card image

Radio show date 01-27-2023

Click here to watch this video


John C. Morley: (00:10)

Hi everyone. I'm John C. Morley, the host of the JMOR Tech Talk Show and Inspirations for Your Life.

John C. Morley: (01:02)

Hey guys, it is John C. Morley here. Welcome to the JMOR Tech Talk show. We are on the last episode for January. I can't believe next week is February 3rd, the first Friday of February. That's just unbelievable. We have a great show for you tonight, and we're working on some great guests. They'll be coming up soon, but I want to tell you there's a lot going on. There's another lawsuit, ladies and gentlemen, yes. US lawsuit against Google could benefit Apple and others. So what's all this about everyone? All right. So you know, every time something happens, it's like Google or Facebook or one of these companies, they all get into some kind of challenge or a debacle. So there was a landmark lawsuit by the US Justice Department against Alphabet Google over its dominance of advertising technology that could help rivals in websites that sell ad space but leaves an uncertain future for the advertising itself.


 John C. Morley: (02:15)

And this is what the experts told Reuters that I now quote the Justice Department's complaint against Google recently. Call for the company to divest Google's ad manager, a suite of tools, including one that lets websites put ad space up for sale. And another that's served as an ad marketplace that automatically matched advertisers with those publishers. Now, if the Justice Department lawsuit succeeds, I quote that advertisers and publishers could have more leverage with more options for expanding players and consequently more competition. Close quote said Neil Begley of Moody's Investor Services. That's gonna be interesting. So Apple, which is steadily growing its advertising business and promoting it as a privacy-first place, could be the winner if Google's ads become less effective. According to Brian Mandelbaum, chief executive of Ad Tech Company Attain, this is a quote.


John C. Morley: (03:22)

So the latest update on this case, just to summarize it, is that the judge blocks the sale of what's happening. And so he's trying to, really, when I say block the sale, he's trying to block what you know they're doing, which is the fact that Google is a monopoly. I mean, that's just no surprise, right? The executives say that Google's business in placing ads on websites does not own and give Google value information on the effectiveness of its ad. Apple, and I quote, can be a new dominant force in advertising. Because Apple has data through its ownership of phones now, does this mean we shouldn't trust Apple? I don't know. Apple never did anything that really would make us weary about them. Still, Google's competitors in the ad tech are increasingly creating products that serve both the publishers, like new websites and news websites which sell Adspace and advertisers who buy ads like Google.


John C. Morley: (04:28)

And they are currently doing some crazy things, and this is gonna happen. And Mr Paul Banister has been speaking about this as the Chief Strategy Officer at Cafe Media, which helps small and medium-sized publishers sell Adspace. But we all know how Adspace has become less effective on Facebook and many of its platforms. I think when we put an ad up on a platform, everyone thinks it's gonna do something, but it doesn't. It takes a lot of hits. If Google's forced to divest the tools that serve publishers, it would benefit our competitors like Xander, which is owned by Microsoft. I dunno if I like that. And that will still work with both sides of the ad-buying ecosystem. This, according to Banister, and with more options, Google's publishers will have more transparency over how much they can sell ad space for and could end up paying less in fees, according to Mandelbaum. If successful, the lawsuit could be the beginning of serious business model changes for Google. Close quote said Paul Gallant, managing director at Cowan, Washington Research Group. Now, the divested assets could result in Google losing key data that help target ads to relevant consumers. Now, if Google loses access to data signals, advertisers could see their Google ads become less effective, said Nikhil Lai, senior analyst at research firm Forrester. So at least twice before, the government had filed lawsuits against the dominant companies with their far-reaching results. A lawsuit breaking up ATT filed in 1974 resulted in an agreement in 1982 to break up the company. And that breakup has been credited with a host of innovations in telephony. So the Justice Department's lawsuit against Microsoft filed in 1998 reigned in the company at a time when it was seeking to extend its dominance in the operating system to the internet browser; while the lawsuit settled, the flight is credited with opening the way for other internet innovators like Google itself. So the thing is, we all know that Google has been getting in our faces, I mean, more than anybody. I mean, that's, that's not a surprise. And the thing that really gets me with Google is I get that they can't maybe afford to hire all these people, but it's just really terrible. So I had a friend of mine who filled out a form on their website, and they put the wrong information in, not intentionally, but they put it in accidentally. I think they put the wrong address for the credit card or something. And within a minute, they got an email saying there was suspicious activity, didn't give them a chance to re-enter it, and said the account was suspended, trying to put a claim to dispute it.


John C. Morley: (07:22)

They said they've looked at it, and the account is never being reopened. I mean, who are these people? Google. They're just some company with a lot of data on all of us, but they really are just these money-hungry cows. They don't provide great services. So let me just tell you this I had a purposeful experience with them for one of my companies. I own quite a few companies, and I told them that I would like to hire you guys to do the ads because they claimed that they were the best. All right, so I spoke to this person after filling out a form, which took like three or four days. As I tried to call a number, but the number was arrogant. Like I called them, they wouldn't even like to listen to me.


 John C. Morley: (08:06)

They were just like so route that if I didn't go this way, then they weren't gonna help me. So two or three days later, this other guy calls me back, the real arrogant son of a gun. And you know, he's telling me this is the way it's gonna be if you don't like it too bad. And he said we'll give you a proposal. You click here. I mean, they were just like high reign. They didn't know what they were doing. And so I trusted them for a moment and said, well, maybe they're gonna come out with something better. Maybe I'm being too opinionated. So I waited about a week, and I got an email from Google email. They only sent it to the Google email saying that this is the campaign that's been created for me, please review it, and it will start immediately once I review it.


 John C. Morley: (08:55)

Fine. So they couldn't even get my town, right? Franklin Lakes, they put Franklin, New Jersey. I mean, this just tells you the quality of the people they're hiring. So the people that Google hires are not employees but contractors, independent consultants. They work for other companies, but they're just great at just trying to rob people's money. Now, when I say rob, they really just try to strong-arm you. And so I let the campaign go for a little while, but I changed some things because I told myself there was no way this campaign's gonna work if they didn't even have the right city. So first, I was getting no traffic. Then I had them do their stuff to build this supposedly amazing campaign. They put me in front of the worst crap you could imagine that just sucked up my advertising dollars. And when I complained, they said you need to spend more money.


 John C. Morley: (10:01)

I said I wanna talk to somebody. Magically nobody was available. I took my account offline from them. I just stopped the campaign. A week or two weeks later, I got a phone call asking, how can we help you? Well, it's a little late for that. Your campaign was terrible. I said you guys don't know what you're doing. You try to manipulate me and waste all this money, and I'm not paying you because you guys don't have a clue. And you have a lot of great con artists that you hire to try to manipulate people like me, but I'm too smart for you because I'm not gonna let you take my money when you don't even have a clue to what's going on. When I ask your people, and I give them my targets, and they can't even figure out things, they just look for things that are gonna waste money.


 John C. Morley: (10:50)

They don't know what they're doing. I'm being very honest. I know some of you might have had good results with Google, and I'm happy for you. But I have to tell you, they've changed, just like Facebook has changed. They're not the way they used to be. Many years ago. You could get results now; you just get aggravation; you get a lot of lies. And if you're saying to me, Hey, John, why is Facebook's ad creation service so bad? Well, Facebook's ad creation service isn't great. If I put in Google's ad creation service, they have all these reasons. They say they're not for every business. I mean, do Google ads work? People say yes. If your account is structured poorly, advertisers don't see conversions. But when you ask them to set it properly, and they can't set it up, that's a problem.


 John C. Morley: (11:57)

The keyword selection tool has gotten trickier than it used to be. Google ads are more expensive. And to be honest with you, I think there are many other things you can do besides Google ads that will yield a much higher return. Now, if you're getting a return on your investment, great, kudos. But I just feel that these people see Google hiring independent contractors, okay? And they call it Google's extended workforce, okay? And it says we contract with businesses worldwide to provide specialized services where we don't have appropriate in-house expertise or resources, often in fields requiring significant specialized training like cafe operations, medical care, transportation, customer support, and physical security. Okay? So if you don't have the expertise to do the advertising correctly, why are you even selling advertising?


John C. Morley: (12:59)

I mean, it's just an oxymoron. So I won't advertise with Google the way I was treated and the rudeness of their team. And also not only that but their inability. I had a better campaign that was performing than what they gave me. My campaign was spending a couple of dollars a day. Their campaign was spending 20, 30, 40, and 50. They were just wasting my money. And maybe some people get lucky, but they get arrogant when you start to complain. So I don't want to do business with an arrogant company. So goodbye, Google. I'm not paying any money to be with you. All right? 

I've gotta give up big shame, shame on Home Depot in Canada. Shame on you. Why? Home Depot Canada was recently found for sharing customers' data with meta, and this was per privacy regulars. Shame on you, shame on you, shame on you. 

Home Depot Inc., the Canadian arm, was found to be sharing details from e-receipts related to in-store purchases with Facebook owner Meta platforms without the knowledge or consent of its customers. And this was according to Canada's privacy regulator. Now, of course, they wouldn't lie. An investigation by the office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, O P C, found that by participating in META'S offline conversion program, Home Depot shared the e-receipts that included encoded email addresses and purchase information. The regular added that the Home Goods chain stopped sharing customer information with meta in October 2022, which was among the recommendations OPC made until the company can implement measures to ensure valid consent. Home Depot and Meta did not immediately respond to Reuter's request for comment. Of course, they didn't. Now, I gotta tell you something else.


John C. Morley: (15:00)

I'm not gonna mention the name of the company, but a lot of these companies sell water. I'm not a big proponent of these people who try to commit these water systems. A lot of them are scams. I have an RO system at home. I did my research, brought my plumber in and had them install it. But a lot of these people, you go to Home Depot, you go to Lowe's, and they say, oh gee, we wanna do a free water test for you. And the reason I'm so wise about this is I worked for one of these companies when I was in school a while back, and it's a part-time job. And what would happen is they would have these samples, you know, they would get them. And the basic of what happened is we'd call them and say, hi, is this Mrs Johnson? Yes, this, oh, hi, Mrs Johnson. I'm from such and such water. Oh, what? Looking by, well, anything, look, I was giving you a call because I have the free results for your free water, and I'd like to provide that to you. Do you have a moment? Sure. Okay. Well, you're, this level is good. So that's really good. This level is very good. Now, this level here has some things that we should be concerned about, and that could be causing some health risks. This could be a little bit harder. I would like to have one of our technicians come out and perform a free survey just so you have a little more peace of mind about what exactly is in your water. This is just a basic test. Most people will say yes. Oh, well, sure. So what happens is they come out, and they come out with this little dog and pony show, and the first thing they ask the wife is will your husband be there? Oh, no, my husband works. He won't be there until, okay, well then we'll schedule it on a weekend when he can be there. They always make sure that the wife and the husband, or if it's a same-sex marriage, that they're both there together. There are two decision-makers. Suppose it's a single home with just one person. And that's, that's fine. So now they come out, they do this dog and pony show, which takes about 30, 40 minutes, and they go through all these great, amazing science experiments, and they wow and dazzle you, but they actually scare you.


 John C. Morley: (17:05)

And they try to rope you into this system under the sink and a house system, and then something that doesn't use soap for your washing machine. And you're probably wondering, what is that system that lets you clean without soap in the washing machine? So it's an aqueous ozone system, basically, and it infuses oxygen into the laundry. But I have to tell you something; I am not a proponent of this. I don't think that this unit, even though it's $297, I just don't think it works really well. It sounds way too good to be true. And a lot of people will say, you know, they washed clothes, and it looked pretty easy. It's one of those things that sounds way too good to be true. The system uses water infused with environmentally friendly ozone to clean clothes.


John C. Morley: (18:10)

A lot of people were sceptical. Some people get impressed, but I have to tell you something, the people that get impressed are usually the ones that are getting paid off or they're getting some kind of value. So anyway, what got me really disappointed with this company is how they literally lie, cheat and steal. So they come into a home and do the dog and pony show. And let's say, you know, they know that the family maybe just had a baby or they just moved in. And this isn't really a time for them to be spending money on a system. Now the system is not $500. It's not a thousand dollars. The system starts anywhere from 5,000 to $30,000. But then, they'll put them on a payment plan for you. And I just think it's so terrible how they not only do this, but they abuse the kids working on the phone to give up like their soul, to get these people to believe them.


John C. Morley: (19:19)

And when I started realizing how much the owner was scum, I walked into his office cuz he wanted to promote me to be like a salesman. And I said thank you. We had a great run. We're done. I can't work with you anymore. I can't work with someone. Well, everybody needs this horse, says, no, they don't. I said, and their water's really not that bad, and you know that, and this is just a scam. And so when that happened to me, and then when I started bringing him a lot of good numbers, I said, I should be getting some more money. And then I saw the kind of sales I was bringing in the door and was still getting the lousy bear wage. And once in a while, I'd get a sandwich or something. And then they were very abusive because they threatened to fire you if you didn't get the numbers that night. And I was like, we're bringing you in so much money, and you're not even giving us a small percentage. I mean, we're doing your business. If it's not for us, you will be out of business.


John C. Morley: (20:25)

So anyway, that's my 2 cents there. But I know we went into a long spiel. I got into the Home Depot thing because, again, what happens with these companies is that, so when somebody buys, this is why I got into this. When somebody buys a washing machine or a dishwasher, they buy a dryer or dishwasher. It's one of the reasons I don't buy from Home Depot or Lowe's. I always buy from a reputable appliance dealer. You'll get a phone call about a week or two after you purchase that machine. Hi yeah, listen, we wanna come out and do a free water sample. I see you just got a brand-new washing machine. You got a brand new dishwasher, and you know, a lot of times, water going through those machines can damage it. So they use that fright factor to scare you. And I think that's just a bad, bad way to sell. So shame on you, Home Depot, Canada, but at least I'm glad to see you've mended your ways. But it's funny when money's involved these companies will try to play that they didn't know any better until the judge slaps them either with cups or with a big fine telling 'em that you're wrong, it's time to pay up. All right, so enough with the Home Depot story there.


John C. Morley: (21:47)

So the US says yes, and the US says something very interesting. It hacked the hackers. What the heck is this about? Alright, so the US says it hacked the hackers to bring down ransomware gangs, helping 300 victims in Washington just the other day to Reuters. And I quote the FBI on Thursday revealed that it had secretly hacked and disrupted a prolific ransomware gang called Hive. This manoeuvre allowed the bureau to thwart the group from collecting more than 130 million in ransomware demands from more than 300 victims. At a US News conference, US Attorney General Merrick Garland, FBI director Christopher Ray and Deputy US Attorney General Lisa Monaco said government hackers broke into the hives network and put the gang under surveillance, surreptitiously stealing the digital keys the group used to unlock victims organizations' data.


John C. Morley: (23:01)

They were then able to alert victims in advance so they could take steps to protect their systems Before Hive demanded prepayments. I quote, using lawful means, we hacked the hackers, monocle told reporters, we turned the tables on Hive. So the news on this takedown was pretty impressive. And when Hive's website was replaced with a flashing message, the Federal Bureau of Investigation saw this site as part of coordinated law enforcement action against Hive ransomware. Wow. So Hive servers were seized by the German Federal Criminal police and the Dutch National High Tech Crime Unit. And another quote, intensive cooperation across national borders and continents characterized by the mutual trust is the key to fighting serious crime effectively. And I quote, said German police Commissioner Udo Vogel in a statement for the police and prosecutors in the state of Baton Waterberg who assisted in the probe. So Reuters was not immediately able to locate contact details for Hive.


John C. Morley: (24:14)

It's unclear where they were geographically based. The takedown of Hive is distinct from some of the other Hive profile ransomware cases. The US Justice Department has announced in recent years, such as a cyber-attack in 2021 against the Colonial Pipeline. In that case, the Justice Department seized some 2.3 million in cryptocurrency ransom after the company had already paid the hackers. Here there were no seizures because investigators intervened before Hive demanded the payments. The undercover infiltration, which started in July 2022, went undetected by the gang until now over 100 million in ransomware. A hive was one of the most prolific among a wide range of cyber-criminal groups that extorted international businesses by encrypting their data and demanding massive cryptocurrency payments. In return, the Justice Department said that over the years, Hives targeted more than 1500 victims in 80 different countries and has collected more than a hundred million in ransomware payments.


John C. Morley: (25:18)

Although there were no arrests announced this past Wednesday. Garland said the investigation was ongoing and one department official, total reporters to stay tuned. This isn't over, guys. Garland also said the FBI's operation helped a wide range of victims, including a Texas school district. Quote. The bureau provided decryption keys to the school district, saving it from making a 5 million ransom payment. He said a Louisiana Hospital meanwhile was spared 3 million. Hive was ransomware as a service organization, sometimes abbreviated as RAAS, ransomware as a service. That's pretty terrible, which means that it farmed out aspects of its hacking spree to affiliates in exchange for a cut of the proceeds. That's terrible. And the Canadian researcher Brett Callow of cybersecurity company Emissof said in an email, and I quote, one of the most active groups around the world, if not the most active close quote.


John C. Morley: (26:16)

So, international law enforcement has struggled for years to beat the hydraulic scrooge of ransomware, which periodically crippled companies, government bodies, and increasingly critical infrastructures. Hives hackers will likely soon quote short of any interest, either set up shop under a different brand or get recruited into another RAAS group, said Jim Simpson, director of Threat Intelligence at British Firm Searchlight Cyber. You see, the thing about this and what all people don't realize is that a lot of these hackers set up shop, and it's kind of like if something happens with their business, they just close the door, and then they just reopen again. Simpson still welcomes the move, saying that the operation has imposed a high cost on hives equities. So this didn't put them out of business, but it probably not quite a few million off of their bottom line that they were gonna get to keep.


John C. Morley: (27:13)

So now they'll have to reinvest that and figure out a new place. Who knows if they had to dispose of those computers? This is why a lot of times, hackers overseas are very successful because not only are they not easily traced, they go through multiple VPNs. They operate in an internet cafe, so they don't really have a presence. They go to some computer. And a lot of these computers, they even used to have these in New York where when you're done with a computer or the time expires, the computer reimages itself. So there's nothing really on it. Interesting. All right. So we'll stay tuned to what's gonna happen about more hacking, but don't think that ransomware is gone because there are still more people out there that do ransomware, and the only real protection against it is to be actively protected. Now, we can do what they call one type of protection, which is active, and the other is passive.


John C. Morley: (28:13)

Okay? So what's the difference? So active and passive relates to the word being active and proactive. Okay? If you're proactive, that means you'll detect things before they become a problem. We'll keep following that up, don't worry. All right. So more news coming up, which I think is very, very, very interesting. Do you know what I have to tell you? Oh, yes. Guess it's coming back to the office. Well, I should say he was coming back to Meta and Twitter. Yes, Trump may soon return to Facebook soon because Meta and Twitter decided to restore Trump's account. Other platforms may follow suit. So former President Donald Trump could soon make a return to Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter and reach massive audiences on each. Now the companies behind those platforms have restored access to his accounts, but that could just be the start of the decision by Twitter.


John C. Morley: (29:13)

And now Facebook parent Meta to bring back Trump could push or at least provide cover for a number of other platforms to make similar moves. Facebook and Twitter restricted Trump's account in the aftermath of the January 6th attack. The bans were seen as necessary by tech executives and many on Capitol Hill, believing Trump could use their platforms to incite further violence. Many of the platforms followed soup by blaming or restricting Trump, including YouTube, Snapchat, and game streaming platform Twitch. Shopify, an e-commerce company, removed two stores associated with Trump. And digital payment provider Stripes said it would stop processing payments for Trump's campaign.

In some cases, platforms, restricted channels or content associated with the then-president, if not directly affiliated. Reddit and Discord, for example, banned pro-Trump groups on their platforms. The net effect was that Trump, or at least his accounts, essentially vanished or went silent across the mainstream Internet.


John C. Morley: (30:11)

Trump's digital exile pushed him to launch his own social media platform through social, his media company even teased plans to create rivals to other online services, including Stripe. Trump has not said whether he will resume posting from Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram. He has believed to have some form of an exclusivity deal with truth Social's parent company to post there. Very interesting. So what the heck does all this mean? I think this means that he's getting some power, and I think some people are getting scared because the organization he has might have more power than the native organization. So we'll stay tuned with that. I'm sure there's more coming up the pipeline. And ladies and gentlemen, this is a very strange one.

 Airlines and cattle farmers have beef or are concerned with Google's climate math. What the heck is this about? Well, this is from San Francisco to Los Angeles. They're concerned that the trip could generate 101 kilograms of carbon emissions, or perhaps 142 or even 366 kilograms, depending on what source you search online. So this is a wide range of estimates stemming from what climate experts view as a growing problem with Google at the centre. So more people are trying to factor climate change impacts into life choices, such as word of vacation or what to eat. Scientists are still debating how to accurately estimate the impacts of many activities, including flying or producing meat while the math gets sorted out. Some ministries create emission estimates that are unfair. So what does this mean, ladies and gentlemen? It means that this is gonna become a political ploy right now based on the action that it's probably going to affect society. Now, I said probably that doesn't mean it will affect society, doesn't mean that does not mean that it will affect society, but it could, it could actually affect society.


John C. Morley: (32:28)

And you might be saying, John, how can that be? Well, it's because you have to understand that it is a certain way. I mean, they're trying to figure out certain things, and by figuring out certain things, I believe that people, for whatever reason, are a little bit challenged, right? They're a little bit challenged. And by being a little bit challenged, they don't necessarily know what to do, right? They don't necessarily know what to do. So by saying we don't know what to do, I think that could be an issue for some people, it could be an issue. And so although we're looking at all these different options, right? Does it mean right now that this is gonna change our world? I don't think it's gonna change our world, but I do feel that it's gonna make a difference.


John C. Morley: (33:45)

I do think it's gonna make a difference. And the reason it's gonna make a difference, ladies and gentlemen, is that people are just stirring up all kinds of crap. All right? I get that there are mission problems, I get it. Okay, but is this really this big of a deal or is this something that just somebody is doing for a political reason? And I'd have to say that this is happening because of political reasoning. That's not nice to say, but I just feel that it is happening for that reason. Okay? And so I know, ladies and gentlemen, that people always hedge things when they're gonna get political. I mean, that's the name of the game, right? They hedge stuff, but why do they hedge stuff? I think they hedge things because they don't realize the impact it's gonna have on our world. They just don't know.


John C. Morley: (34:51)

And so, if you had to make a decision to do something, but that decision was impacted by politics, would you still make the same decision? Or would you change how you'll make the decision based on political influence? Now, I know that seems hard because we don't know what the influence is, but if you didn't make the decision for the better good of all concerned, you'd be doing yourself a disservice, and you might regret that decision you actually made. So this whole thing about airlines, cattle and Google's climate math could become serious because if the numbers given are wrong, it could cause an issue. Let me give you an example. Let's say you're using an online shipping site, maybe one of the big mass, you know, auction sites. I'm not gonna mention their name. And let's say you're using print shipping labels.


John C. Morley: (35:56)

And let's say when you print a shipping label, this is the price of what it is, okay? But later on, you get an email back saying that that label was incorrect because the dimension said this on the label, but that's not really what it paid for. It was off by a few pounds or something. I think that would piss a lot of people off. All right? It would really aggravate people, and they wouldn't necessarily like it. No, they wouldn't like it. Now, if it was intentional, that's one thing, but if it wasn't intentional, then I could understand what was going on. And I have to say that people from around the world always believe something is going to work well. They usually believe it's gonna work well. However, when it doesn't work well, then they're like, oh, geez, I think I made a bad decision. Now, what do I do? And then you're kind of stuck, right? You're stuck because you don't know what to trust anymore.


John C. Morley: (37:10)

And I think the last thing I wanna share with you guys tonight it's a really interesting story. When we talk about technology, we talk about big tech giants. The other big thing we need to talk about is our big financial people like Morgan Stanley find their bankers. I mean, what the heck is this about? I mean, is there just no place that they can, they can understand, or I mean, why would this even happen? I mean, why would they even have a culture like this? And I think this comes down to, you know, levelling fines, individual bankers, penalties. Now they're exceeding 1 million and this is according to multiple media reports, but the bank giant is cracking down on the use of messaging apps such as WhatsApp for official work.


John C. Morley: (38:11)

Apparently, what's been happening is a lot of people are doing deals and doing buy and selling trades with these different apps. Now that is illegal, ladies and gentlemen, that is illegal. That is illegal. And so I think right now they're just trying to keep themselves from without getting fines. Because they know right now that if they get caught with their hand in the cookie jar, they're going to be in serious trouble. And I don't just mean a couple of hundred dollars; I don't even mean a couple of thousand dollars. I mean millions. This was reported by Financial Times not too long ago. And last September, the US Securities and Exchange Commission SEC fined big-name banks and brokers, a collective 1.8 billion. I said it was more than a million, right?


John C. Morley: (39:11)

A billion workers use private texting apps to discuss work and for not always save those messages. The fines include a $1.1 billion assessment for the SEC and a 710 million fine from the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. So what does all this mean? Well, it means that if you're gonna conduct business, okay, you gotta make sure that your platforms are secure. That's number one. And they had to be approved for whatever you're using them for. But also you gotta make sure that you save your messages, whether it's email, whether it's chat, whatever it is, you gotta make sure you save those messages at least for seven years because you could go back and that's why it's always good to have these different types of communication. But if you throw out your messages, how will you ever go anywhere? You're not. You're gonna just have a big, big problem.


John C. Morley: (40:05)

Ladies and gentlemen, I'm John C. Morley, a serial entrepreneur. It has been an amazing privilege, pleasure and honour to be with you on this last Friday of January. You've been watching the JMORTech Talk show. I invite you to click on that QR code, scan it, go to and check out all the great content I have. There's so much information out there to improve the quality of your life. I know many of you have been asking me where Marcus is. So Marcus has been working on some new things expanding to transform you, and we hope to see him in a couple of months. The date is not certain, but he should be back. We know it'll be sometime this year, hopefully, but he is working on some other things, so we do miss him. But I do thank all of your comments for asking about that, and we just have so much to share with you guys.


John C. Morley: (40:56)

We're gonna be going into some live shows in person, so that's gonna be happening when I say in person, like, we're gonna record in person with our guests, and we have a lot of stuff I can't even share with you right now. So definitely show us some love, and support the channel. Tell your friends, your colleagues, and your associates. Share this with everyone you know. And I tell you to do that because we really care about the information we present to you. You notice that our show is not a sales show. That's not by accident. We want to give you true media, the information you can learn about, not stuff people want to tell you about, the stuff you want to know the truth about. Okay? You might have heard the thing they always say that bleeds it leads. I get that. And it's important to give you good news, but I think it's also important to give you information about things that'll help you make decisions every day.


John C. Morley: (41:49)

I hope you guys have an amazing rest of your night here Friday and a great weekend. Feel free to watch any of these shows. There's so much great content. I hope you'll come back and watch it. I definitely hope we'll see you next month, February 3rd, right here, at 5:30 PM Eastern. We'll have more JMOR Tech Talk show. More technology, more things you need to be aware of. More cutting-edge technology about what's coming in our world, like the fact that technology is changing. Are you ready for it? Chat, GPT is also going to be coming up on one of our shows soon, so stay tuned for that, and we'll see you soon. Have a great one, everyone.



Click here to watch this video