AI – A ‘Macbeth Moment’?

The Badger was browsing in a shop when Hubble Bubble (Toil and Trouble) by Manfred Mann featured in the piped music. It struck a chord with the recent warnings by JP Morgan’s CEO, the Bank of England, and others, that an AI bubble could pop. Later that day, while clearing a cupboard, the Badger found his old school notes for Shakespeare’s Macbeth, part of the English Literature syllabus of the time. Scribbled notes about the three witches uttering ‘Double, double toil and trouble: fire burn and cauldron bubble’ caught his eye. The coincidental combination of the song title, these scribbles, and the AI warnings triggered some contemplation on the AI bubble.

During the dot.com debacle of the early 2000s, the Badger was a senior member of a UK, stock-exchange listed, IT services company. Such companies, investors believed, would benefit from the dot.com boom. The company’s share price thus rose ~tenfold before collapsing back to its original level when the market realised that dot.com companies were massively over-valued, and many had little real revenue let alone profit. For years following the crash, doing business in the IT sector was tough. The NASDAQ, for example, crashed from around 5000 to 1100 and it took ~15 years to recover. Many dotcoms disappeared, but the likes of Amazon, eBay, Google and others rose from the ashes to become the powerhouses of recovery. Having worked in IT throughout the debacle, the Badger’s instincts are alive to tech bubbles. Today they ring alarm bells.

Whether AI’s a market bubble that bursts, or a transformation that sticks, depends on whether company valuations are grounded in real, scalable, business fundamentals, or  speculative optimism. Either way, AI is unlike anything seen before, so when JP Morgan, the Bank of England, the World Economic Forum and others have some anxiety, then we should take note, especially as, for example, Nvidia, Anthropic, and OpenAI’s market values have risen many-fold in just two years. There’s unprecedented spending on computational infrastructure, massive bets on future productivity gains, and belief that AI will revolutionise everything. The actual return  on investment, however, has not been impressive so far. When the UK National Cyber Security Centre advises organisations to have plans to operate their business without access to computers following a cyber-attack, the hype of an AI dominated future seems a little questionable.

The Badger’s learned from his dot.com era experience that it’s prudent to be wary. If market valuations become detached from fundamentals, or the availability of computational infrastructure stalls, or the promised productivity gains for organisations don’t materialise, or geopolitically driven export controls cause disruption, then any AI bubble will pop triggering a huge domino effect. AI is facing a ‘Macbeth moment’. Witches making prophecies surround the bubbling AI cauldron uttering ‘double, double toil and trouble; fire burn and cauldron bubble’. In the play, Macbeth felt a sense of foreboding…as do more and more of today’s leaders….

The Future; microchipped, monitored and tracked?

The Badger sank onto the sofa after his infant grandson’s parents collected the little whirlwind following a weekend sleepover. The Badger had been reminded that Generation Alpha are the most digital-immersed cohort yet. Born into a world full of tech, they are digital natives from an early age, as was evident during the activities we did over the weekend. Struck by the youngster’s digital awareness and especially their independence, curiosity, and eagerness to grasp not just what things are, but also why and how they work, the Badger found himself wondering about the digital world that his grandson might encounter in the future.

From his IT experience, the Badger knows that change is continuous and disruptive for IT professionals, organisations, and the public alike. Change in the digital landscape over the last 40 years has been phenomenal. All of the following have caused upheavals on the journey to the digital world we have today: the move from mainframes to client-server and computer networks, relational databases, the PC, spreadsheets and word processing packages, mobile networks and satellite communications, mobile computing, image processing, the internet, online businesses, social media, the cloud, microchip miniaturisation, and advances in software engineering. These have changed the way organisations function, how the general public engages with them, and how people interact with family, friends, and others globally. AI is essentially another transformative upheaval, and one that will impact Generation Alpha and future generations the most.

Data, especially personal data, is the ‘oil’ of today’s and tomorrow’s digital world, and the entities that hold and control it will use it to progress their own objectives. With AI and the automation of everything, the thirst for our data is unlikely to be quenched, which should make us worry about the digital world for Generation Alpha and beyond. Why? Because humans in the hands of tech, rather than the other way around, increasingly seems to be the direction of travel for our world. The UK government’s announcement of a digital ID ‘to help tackle illegal migration, make accessing government services easier, and enable wider efficiencies’ has made the Badger a little uneasy about the digital world his grandson will experience. A backlash, as illustrated by this petition to Parliament, illustrates the scale of worry that it’s a step towards mass surveillance and state control. Governments, after all, do not have good track records in delivering what they say they will.

As the Badger started to doze on the sofa, he envisaged a future where humans are microchipped and have their lives monitored and tracked in real time from birth to death, as happens with farm animals. He resolved to make sure his grandson learns about protecting his personal data and that he values a life with personal freedom rather than control by digital facilities. The Badger then succumbed to sleep, worn out from activities with a member of Generation Alpha…  

Cyber security – a ‘Holy Grail’?

King Arthur was a legendary medieval king of Britain. His association with the search for the ‘Holy Grail’, described in various traditions as a cup, dish, or stone with miraculous healing powers and, sometimes, providing eternal youth or infinite sustenance, stems from the 12th century. Since then, the search has become an essential part of Arthurian legend, so much so that Monty Python parodied it in their 1975 film. Indeed, it’s common for people today to refer to any goal that seems impossible to reach as a ‘Holy Grail’. It’s become a powerful metaphor for a desired, ultimate achievement that’s beyond reach.

Recently, bad cyber actors – a phrase used here to refer collectively to wicked individuals, gangs, and organisations, regardless of their location, ideology, ultimate sponsorship or specific motives – have caused a plethora of highly disruptive incidents in the UK. Incidents at the Co-op, Marks & Spencer, Harrods, JLR, and  Kido  have been high profile due to the nature and scale of the impact on the companies themselves, their supply chains, their customers, and also potentially the economy. Behind the scenes (see here, for example) questions are, no doubt, being asked not only of the relevant IT service providers, but also more generally about how vulnerable we are to cyber security threats.

While taking in the colours of Autumn visible through the window by his desk, the Badger found himself mulling over what these incidents imply in a modern world reliant on the internet, online services, automation and underlying IT systems. As the UK government’s ‘Cyber security breaches survey – 2025’ shows, the number of bad cyber actor incidents reported is high, with many more going unreported. AI, as the National Cyber Security Centre  indicates, means that bad actors will inevitably become more effective in their intrusion operations, and so we can expect an increase in the frequency and intensity of cyber threats in the coming years. The musing Badger, therefore, concluded that organisations need to be relentlessly searching for a ‘Holy Grail’ to protect their operations from being vulnerable to serious cyber security breaches. As he watched a few golden leaves flutter to the ground, the Badger also concluded that in a world underpinned by complex IT, continuous digital evolution, and AI, this ‘Holy Grail’ will never be found. But that doesn’t mean organisations should stop searching for it!

These damaging incidents highlight again that cyber security cannot be taken for granted, especially when the tech revolution of recent decades has enabled anyone with a little knowledge and internet access to be a bad cyber actor. The UK government’s just announced the introduction of  digital ID by 2029. Perhaps they have found a ‘Holy Grail’ that guarantees not only the security of personal data, but also that its IT programmes will deliver on time and to their original budget? Hmm, that’s very doubtful…

A week without access to the online world…

Are you brave enough to survive for a week without accessing the online world using your personal smartphone, tablet, laptop, or desktop? This was the question asked by the Badger’s wife shortly before the Badger and his millennial son departed for a short adventure on the North Devon coast last week. We answered affirmatively but decided to take our smartphones, which would remain switched off all week, in case they were needed in an emergency. We all saw this as commonsense given our intent to walk the rugged North Devon coastal path which, at the time, was covered by a yellow weather warning for high wind and rain. With a little trepidation about relinquishing personal access to the virtual world by taking no laptops or tablets and only having switched off smartphones in our pockets, we departed for North Devon wondering how long it would take before we succumbed to turning on our phones. Did we survive the week without succumbing to temptation? Of course we did.

The first evening at our destination was unsurprisingly difficult given that everyone today has become conditioned to having instant access to communication, banking, shopping, social media, and the internet through personal devices. People in the UK, for example, apparently check their smartphones every ten minutes, so imagine how you’d feel if this wasn’t possible. It took an iron will, some beers, and some proper conversation about the world that evening to keep our discipline and not succumb to switching on our smartphones.

The subsequent days were easier. Walking the coastal path in blustery, variable weather concentrated the mind on real, rather than virtual, world matters. The dormant smartphones in our pockets provided reassurance as we walked, but they stayed unused because no emergencies arose. In fact, we never turned them on all week. On the final night of our stay, we visited a bar and reflected on our week of virtual-world disconnection while watching a magnificent sunset over a choppy sea. We realised that our ‘fear of missing out’ from having no access to the virtual world had disappeared within 48 hours of arriving in Devon. We were proud to have resisted the temptation to use our smartphones, and we felt that detachment from the online world, and its pushed content, had contributed to how refreshed we felt mentally and physically.

We drove home the next morning and then ceremonially turned on our smartphones. We had, as expected, missed nothing of substance by our detachment from the virtual world for a week. This prompted the Badger’s son to state that although the online world has its place in modern life, real life will always go on if it’s not there. That’s a truth. The question is, are you brave and disciplined enough to survive without access from personal devices to the online world the next time you take a short break? If not, why not?

Victima non sum; victor sum…

It can be perplexing when you encounter someone in an organisation who seems to take great joy in causing you discomfort or embarrassment. There are, of course, meetings in any organisation that can be challenging because you are accountable for a project or business stream (for example), but these are usually conducted professionally and respectfully rather than with a primary objective to enjoy personal discomfort and embarrassment. It’s inevitable, however, that you will sometimes encounter an individual who enjoys creating discomfort and embarrassment as part of exerting their dominance. It’s an unpleasant dynamic to experience, especially in front of others, but it’s a dynamic that can reveal lots about the perpetrator.

Why do some individuals clearly enjoy making others uncomfortable and embarrassed? Well, they often have an underlying insecurity and use the creation of discomfort and embarrassment to exert their dominance, control, and superiority. Sometimes they use it as a pre-emptive defence against being embarrassed themselves. Sometimes, of course, they just lack emotional intelligence and are completely oblivious to the impact of their behaviour! As the popularity of reality TV shows illustrate, enjoying the discomfort of others is not unusual because drama draws attention.

How do you handle someone who enjoys making you feel uncomfortable or embarrassed? Firstly, draw on any assertiveness training you’ve had. It can be very helpful. Secondly, trust yourself. Take a deep breath or two, don’t get flustered, speak calmly and thoughtfully, and don’t be defensive. This helps preserve your dignity and shift the power dynamic. Thirdly, assert your boundaries. Signal that you will not tolerate interactions that you feel are malicious, unnecessarily personal, or bullying. Don’t be frightened of getting up and leaving the interaction if necessary.

The Badger was recently approached through a mutual acquaintance to meet two directors of a small company who were seeking advice about addressing problem IT projects. One, the CEO, was a gruff, volatile, egotistic character who belittled the Badger’s experience and ridiculed every answer he gave to questions. The Badger became uncomfortable, embarrassed, and – yes – quietly angry. The CEO tabled the monthly financial status numbers for a project and asked for a comment. The Badger glanced at it and said the project was failing! ‘Rubbish’ riposted the CEO. The Badger calmly rose from his seat, uttered ‘victima non sum, victor sum’, and ended the meeting.

The other director left the room too, apologized for the CEO’s behaviour, and asked how the Badger knew the project was failing. The Badger explained. It transpired that everyone knew it was failing, apart from the project sponsor, the CEO, who was in denial! The Badger declined the director’s plea to become their advisor. Just remember, when someone enjoys making you uncomfortable or embarrassed, keep calm, trust yourself, and keep ‘victima non sum, victor sum’ – I am not the victim, I am the victorin mind…

UK Smart Meter rollout – will new targets make a difference?

Reading the status of the UK’s rollout of Smart Meters to consumers just reinforces how woeful this programme continues to be. At the end of March 2025, 61% of all domestic meters were smart operating in ’smart mode’, and in the latest data published a few days ago this number rose to just 63% at the end of June 2025. It’s pretty clear that this programme, running since 2012, has years left to run before all households have a properly functioning smart meter. When launched in 2012, consumers were told this programme would modernise and empower their energy use, support a greener grid, ensure accurate bills and lower costs, and be complete by 2019. The reality for people, who are paying for the programme and its delays through their energy bills, has been somewhat different.

By the end of December 2025, the current rollout targets – much revised since 2019 – require suppliers to have ‘delivered’ smart meters to 74.5% of domestic premises. Note that the target is not ‘delivered and operating in smart mode’. The government is consulting suppliers  on a post-2025 framework to deliver service improvements and an  obligation to complete the domestic rollout by 2030. It feels like ‘Deja vu’! The government asserts that the rollout so far provides robust evidence that consumers with smart meters are achieving sustained savings of 3% for electricity and 2.2% for gas. That’s hardly impressive for a £13bn programme. In fact, most people feel that any reduction in their energy use has been driven by cost of living and energy crisis factors, not smart meters. The Badger thinks those associated with energy policy seem unable to recognise the programme for what it is – a ‘White Elephant’ in the eyes of the domestic consumer.

Why is it a ‘White Elephant’? Well, there’s missed targets with the goal of having properly functioning smart meters in every home being revised many times and probably being delivered a minimum of 10 years late. There’s the ballooning costs with consumers footing the bill and seeing little tangible return. There’s the technical failures with many installed meters not functioning properly and first-generation SMETS1 meters losing functionality and turning ‘dumb’ when switching suppliers. There’s the poor programme strategy from the outset, something obvious when comparing with more successful rollouts in Italy, Spain, Sweden, Finland, Estonia, Japan, the USA and China. There’s also the abject failure to overcome consumer distrust and show them savings in their energy bills. The Badger is resisting the temptation to go on.

After more than 13 years, adverts like those here and here haven’t changed UK consumer scepticism. Consumers are distrustful, technology has moved on, delivery by politicians and suppliers is poor, and a new framework for 2026 onwards is only going to achieve one thing – give this elephant another lick of white paint…

AI – Pop goes the weasel!

The Badger’s five-year old grandson, full of energy, innocence, and inquisitiveness, has been staying for a few days. It’s been fun, tiring, and a reminder that grandparents can be important influencers for Generation Alpha!  It was also a reminder that today’s childhood is vastly different to that of previous generations. The Badger’s grandson considers being on WhatsApp video calls, watching kids YouTube videos, and engaging with technology like phones, tablets, and laptops in classroom and home settings as routine. This wasn’t the case when the Badger was five, nor was it when the youngster’s Millennial parents were that age!

One evening, just before the lad’s bedtime, the Badger was on the sofa engrossed in the news feed on his smartphone. Reports of anxiety that AI is a stock market bubble about to pop had grabbed his attention. Some reports (like the one here), but certainly not all, derived from a report from MIT noting that most AI investments made by companies have so far provided zero returns. This fuelled concerns, existing in some quarters for a while, that AI is a stock market bubble soon to crash. Many of the reports drew parallels between AI and the dot.com crash of 25 years ago. As a professional in the IT sector at that time, the Badger experienced first-hand the dot.com era and its aftermath, and so he became absorbed in his own thoughts about the parallels. Until, that is, his grandson jumped on the sofa, prodded the Badger’s ribs, and asked to watch a ‘Pop goes the weasel’ cartoon. Initially struck by the synergy between ‘Pop goes the weasel’ as a good label for his AI thoughts, a suitable YouTube cartoon was found and the two of us watched it on the Badger’s smartphone. (A kids punk-music version of the rhyme didn’t seem suitable just before bedtime).

Once the youngster was in bed, the Badger cogitated further on the dot.com era and AI. The late 1990s saw rapid tech advances with many investors expecting internet-based companies to succeed simply because the internet was an innovation. Companies launched on stock markets even though they had yet to generate meaningful revenue or profits and had no proprietary technology or finished products. Valuations boomed regardless of dodgy fundamentals, and the dot.com crash was thus, to those with objectivity, inevitable. To an extent, some of the same dynamics exist with AI today. It may be a transformative technology, with the likes of ChatGPT having impressive traction with people, but AI is really still in its infancy striving to show a return on investment in a company setting. The Badger senses, therefore, that AI is likely in  sizeable correction rather than dot.com crash territory. This should be no surprise, because the history of tech stock market valuations suggests, to quote the nursery rhyme, ’that’s the way the money goes. Pop goes the weasel’… 

Do acquisitions disproportionately shed older staff?

A youngster about to join a large enterprise after completing a degree at University asked an interesting question last weekend. ‘Does an enterprise that acquires another company use the purchase as a smokescreen to shed older, long-serving, higher-paid employees?’  That’s an interesting and unusual question from someone at the very start of their career. So why did they ask it? Well, firstly their new employer has acquired another substantial company and restructuring activities are underway. Secondly, they knew the Badger had some experience in navigating a number of mergers and acquisitions. Lastly, the tech-savvy youngster had come across online chatter that his new employer’s older staff with long service were being disproportionately targeted during restructuring. The youngster, with no experience within large enterprises, anticipates a long career with their new company, but they were a little perturbed that their new employer might possibly be engaging in age discrimination, something that’s prohibited under the UK Equality Act 2010.

Answering required words that were balanced, honest, and rooted in personal experience of post-acquisition integrations. So, what did the Badger say? Firstly, that acquisitions often lead to reorganisations which can legally justify redundancies based on performance or role duplication at any age or level of seniority. Loyalty and long-service counts for nothing in such a scenario, and older employees may be more vulnerable because they typically have higher salaries and benefits, which means shedding them can significantly reduce payroll costs. Secondly, an acquisition can be a vehicle to change an enterprise’s culture, especially in fast moving industries subject to rapid innovation pressures. This always favours the retention of younger, tech-savvy staff and those with in-demand skills. Thirdly, not every acquisition is a smokescreen for eliminating older, higher-paid employees, but, in reality, some acquirers do quietly use their purchase to shed older, higher-paid employees because they know that it’s normally difficult in these circumstances for individuals to prove age discrimination for their redundancy. Do acquisitions disproportionately shed older staff? Some do, some don’t.

The youngster nodded, reaffirmed their intent on a long career with their new employer, and asked if the Badger had any advice for the long term. Yes. Maintain skills that are current and valuable outside your company, as mergers and acquisitions rarely reward loyalty or long service. As you get older and more experienced, watch out during acquisition integration activities for a) silence about future roles for you or your peers, b) performance reviews, and c) role redefinitions. These often signal something is afoot that affects you personally. Also, never forget that HR works in your employer’s interest, not in yours.

The youngster grinned and said they obviously had lots to learn! The Badger smiled too, pleased that he’d sown a few seeds of awareness in a youngster who will soon learn that things are never quite what they seem inside organisations when it comes to workforce matters.

Nuclear reactors on the moon – a geopolitical investment in future dominance of Space…

The building of software and systems for Space missions, and to control satellites and process associated data, was an interesting and  fascinating area throughout the Badger’s IT career. Today it’s easy to forget that the imagery we take for granted with the weather forecast is produced by systems and software created by developers with excellent science,  engineering, and computing credentials, most of whom have little interest in working outside the Space sector. The Badger observed, over the years, that developers in this area often preferred to leave for another Space sector company rather than be assigned to a project outside the sector if there was a lull in available projects.

The Badger thus had two initial thoughts when the US announced an acceleration of its plans to put a nuclear reactor on the moon. The first was ‘Great. More opportunities for developers in the Space sector if AI hasn’t taken their jobs’. The second was more philosophical and about the tension between visionary ambitions and pragmatic, grounded responsibility. The US plan, and the equivalents of Russia and China, is driven by a mix of strategic, technological, and geopolitical motives. However, is it sensible and in humanity’s interest for the Earth’s most powerful nations to spend huge amounts of money on Space endeavours when there’s a pressing need for it to be spent resolving problems on our planet? Should there be investment in long-term Space infrastructure that might, a long time from now, redefine humanity’s future? The answers depend, of course, on your perspective on life and our world.

Some see Space endeavours as a driver of innovation and ultimate human survival, whereas others see them as distractions from addressing real problems here on Earth. To the Badger, all plans for a nuclear reactor on the moon simply illustrate the shift away from an ethos of inquisitive exploration to one of establishing national strategic dominance making Space a domain of economic leverage, diplomacy, and warfare. Regardless of who does it, putting a reactor on the moon is an outright geopolitical investment in establishing future dominance. The prospect of the geopolitical tensions we see on Earth playing out on the Moon and beyond seems, at least to the Badger, grotesque.

Investments in Space endeavours push technological boundaries, reshape thinking, and stimulate innovation, but the fact is that humans are biologically unsuited to the environment beyond our planet is undeniable. So, in an age of automation, robotics, and AI, why spend huge sums sending and supporting humans on the Moon and beyond when robots can do the same job and the savings can be used to address humanity’s issues here on Earth? Is that idealism? Perhaps, but all it would take is leadership on behalf of all of humanity rather than individual nations. And there’s the rub, the likelihood of that ever happening, of course, is…er…zero.

Late payments to subcontractors and suppliers…

Enterprises often hold an annual leadership conference to review the highs, lows, and lessons from the year, and to align their leaders with the business objectives for the year ahead. The Badger first attended such a conference decades ago when all attendees were gathered in the same place for an intense couple of days of formality and informal networking with peers. Enterprises today are increasingly sensitive about the logistical costs and environmental issues associated with gathering people in one place. Many such leadership conferences have thus become more hybrid in nature with smaller, distributed gatherings connected using online video streaming services. This very modern, tech-based approach has many benefits in terms of cost and convenience.

Although the Badger’s first annual leadership conference was a long time ago, he still remembers vividly a particular point made by the company CEO during a presentation lamenting the difficulties of being an IT subcontractor delivering  projects into client’s major programmes. The point was ‘Being a subcontractor is great, but being the prime contractor controlling when a subcontractor gets paid is much, much, much better!’  For some of its projects, the company had been struggling to get prime contractors to pay valid invoices for achieved milestones within contracted terms. The prime contractors had played all kinds of games to pay their subcontractors and suppliers when it suited them, rather than to what was written in their agreed contracted terms. They knew that apart from chasing and whining, subcontractors and suppliers were unlikely to take more forthright action because they wanted to avoid lasting damage to the client relationship in case it excluded them from potential future work opportunities.

Since then, UK legislation in 1998  has made provision for interest on late payment under commercial contracts. However, recent information suggests that only 1 in 10 subcontractors/suppliers enforce this right by actively charging interest, claiming compensation, or seeking debt recovery. This suggests that some level of reluctance remains due to concern about damaging customer relations,  especially for smaller businesses who are, after all, the majority of the UK economy and often heavily dependent on a small number of clients. It may be decades later, but the CEO’s point noted above remains relevant.

Cash flow difficulties can cause liquidity crises and even collapse for any size of enterprise, and so when the Badger heard that the UK government is introducing tougher late payment legislation his first thought was not alleluia, but why hasn’t AI and automation revolutionised payment processing in enterprises to ensure that payments  against valid invoices are always fully paid within contracted terms?  After all, digital technology has been transforming everything for years, and so perhaps this new legislation will add momentum to making a payment revolution happen faster. Let’s hope so. By the way, if you’re interested, you can check how well an enterprise does in paying within terms using the government tool here