Category: Information Technology

An epidemic of apps…

Posted on by The Information Badger in apps, Automation, Change, Digital technology, Information Technology, Learning, Life, Technology

Organisations are increasingly insisting that you download an app because ‘it makes your life easier’. But should you really need an app on your phone to get a coffee in a garden centre’s café, to order food in an eatery, or to gain entrance to the changing rooms at a pool after a child’s swimming lesson? No. The Badger, perhaps, is just being grumpy about the epidemic of apps that is increasingly changing facets of everyday life.

The Badger’s young grandson attends a course of weekly swimming lessons. His parents have pre-paid for the course, and they and the Badger take it in turns to take him to the pool. All the kids and their accompanying adults congregate in the free poolside viewing area when they arrive. The kids, who all wear their swimming costumes under their normal clothes, disrobe. The instructor does a rollcall and then opens a glass gate to move the group of excited kids into the pool, and adults stay in the viewing area to watch proceedings. When the lesson finishes, the instructor sends the kids to the changing room the other side of the pool, and the adults go to the pool’s manned reception where the receptionist lets them through a turnstile to the changing area on mentioning the swimming lesson. This process has been long-standing. It works well, and it accommodates a reality, namely that there might be different accompanying adults each week. Three weeks ago, however, everything changed because a mandatory app that had to be used to operate the turnstiles to the changing room was introduced.

The Badger’s daughter-in-law, who had booked and paid for the course in the first place, downloaded the app and used it successfully to access the changing room after her son’s swimming lesson. The following week, the Badger’s son, who had also downloaded the app, was refused access at the turnstile because his phone wasn’t registered to the person who booked the course in the first place, i.e. his wife! Other accompanying adults experienced the same thing. After frosty exchanges with the receptionist, they were all let through. This week the Badger, who has consciously not downloaded the app, was his grandson’s accompanying adult. The receptionist simply sighed and let the Badger through the turnstile. One can but wonder how on earth this app has ‘made your life easier’.

An app collects all kinds of data about you and your behaviour that provides an organisation with advertising/notification opportunities, tighter control over their operations, and more profit. With the current epidemic of ‘apps for everything’ it’s worth remembering two things. Firstly, that every organisation pressing you to download an app has their interests at heart, not yours, and secondly that when you download an app you are trading some of your privacy and freedom for a convenience that doesn’t always really materialise…  

Digital advancement depends on physicists, material scientists, and engineers…

Posted on by The Information Badger in AI, Digital technology, Engineering, Information Technology, Science, Technology

Browsing the stalls of a large vintage and antiques fair recently, the Badger came across a battery-operated Sinclair Cambridge pocket calculator in working order. It took the Badger back to the 1970s when he, and many of his student friends, purchased one for £19.99, the equivalent of £290 today! Battery-powered pocket calculators had just become widely available, and they quickly became a ‘must have’ amongst students on science and engineering courses. Unsurprisingly, more powerful multi-function pocket calculators soon came along, and the Badger’s Sinclair Cambridge was replaced by a Texas Instruments TI-57 which provided years of service before being consigned to the back of a cupboard.

Since the fair, the Badger’s reflected on how digital technology has evolved since the pocket calculator of 50 years ago. The powerful, multi-purpose, smartphones we carry in our pockets today were pure science fiction in the 1970s. Since then, however, ‘digital’ has been one of the great achievements of the 20th and 21st centuries, ostensibly because it touches nearly all areas of human activity. Most people will, at some stage, have quietly wondered how its continued advances will impact their life in the future. After all, we can already see that drones have altered warfare, humanoid robotics has reached extraordinary levels (e.g. see here and here), automation dominates manufacturing and supply chains, electric vehicles are changing motoring, services are online-first, hybrid working is normal, social media is an asset and a liability, and that super-intelligent AI has as much capability for evil as it does for good. It’s thus natural and human to wonder about how the continued high rate of digital advancement affects our future.

Can, however, the high rate of digital advancement be sustained? Having retrieved his vintage TI-57 from the back of a cupboard, the Badger reflected on this question. The TI-57 has a semi-conducting silicon chip at its heart, and it’s the speedy development of integrated circuits and such microchips to provide more and faster computational capability that’s fuelled digital progress since the 1970s. Fundamentally, progress in the likes of physics, material science, and micro-engineering/manufacturing have determined the rate of digital technology’s advancement. It follows, therefore, that if progress in such subject areas slowed, then so will the rate at which digital advancement impacts our lives. Is slower progress in these subjects likely? Well, the Badger thinks it takes a brave person to write-off the possibility.

The future we hear about today, especially regarding AI, depends on more and faster computer chips at a time when the scientific boundaries of what’s achievable are being reached using the chip methods of recent decades. Just as it was when the pocket calculator first arrived, it’s scientists and engineers who will find necessary new solutions, and it’s their success in doing so that will really determine the rate of digital progress in the coming decades.

Digital ‘Never Forget’ moments – from 9/11 to AI…

Posted on by The Information Badger in AI, Digital technology, Ethics & Regulation, Information Technology, Innovation, Leadership, Life, Risk, safety, Tech for social good

It’s 25 years since 9/11, a truly ‘never forget’ moment. The Badger was workings at his desk in an office outside London when his son rang to ask if he was in London and safe. His son’s voice dripped with concern. The Badger provided the necessary reassurance and his son told him about the World Trade Towers, and that news channels were speculating that Canary Wharf and other London towers might also be targets. That phone call, let alone then watching the live pictures, has always been a ‘never forget’ moment for the Badger. It’s sobering to realise that ~40% of the world’s population today are <25 years old and relate to 9/11 mainly through images and information on social media, streaming platforms, and traditional television. Nevertheless, that day of atrocity will always be one of history’s ‘never forget’ moments.

The 9/11 anniversary caused the Badger to muse about digital technology’s ‘never forget’ moments in the last 25 years since that atrocity. Why? Because since then, digital technology has reshaped power structures, expectations, communication, global markets, and everyone’s behaviour. A few of the macro ‘never forget’ moments that emerged from this musing are as follows:  

  • The arrival of the iPhone in ~2007 because it embedded smartphones as disruptive consumer devices that have changed communication, business, photography, navigation, and entertainment forever.
  • The 2008/9 financial crash, because the exposed vulnerabilities in traditional banking systems spawned innovative fintech digital tools which have since improved, automated, and expanded financial services for individuals and businesses.
  • The 2018 Cambridge Analytica scandal, because it raised awareness of how much social media platforms impact culture, politics, marketing, global behaviour, wellbeing, and the privacy of individuals.
  • The 2020 global COVID pandemic, because digital technology became essential for remote working, video conferencing, and the design, development and production of the mRNA vaccines which saved millions of lives then and continue to do so now.
  • The 2022 release of ChatGPT, because it marked AI becoming mainstream for the public. It reached 100 million users within 2 months, triggered an AI investment boom, and profoundly changed forever how governments, businesses, and individuals think about technology, work, and machine intelligence.

Other moments emerged, as did one overarching truth – digital technology has reshaped the very fabric of society since 9/11.

Another ‘never forget’ digital moment happened in recent days. The US President belittled the worries of major US AI company leaders that advances are happening so fast that there’s a tangible threat to human safety, and that perhaps development should slow to put safeguards  in place. The President’s ‘No, it’s a hoax’’ response wasn’t that of a wise statesman, it was the response of someone with money, power, ego, and winning at any cost at the centre of everything. Should the worst happen with AI, people will ‘never forget’ that human safety was not on the President’s priority list…  

Who really gets a problem project back on the rails?

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

There’s rarely a single cause for why a software or systems project goes off the rails. Normally, project problems are a consequence of human, organisational, and process-related issues caused by things like poorly defined requirements, scope creep, poor planning and tracking, poor line management oversight, poor communication, and difficult client relationships. Sometimes projects really hit the buffers and matters end up in the law courts. More often than not, however, client and supplier executives recognise that failure is, for one reason or another, not an option and so they agree to do what it takes to get the project back on the rails and get the system delivered. One of the Badger’s formative experiences was being part of a small team tasked with getting one of his employer’s major fixed-price projects back on the rails. The project was a basket case exhibiting all the causal characteristics noted above, but the system to be delivered was strategically and politically important to the client and supplier alike. Turning it around was hard work but a great learning experience.

One of the Badger’s colleagues on the fix-it team, Jock (not their real name), was an experienced Scotsman with a sense of humour. Their task was to re-establish a comprehensive, contractually compliant, Functional Specification for the system that was fully agreed with the client. This meant Jock and others, including sometimes the Badger, met with the client’s team of operational users and contractual minders for daily functional discussions over many weeks. It was soon evident that Jock was objective, entirely focused on his task, and masterful in corralling those with different opinions and functional perspectives to a common agreement. Eventually a new Functional Specification, the lynchpin to getting the project back on the rails, was formally agreed. Jock had been firm, fair, and engaging throughout. Although he’d built a good relationship with the client team and great respect within the project team, he didn’t consider himself a natural leader or negotiator.

What did the Badger learn from working with Jock? Firstly, to recognise the difference between a negotiable issue and a non-negotiable principle. Secondly, to say ‘No’ and mean it when it’s appropriate and necessary. Thirdly, that saying, ‘Yes, but that’s not part of the contracted baseline’ unemotionally and assertively is an effective way of saying ‘No, you can’t have it unless we agree the impact and price’. The Badger learned something else too, namely that Jock was a natural leader, and that leaders don’t have to be extroverts, aggressive, intolerant, petulant, or have a distant demeanour. Jock demonstrated that natural leaders are relatable, build respect, have a backbone and principles, don’t clamour to be in the spotlight, and remain objective and fair under pressure. When a project goes off the rails, we should remember that it’s people like Jock rather than company executives who really get it back on the rails.

Your face, voice, and personality – think before you post…

Posted on by The Information Badger in AI, Digital technology, Education, influencers, Information Technology, Life, Online Safety, Online Services, Privacy and Surveillance, Risk

In our digital world an individual’s identity has become more vulnerable as well as highly valuable. Ever since the Cambridge Analytica scandal, many people have limited posting audio, video, and photographs of themselves online in case they are misused by others because, as a friend put it recently, ‘regardless of what we’re told, you can’t be entirely sure who or what will use your posts for their own purpose’. On the other hand, of course, putting podcasts, images, and videos of themselves online is part of their daily life for many people. If you work as an actor, a television presenter, an online influencer, or you are a leader in politics, government, or business, then your face, voice, and image are especially vulnerable to being used to create fake content for nefarious purposes (e.g. see here). Accordingly, there’s no surprise in reading recently that ~80 performers have written to the UK government demanding greater protection against their voices being used by AI. It isn’t, however, just performers that need this greater protection, it’s actually everyone.

Regardless of who you are, something posted online which includes your voice, face, and body image can be manipulated and monetised without you knowing or giving your permission. AI makes it straightforward to create realistic, fake, digital clones of you from audio clips, videos, and images posted online. Your identity could thus be misused, taken away from your control, and your digital clone could be used in scams and other criminality. Surely, therefore, your legal ownership of your voice, face, and body image is embodied as a single right in UK law? Well, no this isn’t the case. Instead, UK law provides a mix of protections for the individual under privacy, intellectual property rights, and a number of other laws. There’s no dedicated legal framework for individuals to control the use of their voice, face, or body image, which makes it challenging and hugely expensive to protect against unauthorised exploitation.

This feels to the Badger like another illustration that the law always hugely lags rapidly advancing digital technology enabling companies to play fast and loose for their own commercial gain. Denmark is apparently one of the first countries in the world to create copyright-style protection for individuals over their face, voice, and other personal distinguishing features. Will the UK introduce something similar? There’s no sign of that, which means it’s worth remembering that it’s been sensible in the digital world for years to think very carefully before posting images, audio, and video of yourself online. ‘Think before you post’ is even more sensible in the era of AI. After all, your face, voice, and personal characteristics are unique to you through birth and biology. They are at the heart of your identity as a human and it can never be right that anyone or anything can use your identity without your explicit permission.

The digital world – a public nuisance?

Posted on by The Information Badger in AI, Business, Digital technology, Information Technology, Life, Risk, Science, Technology, Transformation, Wellbeing

The old coin/card ticket machines in the local High Street’s car park have been replaced by swanky touch-screen units that only take contactless payment. To be fair, there’s one new machine in the car park that still purports to take coins and contactless payment, although nobody has so far been able to get it to actually accept coins! There’s something else too. It’s an open-air car park and the screens on the new units are hardly readable on a bright sunny day. The new machines are straightforward to use once you know how, but earlier this week the only functioning machine was the one purporting to take coins as well as contactless payments. There was a queue, which the Badger joined, but the pensioner at the head of the queue was having trouble getting the machine to accept their contactless card payment. Giving up, they tried coins instead, and that didn’t work either. The flummoxed pensioner thought there was something wrong with their bank card. A kind lady stepped in and said she’d pay for the pensioner’s ticket using her own card. That didn’t work either, causing the lady and the pensioner to grumble ‘The digital world is a public nuisance’.

The Badger subsequently cogitated on whether the digital world is indeed a public nuisance. Putting the legalities of what constitutes a public nuisance to one side, whether the digital world’s a nuisance depends on your perspective. Grandparents, parents, young adults, and children have different perspectives, but research across this age spectrum apparently suggests that views are not purely yes or purely no, but definitely not neutral. Many think the digital world enhances social interactions, learning opportunities, business efficiency, innovation, convenience, and so on. However, many believe it’s become a nuisance because a) it’s dominated by self-interested major corporations who put their profits rather than users first, and b) it lessens person to person physical contact, encourages excessive screen time, distorts our sense of reality, erodes personal privacy, is an enormous source of mis and disinformation, and causes mental, health, and behavioural issues in young adults, children, and vulnerable groups.

Does the Badger think the digital world’s a public nuisance? No…but beginning to lean towards yes! No, because a lengthy career in the IT industry showed that in the right hands, with good laws, controls, and ethical and moral human behaviour within acceptable societal norms, the digital world produces enormous benefits and is a good servant to mankind. Why leaning towards yes? Because although the science relating to the digital world’s impact on humanity has been too slow over the last few decades, it’s now confirming that nuisances are real and often harmful. It’s thus reasonable to conclude that mankind is fast becoming a servant to the digital world when it should be the other way round, and that AI is destined to reinforce this in the coming years…

Suppliers, AI, and putting lipstick on a pig…

Posted on by The Information Badger in AI, Information Technology, Procurement, Risk, Sales, Software

While browsing in a Waterstone’s bookshop, the Badger overheard two people talking about a book. One said to the other: ‘They’ve changed the cover from the copy I read years ago’. The other replied: ‘I think they’re putting lipstick on a pig to sell more copies because it’s a difficult read’. The phrase ‘putting lipstick on a pig’ triggered memories of the Badger’s first ever assignment – as a software developer – in the IT industry. The Badger was part of a team developing a software product, and his team leader – a clever guy experienced in product design, development, and also the offerings of competitors – was a frequent user of the phrase. For example, when news arrived that a competitor had vastly improved the user interface to their product, the team leader commented that they were ‘putting lipstick on a pig’ because there was no change to their product’s questionable underlying architecture. Similarly, if someone on the team produced a software subsystem that was full of defects, the team leader would insist on redesign and reimplementation of the subsystem because fixing individual defects was ‘putting lipstick on a pig’ when something was clearly amiss with the original design and coding.

The phrase is widely used to mean that making superficial changes to something may improve its appearance, but any core underlying issues or characteristics remain unchanged (see this neat YouTube item). Throughout his career, the Badger’s heard the phrase used in all kinds of situations by business leaders, line managers, salespeople, delivery and technical people alike. During the late1990s, customer demand for long-established software products to have web user interfaces was growing. The Badger recalls his company’s salespeople clamouring for the firm’s software products to be upgraded, and developers pointing out that this meant a costly overhaul of product architectures which neither the company nor its clients wanted to fund. It was decided that the way forward was bolt-on solutions that looked the part for the end user without really addressing the underlying architectural issues. Internally, the phrase ‘putting lipstick on a pig’ subsequently became commonplace to describe this solution.

Today, of course, AI is sweeping through the IT industry, and most companies have been addressing its impact on their established and installed software products, and their own internal business, development, delivery, and service operations. Why? Because to have a viable commercial future, they must. Every company thus has an AI story for their clients. As a client, however, how do you know that your supplier’s AI product upgrade or new solution isn’t just ‘putting lipstick on a pig’? You don’t, unless you do a rigorous, objective evaluation to fully understand what you are getting and on what basis. Doing proper evaluations, however, has always been good practice when buying things, and it’s even more important today when dealing with suppliers in the AI era…

More STEM-educated MPs needed for effective national leadership

Posted on by The Information Badger in AI, Education, Engineering, Information Technology, Leadership, Politics, Science, Technology

The lawn’s brown, the flowers and trees look decidedly sad, and there appears to be fewer bumblebees, honeybees, and small birds than usual. There are, however, a greater number and variety of butterflies than normal. These were the Badger’s first thoughts when sitting in the shade contemplating the world after entertaining his grandson at the weekend. His thoughts then wandered into the realities of the current world that his young grandson’s generation face. It’s been an exceptional UK summer, with blue skies and high temperatures across much of the nation. For a nation that is renowned for talking about the weather, the heat brings mixed blessings – there are water shortages, hosepipe bans, and a high risk of destructive vegetation fires. Many people are wringing their hands and banging the climate change drum, but the Badger’s grandson is taking the heatwaves in his stride! He thinks it’s much better having good weather in the school holiday period so that he can be outdoors rather than housebound due to rain and gloom.

The Badger’s thoughts moved onto matters oblivious to his grandson. Things like, for example, the fact that being big and powerful doesn’t mean you’ll succeed (as the Ukraine and Middle East conflicts illustrate), and that with AI the world’s embarked on its most dangerous period of change ever. Whilst there’s much worry due to fossil fuel emissions and climate change, the consumption of resources driven by AI and other technological developments also have major consequences for the planet that hence the future life of the Badger’s grandson’s generation. With a sigh, the Badger’s cogitations concluded that the nature and predisposition of humans, and self-serving leadership dynamics, are at the heart of many of the world’s woes.

The self-serving leadership conclusion prompted the Badger to explore the educational background of the current UK Cabinet. This revealed that only one current UK Cabinet member has studied a STEM subject at university; a situation that’s essentially unchanged from Kier Starmer’s Cabinet. It also revealed (see here) that of the 650 elected Members of the UK Parliament, ~83% have university degrees but only 17% have a STEM degree, a proportion that’s barely changed in 20 years. With ~ 46% of UK undergraduates in the country studying STEM subjects, a measure of 17% suggests significant STEM underrepresentation in the country’s political and governmental circles. No wonder, the Badger mused, that the country has not been firing on all cylinders during this century.

Life today is dominated by science, technology, engineering and maths. In an era of AI and rapid, AI-enabled, science and technological advances, surely there must be more STEM-educated people around the UK Cabinet table for effective national leadership? Of course, there should. Afterall, STEM-educated people, as noted here, base decisions on data and unspun truth, both essential if the nation’s ever to have the leadership needed to get its mojo back…

Want to be an ‘influencer’? Get educated first…

Posted on by The Information Badger in AI, Education, influencers, Information Technology, Life, social media

The Badger recently found himself sympathising with some parents who were stressed-out because their 12-year-old son was being disruptive and problematic at school. The boy has been problematic at school for some time, and none of the measures taken by his parents, or the school, has improved matters. It seems the boy’s issues began when, one way or another, they started using social media heavily. This seems to have significantly influenced his attitude, beliefs, and behaviour as his engagement with content intensified with the passage of time. The boy’s a problem at school because, to use his parents’ words, ‘he doesn’t see why he needs teachers or lessons, because he just wants to be a social media influencer’. The parents are in despair. They think their son is another young victim of the dark side of the last two decades’ social media revolution.

While many families experience similar difficulties, and research (e.g. here) illustrates how digital media affects adolescents, it was the word ‘influencer’ that grabbed the Badger’s attention. The word is flourishing like never before, primarily as a descriptor for someone with a large social media following who earns a living from the content they post. Perhaps the Badger’s a dinosaur, but he’s lost track of the number of people popping up as celebrities on popular television shows because they are ‘an influencer’ with a large following on platforms like Instagram or TikTok. When social media enables anyone from any background, and with any level of education, to be an ‘influencer’ if they produce content that attracts views, then it seems reasonable to ask the question ‘Is being an ‘influencer’ a legitimate career path?’.

The answer’s ‘Yes’ if you are entrepreneurial, can produce engaging content, and can advertise and promote products and brands that generate financial income and profits. Having a successful career, however, depends on business and financial acumen, an aptitude for marketing, knowledge of the influencer market, digital competence, and the ability to stay relevant when technology and audience interests change under your feet. The answer to the question is ‘No’ if you have none of these attributes. The problematic child noted above is too young to have the attributes needed to make a sustainable living from being an influencer. Their compulsive consumption of online content has likely distorted their view of how the real-world works, and so they may be in for a rude awakening when they eventually finish school and join the workforce.

So, what advice would the Badger give this youngster today? Simply this: ‘if you want to be a credible and respected influencer, and earn a living from being one, then you need to get the best education you can under your belt first’. Would they listen? Probably not…which is a sad indictment of a fickle, ever-changing, digital-dominated world in which AI is set to revolutionize everything, including being an influencer…

AI – A weapon of mass destruction?

Posted on by The Information Badger in AI, Information Technology, Public safety, Risk

When members of the public hear the phrase ‘weapon of mass destruction’ or the acronym WMD their first thoughts tend to be of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons. Such weapons, whether we like it or not, have always coincided with advancements in one field or another of science or technology.  For example, nuclear fission was first demonstrated in the late 1930s. Shortly afterwards, the first nuclear reactor demonstrated the feasibility of controlling nuclear reactions, which paved the way for civilian nuclear power generation.  And then the nuclear bomb came too. Similarly, advances in chemistry, microbiology and genetic engineering not only paved the way for positive medical benefits for humans and society as a whole, but also the chemical and biological weapons that could eliminate humanity’s existence. There’s an uncomfortable truth about weapons of mass destruction – they always evolve from, and are a negative aspect of, humanity’s ingenuity. 

On reading that an OpenAI experimental AI model had escaped a test environment and hacked another company’s production systems with no human direction, the Badger’s first thought was that the dynamic described above is happening. AI may yield benefits for society, but it may also be a new WMD – a digital one.  Whereas the development of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons relied heavily on human expertise, physical materials, and infrastructure, this AI model breach demonstrates that the boundary of what constitutes a weapon of mass destruction is expanding, and that the need for human expertise in consciously producing any kind of WMD is a rapidly diminishing factor.  For the average member of the public, the detail of why OpenAI’s AI model went ‘rogue’ is irrelevant because they simply see the breach as a demonstration that the threat from completely autonomous AI is real. They also see it as an illustration that AI acting beyond human expectations means the technology might not be safe in the hands of corporations seeking commercial gain.

Digital technology underpins everyday life and modern warfare today. Over decades the public have become conditioned into thinking that WMDs threaten humanity through either violently explosive, or biologically/chemically toxic mechanisms. The time’s come, perhaps, in our digital-first world for people to broaden their thinking to include AI as a possible weapon of mass destruction. Cyber-attacks are commonplace these days (e.g. see here), and so it isn’t outrageous to envisage AI as a WMD that could bring the whole digital world we rely on for modern life to it’s knees. This might not produce the immediacy of mass death from nuclear or biological/chemical weapons, but it would certainly produce anarchy and its associated human tragedies. The OpenAI breach highlights something uncomfortable. Human ingenuity is a strength, but also a huge weakness that could lead us to be the first species on the planet to be wiped out through its own endeavours rather than natural events.