(The Big Disrupt) IoT: Schizophrenia

How do you ever get anything done?

How do we, as a society, ever get anything done?

Every ten seconds some kind of notification is demanding our attention. Emails from friends and colleagues, social media blips, timers, news updates, the list goes on forever. We are subjected to a constant barrage of digital noise.

And not just in one place.

We have phones, tablets, laptops, desktops and connected vehicles, just to name a few. There is never a moment when we are more than ten feet from a device that is connected to the internet. Not only is this a huge tax on our attention and the main culprit of what many call ‘shiny object syndrome’, it is also a huge risk to our personal data.

All day as we Tweet, post, reply, and consume, our data is passing through the airwaves on some kind of connection. Some of those connections are more secure than others, depending on the awareness and technical aptitude of the proprietor of a given wireless hotspot. However, by and large, the measures that are in place to secure our personal musings and private data are woefully inadequate.

The number of connected and mobile devices we use keeps increasing while the measures that protect us lag behind.

The next time you pick up a shiny new internet enabled gadget it is well worth asking how it may affect your privacy.

(The Big Disrupt) IoT Security: Security of Internet of Things by @jameslyne

Check out this short but interesting talk with security expert James Lyne as he talks about the security of the Internet of things.

(The Big Disrupt) Why antitrust cases are piling up against Google

Talk about a bad week. After being hit with $6.8 million fine by Russian antitrust authorities for pre-loading their apps on android device, Google find themselves at the center of another antitrust investigation this time in South Korea. While Google doesn't have much of a foothold in the South Korean market as they do in others, the KTFC issued a press release revealing that Google were under investigation and not much more. 

The upshot of all this is that Google is now subject to three charges from the EU commission, a antitrust investigation in South Korea, and $6.8 million lighter. Even the FTC was still sniffing around Google last may before deciding not to pursue further. South Korea and Russia aren't important markets for google but the fact that the KFTC and FAS (regulatory bodies in South Korea and Russia respectively) were and are willing to take on Google is a sign of a potentially worrying trend. 

The old debate about whether states and their sovereignty was relevant are over in an age where multinational companies (MNCs) like Google can deal directly with tax authorities and negotiate how much tax they'll pay despite years of avoiding it. However the recent spate of antitrust cases against Google and others could be a way states can extract fines and concessions out MNCs. However, the vast majority of states, particularly in Europe, are in no position to pull this off which is why the EU commission has been more assertive in enforcing anti-competition laws. Nothing shows how weak states are in the global village than Google's rivals complaining directly to EU rather than its member states. 

However, even the EU commission options are limited to concessions and fees as EU anti competition laws is nowhere near as aggressive as it is in the United States as a corporation using their dominant position in a market to stifle their rivals or new entrants could end doing jail time. Google know this and are willing to make concessions and may end up paying a fine despite being  caught out on multiple occasions for the same practice of pre installing apps in devices. 

With EU antitrust chief Margrethe Vestager under serious pressure to bring the 6 year old case against google to a close, there has been rumors in the press that Google could end up coughing up $3.4 billion which may be substantial sum you and me but is a drop in water for firm that makes over six times that much each quarter. 

In sum, Google may see a serious spike in their legal bills in the foreseeable future as the company continues to collect enemies but given the fact states are no position to take on google's dominant market position and even the EU commission has its hands tied, Google may just win the war to defend their markets. 

  

(The Big Disrupt) Augmented Reality: Pokemon Go and IBM Watson IoT collaboration at work

Check out this short but insightful piece the collaboration between IBM Watson and Pokemon Go at work and what can be using the IBM Watson's platform.

(The Big Disrupt) Ad Blocking: a tale of two markets – why ad blockers are winning

There are a number of reasons why ad blockers are going to bleed advertiser and publisher dry but possibly the most important and obvious reason is that publishers and advertisers aren't responsive to their audience, ad blockers are. 

Ad blocking exists because publishers and advertisers have ignored the demand among online audiences for years to make better ads or at least make them less intrusive or difficult to get rid of. Ad blockers, spotting a golden opportunity, have responded to the demand among internet users for an ad less internet   and have (with a little help with Apple Inc.) created a growing market that's costing publishers and advertisers billions in lost ad revenue. 

The ad blocking market has exploded  in a very short space of time with popular ad blocking app Ad Block Plus reaching 200 million users last year and ad blocking showing growth of 41%. With ad blocking growing this fast and showing no sign of stopping, ad blockers have become more assertive. 

Ad blocking company Ad Block recently started placing amnesty international  ads on top of blocked ads and, controversially, ad block plus offers an "acceptable ads" program which allows advertisers to, at a price, make their ads immune from being blocked. Advertisers have likened acceptable ads to "blackmail" and even racketeering but ad blockers can argue an irrefutable point, they're meeting a demand advertisers have ignored for years. 

This trend obviously represents bad news for publishers and advertisers who so far have failed to come up with a coherent strategy to combat ad blocking 

Publishers such as Yahoo and Washington Post in response to the explosive growth of ad blocking have gone about alienating their readers by banning those who use ad blocking apps and ad industry body IAB have likened ad blockers to criminals however, despite the bluster offered by publishers and advertisers, publishers and advertisers can only play defense.   

Publishers could have easily offered their readers an ad free  user experience for a fee but their apprehension over readers simply choosing free alternatives and their potential adless subs eating into their paid ad inventory has meant that ad blocking have beaten them to the punch.  

Advertisers, less exposed than publishers to negative effects of ad blocking, have spent more time tarring ad blockers in the press and making calls for the quality of ads to improve despite  missing the delicious irony that they're  responsible for the load time destroying and intrusive ads people hate so much . 

Advertisers in truth haven't really done much but talk tough because while brands and agencies may lose a large chunk of their budgets to blocked ads, advertisers can and will find their target audience elsewhere. 

There isn't a brand in the world expecting to recoup their online ad budget as advertising for most brands is at best a way to reach their target audience with an ad about their existing or new products or services or at worst a very expensive brand awareness exercise.   

Unlike publishers, advertisers have other options to choose from to reach their audience from native to TV advertising. The real losers in this equation will be publishers whose ad inventory will be depleted by the increasing use of ad blocking apps and will thus see less ad revenue because of it. 

In sum, there's no getting rid of ad blockers as they've created a market for an ad free internet popularized by an aloof and slow market between publishers and advertisers who still see ad blockers as the problem.