The Standup with ThePrimeagen - LeetCode is dead? Privacy is done?

Episode Date: May 7, 2025

The very first episode. You’ll like it :) Also, ssh terminal.shop ;)

All right, so we are going to try something completely new. We are going to do the first ever. This is just a working name right now, okay? It's called The Name Is The Show. Okay, we got people on here right now. We got Trash Dev down in the bottom. We got Teage in the middle, and we got Casey Moratory up at the top. By the way, did you know that Teage Streams?

And we are going to be discussing some pretty hot topics here in the tech world. One, is cheating on leak code actually good, or is it, bad are cheating on technical interviews using the latest and greatest software that you've been seeing where people do cheat and to be able to get these Amazon internships. And then two, we're going to discuss a little bit about the Firefox privacy side of things. So we got some hot discussions. We're going to have some hot takes. And I have a good feeling like by the end of this, TJ will in fact be canceled. So I think everybody should be pretty excited about the outcome to this. I'm excited for my one and only episode. Thank you for inviting me.

This one episode is going to be amazing, TJ. I have strong confidence that you can do this. All right, so our first topic to discuss is going to be the LEAT code cheating story. I'm not sure if you guys have seen this, but the leak code cheating story comes with this beautiful website that says, fuck leak code. And then it has this whole tool so you can do invisible cheating live on interviews. And the creator, Roy, decided to live stream him or effectively record a YouTube of him going through an Amazon interview, effectively passing, getting a job offer. and then Loll KekW, like I'm going to take a job with you guys, all over the internet,

and then released a tool that showed that he could cheat his way through without actually doing anything. And he pretended to be dumb and did the entire copying and pasting from the LLM to get the exact answer. Of course, Amazon and all of their brilliance did ask the two media, the two, or the medium, the running median question, so the two heap question, which is just like the oldest. That thing was in cracking the coding interview, like maybe 15 years ago.

So, I mean, it's also on them for asking such a stupid question. question, but at the end of the day, is using leak code to cheat on an, or using an LLM to cheat on an interview? Is that okay? TJ, I know you got a lot of thoughts on this. So why don't you just lay it down on us right now? This is probably why it's going to be my first and only appearance on the show, which is that I'm going to go with the controversial take and say cheating is just bad.

and I know I know it's not popular I know that this is the last time I'm going to be here but I'm going to go cheating is just bad that's my official position and in honor of Casey I actually brought a whiteboard is that okay? Yeah that's okay yeah yeah yeah

If you want to use that antiquated whiteboard technology I mean you're that's very very interesting the 1700s will be very interested to you know I don't have the cool really cool setup this is the best that I this is the best that I've got going on here so here

is my reasoning why I don't think that you should do this. If you think of you, here's a person, okay? And here's your brain for trash, maybe this, but like on average, maybe here. Okay. Every time you make a decision, you fill in a little part of your brain, you draw those neural pathways, you have a decision matrix inside of your brain that helps you make decisions. Every time you make one. When you don't bring back the extra change, that you got at the store and say, this wasn't mine, you're filling it in. Stealing's okay.

When you lie to someone, you're saying it's good to lie. When you cheat, it doesn't matter if Amazon's a scummy company. It doesn't matter what they've done. It doesn't matter. Whatever. I'm saying in your own brain,

in your brain, okay? You're filling in cheating equals good. Okay? And for the rest of your life, you'll know you cheated to get your job. And it doesn't matter. It doesn't matter. It doesn't matter.

For the rest of your job. your life. Okay, you're working there and you're getting money. You're providing for yourself. Okay, you cheated and you're filling in your own brain. You're filling in your own conscious and your own decision matrix towards bad things. So that's why I think you shouldn't cheat, even if you think Amazon sucks and lead code is bad. Okay, so if I'm hearing you correctly, what you're effectively saying is that all of these people tuned in to this show because they wanted to see a 1990s after-school special by like the Disney Corporation. The moral of the story is, look, you cheated on this Amazon interview.

And then like 15 years later, you're like, you're, you're, you know, addicted to crack in some back alley somewhere. And like, it's all over. And it was that one thing, that decision to use an LLM on the Amazon interview. That is why you are having this life right now, you know, yeah. Okay. Can I clarify? Yes. I only think that outcome is likely if you're using grok for your advice. Okay.

A little wild, a little while. All right. Got it. But, okay, so, I mean, to be, to be fair, there is some sort of moral culpability that you have to have. That you have to be like, I am okay with cheating if you're willing to cheat. Even if you think the person that you're going against is bad, right? You still have to say, no, it's okay to cheat. Let's just pretend that Amazon didn't just cheat in. general, but specifically cheated against you.

I could even cite the old classic eye for an eye makes the whole world blind, despite me not liking that phrase. But nonetheless, you are saying that vengeance is okay. If you cheat me, I should be able to cheat you in any other way as well. And I'm not sure if that actually makes a better world in any sort of sense. And I know a teach I'm probably going to get canceled along with you. This is also my last dream. But I am actually on the side that I do not think cheating is good by principle, not in

specific. And so in specific, maybe there's some good reasons why, you. you can kind of justify your choice of cheating. But I would say in principle, it's never okay to walk away from a store with some extra change. You should go back and you should give it, even with the inconvenience of four kids. And I do want to clarify, I'm not saying using LLMs and interviews is evil. I'm saying lying about it and doing it to cheat, right? Like clearly the setup for like the Amazon interview and everything is they put you in some dumb web browser text editor,

uh, wannabe situation, right? and they want to see you think and talk to them about the problem. Right? So, like, if they said, use whatever tools you want, I would be like, good idea. Use whatever that interview code or website is to get the perfect answer. That's awesome. But, like, that's obviously not what they're doing. Like, that's clearly not the case.

I mean, to be fair, you're just to play devil's advocate. The interviewer cheated because he obviously didn't make up this question himself. He got it out of an old book. Or asked an L.L. them like what kind of question should I ask us this interview like, hey, I've got an idea, chat GPT in its Infinite Tesla wisdom comes back. It's like, how

about using two heaps to find a median continuously? Something that literally no one has ever had to do in the history of computing. It's like nobody does this. It's not a thing, right? It's like you could go find, you'd have to find the 0.000-0-0-0-0-0-1%

of all computing problems where you actually want a continuous median. And for some reason, you're going to write it in Python. It's like you're super concerned about the speed, but Python was on the table for some reason. Like, that's in the mix. N-Log-N sorting the thing when we go to get the median. That's going to be too much to get the median. We're not going to want to do that.

Or we're not going to want to do on-time by just doing an actual – you can do median in O-N time, right? That's an actual thing, unlike sorting. None of that's okay. We've got to have it continuous really reporting the median with no extra actual work. But we fired up Python. The programming language, it takes 100 cycles to execute an ad, right? So, I don't know. I mean, is the cheating bad?

Should you have cheated on this interview? I'm inclined to agree with both of you that you shouldn't have cheated because that's just kind of bad for you. It's bad morally. It's about like to that amazing whiteboard diagram. Can we get that back up on here? Is that still available? I don't know. I think that does kind of say it all from the perspective of the actual person.

It's worth a thousand words. I mean, that's, if that doesn't, that is your brain on drugs, is I think what he's trying to say here. And I think we can all agree you don't want to look like, like whatever that was on the whiteboard. But all of that aside, the suck, like if we wanted to talk about who is responsible for the percentage of suck, in this case, the percentage of suck is definitely Amazon for whatever that thing was supposed to be. I have to plead ignorance here. I've never seen one of these moderates. and tech interviews, but wow, like, I watched that video that you, that you sent.

I don't even know what to say. So, so, yeah, that's my, that's my take. So I have a quick take. I think, obviously, we talked a lot. I think the obvious answer to this question is no cheating is bad, but I do think there's a responsibility on the interviewer's side to just not ask such dumb questions that can be easily cheated. So we've been doing this forever, right? Leakot memories have existed. We've been sharing test banks online. People have been given a list of questions to study and effectively just memorize leak code. So like, is that cheating in a sense? If you see a test bank or someone's like, they ask a question around graphs and you study graphs, is that considered cheating or are you just well prepared? Right? So. Well prepared would be the answer.

Yeah. I would say that's fair. But like honestly, I'm kind of glad like this is happening because I think it's going to actually, like, cause companies to, like, think about this. And I know people complain about Liko the time. Like, I play the game. If I'm going to interview and I'm going to happen, I'm going to practice, right? But I think it's going to, like, result in some, like, pretty creative interviews. So that's what I'm looking forward to. I actually agree with that.

I do think that the interview process is not a great interview. But obviously, there is something to the secret handshake, as I like to call it. You went off and memorized 50 hard problems. I asked you one of these 50 hard problems. ah, you've done it, right? If you've read the book, The Wheel of Time, you have to perform 100 Weaves to become an I-S-D-Eye. And so that's just like a requirement.

And so it doesn't make you into a great I-Sid-I. You just have to know those 100-weaves to be able to be a powerful witch in the world of a wheel of time. And so it's like there is something to having some sort of barrier. I don't think it's a good, I don't think this is an ideal one by any case. But it is something. I know that if someone can do that, they can at least program a function that can do something complicated.

Can they actually build real software where I'm going to find out in three months and either fire them or continue to go, oh, this person's actually really, really good. But I at least know they can program. But I think we can probably come up with much better ways at this point. All right, TJ, I did cut you off. I'll just give my next hot take, which will definitely get me canceled, which is that I actually think asking a question, like the median thing or whatever, is like it's actually kind of good as a first filter, assuming that you're not just literally copy-pacing from the

LLM in the sense that lots of people lie about their skills and their requirement or like their abilities and just literally like a filter where you say can you write any code and talk to a human like you like Amazon gets so many applications that they kind of do have to do that now could they do something better could they do something I'm not going to argue that there's no better option but I'm just going to throw it out there that like people apply to stuff that they're wildly unable to do. I know I graduated with people that I was like, how did you pass any of our CS classes?

Right? I've worked with people where I'm like, I don't know what you do here. I've never seen code of yours that runs. So I don't know. I'm not saying I love lead codes, but like asking an easy lead code is kind of like,

okay, if everyone thinks it's so easy, then just like you should do it. That seems good. I don't think it's easy or hard that's the problem, it's mismatch for the task, right? It's kind of like, as if you were going to say, like, well, we're, you know, we're screening for this NFL football team. And so what we decided to have people do is, like, recite Shakespeare and see how good they, you know, are they up to, you know, Patrick Stewart levels of presence here on the field? And you're just like,

what is that measuring? Look, if Amazon shipped really performance software, and that was their thing, Right. They're all about like, wow, like we have to scale really, really big. And the main kind of problems we face is that our programmers just are using n squared algorithms for median. Then it's like, okay, maybe this kind of thing makes sense. But the reality is nobody there is doing that. Like, that is just not a thing that's happening realistically. And most of what you're doing at Amazon, I'm just going to go ahead and assume is like just like shoveling manure, right? It's like you've got these legist, these large, legacy systems, you've got to deploy new stuff, the amount of time you're going to spend thinking about something like a dual heap median, which by the way, like, I defy someone to find the case where you should be doing that. Like, that to me actually sounds like just a bad idea. And the fact that that's on an interview already is like a weird, I'm like, okay, describe to me exactly the actual scenario in practice where you think that this Python dual heap median

is something that someone should have pressed the like, you know, I, I, what is the thing that Devin can't do? Push to master or whatever, right? You know, describe that to me. It's very synthetic. It's thinking in a way that you will not be doing 90% of the time when you're programming. And I find it especially disingenuous when these companies ask these sort of questions that, you know, they belie two things. One, it's like pretending that the company cares about performance when I know they don't, right?

I know most of their time they don't spend any time. But two, also, if you cared about performance, nothing would look like that. You're not programming in Python. You're not thinking about using heaps. Like, heaps are not a very performant thing 99% of the time. You're not giving the interview candidate. Like, let's say I was going to take this interview. I would be asking so many questions, right?

Like, I'm going to be asking, like, okay, wait a minute. What is the scenario where this actually makes sense to be thinking about? Like, why are you focusing on this aspect of the problem? Are you sure that this is something that you're actually doing? How did you measure how many queries you were doing of the median and all this sort of stuff, right? And maybe the idea behind the interview is to see if the person asked those questions, okay, sort of. But that still feels like a bit of a trick. It feels like you're asking me to answer this question just to see if I'm smart enough to know I shouldn't be answering the question.

So I find this kind of interview just sucks. Figure out an interview format where you can actually interrogate the person about their experience and ability to write code that they are comfortable with, that they're used to writing, see how it goes, right? Don't pick some weird problem that's faux about performance when the interviewer himself probably doesn't even know about the performance of that thing. It just feels off. Hey, to be fair, in 2011, I got a call from Google, and they asked me this question. And at that time, I didn't know how to solve it because I had red cracking the coding interview.

And so I asked that exact question, well, how often are we getting the median? and they said, oh, you know, pretty regular. I'm like, well, how many elements are we talking about? Yeah. You know, is it like small? Can I just store it in an array? And they're like, oh, no, it's going to be like hundreds of millions. And I was just like, well, my laptop can't have hundreds of millions inside of like an array.

Like, I don't even actually. So it's out of core now, right? Like, what are we doing? Or we have multiple machines? I don't even know how to do this. Like, what are you talking about? I don't even have this kind of memory. And they couldn't even answer the question to make any sort of practical sense.

And so I actually did exactly what you said, Casey. I did ask those questions, and they promptly said I was not allowed to interview a Google again for a year. That is so bad, right? I believe I answered it correctly. I said, no, this is actually a really bad problem because this doesn't even make any sense. Like, I'm not going to be doing any of this. Like, at least asked me to do like binary search because I've actually done that maybe six times professionally. But I have never once done that kind of nonsense with this.

Like, I totally get the sentiment, but that does not detract from the fact that it's still wrong to cheat. No matter how stupid the hurdle is. is it doesn't make anything different, right? I'd rather take the, I think the bigger thing is that if you really hate a company's hiring policy, maybe that's a good sign that you don't actually want to work at that company. Maybe that's the bigger takeaway you should be having right now is that you don't want to work at Amazon because they are going to be like, that is the barrier they think is a good mark of an engineer.

And maybe that's not the people you want to work with. Well, it depends on what kind of flexibility you have, right? I mean, if you're somebody who really needs a job, then you're, you know, you're a job, then you don't necessarily have the flexibility to say, like, well, I'm going to be choosy about what company I work for, right? So I can totally get that. And, you know, so I don't know. Again, I'm sort of playing devil's advocate because obviously I don't think cheating really benefits anybody in the long run.

But at the same time, it's kind of like, yeah, it's the only thing I want to make sure isn't done is like focusing on the cheater as if they're the only crappy part of this. And it's like, yeah, I mean, they're an additional crappy part. But the wider crap is a much stinkier, more expansive crap, if you will. A real bull-clogger, if you know what I'm talking about. I'd be interested. What's your favorite, like, technical interview either you've, like, had or given, Casey? Or like trash or prime, I guess, too. I prefer the Chris Hecker style interview.

I always have. I think it's the best kind. For us laymen that don't know what that means. Can you enlighten us who Chris Hecker is and why does his interviews wrong? Sure, sure. So Chris Hecker, very old school. He was the person who first tried to get games on Windows. He made a thing called WinG, which was the precursor to DirectX. He made a game called... Oh, I hate him. Okay. There's all right. I'm sorry. You shouldn't. I mean, it was a good development. It's why we have Steam at all, right? Like... Oh, we love him. We love them. Never mind. So, yeah, and he made a game called Spy Party, which is a, you know, a game you can play on Steam. Oh, and he did the creature creation stuff for Spore, for the Electronic Arts game Spore.

Yeah. So his interview process was the best one, and it's the one I always have used and would use again if I was ever hiring someone. And it's very simple. It's basically a drill down interview where you take something that the person has done. So basically you ask them for their history and you kind of, you randomly pick kind of something you want to drill down on. And you drill down on it continuously until you get to like the. very minutia of that problem. And this is such a great interview because it allows the person to talk about things they are

comfortable with. So you're not springing this like dual heap median nonsense on them, which is something no one's thought about, right? It's like it's a vague CS thing that would almost never have come up in 99% of all programmers' lives and they wouldn't have spent much time thinking about. This allows you to focus on something that, you know, they have thought about. And you get to see, like, can they remember the stuff they do, how far through the it did they think? Are they able to explain those things that they did and why? And these interviews

are very productive in my experience. And typically are really good at figuring out whether a candidate's actually a decent programmer or not. The only thing they can't do, and Leak Code interviews also don't do this, is figure out how much someone programs that can be difficult. But I don't think there's much you can really do in an interview to determine that. Yeah, you know, that is one thing about Leakode style interview, especially if you have a keyboard that they can actually do it live, you can actually make a lot of judgments just on that. You know, when you see someone at least write parts of the function or parts of something in like a really fast, obviously, they understand the language really, really well. You can say, okay, this person does program a lot. Like when I was watching that video,

my biggest takeaway was he's probably a really talented programmer. Just by watching him type and do stuff, even though he was feigning to be stupid, you could actually see, oh yeah, he's actually really talented, just by his peer command of how he's interacting with his computer and all that. By programs a lot, though, what I mean is, is this a person who's just going to talk all day with other people in the office or, like, spend all day on social media, like that kind of thing? I mean productivity-based, because, like, there's definitely programmers who are very good if you force them to program for an hour. They're excellent, but they don't work, like, 90% of the time, right? So what I mean is that you can't screen out in this type of interview, and I don't know how you do.

I actually wanted to double tap on what Prime just said, because I had the exact same observation of watching that video. I was like, anyone who probably didn't know anything about anything could not, wouldn't have, wouldn't have passed an interview. Like, it was so back and forth with the questions. And I was like staring at his eyes a lot of the time. And he wasn't really looking at the prompt at all. Like, he was like literally solving it. So like, I wasn't even impressed with the product, really? I was more just like, okay, you're even what you're doing.

And maybe you'll peek at some syntax every now and then. But immediately after like the first like five minutes, I was like, he already knows what he's doing. Like he's talking so well. So like if you handed that to like my mom to pass the same interview, she would just literally crumble and she'd probably be trying to type into chat GPT. Like what did this person just ask me? I don't know if anyone else feels the same way.

No, that's a very good point. I was thinking the same thing where I was like a bunch of people are going to buy this who don't know how to code and they're going to get to the Amazon interview. And then it's going to be so incredibly obvious that they are cheating because it'll be like, hmm, I'm thinking we probably should use death function my nuns heap one, heap two. What do you got? What do you think about that? I've ironically had someone do that in an interview.

One of my last interviews, someone was typing and I was just like, hey, here's the problems. They're like, okay, what are the problems exactly? And I'm like, here's the exact problems. I'm going to write them in comments. And then I watched them highlight my comment. then their highlight went away and they're like, I'm going to start over now. And they erased all of their work and then just restarted. I was just like, really?

What? This is crazy. I can't believe you decided to start over and write almost the same code. Huh. I wonder what they're doing. Yeah, I do think asking people questions like you're saying Casey is much better, especially for, say, like, mid to senior level engineers. my, like, one of my favorite interviews was we did a very similar thing to that,

except like they told me I could bring a project already that I had worked on. So they didn't have to like pick one randomly, but I could sort of like prepare to do that. And so like I just brought telescope and I just like said, here's what I did. Here's how I designed it. Here's the interesting bits. And then we just like chatted about it for 45 minutes.

And for like mid to senior level, I think that that's way more revealing. and way more useful, especially at like Amazon. You are right. I think a lot of times it's like you're having meetings that could have been emails. So like talking about stuff and getting alignment is probably like a thousand X more valuable than can you do do men heaps. That is fair.

All right. I'm going to let one of the viewers have the last word on this topic. All right. The broadcast element says if your technical interview can be beat by AI, it's a poor technical interview. I generally agree. All right. Hey, well, we're going to move on.

Let's move on on topics, okay? We're going to move on. We're going to talk now about our next topic, which is going to be about Firefox. Firefox just recently released a new update to all of their policies. They've included an acceptable use side, which actually has forbade even looking at any adult content, including downloading or uploading, which is kind of funny.

I don't think people are going to agree with that. Yeah, trash, what are your thoughts right now? But with that, it also comes with, shut up. What? I'm sorry, can we pause for a second here? Because even separate from it, they put something in there that said you can't use the browser for adult content. They didn't really. So, so that's not really amazing. It says you can use Firefox under the acceptable use policy.

And one of the acceptable use policy is you can neither download nor upload obscene or, I forget the exact. Graphic content, explicit and graphic sexual content. Yeah. And so I'm not sure exactly what they mean by graphic, like maybe not end 64. graphics. I'm not exactly sure what they mean by that. So you're basically telling me I can't use Firefox to update my only fans anymore. Like I can't even upload my content

anymore is what you're telling me. They're locking me out. And you know what? This was actually the least of the internet's worries. Okay, the big worry is this thing right here which says the following. You give Mozilla certain rights and permissions. Exact quote. You give Mozilla the rights necessary to operate Firefox. This

includes processing your data, as we describe, in the Firefox privacy notice. It also includes a non-exclusive royalty-free worldwide license for the purpose of doing as you request with the content you input in Firefox. This does not give Mozilla any ownership in that content. And so people are kind of wigged out about that because having the royalty-free access to your content in some sense might mean training AIs on it to give you a better experience, the ability to be able to use your data to sell for them to make money with the recent ruling with Google and not allowing it as a default browser anymore. There's a lot of different reasons for this.

And they've also recently in the last year purchased a company called anonym, anonym, which I think it's called anonym, which is an anonymous advertising style platform. Privacy preserving is their word. Privacy, that's right. They no longer say privacy first. They're now privacy preserving advertisement company. So they are kind of gearing or changing gears into an advertising company. Now, Casey, I know you love advertising.

so why don't you tell me all about how you feel about this recent Firefox change? Oh, I'm the lead off batter here. Yeah, why not? Okay. I was actually going to do trash dev, but I forgot literally mid-talk. And so I was just like, oh, I already selected Casey. I was ready. I know.

It makes perfect sense. We have three web programming people and one non-web programming person. So the change in the browser, it's like, let's go to the guy who doesn't do web for a living. That makes perfect sense. I guess what I would say is the problem with a lot of this stuff is that, you know, that, all of that, what, the entire update, right, is going to be made by some legal team who's just like they, you know, they're just trying to cover all possible bases. They're like, they don't want to get sued in California under the, you know, reverse gromulus act that says that you can't do this or that with information. And they don't want to get sued in Texas under the like, gromulus's must be covered act, which says that you can't have.

obscene material or whatever. So they're just going to have this long thing that's just every last thing they can think of that they might get sued for. They just want to make sure you get sued for that instead, right? Or that you can't sue them for it. And so I think one of the problems with any of these agreements is it's like you have no idea what they intend to do, right? And I think it's bad in both ways.

It's bad in the sense that you don't really want the agreement to just be so open-ended and say, well, whatever we do is, it's fine. Don't worry about it. But at the same time, I don't know how much trust people should put in the agreements when they don't say those things. Because honestly, the companies seem to do them anyway. And then they just pay some class action settlement to get out of it. And then they'll update it then, right? So I guess what I would say is, is this good?

Probably not. Do I have a tremendous amount of concern about it? Probably not. Do I use Firefox browser? No, I don't. That's about all I've got. So hopefully the web devs now can actually have an informed opinion. So take it away.

All right, trash dev. Mr. Leadoff, why don't you lead us off? Because Casey's lead off is amazing. He teed you up right now. Let's go. So let me preface this. I'm not a big privacy person. So let me tell you a quick word about me.

I use one password literally. And when if I have to change it, I think I think. You should not admit that. No, it's okay. No, I'm going to tell you. Wait, wait. You don't mean. one password the service. You mean

one password. You guys, the password. I use what is going on right now? I'm going to tell you why what is going on right now. Hold on. I'm going to get there. You guys, you guys didn't get this. So I've been using one password for like literally the entire existence of the internet. All right. I have a

really small brain as T's drew earlier. Yeah, yeah. So I also use Chrome. So that already tells you a lot about me that privacy is not like the biggest thing. If you want on the dark web, it would probably be a convenience store. With all my information in it because it has been, my identity has been stolen like three times and like three weeks ago, someone tried to steal it again.

It's like insane. So I've already given up on my privacy because I know it's just splattered all over the internet. So like at this point, I just like don't even care. Are you saying you're not that into privacy because you use one password and everyone already logs into your accounts? Is that what you're saying? You know, I'm not going to go any further into my privacy practices. Okay.

If only there was a way to solve this trashdiff, you could have your privacy back. So you saw the recommendation from the security expert that was like you should use a service like one password. And you remembered the one password part and forgot the service part, I guess. Why would I trust one password? You know, I don't know what they're doing. That's a good point. That's a good point. That's what I'm saying.

Totally fair. Do you want me to go trust someone else with my password? No, I trust whatever's in here that I often forget. Singiller. singular like I'm going to just them. To be fair, my one password is pretty long. It's a pretty big password.

I don't know if you can reinforce it. You've telling yourself that. It has a special character. It has an uppercase, lowercase, and has some numbers. That's pretty good. I feel like I'm pretty protected. You're not going to be able to break that.

That's unbreakable right there. It would probably take like a couple of years, maybe. I don't know. But I feel good. Do you and your wife share the same password? no but she actually is even worse she doesn't even know her password she had to log over email

and we couldn't get back at her email because she didn't even know the password so we were like just like what do we do it's it's yeah like this household we don't even have curtains really so people just like look in our windows no privacy the password's written on the wall in big letters in case anyone

forgets it you can just look up there I'm not going to lie there are some passwords written in places where you could probably see it but it's okay it's just us but anyways back to Firefox, I can empathize, I feel, that someone would care about privacy would be pretty upset, right? I read the terms of use, everything was worded so vaguely. They, like, backtracks. Like, the worst part you could do is, like, release something and then just, like, backtrack and, like, reword it again into something else.

And, like, they were talking about how, like, sell means different things and, like, different states. And I'm just like, dude, what is this? Like, all I got from it was they worded it so vaguely that they can ultimately do whatever they want. because that's just what companies do. I'm not saying Mozilla's like Evil Corp, but it doesn't mean they won't become, right? At some point they need money, right? We were talking about earlier.

A lot of people know this, that a company needs money to run. The users are your product, right? So how are you going to get that? I guess potentially selling data or selling quote-unquote data to third parties that would attract advertisers or something like that. But me, obviously, you know, I don't care about privacy,

but I think the dozens of people that use Firefox are pretty scared. Okay, but hey, to be fair, I think, I also think that this has nothing to do with the Chrome settlement and income. I've been thinking about this a lot lately, which is that people who are concerned about their privacy in the, in the first place, was likely going to change their default browser to something else.

They don't want Chrome anyways, the people that are already up in arms. And so, yeah, you can no longer have a default search. And so, of course, what's going to happen? All the people who already would use Google will just continue to use Google. It's not like all these people on Firefox going, dang, I wish there was a way to use Duck, Duck Go, because that's the one I really want to use, but I guess I'm stuck here with darn Google, right? Those are all the people already motivated to fix it. So my assumption is that they're actually going to have virtually no change in revenue.

I think this has been a long planned play to get into the advertisement space because they're sick of making a couple hundred million dollars. They want to make a couple billion dollars. And that's the big difference here. correct me if I'm wrong there's just an open source fork of this anyway right like you can go install Libra Wolf if you don't want to use Firefox

is that am I correct there yeah it's a fork of it but I would assume that you know the fork is going to probably be difficult as time goes on especially if there's like weird stuff that gets put in I assume forks become more and more difficult as time goes on okay all alright TJ you haven't spoken up at all sorry I was literally making a meme for trash can you put it on the screen

all right there you go this is the meme Anyways, I think this seems like a really bad blunder by them primarily because, like, like, you're saying, this is just like saying, your whole pitch to people is we're the privacy browser over and over. Having to delete, we never have and we never will sell your data in a public GitHub repo. you can see the red of the diff getting deleted of we never have and we never will and now it just says that's a promise they end up too. It does say that's a promise right yes and now you don't have to do that. I mean, in my mind, it's like you may as well just like pack it up, restart as a new organization and like try again. Like that would actually seem better. Like they maintain two different forks or they do something else because you're literally throwing away,

you're super fans. Because the only people are using Firefox are super fans, right? To be like if NeoVim was like, and by the way, now it's scripting in JavaScript

and we're going to do telemetry. And also you have to log in. Everyone would be like, why? Part of the whole reason we're using this is we are tired of those things, right? So if C added a garbage collector. Like it's like none of these things

are why the audience uses it. So I would have done, you know, I don't know, I'm not in charge. I've never been CEO of a really big company who mostly runs off Google's goodwill. But like, I just think that trying to do literally anything else besides going down that route

would have been much like smarter for them to exist in five years. Maybe I'll be wrong, but... Now, correct me if I'm wrong, because again, this is not my area of expertise, but when they say promise, is it possible they just mean a JavaScript promise and that that promise has now completed?

Because my understanding is that that would be fine, right? It's like, it's for a limited time anyway. I mean, until 2025. Yeah, yeah. It's been rejected, I believe, is the technical term that you're looking for. The promise was rejected. Was rejected. Okay, so, so what's the problem? I don't see the problem. This is a web company. It's the web. They're just talking, they were, they were using a very technical term, and maybe the audience didn't understand that. It was that kind of promise. And so, you know, that's what you would expect. Promises get rejected all the time, boys. You know, no big deal. I think the thing is that most

people probably need to come to the conclusion of is if you use a free product, you're the product, right? And so since this free product's product can no longer make the money they may not make or they're actually wanting, my hypothesis, actually wanting to make much, much more money, they're going to lean into an alternative stream. And so you should never be surprised when this happens. Like, just like when X changed its privacy or its terms of use policies explicitly stating they can use all of your content to train on LLMs. And the rich part, of course, is everyone goes to Blue Sky and which is completely open in every single LLM, trains off that kind of the hilarious leave like i'm gonna stick it to the man by training on 10

different l l lms now you know it's like okay that's probably grok still trains off blue sky too grok is loving blue sky just as much but nonetheless like when they did that like you knew that was coming that should be no surprise because you're using a free product like that is that is what's going to happen and so i don't know i guess i'm surprised that firefox made it this long more than anything else. Well, they couldn't, they sort of couldn't not make it this long because they just, I mean, there, they're as close to a state subsidized thing as we've got, right? Like, they are just sort of handed the money from Google and no matter what they did, they were just getting it. So it's kind of like if they actually had to compete in some way and their, you know,

ability to survive was based off of usage metrics, they would already be gone. But it's not, right? That's not what they're actually, that that isn't what determines their survival. And so, yeah, to your point, I assume that this whole thing is roughly motivated by the fact that they are worried that that gravy train will now dry up, but I guess I don't really know. I mean, you got to come up with your millions of dollars to pay your CEO who doesn't do anything somehow. And if Google isn't going to do that for you, then you're going to have to, I guess you're going to have to get it from advertisers.

I don't know. All right. Trash, Dev, I'm going to give you the final word here. Don't trust password managers. Trust what's in here. Use one password. Trash, just a quick question. Of course, the question by God is my judge.

95. What's your password, Trash? It's too long. It starts with a P, ends with a number. Oh, no. You just reduced the search phase. There's at least like 40 things in between there. Well, the thing, good luck, buddy.

He lied about the 40. Good luck. I swear, if something happens to my stuff today, I'm going to be very sad. It's been 15, bro. It's been 15. But here's the thing is, like, if you only have one password, then someone's going to leak that password. Some service is going to be storing it in plain text because they're stupid. Every time I log into something, it tells me that my password is leaked and I should change it and I just like ignore it.

This just keeps getting better. It was like your password was like leaked in the breach. I'm like, yeah, whatever, ma'am. Yeah, don't talk to me about no breach. I don't want to hear about some breach. It's not relevant to me. You don't know where I'm from. Where I'm from, I'm not scared of those warnings.

This password's stronger than any breach or whatever. Oh, my. You're not online banking. Right? You have to go in person. I do the multifactor stuff. That helps, right? It does help.

Got the MFA. It feels like it's pretty safe I don't know That's good I still am I'm not gonna lie I've had my like savings Like wiped like three times But they gave it back

They gave it back So we're okay Why you just left the front door Get it open They're like Dude you've been breached What are you gonna do I'll just leave the bank pass

For the same Real scenario I was on the phone With one of like The fraud people And he's like Would you like to change your password And I was like

Can we just keep it the same And it was just like 10 seconds of dead silence. And I was like, just making the same, man. Not even kidding. Because I will forget and then I would just be left out anyway. Oh, my gosh. What did you tell him? Like, look, we...

We all... I got a small brain. I just keep it the same. As we know, we're able to recover it here. You just said you can get the money back. So I'll just call you if it gets wiped again. It's cool. Just roll the account number and the routing numbers.

Let's try it again. Just hit him with only one in 20,000 people or whatever have identity theft. Like, it's not going to happen to me again. I think once every couple years is acceptable. Oh my gosh. The reason why that stat is that way is that trash dev represents a huge portion of a very large number of them. This one guy has been breached 9,000 times. Therefore, it's one in 20,000 everybody, one in 20,000.

It's like the whale. He's the whale of breaches. It's like, you know, this very. This very bimodal graph where, like, if the heat trash is up at the top, occupying, like, 50% of all breaches is his one single password. Should I just switch my browser? If I change my browser, will it be better? This is such the wrong audience to tell. Like, every time Prime opens a website, we get a million DDoS.

Like, you've made a terrible error. Go change your passwords now. When this was a topic, I was like, I got to tell them how I just how I roll. I'm like the worst person to talk about privacy. Well, I love how you equate the password with privacy, like, because it's so bad anyone can access your stuff. Oh, my gosh. It is what it is. Well, that was fantastic.

I think it's time to wrap this up. Hey, everybody, thank you for joining us in the inaugural episode. I still don't, I'm not convinced that I love the name. The name is the show, but hey, that is the show's name. If you like it, make comments. If you feel that TJ needs to be canceled for his extremely moral take on things. Oh, my mind, he's bringing out the whiteboard one more time. Then let people know, thank you for subscribing.

Thank you for being here. Please post your guesses at Trash's password as well. So we can see. That's what I want to know. What starts the P? Whoever breaks the letter. Hey, if you guys only use one password, post that password in the comments, too. What's your favorite one password?

Who's your favorite password? Post it in the comments below.