I remember when I travelled to the USA back in 2010 I figured that wifi was ubiquitous enough now that I probably wouldn’t have to worry about getting a data plan. Back then that was partly true, indeed I was able to do pretty much everything I needed to for the first two weeks before needing Internet on the go became something of a necessity. Thankfully that was easily fixed by getting a $70, prepaid plan from T-Mobile which had unlimited everything which was more than enough to cover the gap. Still that took a good few hours out of my day just to get that sorted and since then I’ve always wanted a universal mobile plan that didn’t cost me the Earth.
Today Google has announced just that.
Not to be confused with Google’s other similar endeavour Project Fi is a collaboration between Google and numerous cellular providers to give end users a single plan that will work for them across 120 countries. Fi enabled handsets, of which there are currently only one: the Nexus 6, are able to switch between wifi and a multitude of local cellular providers for calls, txts and, most important of all, data. This comes hand in hand with a bunch of other features like being able to check your voicemails through Google Hangouts as well as other nifty features like Google Voice. Suffice to say it sounds like a pretty terrific deal and, thankfully, remains so even when you include the pricing.
The base plan will set you back $20 which includes unlimited domestic calls (I’m assuming that means national), unlimited txts to anywhere and access to the wifi and cellular networks that are part of the service. From there you can add data onto your plan for the rate of $10 per GB which, whilst not exactly the cheapest plan around (What I currently get on Telstra for $95 would cost me $120 on Fi) does come with the added benefit of being charged in 100MB increments. So if you don’t use all your data cap by the end of the month you don’t get charged for it. The benefit here is, of course, that that data works across 120 countries than my current 1, something I would’ve made good use of back when I was travelling a lot for work.
Like many cool services however Fi will only be available to US residents to begin with as their coverage map doesn’t extend far past American border. This is most likely due to the first two providers they’ve partnered with, Sprint and T-Mobile, not having a presence elsewhere. However it looks pretty likely that Google will want to extend this partnership to carriers in other countries, mostly in the aims of reducing their underlying costs for providing data coverage overseas. The real kicker will be to see who they partner with in some countries as depending on who they choose the experience could be wildly different, something I’m sure they’re keen to avoid.
I don’t think I’d make the switch to Google Fi right now even if it was available, not at least until I had a few good reports on how their service compared to the other big providers. To be sure it’d definitely be something I’d like to have when I’m travelling especially now considering how much more I can get done on my phone compared to when I last spent a good chunk of time abroad. As my everytime provider though I’m not so sure as the features they’re currently offering aren’t enough to overcome the almost $30 price differential.
I’m sure that will change with time, however.
Flash, after starting out its life as one of the bevy of animation plugins for browsers back in the day. has become synonymous with online video. It’s also got a rather terrible reputation for using an inordinate amount of system resources to accomplish this feat, something which hasn’t gone away even in the latest versions. Indeed even my media PC, which has a graphics card with accelerated video decoding, struggles with Flash, it’s unoptimized format monopolizing every skerrick of resources for itself. HTML5 sought to solve this problem by making video a part of the base HTML specification which, everyone had hoped, would see an end to proprietary plug-ins and the woes they brought with them. However the road to getting that standard widely adopted hasn’t been an easy one as YouTube’s 4 year road to making HTML5 the default shows.
Google had always been on the “let’s use an open standard” bandwagon when it came to HTML5 video which was at odds with other members of the HTML5 board who wanted to use something that, whilst being more ubiquitous, was a proprietary codec. This, unfortunately, led to a deadlock within the committee with none of them being able to agree on a default standard. Despite what YouTube’s move to HTML5 would indicate there is still no defined standard for which codec to use for HTML5 video, meaning that there’s no way to guarantee that a video you’ve encoded in one way will be viewable by HTML5 compliant browsers. Essentially it looks like a format war is about to begin where the wider world will decide the champion and the HTML5 committee will just have to play catch up.
YouTube has unsurprisingly decided to go for Google’s VP9 codec for their HTML5 videos, a standard which they fully control. Whilst they’ve had HTML5 video available for some time now as an option it never enjoyed the widespread support required in order for them to make it the default. It seems now they’ve got buy in from most of the major browser vendors in order to be able to make the switch so people running Safari 8, IE 11, Chrome and (beta) Firefox will be given the Flash free experience. This has the potential to set up VP9 as the de facto codec for HTML5 although I highly doubt it’ll be officially crowned anytime soon.
Google has also been hard at work ensuring that VP9 enjoys wide support across platforms as there are already several major chip producers whose System on a Chip (SoC) already supports the codec. Without that the mobile experience of VP9 encoded videos would likely be extremely poor, hindering adoption substantially.
Whilst a codec that’s almost entirely under the control of Google might not have been the ideal solution that the Open Source evangelists were hoping for (although it seems pretty open to me) it’s probably the best solution we were going to get. I have not heard of the other competing standards, apart from H.264, having such widespread support as Google’s VP9 does now. It’s likely that the next few years will see many people adopting a couple standards whilst the consumers duke it out in the next format war with the victor not clear until it’s been over for a couple years. For me though I’m glad it’s happened and hopefully soon we can do away with the system hog that Flash is.
I’d like to say that I’ve never run ads on my blog out of a principled stance against them but the reality is I just wouldn’t make enough out of them to justify their existence. Sure this blog does cost me a non-zero sum to maintain but it’s never been much of a burden and I wouldn’t feel right compromising the (now) good look of the website just to make a few bucks on the side. This hasn’t stopped me from wondering how I would go about making my living as a blogger, although unfortunately pretty much every road leads back to advertising. However that model might be set to change with one of Google’s latest products: Contributor.
The idea behind it is simple: you select a monthly amount you want to contribute to the sites you frequent and for sites participating in the Contributor program you’ll see no ads from Google AdSense. It’s a slight tweak on the idea of services like Flattr with a much lower barrier to adoption since most people have a Google account already and most sites run AdSense in some form. You also don’t have to specify how much goes to each site you visit, Google handles that by counting up the pageviews and dividing up your monthly contribution accordingly. In a world where AdBlock Plus has become one of the most installed browser extensions this could be a way for publishers to claw back a little revenue and, of course, for Google to bump up its revenue.
This isn’t Google’s first foray into crowd funding publishers as just a few months ago they released Fan Funding for YouTube channels. That was mostly a reaction to other crowd funding services like Patreon and Subbable whereas Contributor feels like a more fully thought out solution, one that has some real potential to generate revenue for content creators. Hopefully Google will be scaling the program into a more general solution as times goes on as I can imagine a simple “pay $3 to disable all AdSense ads” kind of service would see an incredibly large adoption rate.
On the flip side though I’m wondering how many people would convert away from blocking ads completely to using Contributor or a similar service. I know those AdBlock sensing scripts that put up guilt trip ads (like DotaCinema’s Don’t Make Sven Cry one) are pretty effective in making me whitelist certain sites, but going the next step to actually paying money is a leap I’m not sure I’d make. I know it’s nothing in the grand scheme of things, $36/year is a pittance for most people browsing the Internet, but it’s still a barrier. That being said it’s a lower barrier than any of the other options available, however.
I think Contributor will be a positive thing for both publishers and consumers in the long run, it’ll just depend on how willing people are to fork over a couple bucks a month and how much of that makes its way back to the sites it supports. You’ll still need a decent sized audience to make a living off it but at least you’d have another tool at your disposal to have them support what you do. Meanwhile I and all the other aspiring small time bloggers will continue to fantasize about what it would be like to get paid for what we do, even though we know it’ll never happen.
But it could…couldn’t it? 😉
There’s two distinct schools of thought when it comes to the modular smartphone idea. The first is that it’s the way phones were meant to be made, giving users the ability to customize every aspect of their device and reducing e-waste at the same time. The other flips that idea on its head, stating that the idea is infeasible due to the limitations inherent in a modular platform and reliance on manufacturers to build components specifically for the platform. Since I tend towards the latter I thought that Project Ara, Google’s (nee Motorola’s) attempt at the idea, would likely never see the light of day but as it turns out the platform is very real and they even have a working prototype.
The essence of the idea hasn’t changed much since Motorola first talked about it at the end of last year, being a more restrained version of the Phonebloks idea. The layout is the same as the original design prototypes, giving you space on the back of the unit for about 7 modular units and space on the front for a large screen and a speaker attachment. However they also showed off a new, slim version which has space for fewer modules but is a much sleeker unit overall. Google also mentioned that they were working on a phablet design as well which was interesting considering that the current prototype unit was looking to be almost phablet sized. The whole unit, dubbed Spiral 1, was fully functional including module removal and swapping so the idea has definitely come a long way since it’s initial inception late last year.
There are a few things that stand out about the device in its current form, primarily the way in which some of the blocks don’t conform to the same dimensions as other ones. Most notably you can see this with the blood oxygen sensor they have sticking out of the top however you’ll also notice that the battery module is about twice the height of anything else. This highlights one of the bigger issues with modular design as much of the heft in modern phones is due to the increasingly large batteries they carry with them. The limited space of the modular blocks means that either the batteries have significantly reduced capacity or have to be bigger than the other modules, neither of which is a particularly desirable attribute.
In fact the more the I think about Project Ara the more I feel it’s oriented towards those looking to develop hardware for mobile platforms than it is for actual phone users. Being able to develop your specific functionality without having to worry about the rest of the platform frees up a significant amount of time which can then be spent on getting said functionality into other phones. In that regards Project Ara is amazing however that same flexibility is likely what will turn many consumers off such a device. Sure, having a phone tailored to your exact specifications has a certain allure, but I can’t help but feel that that market is vanishingly small.
It will be interesting to see how the Project Ara platform progresses as they have hinted that there’s a much better prototype floating around (called Spiral 2) which they’re looking to release to hardware developers in the near future. Whilst having a proof of concept is great there’s still a lot of questions around module development, available functionality and, above all, the usability of the system when its complete. It’s looking like a full consumer version likely isn’t due out until late next year or early 2016 so we’re going to have to wait a while to see what the fully fledged modular smartphone will look like.
It was just over 2 years ago that Felix Baumgartner leapt from the Red Bull Stratos capsule from a height of 39KMs above the Earth’s atmosphere, breaking a record that had stood for over 50 years. The amount of effort that went into creating that project left many, including myself, thinking that Baumgartner’s record would stand for a pretty long time as few have the resources and desire to do something of that nature. However as it turns out one of Google’s Senior Vice Presidents, Alan Eustace, had been working on breaking that record in secret for the past 3 years and on Friday last week he descended to Earth from a height of 135,890 feet (41.4KM), shattering Baumgartner’s record by an incredible 7,000 feet.
The 2 jumps could not be more different, both technically and generally. For starters the Red Bull Stratos project was primarily a marketing exercise for Red Bull, the science that happened on the side was just a benefit for the rest of us. Eustace’s project on the other hand was done primarily in secret, with him eschewing any help from Google in order to avoid it becoming a marketing event. Indeed I don’t think anyone bar those working on the project knew that this was coming and the fact that they managed to achieve what Stratos did with a fraction of the funding speaks volumes to the team Eustace created to achieve this.
Looking at the above picture, which shows Eustace dangling from a tenuous tether as he ascends upwards, it’s plain to see that their approach was radically different to Stratos. Instead of building a capsule to transport Eustace, like Stratos and Kittinger’s project both did, they instead went for a direct tether to his pressure suit. This meant he spent the long journey skywards dangling face down which, whilst being nightmare material for some, would’ve given him an unparalleled view of the Earth disappearing from him. It also means that the load the balloon needed to carry was greatly reduced by comparison which likely allowed him to ascend much quicker.
Indeed the whole set up is incredibly bare bones with Eustace’s suit lacking many of the ancillary systems that Baumgartner’s had. One that amazed me was the lack of any kind of cooling system, something which meant that any heat he generated would stick around for an uncomfortably long period of time. To get around this he essentially remained motionless for the entire ascent, responding to ground control by moving one of this legs which they could monitor on camera. They did include a specially developed kind of parachute though, called Saber, which ensured that he didn’t suffer from the same control issues that Baumgartner did during his descent.
It’s simply astounding how Eustace and his team managed to achieve this, given their short time frame and comparatively limited budget. I’m also wildly impressed that they managed to keep this whole thing a secret for that period of time too as it would’ve been very easy for them to overshadow the Stratos project, especially given some of the issues they encountered. Whilst we might not all be doing high altitude jumps any time soon the technology behind this could find its way into safety systems in the coming generation of private space flight vehicles, something they will all need in no short order.
For the last 6 months I’ve been on the lookout for the next phone that will replace my Xperia Z. Don’t get me wrong, it’s still quite a capable phone, however not a year has gone by in the past decade that there hasn’t been one phone that triggered my geeky lust, forcing me to part ways with several hundred dollars. However the improvements made since I acquired my last handset have just been evolutionary steps forward, none of which have been compelling enough to make me get my wallet out. I had hoped that the Nexus 6 would be the solution to my woes and, whilst it’s not exactly the technological marvel I was hoping for, Google might just be fortunate enough to get my money this time around.
The Nexus 6 jumps on the huge screen bandwagon bringing us an (almost) 6″ display boasting a 2560 x 1440 resolution on an AMOLED panel. The specs under the hood are pretty impressive with it sporting a quad core 2.7 GHz SOC with 3GB RAM and a 3220mAh battery. The rest of it is a rather standard affair including things such as the standard array of sensors that everyone has come to expect, a decent camera (that can do usable 4K video) and a choice between 32GB and 64GB worth of storage. If you were upgrading every 2 years or so the Nexus 6 would be an impressive step up however compared to what’s been available in the market for a while now it’s not much more than a giant screen.
You can’t help but compare this phone to the recently released iPhone 6+ which also sports a giant screen and similar specifications. In terms of who comes out ahead it’s not exactly clear as they both seem to win out in various categories (the Nexus 6 has the better screen, the iPhone 6+ is lighter) but then again the main driver of which one of these you’d go for would be more heavily driven by which ecosystem you’d already bought into. I’d be interested to see how these devices compare side by side however as there’s only so much you can tell by looking at spec sheets.
As someone who’s grown accustom to his 5″ screen I was hoping there’d be a diminutive sister of the Nexus 6, much like the iPhone 6. You can still get the Nexus 5, which now sports Android L, however the specs are the same as they ever were which means there’s far less incentive for people like me to upgrade. Talking to friends who’ve made the switch to giant phones like this (and seeing my wife, with her tiny hands, deftly use her Galaxy Note) it seems like the upgrade wouldn’t be too much of a stretch. Had there been a smaller screen I would probably be a little bit more excited about acquiring one as I don’t really have a use case for a much bigger screen than what I have now. That could change once I get some time with the device, though.
So whilst I might not be frothing at the mouth to get Google’s latest handset they might just end up getting my money anyway as there just enough new features for me to justify upgrading my near 2 year old handset. There’s no mistaking that the Nexus 6 is the iPhone 6+ for those on the Android ecosystem and I’m sure there will be many a water cooler conversation over which one of them is the better overall device. For me though the main draw is the stock Android interface with updates that are unimpeded by manufacturers and carriers, something which has been the bane of my Android existence for far too long. Indeed that’s probably the only compelling reason I can see to upgrade to the Nexus 6 at the moment, which is likely enough for some.
When Google+ was first announced I counted myself among its fans. Primarily this was due to the interface which, unlike every other social media platform at the time, was clean and there was the possibility I could integrate all my social media in the one spot. However as time went on it became apparent that this wasn’t happening any time soon and the dearth of people actively using it meant that it just fell by the wayside. As other products got rolled into it I wasn’t particularly fussed, I wasn’t a big user of most of them in the first place, however I was keenly aware of the consternation from the wider user base. It seems that Google might have caught onto this and is looking to wind down the Google+ service.
Back in April the head of Google+, Vic Gundotra, announced that he was leaving the company. Whilst Google maintained that this would not impact on their strategy many sources reported that Google was abandoning its much loathed approach of integrating Google+ into everything and that decrease in focus likely meant a decrease in resources. Considering that no one else can come up for a good reason why Gundotra, a 7 year veteran of Google, would leave the company it does seem highly plausible that something is happening to Google+ and it isn’t good for his future there. The question in my mind then is whether or not winding down the service will restore the some of the goodwill lost in Google’s aggressive integration spree.
Rumours have it that Google+ Photos will be the first service to be let free from the iron grip of its parent social network. Considering that the Photos section of Google+ started out as the web storage part of their Picasa product it makes sense that this would be the first service to be spun out. How it will compete with other, already established offerings though is somewhat up in the air although they do have the benefit of already being tightly integrated with the Android ecosystem. If they’re unwinding that application then it makes you wonder if they’ll continue that trend to other services, like YouTube.
For the uninitiated the integration of YouTube and Google+ was met with huge amounts of resistance with numerous large channels openly protesting it. Whilst some aspects of the integration have been relaxed (like allowing you to use a pseudonym that isn’t your real name) the vast majority of features that many YouTubers relied on are simply gone, replaced with seemingly inferior Google+ alternatives. If Google+ is walking off into the sunset then they’d do well to bring back the older interface although I’m sure the stalwart opponents won’t be thanking Google if they do.
Honestly whilst I liked Google+ originally, and even made efforts to actively use the platform, it simply hasn’t had the required amount of buy in to justify Google throwing all of its eggs into that basket. Whilst I like some of the integration between the various Google+ services I completely understand why others don’t, especially if you’re a content creator on one of their platforms. Winding down the service might see a few cheers here or there but honestly the damage was already done and it’s up to Google to figure out how to win the users back in a post Google+ world.
I can remember my first encounter with virtual reality way back in the 90s. It was a curiosity more than anything else, something that was available at this one arcade/pizza place in the middle of town. You’d go in and there it would be, two giant platforms containing people with their heads strapped into oversized head gear. On the screens behind them you could see what they were seeing, a crude polygonal world inhabited by the other player and a pterodactyl. I didn’t really think much of it at the time, mostly since I couldn’t play it anywhere but there (and that was an hour drive away) but as I grew older I always wondered what had become of that technology. Today VR is on the cusp of becoming mainstream and it looks like Google wants to thrust it into the limelight.
Meet Google Cardboard, the ultra low cost virtual reality headset that Google gave out to every attendee at I/O this year. It’s an incredibly simple idea, using your smartphone’s screen and to send different images to your eyes. Indeed if you were so inclined a similar system could be used to turn any screen into a VR headset, although the lenses would need to be crafted for the right dimensions. With that in mind the range of handsets that Google Cardboard supports is a little limited, mostly to Google Nexus handsets and some of their closely related cousins, but I’m sure that future incarnations that support a wide range of devices won’t be too far off. Indeed if the idea has piqued your interest enough you can get an unofficial version of it for the low cost of $25, a bargain if you’re looking to dabble with VR.
Compared to the original OculusVR specs most smartphones are more than capable of driving Google Cardboard with an acceptable level of performance. My current phone, the Sony Xperia Z, has a full 1080p resolution and enough grunt to run some pretty decent 3D applications. That combined with the bevy of sensors that are in most modern smartphones make Google Cardboard a pretty brilliant little platform for testing out what you can do with VR. Of course that also means the experience you can get with this will vary wildly depending on what handset you have but for those looking for a cheap platform to validate ideas on it’s hard to argue against it.
Of course this begs the question as to what Google’s larger plan is for introducing this concept to the world. Ever since the breakaway success that was the OculusVR it’s been obvious that there’s consumer demand for VR and it only seems to be increasing as time goes on. However most applications are contained solely within the games industry with only a few interesting experiments (like Living with Lag) breaking outside that mould. There’s a ton of augmented reality applications on Android which could potentially benefit from widespread adoption of something like Cardboard, however beyond that I’m not so sure.
I think it’s probably a gamble on Google’s part as history has proven that throwing out a concept to the masses is a great way to root out innovative ideas. Google might not have any solid plans for developing VR of this nature themselves but the community that arises around the idea could prove a fruitful place for applications that no one has thought of before. I had already committed myself to a retail version of an Oculus when it came out however so whilst Cardboard might be a curiosity my heart is unfortunately promised to another.
With an abundance of space and not much else the rural parts of Australia aren’t really the place where a kid has much to entertain themselves with. From the age of about 12 however my parents let us kids bash our way around the property in all manner of vehicles which has then fed into a lifelong obsession with cars. This has been in direct competition with my financially sensible side however as cars are a depreciating asset, one that no amount of money invested in them can ever recoup. However I still enjoy the act of driving itself, especially if it’s through some of Australia’s more picturesque landscapes. You’d think then that the idea of a self driving car would be abhorrent to a person like myself but in reality it’s anything but.
We’re fast approaching the time when cars that can drive themselves to and from any location are not only technically feasible, they’re a few short steps away from being a commercial reality. Google’s self driving car, whilst it has only left its home town a couple times, has demonstrated that it’s quite possible to arm a car with a bevy of sensors and have it react better than a human would in many situations. Indeed the accidents their car has been involved in have not been the fault of the software, but of the humans either controlling the self driving car or those ramming into the back of it. Whilst there’s still many regulatory hurdles to go before these things are seen en-masse on our roads it would seem like having them there would be a huge boon to everyone, especially those travelling as its passengers.
For me whilst driving isn’t an unpleasant experience it’s still a time where I’m unable to do anything else but drive the car. Now I’m not exactly your stereotypical workaholic (I will keep a standard hour day and attempt to automate most of my work instead) but having an extra hour or so a day where I can complete a few tasks, or even just catch up on interesting articles, would be pretty handy. Indeed this is the reason why I still fly most places when travelling for business, even when the flight from Canberra to the other capitals is below an hour total. It’s not me doing the driving which allows me to get things done rather than spending multiple hours watching the odometer.
There’s also those numerous times when neither the wife nor I feel like driving and we could simply hand over to the car for the trip. I can even imagine it reducing our need to have separate cars as I could simply have the car drop my wife off and return to me if I needed it. That’s a pretty huge benefit and one that’s well worth paying a bit of a premium for.
This would also have the unintentional benefit of making those times when I wanted to drive that much more enjoyable. Nothing takes the fun out of something that enjoy than being forced to do it all the time for another purpose, something which driving to work every day certainly did for me. If I was only driving when I wanted to however I feel that I’d enjoy it far more than I’d otherwise would. I think a lot of car enthusiasts will feel the same way as few drive their pride and joys to work every day, instead having a daily driver that they run on the cheap. Of course some will abhor the experience in its entirety but you get that with any kind of new technology.
For me this technology can not come quick enough as the benefits are huge with the only downside being the likely high cost of acquisition. I’ve only been speaking from a personal viewpoint here too as there’s far much more to be gained once self driving cars reach a decent level of penetration among the wider community.
That’s a blog post for another day, however.
Twitch.tv started out as the bastard child of Justin.tv, a streaming website that wanted to make it easy for anyone to stream content to a wider audience. Indeed for a long time Twitch felt like something of an after thought as divesting part of an already niche site into another niche didn’t seem like a sound business maneuver. However since then Twitch has vastly outgrown its parent company becoming the default platform for content streamers around the world. The sponsorship model it has used for user’s channels has proven to be successful enough that thousands of people now make their living streaming games, giving Twitch a sustainable revenue stream. This hasn’t gone unnoticed of course and rumours are starting to circulate that Google will be looking to purchase them.
The agreement is reported to be $1 billion all cash deal, an amazing deal for the founders and employees of Twitch. The acquisition makes sense for Google as they’ve been struggling to get into the streaming market for a long time now with many of their attempts drawing only mild success. For the Twitch community though there doesn’t appear to be any direct benefits to speak of, especially considering that Google isn’t a company to let their acquisitions just do their own thing. Indeed if this rumour has any truth to it the way in which Google integrates Twitch into its larger platform will be the determining factor in how the brand grows or ultimately fails.
At the top of the list of concerns for Twitch streamers is the potential integration between YouTube’s ContentID system and the Twitch streams. Whilst most of the games that are popular on Twitch are readily endorsed by their creators (like League of Legends, DOTA2, World of Warcraft, etc.) most of them aren’t, something which has seen content producers and game developers butt heads multiple times over on YouTube. With the Twitch platform integrated into YouTube there’s potential for game creators to flag content they don’t want streamed something which is at odds with the current Twitch community ethos. If not handled correctly it could see much of Twitch’s value evaporate after they transition across to YouTube as arguably most of it comes from its wide community, not the technology or infrastructure powering it.
On the flip side though Twitch has been known to suffer from growing pains every time a popular event happens to grace its platform, something which Google could go a long way to fixing. Indeed that would likely be the only thing that Twitch has to gain from this: a global presence without the need to invest in costly additional infrastructure. If Google maintains Twitch as a separate, wholly owned brand then this could be of benefit to both of them as a more stable and available platform is likely to drive user numbers much quicker than Twitch has been able to do previously.
We’ll have to see if this rumour turns out to be true as whilst I wouldn’t begrudge Twitch taking the cash the question of what Google will do with them is what will determine their future. Whilst the combination of Twitch chat and YouTube comments sounds like the most unholy creation on the Internet since /b/ there is potential for both Twitch and Google to gain something from this. Whether that’s to the benefit of the community though remains to be seen.