No week note this week. I’m taking a well-earned rest and enjoying the beautiful island that I live on. I’ll be back in a week or two.

Have a great week.

It was another one of those weeks that seemed to come and pass without much particularly standing out, but when I looked back, I found that I had completed a lot of things that I hadn’t registered.

I finally got around to roasting the coffee beans I had prepared from the fruit to the bean. It was something I really wanted to do, and I really appreciated the effort involved. For the first coffee of Sunday morning, I made an espresso from those beans and thoroughly enjoyed it. Such fresh coffee has a much fruitier flavour and a strong and layered texture.

I decided to put the foot to the floor and finish the Virtual School of Internet Governance training. With only two modules left out of ten, I decided it was a good time to put in a little effort to finish them before the deadline. The materials are really good, and there is much to read and take on board. The questions for the test are not so hard, but that’s not really the point of these kinds of courses. The access to people, materials and discussion forums makes it interesting. Despite finishing the course, I have a pile of unread supplementary documentation to read. I’ll be going over them during the following months. I have an upcoming overseas voyage, so I’ll take advantage to read much of it then.

I ran one of my GenAI training courses last week with a small group of managers and directors. The idea behind these courses is to expose the people responsible for their companies to the capabilities, but importantly, to the risks and limitations of the tools. I don’t take a binary position in that these tools are either all good or all bad. I can see that they are a bit of both and need to be used responsibly, so I based my training on that premise. So far, it has been very successful, and I am happy to contribute.

Reading

I’ve not been reading novels as much as I would have hoped, but I think there’s something to be said for doing other things now and again and not getting saturated doing the same thing over and over. Again, that doesn’t mean I haven’t been reading. Like last week, I have been reading a lot, just not the things I had set out to read. For professional reasons, I had to concentrate on other texts rather than the books I had planned to read.

One of my favourite reads is The Internet Protocol Journal. The latest issue has a very interesting article about Ethernet. It covers the beginnings of the latest developments of one of the single most important technical protocols ever invented. It reminded me of a couple of books about TCP/IP that changed my life that I have lying around somewhere in the house. I can’t remember the exact title, but they influenced my understanding of networks, networking, and the infrastructure behind it.

Of note

I’ve been working with a couple of clients on aspects of digitalisation. It’s clear that there is a huge opportunity out there to help clients with the basics of digital organisation, document management, administration of systems, and, of course, compliance.

This was another big week for regulation news, with Apple being the subject of much scrutiny. There seems to have been a lot of cognitive dissonance amongst the pro-Apple media, with many journalists too young to remember what happened in the years of IBM, or later, Microsoft, when it came to regulation and compliance. There is a lot of misplaced attribution to the “genius” of Apple versus the reality of a market that allowed Apple to grow into the giant it is now.

I have two comments on Apple’s current attitude. Apple is a giant, and its priorities have changed. It is no longer as interested in serving its clients in the best way possible. It is now mainly interested in resting on the laurels of an admittedly hard-won position and extracting rents without doing the work it used to. Secondly, the pro-Apple press/bloggers and other commentators are mostly US-based and have shown absolutely no understanding of the reasoning and aims of EU regulation. This will bite them in the arse soon as the investigations play out. I’m getting the popcorn ready.

Have a great week.

I have a particular difficulty writing this part of the blog as I don’t seem to recall any details of what I have been doing this past week. Luckily, I write a small note in a journal every morning (-ish) to help remind me and also to help me process what I have actually achieved each week.

I did a lot of admin-type work last week, tying up loose ends and planning the next set of projects in the pipeline. I finished the slides I had prepared for a teaching session scheduled for Thursday afternoon. I had devised a fun activity for the students around the topic of Project Management and was looking forward to the class activity and seeing how they would go about the task. Sadly, the session was moved online at the last minute, and I had to improvise a little. The theory section was fine, although teaching online is really difficult as you don’t get immediate feedback as most people shut off their cameras for privacy reasons, which I can totally relate to. The exercise was possible but had to be completed during a collaborative online meeting through Teams. I split the class into groups and assigned breakout rooms and then spent the time moving between the rooms to offer assistance and advice. It was okay, but I would have much preferred to have done this in the class.

One thing that has come up as a direct result of the push to deploy AI tools in business is the need to control and protect data. I think there will be a number of surprises over the coming months as businesses discover that their data governance policies are inadequate and lend the AI tools to create security and confidentially issues. I have started developing a consultation for small businesses to address this before it becomes a problem. If you want to know more, reach out.

In personal news, I had been given 1.7kg of coffee fruit to process. I’d asked for it, and as a friend produces coffee, he gave me a small bag to try out. It is a long and arduous process to get from the fruit to dried beans that can be roasted. I have a bag ready for roasting, which comes out at less than 200 grams of beans, quite a reduction from that initial amount. The fruit can be used to make juice, but I’m not sure how to do that, so I binned the outer shells. Perhaps I’ll look into that another time. I’m looking forward to the roasting, but I have done it before, from beans supplied by my friend previously.

Reading

I haven’t been as religious or as motivated to read novels this week. I have no specific explanation; it’s just one of those things, I guess.

Not reading novels doesn’t mean that I don’t read a lot. In fact, the amount I read this week is as much as ever. I read or started reading a couple of interesting articles and papers.

I started to read a blog post on the impact of Starlink’s push to provide internet to the Amazonian region. The post entitled Starlink’s Amazonian Adventure: Bridging Gaps Or Just Adding Concerns? by Lua Cruz examines one of the interesting but largely misunderstood aspects of the so-called digital divide (zero-rated schemes) and other topics. Often touted as a means to get the underserved online, these schemes actually restrict and reduce the beneficiaries to a subset of the internet and create incentives for monopolies to do nothing to develop communications in the served regions. We’ve seen a lot of that in the Caribbean, and the most prominent example worldwide was Facebook’s attempt to control the Internet in India, which luckily didn’t get off the ground.

I started another paper entitled “China’s digital expansion in the Global South: Systematic literature review and future research agenda”. I haven’t read enough to form an opinion as yet. However, it is interesting to learn more about the global forces vying for control of the Internet and how we’re at a precarious point in its history in that it might start to fracture badly. That will not be good for the world.

Speaking of which, on the 35th anniversary of the modern Internet, at least the Internet as most people experience it, Time Berners-Lee wrote a blog post on his WWW Foundation site. It’s not long, and I think you should read it:

Of note

The crypto world is all a buzz because number go up! The world burns faster because of your ilk, and all you care about is a little bit of magic bean money rising in value. May the fleas of a thousand camels infest your anuses for a thousand years.

I mentioned the resurgence of ideas from the old Internet; well, another one was promoted and did the rounds (at least in my Internet circles). Do you remember blog rolls? They were the Internet’s recommendation engine before advertising and marketing destroyed the Internet by making us units of production to place ads next to. Long live the independent web and the ideas that they promote.

Have a great week.

I had one of those in-between weeks. I would probably be better describing it as a transition week. Some things came to an end, and others started up.

I had some marking to do for the students I teach, I had a bit of admin work to tie up some loose ends, and then I spent a lot of time researching and continuing the course on Internet governance. As a little context, this course spans over ten weeks and at the end of every module, there is a quick knowledge check test. What takes most of the time is the amount of reading to be done, as well as the supplementary videos and talks to listen to. You really need to enjoy the subject and have the fortitude to put in the required hours. I love reading and read fast, so I don’t mind that part. However, I wouldn’t say I like video as a format for learning, and I am aware that I’m going against the grain of how online learning is headed. Thankfully, I have a simple solution that gives me what I need in the format I like. I use various transcript tools to export and then read the text. What I can also do with that is store it in my DEVONthink database for searching and note-taking at a later date. This is much more useful than a link to a YouTube video.

Reading

I finished Clément Perarnaud’s (Open Future) paper entitled Finding the path to a more open internet. A new European approach toward internet standards. If you are interested in the open Internet, I would recommend reading it. It provides a good overview of what is happening there.

I know I said I wouldn’t, but I bought a new book to read, but I couldn’t ignore a book called Machine Readable Me by Zara Rahman, which “considers how and why data that is gathered about us is increasingly limiting what we can and can’t do in our lives and, crucially, what the alternatives are.”. I’m looking forward to reading it. It’s a small book, so it shouldn’t take too long.

Of note

All You Face Are Belong To Us

I was happy to learn that Spain has decided to end the operations of World Coin in the country. I can’t think of another project that is as poorly thought out as this one, and I implore anyone thinking of signing up the reflect on the risk of giving intimate biometric data in exchange for a lousy shitcoin that will be worthless when the plug is inevitably pulled.

The currency of destruction

Speaking of shitcoins, Bitcoin hit an all-time high this week, some seem to think, proof that it is a viable currency. Proof (I would say) of this excellent quote from Kurt Vonnegut, “We’ll go down in history as the first society that wouldn’t save itself because it wasn’t cost-effective.”

A New Hope?

From my little corner of the internet, there seems to be a real resurgence in interest in some of the earlier and open standards and protocols. One example is RSS or Really Simple Syndication. I’ve been a fan and a user of it since its beginnings and have never stopped using it. It’s the main way I get much of the news I read.

Have a great week.

Source: Pixabay

I like the philosophy stating that writing is thinking and that to write clearly, one must think clearly. I do neither. I’m neither a good writer nor a good thinker. What I do, though, is think about the big picture and piece together seemingly unrelated threads into a reasonably cohesive structure that holds up to a bit of scrutiny. Maybe not a peer review, but that’s not why I write here. I write to process my thoughts and flesh those out, sometimes in real-time as I’m writing. It’s not the most scientific of methods, but it favours my type of neurological quirkiness, and, to be fair, the email newsletter format is not the best forum for that type of research. Without this outlet to write about the topics that frustrate me so much, I’d be pretty bored. Consequently, I try to make complex topics seem a little simpler without shying away from the details, with as many supporting links and examples as necessary. For the other stuff I like to write about, this year saw me start (restart?) a new personal blog where I can express other personal thoughts on things that are not on topic here.

On to this newsletter edition. It’s one about regulation (don’t run away yet —it might be interesting 😉), specifically regulation that affects the internet and the coming wave of regulation that we haven’t quite got to grips with yet. The Internet is about to change radically. For better or for worse, I have no idea, and I wish I had a crystal ball and a bit of spare cash to make a huge bet. But I don’t. However, what seems patently clear is that the Internet is about to be regulated by the world’s largest economies. Some have already done so. States like China and Russia have, in all but name, created a walled-off, splintered Internet for themselves and their citizens. The EU has regulated several major issues that have, again in all but name, forced the entire world to fall into line. The United States has continued to shy away from regulation, thereby creating an environment for innovation (or so it tells us). I wanted to discuss some real-world leanings and the aftermath of the GDPR, trying to provide some context and the basis of a discussion topic if you’d like to discuss it. Disclaimer: I’m not a GDPR expert nor legally trained. I’m piecing together various facts and observations from the work I’ve been doing in Internet Governance and my on-the-ground experience with MSMEs.

I hope you enjoy the read. Ping me @virek@mastodon.socail.

The GDPR is dead. Long live the GDPR

They said GDPR was the end for small businesses, at least those that used and dealt with personal information in the EU. They said it would overly burden them and make it difficult for them to function. They said it would further entrench the monopolies. It was bad, bad, bad, as far as the eye could see.

Some wrote about how the “moats” of the big companies would protect them, and hence, regulation would only ensure that those businesses would thrive, having been helped by the regulation from the path-clearing and summary executions of small businesses thanks to the EU. They still write this stuff. They still believe it.

The thing is, they were right, but for all the wrong reasons. So what actually happened?

From my perspective, observing MSMEs in an admittedly small economy, virtually nothing changed. Rien. Nada. Nichts. Zilch. Nothing. Small businesses carried on as before, with no discernable change. There wasn’t a sudden decline in the number of MSMEs worldwide, especially in the EU. It has been pretty constant, with the usual ups and downs since the legislation was implemented. Though not a source, Statista has a visualisation that shows this. There is some discussion on the adverse effects of innovation in the EU as a result of the legislation, but these papers are finding it challenging to determine if any observed fluctuations are a direct result of the legislation or other external factors. From an anecdotal perspective, Europe doesn’t appear to be any less “innovative” than before.

It’s evident that small businesses didn’t sweat it. They knew full well they’d carry on as before, changing things progressively over time. No rush. No panic. There was no immediate rush to entirely change their businesses at the operational level, aside from a bit of thinking about this new risk and what it might mean to them over the coming months and years. Basically, It was business as usual.

How do I know this? For one, I am on the ground next to these small businesses and have been for most of my working life. I’ve seen them shrug at this legislation and tell me point-blank, “… we’ll wait and see”. And I’ve seen them do absolutely nothing. Not even a small audit to attempt to reveal exposure to the risks the regulation inevitably brings. And I know why. They cannot afford it as a capital outlay and don’t have the time to waste. You think large enterprise bosses are busy. Spend some time with MSMEs, and you’ll understand what busy is.

Secondly, as the legislation was being debated and passed from discussion to vote to implementation, there were many thousands of consultants with no experience (and limited knowledge) rubbing their hands together, hoping to make a killing off consultancy fees to help businesses comply with this legislation. Twenty million Euros or 4 per cent of global turnover was a sweet, sweet incentive, or so they thought. Small consultancies, too, thought they’d get in on the gravy train before it left the station. I myself was tempted, but I decided against it, feeling that it would be a hard sell to the tiny enterprises that constitute the French West Indies (who were directly in the firing line) and those in the wider Caribbean caught in the net, so to speak. Something felt off for me, so I didn’t pursue it seriously. Hindsight proves I was right not to invest too much time and energy, and businesses didn’t employ the consultants.

This all begs the question, “Where are we today with regard to GDPR?”

Status Quo. Nothing has substantially changed. The consultants and consultancies specialised have largely crawled back under their rocks, awaiting the next grift cycle, and the small businesses have all magically become compliant (mostly) without doing much.

“Magically” is doing a lot of heavy lifting in that phrase.

Gradually and then suddenly¹, all the software, the tools, and the processes that businesses rely on to operate all got updates, patches, and replacements and became compliant. Businesses updated, patched, and replaced software through natural attrition and good governance cycles. The whole value chain became compliant, and therefore, so did MSMEs.

And then everyone carried on as though nothing had happened.

It’s just like the Year 2000 Bug. It was the literal end of the world for some commentators. The banks would collapse, there’d be food shortages, riots, and all sorts of apocalyptic scenarios were being described and subscribed to. I know I was there. I personally certified all the software we used in the company I was working with at the time and worked with the developers to amend any inconsistencies and errors during a six-month test and implementation project. (TLDR: it all worked fine). But just like GDPR, nothing happened. It all just sort of fell into place without issue.

So how did big business entrench its holding on the market? If the legislation’s critics were right but for the wrong reasons, what conclusion can we get from the GPDR since its introduction in 2016?

Some consider GDPR to be a failure, agreeing with the above, but it is because of non-enforcement, not because of a failure of policy.

One can argue on the merits or not of the specifics, but to do so is to ignore the spirit and the overarching aim of the GDPR, thereby completely misunderstanding why the GDPR was introduced. There are two elements to understand when discussing the GDPR and the EU. The GDPR is a blunt instrument to coax businesses into doing the right thing concerning personally identifiable data on individuals. It is explicit in the types of data it covers, but it is a set of principles to guide businesses that collect, process, store, and share that data. Encouraging them to do those things reasonably. “Reasonable”, defined as “don’t abuse the person concerned with your access to that data”. The second element is that the EU is more concerned about defending individual EU citizen liberties than it is in defending state or business liberties. It is often mischaracterised as the middle ground between the free-for-all of the US regulatory environment and the all-controlling of the Chinese model. That’s just too reductive. The EU was set up post-WWII with the explicit aim of regional economic integration that would promote, protect and ensure peace in Europe. Peace through deeply integrated trade. In Europe. Not elsewhere.²

But back to enforcement.

For as long as the GDPR has been in force, companies like Meta, Google, and many others have been abusing our trust and ignoring the GDPR, and to boot (paraphrasing William Gibson), enforcement is already here —it’s just not evenly distributed yet. These companies have set themselves up in European jurisdictions that are not motivated to press for full enforcement for many reasons (Hint: Economic). This has allowed them to continue doing business on the backs of our data, freedoms, and privacy without regard to the idea of the GDPR. And what a lucrative business it has been. Occasionally, the odd slap on the wrist happens, but this is brushed off as the “cost of doing business”.

As I was writing this, the EU announced a 1.8B€ fine for Apple’s anticompetitive practices in the EU’s music streaming business. If I remember rightly, this is a result of an investigation that started in 2019 and has nothing to do with the highly discussed Digital Markets Act (DMA). Apple made 1.05B$ per day in the year ended 31/12/2023.

The Digital Markets Act and the Digital Services Act enforced this week will likely be enforced differently and more aggressively. Apple’s insistence on removing PWAs (Progressive Web Apps) and bleating about having to comply with the regulation, its subsequent U-turn and the 404 I get when trying to open the Apple Newsroom page that shamelessly tried to defend their indefensible position are signs of the way the wind is blowing.

To paraphrase Game of Thrones (shamelessly): Enforcement is coming.

And, to be clear, I’m not championing any and all regulation as a good thing, and I do think there are aspects of the way the EU regulates that could be a bit more inclusive and less subject to the (literally) thousands of lobbyists employed by states, organisations and businesses, to have a chance at creating better legislation.

Monetisation and the death of the Internet (as we know it)

This is a bit of a rant. My apologies upfront.

Rampant monetisation has completely trashed the internet and been a driving force for a divided, divisive, and less interesting Internet. Just look at how the homogenisation of the design language of all the “social” apps has made them all look the same, ensuring that monetisation mechanisms are simplified and broken down into base elements. If their branding weren’t so visible, most would be hard-pressed to identify if it was Instagram, Bluesky or Twitter (X if you’re that way inclined, but the URL is twitter.com).

When I think of monetisation of the internet, I’m talking about how we, as humans, have been reduced to functional blocks of content creation and content consumption. Nothing more. There is little room on “big-Internet” for the small weird projects of social good, the oddball things that used to exist, and the life-changing discoveries that were easily found previously. And, of course, when I say no room, I mean there is no attention available because attention is being sucked away by the 30-second video clips of abject nonsense and awful or outright dangerous “content”.

This dehumanising of the internet visitor is one of the factors that help explain why the internet has become so polarised and so violent. If we’re not human any more, then we’re not hurting anyone when we’re violently threatening each other. But it’s not reality, and we know it. We feel it. But we cannot control it. Tech, as currently deployed, is dehumanising us, making unpaid productivity modules slotted into the platform’s impossible endless growth targets. These modules have broken us down so much into the basic elements of creation/consumption that they (we) are as expendable as toilet paper.

This is not the Internet I want. This is why I’m getting involved in Internet governance. I’ll keep you up to date.

I’m not the only one thinking about this. Watch this video from Taylor Lorenz, a journalist who recently released a book called Extremely Online.

Generative AI (again!)

I wanted to write about generative AI again, but at over two thousand words once more, I think I’ll bump it to the next newsletter. I’ll give you a little teaser, though. The following was the working premise for discussion:

Generative AI is simultaneously the most significant opportunity for small businesses to get a helping hand and the biggest shit-show we’ve seen since the invention of the Internet (arguably equalling Social Media’s continued destruction).

Until next time.

The Future is Digital Newsletter is an ongoing discussion. Please feel free to share it with others who may be interested.

Thanks for being a supporter. I wish you an excellent day.

/committedtodisk