cracking face, but the most important of all of them, which again, I am surprised didn't exist until now, a pickle.
Juravich: Yes, I was shocked we didn't already have a pickle emoji. I agree with you. So it looks like CNET also is most excited for the pickle. Is it one people have been wanting for a while? Do people like request emojis?
Holly: Yes. Emojis are requested by the tens of thousands. There is a group called the Unicode Consortium that approves a certain amount each year and then hires artists to do the artwork and make sure that they are available to all of the platforms. Google and Apple and Samsung all have variations on these that they include in their software. So it is a surprising amount of human beings involved in an emoji going from a request to something that you see on your phone. And in doing so, you, know, when we get to software updates in 2027, this list will be added to what is already on your phone just via software update.
Juravich: Okay, so will everyone have it? Apple, Android, you know, all phones will have them in 2027 at some point.
Holly: That's right, yeah, it will depend largely on when the software update cycle per phone is. Apple and Google usually go quite quickly with these and Samsung may wait until the next round of phones come out because they usually launch them quite early in the year or they may just do it with a software update as well.
Juravich: So it's so if I send someone the pickle emoji, but their phone hasn't been updated yet. What happens? I don't
Holly: It's just a box.
Juravich: The empty box with the question mark, yeah.
Holly: If you have an emoji that someone else doesn't have, then it's just a box with a question mark in it.
Juravich: But overall, the idea is that emojis are as universal as the alphabet, like every phone has all the letters of the alphabet so everyone has all of the emojis.
Holly: Yeah, that's the whole point of this consortium is that there is a base language that we can all communicate through, be it text or image or, in some cases, music files.
Juravich: Okay, so there's not really, I wrote down, is there an emoji czar? That's what I was gonna ask you about, who decides what we get, when, and why? But it's a committee.
Holly: Yeah, it is. It is a group of people that have been around for, you, know, honestly, longer than we have had smartphones. It is a non-profit corporation. They are a 501 that is based out of Mountain View, California. They have been around since 1991. And that is a big part of what the board of directors for the Unicode Consortium does is make sure that these things that we use to communicate with one another work as similarly as possible. Across a wide variety of devices.
Juravich: And if we have a suggestion of what we wish we had an emoji of, do we send it to them? Is that?
Holly: Unicode.org is the website that you can go to and there is a submission process every year in July. They go and approve new ones that are gonna show up across all of our things in the following year.
Juravich: All right, well, I look forward to texting you some new emojis at some point, Russell, but thank you so much for your time today. This has been Tech Tuesday. We've been talking with Russell Holly, Director of Commerce Content at CNET. Thank you for joining us.
Holly: Thanks for having me.
Juravich: And you've been listening to Tech Tuesday from all sides on 89.7 NPR News. Thanks for joining us. I'm Amy Juravich.