Category: 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…

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…

A smartwatch for wellbeing and health?

Posted on by The Information Badger in Health & Social Care, Information Technology, Life, Online Services, Privacy and Surveillance, Smartwatches, Technology

Last week the Badger attended his uncle’s 90th birthday. He sat with a group of mostly millennial adults and found himself watching how often they checked their smartphone or smartwatch, and sometimes both. Before the Badger’s uncle blew out the candles on his birthday cake, conversation in the group was convivial and centred on catching up since the last time everyone was together. A smartwatch noisily tinkled and buzzed, and the person sitting opposite the Badger got up and announced to everyone that their watch had told them they’d been sitting for too long! They walked away and returned a few minutes later. When they took their seat, they began talking in a way that sounded like a commercial for smartwatches equipped with health and wellness tracking apps.

A discussion ensued. People in the group were asked if they had smartwatches and found their health apps useful. Most younger adults nodded. A few admitted to being addicted to the well-being and health metrics their smartwatches provided. A couple said they had a smartwatch but rarely used the health and well-being functions, and the remainder, including the Badger, did not have a smartwatch. The Badger was asked why he doesn’t have a smartwatch given his IT/tech background, especially when, as the questioner put it, the health apps ‘would be beneficial at your age.’  In reply, the Badger made two curt points. The first was that his solar powered but otherwise conventional watch and the smartphone in his pocket met all his needs to function while out and about in today’s world. The second was that smartwatches are not approved medical devices, and so their health metrics fundamentally provide the same health guidance that doctors have given for decades – walk more, don’t drink too much alcohol, and maintain a healthy weight. You don’t need an expensive device and constant checking of metrics to comply with that advice. The cutting of the birthday cake stopped further discussion.

While the well-being and health functions on smartwatches do, of course, encourage good health and lifestyle habits for those individuals that need such prompts, many who glance at their smartwatch dozens of times a day to check their metrics are doing so unnecessarily. Does this habitual attention to the likes of step count, heart rate, sleep quality, and sitting too long simply illustrate that people are becoming needlessly addicted to another digital device? Possibly. Smartwatch firms are profit-motivated businesses not health services, and concern about profiling, advertising, and losing control of sensitive personal data would be prudent. Remember, it’s cheaper and better for privacy to simply do what the doctor’s ordered for decades, namely walk more, drink less alcohol, and maintain a healthy weight. Concentrate on living life rather than being a slave to metrics provided by your smartwatch. After all, the Badgers sprightly uncle has reached 90 years of age by doing just that…

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

Posted on by The Information Badger in Energy and Energy Markets, Information Technology, Smart Meters, Technology

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!

Posted on by The Information Badger in AI, Business, Digital Transformation, Information Technology, Technology

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’…