Category: Information Technology

Potholes – Can IT, tech, and AI help?

Posted on by The Information Badger in AI, Automotive, Change, Digital Transformation, Information Technology, potholes, roads, safety, Technology, Transport

The UK Department of Transport’s map showing how England’s Local Authorities rate on keeping local roads in good condition and free from potholes is a little embarrassing. Why? Well, apart from the visual impact of the Red, Yellow, Green picture, you’ll see here that only 16 (~10%) of 154 Local Authorities are rated Green, 13 (~8%) are Red, and a whopping 125 (~81%) are Amber. So little Green is embarrassing, especially as most road users, if the Badger’s local community is representative, think their Yellow-rated Local Authority should really be Red.

The methodology for these ratings is here.  There are three underlying scorecards – Condition covering the Local Authority’s road conditions, Spend covering their spend on highways maintenance, and Best Practice covering how well they follow highways maintenance best practice. It’s this Best Practice component in particular that requires attention because only 20 (13%) out of 154 Local Authorities are rated Green. The Badger’s not surprised having witnessed the way potholes are repaired in his own locality. They are repaired, and then the same ones reappear a month or so later and they are repaired again …and then a month or so later again! Why do the repairs constantly fail? The Badger’s observations suggest there are likely underlying problems with the reactive nature of his Local Authority’s repair business process, its contractor management, and the professionalism and quality of the repair itself. The Badger was a little surprised to read that the Institution of Civil Engineers apparently believe that failing pothole repairs are due to the UK’s moderate climate with temperatures hovering around freezing in Winter. When the RAC produces its own pothole index, however, the Badger thinks there’s got to be more to the problem than that.  

So, can IT and modern tech help with this problem? Well, people can already report a pothole online using their Local Authority’s website – although the mechanism isn’t always easy to find on the website – or by using a tool like FixMyStreet.  Local Authorities also already use Highways Asset Management Software packages of one form or another, and so IT and tech and is already playing a role especially if it’s efficiently integrated across the entire ‘cradle to grave’ business process. Is it? Your guess is as good as the Badger’s.

So, what’s the answer to the question? Well, digital innovation and AI in some form seems to be the answer to everything these days, and a case for it for helping with potholes can be seen here. So, the answer is ‘Yes’, but with the following important caveat. The whole business process must first be overhauled to be proactive with embedded professionalism, quality, and contractor management controls. Simply investing in more IT, tech, and AI without doing this would be an expensive mistake that will not improve the pothole situation on our roads or ease public concern.

Electricity – The lifeblood and Achilles heel of the modern world…

Posted on by The Information Badger in Online Services, Technology, Risk, Life, Information Technology, Electricity, Disaster recovery

Risk, an unavoidable aspect of daily life, is the possibility of something bad happening. Every personal activity and decision we take involves some level of risk. Understanding this, and managing risk responsibly, builds self-confidence, resilience, independence, and fulfilment. Risk is inescapable for businesses and governments too. Most maintain risk registers and have plans to manage the consequences should they happen. The public version of the UK’s National Risk Register, for example, is here.  A few days ago, the Badger’s home experienced a power cut following heavy rain in the area. It was the first for many years and so it reminded the Badger of just how dependent we are in today’s world on electricity. It’s the lifeblood of the modern digital world, but also its Achilles heel. The Heathrow  shut down of March 2025,  the Iberian grid collapse of April 2025, and Russia’s relentless attacks on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure, all illustrate the chaos that can be unleashed when electricity supply is  seriously disrupted. 

The Badger’s power cut set him thinking. In an age of global belligerence, could an enemy bring societal chaos to the UK without using cyber techniques or nuclear weapons? Well, yes. Simply knockout a significant number of the nation’s electricity production sites. The country’s electricity supply is vulnerable due to many things, including outdated infrastructure, and so an unexpected coordinated attack using conventional weapons on the  top dozen or so non-nuclear generation and interconnector sites would cause havoc with our daily lives. If there was also a simultaneous attack on the undersea data cables connecting the UK to the world digitally then we would experience chaos like never before.

At this point it’s worth emphasising that this is the output of the Badger’s own musing. It is not derived from having any particular insight into the measures the nation uses to protect its critical national infrastructure. But if the Badger thinks this scenario is plausible, then our defence forces and our enemies will have too, and so hopefully something similar will already be on the country’s private version of the National Risk Register. But here’s the thing. As an individual, do you spend any time thinking about how you would function during a prolonged loss of electricity and online services? Probably not. Should you? Yes, because you’ll get a flavour of the likely impact of a nationwide blackout here. 

Is it prudent to have some appropriate fallback items and mechanisms ‘in the back of a cupboard’ to use if such a scenario occurred? Of course it is. When the Badger was a child, before the modern digital world existed, one of his father’s mantras was ‘Always have something to fall back on because you never know what calamity will unfold tomorrow’. These words seem even more relevant today when electricity is the lifeblood of a modern world that’s more dangerous than it’s been for decades.

Do Londoners want Robotaxis?

Posted on by The Information Badger in Automotive, Autonomous vehicles, Driverless transport, Information Technology, Public safety, Risk, robotaxis, Smart City, Technology, Transport

When a government says it will introduce new rules in the second half of 2026 to permit fully driverless taxis to start operating in London, then some scepticism seems appropriate. Waymo, owned by tech giant Alphabet, plans to launch a pilot in London in the coming months and aims to carry fare-paying passengers later in 2026 when regulations allow. Why is it prudent to be a little sceptical, especially if you’ve had a strong relationship with digital and information technology for years? Well, this short video from a YouTuber answer’s neatly. It’s also always prudent to be wary of positions asserted by governments. After all, the 2001 vehicle tax changes to encourage diesel car ownership to lower CO2 emissions didn’t actually prove to be the right one for either the public or the environment.

There’s been significant trials of autonomous vehicles in the UK since 2015, and there’s no doubt that the organisations and commercial companies involved have learned a lot. The Badger knows that the integration of vehicle LIDAR, RADAR, Cameras, and computing with Machine Learning and AI in robotaxis has moved forward impressively in recent the years, but here’s the thing. While companies like Waymo and others have a vested interest in making a commercial return on their investments in driverless taxis, and government wants to be at the forefront of innovation, do Londoners actually want driverless taxis navigating their streets? The Badger doesn’t know, but he got an inkling of what the answer might be when chatting to his nephew, a second-year physics student at university in London, recently.

The Badger’s nephew, a heavy user of digital tech, said he would not use a driverless taxi in London. He cited concern about how personal data would be used, that they are obvious targets for cyber-attacks, concern about accidents, price, uncertainty about liabilities and responsibilities, the environmental impact of the computing resources involved, and whether the case for robotaxis in London really stacks up! This latter point chimes with one made by the YouTuber above. He also made two other points. The first was that UK roads have become pothole-ridden danger zones, especially in the rain when the holes are filled with water and become invisible, and so repairing the roads to make them safe for everyone should be a much higher priority than driverless taxis. The second was that his generation still sees getting a full UK driving licence as a rite of passage and an important step to becoming independent. Good points! It seems the younger generation may be more sceptical about robotaxis in London than many think.

There may be a ‘push’ from government and big companies for robotaxis, but the ‘pull’ from Londoners might be weaker than the hype has us believe. Will robotaxis in London become both the norm and a commercial success? Time, as always, will tell…

Untruth Social…

Posted on by The Information Badger in Conflict, Ethics & Regulation, Information Technology, Leadership, Opinion, social media

The Badger is not a journalist, a member of any political party, or a subscriber to any particular ideology. He’s just a member of the UK public whose blog normally avoids commenting on the pronouncements of the ‘global elites’ who recently gathered in Davos, Switzerland. Today is, however, an exception because President Trump’s recent utterances were an insulting word-salad where facts seemed irrelevant. Here are a few points from the Badger’s cogitation on the President’s various comments and positions.

The first point is that President Trump has been democratically elected and so we must assume that his policies and approach, whether domestic or foreign, have the support of the American people. The second is that he and this US administration are brutally ruffling feathers domestically in the US and internationally. The President has taken many positions to date that have validity, and many that don’t, but his bullying has changed how his country is viewed by the public beyond the USA’s shores forever.

The third point is that people in Europe feel that the USA is no longer a trusted ally. Trust takes years to build, seconds to break, and forever to repair. President Trump’s utterances have broken that trust. No one trusts a Russian because of President Putin, and now no one trusts an American because of President Trump! The fourth point is that this elderly President’s utterances fully highlight a character with a need for personal attention, praise, admiration and that they are always right on everything. A President who publishes emails from the leaders of longstanding allies and asserts that the UK army was not ‘a frontline fighter’ in Afghanistan is, frankly, untrustworthy, and undeserving of anyone’s respect.

So, here’s the final point. The old adage ‘don’t get angry, get even’ seems apt. National governments recognise their relationship with the US has changed and that adapting to a new future will be challenging. Governments may be angry but getting even is much more difficult for them. Ordinary members of their public, however, have more power to get even than they realise. The US stock market is heavily dependent on the performance of tech stocks. If ordinary members of the public in Europe collectively stopped using social media and streaming services for just one week then the big US tech giants’ revenues would be hit. If everyone stopped using social media for one week every month then the hit would soon mount to a crisis. Investors avidly track engagement metrics, and so stock prices could drop sharply because if users aren’t scrolling, money-making ads aren’t being served. The market impact could be problematic for President Trump.

In a world dominated by social media, streaming, and online services, it’s worth remembering that ordinary people have more power in their hands to register displeasure than most realise. Perhaps it’s time to change our behaviour and wield that power…

Everyone has a story about their dealings with the NHS…

Posted on by The Information Badger in Consulting, Information Technology, Leadership, NHS, Processes and Practices, Technology

In 1948, UK households received a leaflet telling them they were entitled to free health care. The UK’s National Health Service (NHS), funded from general taxation, free at the point of delivery, and available to all based on clinical need rather than income, was born. The NHS still exists, but the way it is organised and care is delivered, has changed considerably. The government of the day sets its budget and spending has grown, on average, by 3.9% in real terms since the 1950s. The NHS is huge.  It prioritizes emergencies ahead of treatments which are not immediately necessary but are important for maintaining or improving a patient’s life. Waiting lists can thus be long and are something the NHS can use operationally to stay within financial constraints. They are currently high and only responding slowly to government initiatives, as this  3-minute video highlights. The public remains sceptical about whether improvements are real because they still encounter frustrations with their NHS interactions. The care received from NHS doctors and nurses is rated highly, but navigating ‘the system’ to get it can be irritatingly problematic.

Everyone has a story about dealing with the NHS. In May 2025, after more than a year waiting, an acquaintance had a day-surgery procedure with an overnight stay and discharge the following morning. They were told on discharge that they’d receive a follow-up clinic appointment by letter for 4 to 5 months’ time. This was also recorded on their formal discharge letter. Having heard nothing by the end of October, they phoned the relevant hospital department to enquire about the appointment. They were passed between different extensions and ultimately to an answerphone where they left an appropriate message and their contact details. Having heard nothing again by early December, they phoned again and were ultimately redirected to a different extension to leave a message on an answerphone! Again, nothing had happened by early January 2026, and so they sent an email to an address buried in their discharge notes. An email reply appeared within two hours saying that the appointments team had been asked to make an appointment. Since then, there’s been nothing!

Yesterday the acquaintance asked the Badger, ‘Given your service operations and IT experience, is this a symptom of a failing service?’ They added, ‘In the old days, I’d have been given a card with my clinic appointment on it on discharge before leaving the ward. Who’s to blame for replacing that for the woeful process of today?’  The Badger answered the first question with yes, and the second with ‘Blame rests with governments, NHS leaders, and the external management consultants whose advice rarely improves NHS efficiency.’  To the Badger’s surprise, his acquaintance, a retired management consultant, agreed fully and added ‘more technology won’t help unless these processes get sorted’. They have a point…

Have the lessons from the ‘Move fast and break things’ era really been learned?

Posted on by The Information Badger in AI, Change, Information Technology, Leadership, Risk, Technology, Transformation

The first quarter of the 21st century is complete, and so it seems appropriate to reflect on a period of continuously accelerating digital innovation that has transformed how people work, play, communicate, share information, and buy things. The technological change seen so far this century differs markedly to that experienced by previous generations. It’s been fast! Previous generations experienced the impact of technological change much more slowly. The technologies the Badger’s grandfather and great-grandfather were used to in their childhoods, for example, were still central to their lives in their old age. With subsequent generations, it’s become normal for the barely imaginable technologies of their youth to become commonplace in their later life. Just think, if your ancestors could spend a week with you today, most would be wide-eyed and speechless in awe at the digital technology you use!

Digital technology has driven significant changes in society in the last 25 years, and AI will be no different. In the last 25 years, the internet has become critical global infrastructure, and the advent of smartphones has blended communication, entertainment, photography, and productivity into a single, pocket-size, device. Personal and professional interactions have become dominated by email, instant messaging, and real-time video calls rather than paper, and the way we store, access and manage large amounts of data has moved from local, physical, items like high-capacity CDs, to ‘The Cloud’ where it can be accessed from anywhere at any time. Streaming for entertainment and the online purchasing of goods have become the norm, and cyber capabilities have become crucial for militaries and policing. And then, of course, there’s social media. Whether you love it or loathe it, it’s been an addictive disruptor of everything!

All this, and much more, has happened in barely 25 years. Our lives have become deeply entangled with digital technology and the world has become more unstable. While this instability can be attributed to economic, climate, pandemic, and geopolitical factors, the digital revolution has, in the Badger’s opinion, played a significant role in societal disruption. Why? Because the early Facebook philosophy of ‘Move fast and break things’ epitomised the ethos of the companies that are today’s tech giants, and ‘Silicon Valley’ as a whole. This ethos showed scant regard for the overall societal impact of what they produced. As we are now seeing, the societal, ethical, political, and human problems this ethos produces only really manifests itself many, many years later. With AI continuing the digital revolution in the second quarter of the 21st century, a good question to ask is this: have the lessons from the impact on society of the ‘Move fast and break things’ era been learned and applied in the AI world that will be transformational in the coming decades? AI gives enormous power to those who control it, and so the Badger thinks the answer to this question is obvious. You, however, may think differently…

AI – from ‘build, baby, build’ to ‘bust, baby, bust’?

Posted on by The Information Badger in AI, Business, Delivery, Information Technology, Leadership, Risk, Technology

Every Christmas/New Year period, the BBC’s Radio 4 Today programme invites well known individuals to guest-edit the programme. Each guest focuses on a topic relevant to their interests, experience, and society. Two of the Christmas 2025 guests were inventor, engineer, and businessman Sir James Dyson and the AI pioneer and entrepreneur Mustafa Suleyman.  The Badger was driving to visit relatives on the days they were guest-editing. He had the Today programme on the radio as background noise on both occasions. He turned the volume up when each man was interviewed because they were intelligent, impressive, and articulate individuals conveying enormous common-sense and objectivity, characteristics which seem in short supply today.

Their words resonated with the Badger. Sir James Dyson, for example, likes ‘doers’ rather than ‘talkers’, and Mustafa Suleyman spoke eloquently about AI and that it must be ‘a tool in the hands of and under the control of humans if it’s to benefit all of humankind’. There’s plenty of ‘talkers’ in the world, but it’s ‘doers’ like these two with vision, objectivity, commonsense, and a passion for humankind, rather than politicians, which have the greatest influence on the lives of most people. The Badger agrees that AI is a tool. There are plenty of ‘talkers’ concerned that humans would become subservient to AI, but if we let that happen then we only have ourselves to blame. There’s currently a huge ‘build, baby, build’ rush to construct new, giant, energy-hungry, AI data centres and to amass and use the chips and devices they need to function. Enormous sums are being spent around the world, the technology continues to advance way ahead of any regulation, and AI company stock market valuations are stratospheric. Having worked in IT during the dot.com era, the words of these two men made the Badger ponder more about the current AI ‘build, baby, build’ surge.

Four conclusions emerged. The first was that such surges often produce over-capacity and ‘bust, baby, bust’ outcomes (c.f. China’s property crash) with the bigger the boom, the deeper and longer the bust! The second was that AI is here to stay, but some huge AI companies will not survive even though the AI market bubble is not like the dot.com era when many companies with high valuations had no revenues. Inevitably, when investor appetite for speculative risk tightens for any reason, and it will, a painful correction will happen. The third was that eyebrows should be raised when tech companies arrange for the restart of shuttered nuclear facilities to provide electricity for their new data centres.   

The Badger’s last conclusion was that we should question whether the world’s leaders, including those of hyperscale global tech corporations, are the right kind of ‘doers’. Do they have objectivity, common-sense, and mankind’s well-being at heart, or are they just examples of Lord Acton’s 1887 line ‘Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely’? Whatever the answer, 2026 looks likely to be a troublesome year…

Social media: The same trajectory as tobacco?

Posted on by The Information Badger in Business, Information Technology, Public safety, social media, Technology

A New Year is fast approaching. For many it’s a time of joy and optimism, but for others it can be a daunting, sad, and worrying prospect. Christmas and the New Year period for the Badger’s family is about getting together whatever the circumstances. When we do, there’s always a discussion about the future of the tech world and so the Badger’s been musing on the subject in preparation. One of his conclusions has been that foreseeing a future event isn’t as outrageous as it might seem if you look at history and compare it with present-day dynamics.

The Badger’s concluded, for example, that ‘social media will follow the same trajectory as other industries that have touched health, cognition and social order’. That’s not an outrageous conclusion when there are striking structural parallels between social media and, for example, the tobacco industry. The latter thrived for decades in a regulatory vacuum with products that were known to damage users’ health. Similarly, social media operates in an under-regulated space with products that keep users engaged to maximise profits regardless of the toll on public health. Whereas tobacco’s harm is biochemical and physiological, social media’s is cognitive, social, behavioural, and physical in a way that’s harder to see or measure. It hides it’s harm behind its convenience, utility, and benefits. Worrying about harmful content, its encouragement of habitual screentime leading to lower physical activity, lowering attention spans, and eroding emotional adaptability, is not misplaced because these are all bad for long term physical and mental health.

The tobacco industry was built on the underlying motives of maximum user engagement, maximum revenue, product optimisation for addictive behaviour, and resistance to regulation. Social media seems the same. With tobacco, law makers eventually ‘woke up’ because – as history shows with industries that touch human health, cognition, and social order – once harms and their cost become undeniable in the public domain, society always pushes back! At some stage this seems likely to happen with social media resulting in its radical transformation. Gradual reform rarely works when business models are not aligned with societal well-being, companies are financially and politically powerful, and consumers have become accustomed to products and services. Any transformation of social media, given the slow speed of regulation, seems a long way off unless something radical happens.

What could that something be? Well, history shows that radical change tends to come from economic collapse rather than moral awakenings or gradual reform. If the social media giants were to start making huge financial losses that collapse their share price, then radical change would happen because such shocks always force restructuring, regulation, and cultural re-evaluation. Is this plausible? Well, never say never! The Badger will be adopting ‘never say never’ as his reference point for everything during 2026. In the current world and tech climate, it seems silly to do otherwise…

The world needs Australia to succeed with banning those under 16 from major social media platforms…

Posted on by The Information Badger in Business, Ethics & Regulation, Information Technology, Public safety, social media

Australia’s legislation banning the access of those under the age of sixteen from major social media platforms came into force today, 10th December. Its purpose is to protect children from harmful content, cyberbullying, and online predators. The major social media platforms are required to take reasonable steps to enforce age restrictions or face fines of up to AU$50 million. A neat item from Australia’s ABC on the topic can be found here.  Some platforms began locking out existing under-sixteen accounts and blocking new ones a couple of weeks ago.

Australia is the first country in the world to impose such a ban, and their move could be the first domino in a global trend given that debates are underway in many other countries about following suit. Supporters of the ban see it as a necessary safeguard against online harms and a way to hold the giant tech companies accountable. Critics and the social media companies, however, argue that the ban is blunt, hard to enforce, risks isolating teenagers, and raises privacy/digital rights concerns. After absorbing a wide variety of views expressed in the media by affected teens, parents, and industry and government commentators, the Badger asked himself, ‘who’s side are you on?’ He found the answer surprisingly easy.

From his own use of social media, the Badger thinks that society’s general moral decline is plain to see when misinformation and disinformation abound, and a lot of content amplifies unethical behaviour, distorts decent judgement, and attempts to reshape cultural values. Viral fame seems to reward scandals, outrage, and bad conduct, and constant exposure to divisive content fuels fear and outrage undermining the traditional values that have held communities together for generations. Today’s under-sixteens are vulnerable because they often model their behaviour on what they see online rather than on traditional role models. The Badger thus admires and supports Australia’s action because the major platforms have been too powerful for far too long. They are fast to act to make more money from users’ content, but slow to act on anything dubious or perceived as limiting their power and interests. Will more countries eventually follow Australia’s lead? Probably.

The ban’s critics assert that under-sixteens will simply find alternative ways to access the major platforms. That’s a hollow argument because it’s always been true that teenagers find ways around legal barriers. For example, there are laws about underage consumption of alcohol and smoking cigarettes, and yet it happens! Similarly, in his youth the Badger and his friends found ways of watching movies rated as inappropriate for our age at the local cinema. As has always been the case, the law puts a firm stake in the ground for society, and long may that continue. The world thus needs Australia to succeed with its ban, so let’s hope it does…

‘Do what’s necessary to fix this fast’ – Would you be up for the challenge?

Posted on by The Information Badger in Delivery, Information Technology, IT Project Management, Leadership, Learning

Here’s a situation. A contractor has a large fixed-price contract to develop a major system (hardware and software) that’s crucial to the client’s business. The project is in serious difficulty. Contracted deliverables to date have been of poor quality and late. Lots of software has been developed but there are severe test and integration problems. Hardware from a subcontractor is also late, exacerbating the difficulties. The client has constructed a new building which has been sitting idle for six months waiting for the new system to be installed. They are threatening punitive litigation. The project is causing the contractor significant, company-level, financial damage and resolving the situation has become a business-critical issue. Client and contractor executives have agreed that the contractor has one last chance to deliver the system and avoid litigation, ostensibly because unrelated matters within the client’s wider enterprise have delayed for some months when the building must become operational.

If you, an employee of the contractor not associated with the project, were asked to ‘Do what’s necessary to fix this fast’, what would your reaction be? The Badger once pitched this scenario and question to a group of IT sector project managers. Their responses were interesting. Most of those with cost-plus project management experience said they wouldn’t take on the challenge because being associated with a problem project might damage their career prospects. Others said they’d accept the challenge but only if it were accepted that their need to review the project, establish committees, and rebuild stakeholder management meant it was unlikely the project could be ‘fixed fast’.

Only one person, someone who had run a couple of modest fixed-price contracts, said unequivocally that they’d take the challenge. When the Badger asked them why, their response was – ‘If you’ve successfully run software and hardware intensive fixed price projects then you’ve learned that you’re a highly focused, demanding, disciplined and decisive individual with limited patience. You’ve learned that you need to be respected by your team and your client but not necessarily liked. You’ve learned the importance of dynamism, belief, team spirit, and having a positive attitude, and the importance of looking forward and taking speedy action to head off emerging threats to success. You’ve also learned that decisions must be good ones but not necessarily popular, and that ‘No’ is an immensely powerful word. Having learned all this, taking on the turnaround of a seriously troubled project threatening the company seems like a great personal opportunity rather than a foolhardy thing to do’.

The Badger smiled. Here was a kindred spirit! Fixing troublesome projects is always a challenge and a great opportunity to expand one’s capabilities. The contrast in attitude between those with cost-plus and fixed-price contract PM backgrounds was stark. If you were asked to ‘Do what’s necessary to fix this fast’ today, would you be up for the challenge?