bro, one more time. ♪ worth of drip, but... ( inaudible rapping ) jif peanut butter. it's that jif'ing good, ludacris changed his flow for it. the modern internet era is about to begin with. major consequences for not only silicon valley companies, but all of us. but first, has the mystery of san francisco's car

break ins crisis finally been solved? the san francisco chronicle may have some explanations along with some solutions. i'm kristen sze. thanks for watching. getting answers on abc7. every day we talk with experts about issues important to the bay area and you joining us live. first to kick things off, chronicle date reporter data. reporter that is susie nelson whose story about the city's car break ins as really gotten our attention. susie, thanks for your time. >> thank you so much, kristin, do car break ins just feel rampant in san francisco or is it really worse than most of california? it is not just you. it's not just me. car break ins are really high in san francisco and oakland as well. and they are much higher in san francisco than pretty much any other major city in california, let alone the us. so san francisco's car break rate recently has been about four times the statewide rate and it's higher than that of a lot of other major

california cities as well. >> if i'm reading this correctly , read is san francisco on this graph. and it's what 2.5 k per 100 k. explain what that means in terms of break ins and what you can expect it. >> yeah, sure. so you look at break ins by the population portion. so basically what this means is that for every 100,000 people in san francisco so 2500 people reported a break in last year and that is just the people who reported. so you know, i've had my car broken into twice. and i will tell you that i didn't report either time. so you can bet that these numbers are actually higher than what's being shown. >> got it. so are these numbers truly at a high all time high or at least near it? >> yeah. so break ins were also pretty high back in the 80s, which is the earliest year that we have data available. but they , they are very high right now too. they were lower in the kind of late 90s, early 2000 and then

starting in around 2010, 2011, they started really go up. and that's kind of the focus of this article, the mystery i wanted to solve is what happened that made san francisco this huge national outlier in break ins. >> yeah. so you went out there looking for answers behind the surge. how did you go about looking for answers? what did you look at? >> yeah, so i'm a data journalist, so i looked at a lot of numbers. i looked at crime data, i looked at economic data. but i also talked to a ton of experts with a bunch of different opinions on this. so i spoke to criminologist, i spoke to economists, i talked to a guy who works at a car window repair store to get his take. and i talked to a bunch of former cops, too. >> so after you talk to all those people in your article, you detail each of the factors that kind of people came up with. let's start with prop 47. the proposition that voters approved in 2014 that made many low level crimes, misdemeanors instead of felonies. did that play a role? >> yeah. so it's kind of an

interesting and nuanced role. but yes. so prop 47, as you said , made a lot of misdemeanor or a lot of lower level theft crimes into misdemeanors. it actually doesn't apply to auto burglaries. so prosecutors can still charge those as felonies. but but still, i think there's this perception in widespread that people don't get caught if they commit a car break in and they don't get prosecuted. so researchers have found that prop 47 was associated with a statewide rise in break ins. but but that doesn't explain the san francisco surge because it was so much bigger and it started happening years before prop 47. right. >> so you started to look at other factors. and you mentioned the economics being one of them, the enormous tech wealth here, ironically. explain that. >> yeah. so over the last ten years, as the data shows, san francisco's richest people got a whole lot richer while its lowest income people didn't see their incomes rise as much. so that's one factor is there's this big wealth disparity here

and the other big thing that i found is that san francisco has just so many cars. it's like geographically very small. so it has like 10,000 cars per square mile, which means tons of opportunities to break into cars . it also has a big tourism industry, which means that, you know, a lot of folks are coming in, buying things at malls or stores and leaving stuff in their cars as they may not be as wise as some of the people who've lived here for a while. they might have to learn the hard way not to leave their cars . >> interesting. so there's opportunity too, right? and i wonder why so many cars? i don't know if it's because transit was slower to get adopted. or maybe it's our major hills there. people just don't want to walk it. but also, you mentioned the evolution of technology making break ins more lucrative. >> yeah. so that was one thing that i really found interesting . so the iphone and the ipad both get introduced in kind of like late 2000, early 20 tens and a lot of people start leaving them in their cars, which means that, you know, if you break into a car, you might

get a several hundred dollars, $1,000 device, but also these tools are often equipped with bluetooth or hotspot technology. and people can use those tools to find hidden devices and cars. and it means that it's more likely for them to get a payoff because they're like, oh, i know there's an iphone in here. got it. and also the rise of e-commerce outlets like amazon and ebay made it a lot easier for people to sell their stuff. right. very quickly, i see. >> i see. okay. now, susie, many people believe the lack of prosecution has been a factor in san francisco and driving crime. the progressive chesa boudin was recalled last year, but what did you learn actually about the impact of ndas policies? >> yeah, so i looked at the break ins over the years and there isn't really a big like correlation between progressive policies and the number of break ins break ins have actually been rising recently under the more moderate da. and really what it shows is that and what the research shows is that da

policies don't really have an impact on this kind of thing. what's much more likely is that the getting caught and the likelihood of getting arrested is making a really big impact on this right? >> i mean, there's law and there's order, there's the arrest and then the prosecute action. while we were focusing on the prosecute part, let's look at the arrest part. didn't you say only 1% resulted in arrests in terms of the break ins? do you know why? >> yeah. so it's and it's actually gone lower over the years. so in 2011, police made arrests in like 2.5% or about 2. and now it's under 1% of break ins. and i mean, the ben wu, i talked to this guy, ben wu, who works at a auto repair store, and he summarizes it really well. he said that it takes, you know, four seconds to break the window and five seconds to grab the bags and then you're out of there. i think it's really hard for police to solve a crime where there are no fingerprint. usually often the cars that drive away are stolen or have stolen license plates. and it's

also not the highest priority for the sfpd. they have said over and over again that they're focused on solving violent crimes, which i think most of us can agree is probably a good priority. but it is still really frustrating that so few of these crimes are resulting in arrests . >> okay. so then what are some solutions then, based on those findings? right. i mean, it seems like beef up policing, but maybe it's not that simple. yeah it is frustrating at first. >> it feels like there's nothing. but i looked at a couple of studies that have been done in the bay area over the years and actually there was this really cool study done in vallejo where police did this really focused intervention in one parking garage and they put a ton of police there. they put a ton of signage telling people to take their stuff out of their cars, and they only made five arrests. but break-ins went down by 40% in that one garage over that couple. i think it was a month long period that they were doing this. so i think really focused police work and also

initiatives that are really putting the responsibility on the people who have stuff in their cars. i think the number one thing we can all do, it's not very glamorous, but we all just need take stuff out of our cars so that this is a very low reward proposition to be breaking into our cars. so like a public awareness campaign, nobody ever leaves anything in their cars. >> and sooner or later the thieves learn, okay, there's nothing there. why do it? >> yeah, i mean, like one of the case i talked to a guy who works with people who break into cars, and he said that, like social media and tiktok make this kind of a viral thing. so a kid will break into a car or a person will break into a car and then they'll share with their friends that they did it. and nothing happened. and they got a ton of money. they're going to tell all their friends, so what if we could change the narrative and the kid breaks into the car and they don't get anything? then maybe we could change this kind of status quo. >> wow. data reporter with the chronicle. susie nelson. this is just a very comprehensive and eye opening piece. thank you so much for coming on to share it.

>> thank you so much for having me. >> coming up, heat continues to shatter records here in the us and around the globe. today we're taking a look at the climate crisis, its impact and why it's making people want to move. bay area climate science expert will be joining us rsv can be a dangerous virus... [sneeze] ...for those 60 and older. it's not just a cold. and if you're 60 or older... ...you may be at increased risk of hospitalization... [coughing] ...from this highly... ...contagious virus. not all dangers come with warning labels. talk to your pharmacist or doctor... ...about getting vaccinated against rsv today.

right now from california to massachusetts, the world meteorological organization says this summer marked the hottest three months ever on record. and perhaps even more alarming, experts say there's a 98% chance the hottest year in history will happen in the next five years. we're also learning climate

change could force many americans to move. a new ipsos poll found one fifth say conditions will make it more difficult where they live for those of us in the west who live with wildfires and droughts. nearly one third say they might move live in the midwest as just 13, but 40% of poll takers say climate change negatively affects everyday life. joining us live now to break this down is eugene cordero, professor of meteorology and climate science at san jose state university. professor cordero, thanks for your time. >> thanks for having me. >> first, let's talk about the heat. the east coast is sweltering today. d.c. hitting 100 degrees. new york city, 93 degrees. how much of this is attributable to climate change? >> certainly, we are changing our climate system today and we have lots of records to show that the average global temperature has been rising because of human activity and also we have good records to show that the prolonged heat that we've been seeing like like this year and these intense heat waves are more frequent because

of climate change and are directly attributable all to human activities. so it's super clear. >> all right. well, a un official today said something i found quite alarming climate breakdown has begun. what does that mean? >> well, and you know, this is a little bit of rhetoric from the un, but it basically saying that we're really starting to see the impacts of climate change. it's not like distant into the next decade. it's happening now. we have the records to show that, you know, extremes in heat, these wildfires that we're seeing and ocean temperatures are really high this year. and that it you know, this is the point where we really need to take action. and that's what the un is really trying to inspire policymakers to do something about this. >> oh, yeah. yeah you mentioned ocean temperatures. i think off miami in the atlantic ocean, it was like nearing 100, which seems crazy to me. what are the negative consequences as a result of that warming water? >> you know, there's those that

super warm water in the atlantic is a fuel source for hurricanes . you know, the hurricane we saw last week, you know, it builds its energy from warm ocean temperatures and that's why you see that rapid intensification in of these types of storms. and of course, it's also can have impact on on fishing and plants in the ocean and this gulf stream that we that we're used to the climate that it helps support. >> i see yeah. in fact i think one is forming now that some predict could turn into a cat five. we're going to keep you keep our eye on that one. but that is certainly frightening. and of course, the prediction, one of the hottest year in history probably happening in the next five years. how do we calculate that? >> you know, we use climate models to help us get a sense for what's going to happen in the future. and we also use the current observations. we're going through an el nino right now which spikes the temperature just a little bit, but we see an overall trend in global average temperatures and i feel

confident with that prediction as well that we're going to see one of the warmest years on record. i think it probably might happen this year or next year, but it's certainly imminent. and you know, we are shifting the what the temperature looks like and the weather of our planet systemically. >> i mean, certainly we i guess this is worrisome because lives are at stake ultimately, right? >> yeah. we can also calculate the impacts that these storms are having, the economic impacts, the societal impacts. and then that's not to say the impacts about plants and animals who don't have the ability to turn on the air conditioner, don't have the ability to mediate some of this extreme weather that we're seeing. and we are seeing the real impact this is having on species throughout the planet. >> and of course, emissions contributes to the warming. but noaa says greenhouse gases are at an all time high. that's also new information. and this even though we're trying really hard

with new technology to cut down on emissions, are efforts failing? i would say we're making progress, that's for sure , is the rate of increase is starting to decline. >> but, you know, population continues to go up. and like you said, the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere continues to go up. so, you know , california is a leader and we're doing some great things. we're electrifying our homes and our cities. we're moving to electric vehicles, getting our energy from renewables. but there is a lot more to do. so so i am optimistic that that we are making some progress, but now is the time to accelerate that progress and really say, okay, we're going to take this issue seriously and we're going to change how we use energy and interact with it, not just here but throughout the country and throughout the world. yeah and it certainly concerns those of us in california, too. >> you know, we experience wildfires. that is certainly one impact. ipsos poll found 30% of californians actually say they may move or have to because of climate change. what are your

thoughts on that? >> you know, i've seen this firsthand. my neighbor across the street this year, this past winter, you know, he had all these storms and she said, you know, should we be thinking about moving? is it getting too extreme here? and then even more striking, one of my colleagues who works in the north part of california, in the central valley, she moved to nevada last year. and i said, hey, why are you moving? and she said, you know, the wildfires every summer, it's the air quality is so poor and the heat is so stream are for the health of myself and our family. we're moving. and so it really is happening. well are there places in the us that we can move to escape the worst effects of climate change? >> or are we just or is whatever's happening just going to chase us to wherever we're going to next? >> i mean, in some level we're changing the whole system. so we're going to see more extremes everywhere. but but certainly california, the fires that we're

having, this drought, it's not like that in all parts of the country. now, of course, we love our weather here in california. we're very grateful for this beautiful weather and other places may not have that. they may have extreme, you know, snow in the winter, which a californians were not so used to. so we're always going to deal with the weather and climate. but certainly people make individual choices and say like, i don't want more smoke and i'm going to move to other parts of the country where we don't see such wildfire was. >> right. look, we only have time for one more. so i'm going to ask you, obviously, it's going to have to be a multi pronged solution. what do you think is the most pressing thing that we have to do right now? >> i often go back to this kind of personal level, like we have to decide that out of like ten people in the world, i'm going to be one of those people who's going to say, i'm going to do something at the personal level or maybe get involved in some community group. but we only need 10% of people to actually care enough to create systemic change. and i think that individuals stepping up and doing something in their own

community, in their own home can make a real difference. and that's what our research is showing at san jose state. >> wow. if only 10% of us took action. all right. well, that is good to know. and that makes it just a little less frightening. a little more realistic. professor cordero, thanks for your time. >> thanks for havin me. >> with the abc7 weathering tomoow interactive tool, you can find t e impact of climate related threats le fire heat, floods and high winds in your neighborhood. or just look up your zip code on abc7 news.com slash weathering tomorrow. we'll be right back with the department of justice taking aim at google. the two giants facing off in court with a trial that could have implications for all o

♪ always in that state of mind ♪ ♪ living on a high vibration ♪ ♪ so hot gonna make it melt ♪ ♪ and i'm lovin' what i'm tastin' ♪ ♪ que bonito lugar lleno de tanto sabor ♪ ♪ so much flavor ♪ ♪ un future brillante se acerca ♪ ♪ ahhhhhhh ♪ ♪ nos gusta mezclar ♪ ♪ como malteada ♪ ♪ aqui hay lugar ♪ ♪ yeah we livin' in the golden state ♪ ♪ dame mas, fres-co y real ♪ ♪ (wooh) dale gas ♪ ♪ vive en el estado dorado ♪

check this out. discover family favorites in a blockbuster september on disney+. i would love to see that! ♪ it feels good ♪ and for a limited time you can get 3 months of disney+ with ads for just $1.99 a month. toot toot! the summertime fun rolls on... only on disney+. which is accusing the search leader of illegally abusing its dominance to stifle competition . the trial begins tuesday and

will be the first monopoly trial of the modern internet era. joining us live now to talk about implications for you, the consumer is rebecca hall, allensworth with vanderbilt university law professor specializing in antitrust law. professor, thank you so much for joining us today. thanks for having me. so can you elaborate on what the government is accusing google of specifically ? how did google allegedly abuse its power to kill the competition in that search market? >> yeah, so google is using exclusive dealing contracts or de facto exclusive dealing contracts with the people who make the devices that we use search on, especially apple on the iphone and android. and the idea is by using these exclusive deals, they have made it difficult or virtually impossible for any other uh- search product to be used as much as theirs is. >> what do you mean by exclusive deal? like is it that when you have an iphone, google automatically pops up as the search engine? >> exactly. so this is going to

be a major contested point in the trial because google's going to say, yes, we are the one that pops up. we're the first one. siri uses us automatically, but competition is just a click away. you can reconfigure your phone to allow search through other engines. but the government's position is those defaults matter. they're very powerful. people don't know how to switch search engines. i actually don't know how to search. switch the search engine on my phone. >> i was certainly love it if tvs came with abc seven programed as the default tv station and you'd have to change it, go somewhere else. so i get that. but why should consumers care about this outcome in the trial? well google google really has no competitors in the search space. >> i mean, we know this because we use the word like a verb. you know, i'm going to google. it means i'm going to search it. and what would the world look like for consumers if there was a viable competitor to google? one of the things i don't like about google is that i search the internet for information,

and what i get are products. so there's lots of different things that we could ask for from our search engines, but we don't have that kind of choice as it is right now. it's kind of google or nothing and that means that, you know, we pay for it with the amount of advertising that we have to look at. >> it was just going to say, right, is that how we pay for it? because usually the government goes after a big company for monopolies like, oh, well, the consumers are being hurt. we're having to pay more, but there's no cost to us to use google. >> so that's one of the things that's really interesting about this case is that this is a case where the product is ostensibly apparently free, but we know that really you are paying for it with your eyeballs, you're paying for it with your attention and your time and it is an extremely lucrative business for google, as evidenced by how much they're willing to pay companies like apple and android to be the default on those phones. >> yeah, not to mention they're paying an army of lawyers for this trial. so let's talk about the potential outcomes. right. if google is found guilty or not guilty, what are the precedents set? what could happen? what has

to change? >> well, as a law professor, i'm most interested in the precedent set. i think that we need law on the books. now that takes a real hard look at the way companies of today abuse market power. and that is the case that's most analogous to this goes back to 2001 is the microsoft case. and i think that what happens in this case is going to determine whether or not that case is still a viable theory for monopolies. and so that matters a lot as far as what consumers might care about. but unfortunately, it might matter a little bit less there, because i think even if the government wins this trial, it's not as if suddenly another competitor editor to google can appear and kind of robustly compete with it. there are a lot of reasons why it's hard to compete with google. >> yeah, but let's say they're found guilty. does that change the way apple or meta or any of the other big tech companies here in the valley do business? >> yes, and i would hope that that would be a major effect of such a such a determination, because now you've got

precedent. you have the idea that, first of all, defaults matter that and that's that's applicable to a lot of different tech products that zero price markets can still have consumer harm. that's obviously relevant to something like meta. so yes, this could have absolutely have ripple effects throughout silicon valley. >> all right. i understand this trial may take about ten weeks. will tech executives testify? what do you think we should watch out for and pay attention to? >> they will. and i wish it was ten weeks of riveting testimony by tech execs, but it's going to be an awful lot of very boring professors talking about math and economics punctuated by some moments of hopefully some courtroom drama from the tech executives themselves as well. >> i don't know if i'm just a nerd, but i think conversations with professors are vastly interesting, including this one with you, professor allensworth from vanderbilt law. thank you so much. thank you. a reminder, you can get our live newscasts. breaking news, weather and more with our abc7 bay area streaming

thousands of women with metastatic breast cancer,

are living in the moment and taking ibrance. ibrance with an aromatase inhibitor is for adults with hr+/her2- metastatic breast cancer as the first hormonal based therapy. ibrance plus letrozole significantly delayed disease progression versus letrozole. ibrance may cause low white blood cell counts that may lead to serious infections. ibrance may cause severe inflammation of the lungs. both of these can lead to death. tell your doctor if you have new or worsening chest pain, cough, or trouble breathing. before taking ibrance, tell your doctor if you have fever, chills, or other signs of infection, liver or kidney problems, are or plan to become pregnant, or are breastfeeding. for more information about side effects talk to your doctor. be in your moment. ask your doctor about ibrance.

tonight, breaking news involving the president's son, hunter biden. also breaking, we're now watching a hurricane that could become a category 4. will it affect the east? and the murderer who escaped from prison in pennsylvania west of philadelphia, new images of him tonight. where they now think he is. first, the newly named special counsel signaling he plans to indict hunter biden by the end of this month. pierre thomas standing by with late reporting. at this hour, the urgent manhunt. the new