Magazine menu Close Magazine menu

Future tech

Latest stories

tale two metaverses

The Metaverse’s history shows we’re not quite ready for it

  • min read
    • In October 2021, Facebook Founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg changed his company's brand name to Meta to reflect what he sees as the importance of the metaverse to their business strategy. Experienced using a virtual reality (VR) headset, the three-dimensional virtual environment lets characters (called avatars) engage in social and commercial activities much like real life. Many global business giants see the Metaverse as a huge commercial opportunity that will change how we live and work. Should your business get involved? I believe the Metaverse's history shows while it's an environment you should get familiar with, it may not be the time to invest big. Here's why. MMOGs have been around since the 1990s. Their popularity has risen fast worldwide with improved internet connectivity, computer power and immersive graphics. One such game, space simulator EVE Online, has seen over 60,000 players simultaneously playing. And like in the Metaverse, trading virtual items for real-world money in MMOGs has become big business. What's the Metaverse's attraction? The Metaverse has business potential because of our willingness to invest so much time and money in playing games online. In a 2022 virtual conference on the Metaverse, Datin Lorela Chia, CEO of Haus of Stylo, Malaysia, gave examples of the fashion and games industry collaborating, like creating and selling virtual garments for avatars. But it's not just about buying and selling things – the Metaverse offers a way to meet, discuss or learn that's more immersive than other online communication tools. Bill Gates said in 2021, "Within two to three years, I predict most virtual meetings will move from 2D camera image grids… to the Metaverse – a 3D space with digital avatars." Metaverse follows in Second Life's footsteps In almost every way except the VR headsets, there was a Metaverse from 2003, when Linden Labs launched virtual world Second Life. Second Life is a virtual world that lets users create avatars and settings, and teleport from one place to another in seconds. Second Life has an estimated 800,000 users and many of the characteristics of a real-world civilization – rules, citizen rights, homes, shops, universities and events. It has many business applications like hybrid conferences, virtual project meetings and data visualization for education and collaboration. IBM has used Second Life for internal meetings. BP for graduate recruitment and Imperial College London for virtual hospital tours. But with all its functionality and experience, Second Life hasn't gained mainstream commercial success. So why does Mark Zuckerberg believe his Metaverse has massive disruptive potential? What's enabling today's Metaverse? The answer lies in how the internet evolved since its birth in 1983. The power of 5G and fibre, smartphones and social media have all played a role. Today's advanced internet technologies make the Metaverse possible, but the devices and applications we use daily will determine whether it has significant commercial potential. Second Life runs on a desktop computer and connects to a network of Linden Lab servers. It's a security risk for businesses with network firewalls. Second Life is also 'synchronous:' users only get value from being online at the same time as other users. So there are no users in most Second Life locations most of the time. To use a real-world retail analogy, there's a lack of footfall. This is also true for the Metaverse. Its commercial potential will depend on user numbers and where they spend time. It's critical there's on-demand universal access across computers, laptops and mobile devices. Perhaps 'Web 3.0' will be the technology that delivers on making Metaverse experiences securely accessible to a global marketplace across different devices, but especially mobile devices like smartphones. What is Web 3.0 and why does it matter? IT industry analyst Robin Bloor recently said, "Web 3.0 is the third generation of the internet — a global network that permits intelligent interactions between all its users and devices." Web 3.0 is a theoretical new blockchain-based iteration of the web. It could provide increased data security, scalability and privacy for users. It would let users publish rich media content to a global audience and make a Metaverse more commercially viable than Second Life. By making the web more powerful, intuitive and secure, Web 3.0 could mean the volume of online users accessing and creating content grows faster. One major difference, most relevant to the Metaverse, is better handling of the 3D graphics needed for virtual worlds. Blockchain important to Metaverse commerce Metaverse settings are computer-generated environments or 360-degree photos and videos captured by consumer or professional cameras. These digital images and videos are now traded on the internet. Blockchain can validate ownership of these digital assets, enabling the fashion industry to sell digital garments. In Second Life from 2005, you could create digital assets and trade them for the digital currency Linden dollars. Today, the same thing is happening in the Metaverse using blockchain and cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin. These latest developments, alongside artificial intelligence that connects buyers with sellers, will add to the growth of the Metaverse. How will the Metaverse affect business? The future shape and commercial potential of the Metaverse go beyond numbers of users. It also depends on how often they visit, for how long, where and why. With pandemics and climate change restricting face-to-face contact and travel, applications that enable remote communication and collaboration have grown fast. Online meeting app Zoom saw daily meeting participants grow from 10 million to 300 million between 2019 and 2020, mostly from small business and personal use. Will the Metaverse become the new virtual meeting space Bill Gates predicted? It seems unlikely for now, with the convenience and ease of use of Zoom and other online meeting platforms. More likely, the commercial potential of the Metaverse will be unlocked by applications that benefit more from immersive experiences. It could also be useful in mental and physical health therapies that use virtual reality and for complex 3D data visualization. Facebook (Meta) has invested hugely in strategy based on VR headsets as the gateway to their Metaverse platform. Unlike the browsers found on every smartphone and laptop, few own or have access to a VR headset. At the moment, Metaverse suffers from the same problem that restricted Second Life – a limited marketplace, until the technology evolves to the point where VR headsets or glasses are affordable and ubiquitous. Unlike recent disruptions like cryptocurrency, the Metaverse relies on mass adoption to be profitable for business. Several factors in the market today make mass Metaverse adoption unlikely, like low VR headset ownership and lack of systems to access the Metaverse with commonly owned devices. While businesses should closely follow the Metaverse's development, it may be premature to invest heavily at this time. In any case, watch this space.
legal regulatory systems keep up rapid change

Regulation can keep pace with changing tech. Here’s how.

  • min read
    • With rising concerns about consumer privacy, anti-competitive business activity and the spread of misinformation, public and policymakers' scrutiny of the high-tech space is intensifying. Big Tech's influence is still rising. Safety and data privacy laws already struggle to keep up. Who should oversee and police the online giants, and how can we ensure privacy and security standards meet what consumers rightly expect? The blistering clip of technology If you thought the world moved fast before the pandemic, it's now positively frantic. COVID-19 prompted business to leap forward a technological decade in just three months. "From news, images and videos to apps, games and user-generated content, most material we consume is funneled through the largest technology firms," Taylor Tresatti, head of industry research for BIZDEV: The International Association for Business Development, told me. "More of the world's conversations only take place online." Tech firms' disproportionate influence, alongside concerns about their opaque business practices, raises questions about where responsibility lies for overseeing and governing online worlds. Regulatory processes and technological change International law's often outdated rules, lack of alignment between territories and government bodies and ongoing new technology add up to a mess for government and industry leaders. They're also concerned regulation could throttle innovation. Politicians are often quick to play to public fear but slow to understand new technologies' impacts fully. "These systems are often slow to change and adapt, so they're at direct odds with the technology they aim to manage," Tresatti observes. "That's before artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning start to drive more exponential industry advancement and growth." Other fast-moving advancements regulation must consider include robotics, quantum computing and industrial automation. Political and public concern not always aligned Political leaders can be part of the problem, Bob Ehrlich, head of consumer insights at Techsavvy, told me. "These and other virtual boogeymen are hot topics for voters, but politicians also face the challenge of how to keep up with a growing technological arms race among international powers." He expects this to lead to greater regulation in the high-tech space. Meanwhile, consumer concerns over privacy and data sharing are skyrocketing. Even as companies like Apple and Google adopt new privacy measures, Meta (formerly Facebook) has fought against them. In technologically advanced nations like the US, there's no comprehensive federal law regulating how most companies collect, store or share customer data − data often prone to compromise or breach by more sophisticated, complex threat actors. "The stage is set for a perfect storm," says Ehrlich. "From back-end oversight and management of data to front-end user experiences, many potential points of failure present themselves. We've got to be more thoughtful and make speedier decisions to have any hope of staying on top of this rapidly changing space." Rethinking the future of high-tech regulation To get better at addressing these challenges, I think we must have more informed discussions and make decisions on these topics more often, indeed, routinely. Given their unprecedented scope and influence, we must fundamentally rethink our approach to tackling technology-related issues. Government and IT leaders can use these three approaches. 1.    Adopt new standards for content sharing Instituting new industry, state and international policy standards and guidelines can help govern content sharing and moderation, data privacy and user security. Active cross-collaboration between agencies and governments would improve regional and international consistency. Christchurch Call is an example of how heads of state and the tech sector can work together to create effective new standards and processes. The international strategy for removing extremist content from social media fast was developed in the wake of a terrorist attack live-streamed on Facebook in 2019. 2.    Form partnerships between public and private sector We must bring together experts from different industries and policymakers to research, discuss and make recommendations on how to regulate emerging technologies and trends. These charter taskforces or committees should be empowered and resourced to report and recommend to lawmakers more rapidly. They should also include younger voices – digital natives – to offer up-to-date insights and perspectives. India has already begun working with Google similarly to help curb the spread of misinformation. 3.    Turn the focus from past to future Lawmakers should challenge themselves to rely less on historical precedents when making decisions. Instead, they could hold future-focused scenario-planning exercises to steer their decision-making around emerging technological use-cases and concerns. Screening processes and regular training would help ensure key decision-makers have contemporary, working tech knowledge. The lawmakers' role should also involve finding and closing the loopholes in legal and regulatory frameworks that unscrupulous actors exploit. Already, the US has convened task forces to help plan for and tackle topics like AI and robotics. Keeping tabs on tomorrow's world More regulatory oversight and governance is obviously coming soon in the IT space, but it needn't hinder industry growth or advancement. Partnerships between technology sector firms, lawmakers and industry bodies can mean opportunities to fast-track innovation while giving customers a more positive high-tech experience. As a futurist who's helped over 1,500 businesses and government agencies adapt to challenges like these, I know ensuring regulation and law keep up with technological change isn't impossible. We must get more government and industry leaders on the same page and promote teamwork and collaboration between the public and private sectors. "When everyone with a stake in the technology ecosystem works in tandem, it creates a more stable playing field and more chances to benefit industry players and everyday consumers," says Ehrlich. "From organization and government leaders' perspectives, finding more harmonious ways to collaborate at every turn is a meaningful upgrade worth pursuing."
path dependence business innovation

How business can innovate better by escaping ‘path dependence’

  • min read
    • It's an elaborate story how railway track spacing (and so, the space shuttle rocket boosters) ended up 4 feet 8 1⁄2 inches or 1.44 meters: Mind-bogglingly, the measurement goes back to the width of carriage wheels when pulled by two horses. And unlike many similar stories, it seems more fact than fiction. Data engineer and Associate Professor of English at University of Michigan, Tung-Hui Hu, points out this phenomenon – new infrastructure tending to follow the path of older infrastructure when its relevance is long past – in recent Tomorrow Unlocked audio series Fast Forward. The phenomenon is called path dependence or path tendency. He studied it in writing his book, A Prehistory of the Cloud. Hu says in Fast Forward, "I first noticed the tracks of the Southern Pacific Railroad were where they ran fiber optic cable. It made me wonder what precursors to the Cloud – what older networks – might exist. The highway system in Chicago, for instance, is built on top of old Native American trails. We have the same choke points, in terms of traffic, as we did 100 years ago. It's hard to run a cable through a mountain. We tend to land cables in the same places as they did in the 19th century." Every tech business today wants to be a disruptive innovator like Uber or AirBnB – inventing products that don't just improve what's already there, but fundamentally change how a market operates. Examining how your business is 'path dependent' – or follows practices no longer relevant or necessary – could open the door to disruptive ideas. What keyboards say about path dependence in tech The pattern of keys on the standard laptop, computer and even smartphone is a classic example of path dependence. The layout is called QWERTY after the first six letters on the top line of the English-language keyboard. But why are the letters in this strange order? QWERTY keyboard layouts were designed for the earliest typewriters in the 1870s to address a common problem: Mechanical letter levers close to each other would collide and jam. Many have tried to design alternatives to QWERTY that could be faster to learn and use. The Dvorak keyboard layout puts the most often used letters on the home keys, but whether it's faster, research is unclear. Dvorak, invented in the 1930s, didn't intend to 'disrupt' typing but make it faster and easier. Today, we see features like voice recognition disrupting writing itself, and with AI widely used to predict what people will want next, we may need to communicate our needs less in future. How do organizations stay nimble, notice and adapt to emerging trends, or even get ahead of them? No business wants to be the next Borders, Blockbuster or Polaroid, but it's not always clear how what patterns we have or how to break out of them. Research in the field of path dependence offers insight. Using self-reinforcing mechanisms as a way to change In the journal Business Research in 2020, Johann Fortwengel and Arne Keller ask, how can locked-in organizations regain their scope for maneuver? Past research suggests organizations usually escape path dependence thanks to external 'shocks,' like tough competition entering their market or the price of certain materials becoming uneconomic. But Fortwengel and Keller found "some organizations succeed in escaping from path dependence against all odds." Where organizations took time to understand how they were path dependent, and interrupt the ways the path reinforced itself (for example, in staff onboarding,) businesses could undo old paths and build new ones. One organization Fortwengel and Arne studied, 150-year-old German camera makers CameraCorp, had been a roaring success in the 20th century. "Employees gradually followed the informal principle to treat optical excellence and mechanical accuracy as the fundamental basis for decision-making, and adopted it as the ultimate priority in every aspect of their daily work." When in the mid-90s the Head of Electronics wanted to introduce new electrical features to the lens, he encountered much resistance because the solution was neither optical nor mechanical. The company became 'tapered' in its audience appeal, catering increasingly to the needs of the camera elite and ignoring wider market trends. When the digital photographic revolution hit in the late 90s, CameraCorp realized they couldn't go on building their business purely on past strengths. They established a structurally separate research-based digital imaging group. Although the group made several breakthroughs, staff in the wider organization didn't embrace the promise of change. CameraCorp could then make bold leaps to become a market leader in digital camera tech, whereas several big players in the camera and film market didn't adapt fast enough to survive the industry's digital transformation. Fortwengel and Keller stress the need to understand how paths are reinforcing themselves. "Self-reinforcing mechanisms play a complex role in path dependence. On the one hand, they are the key driver of path dependence, on the other hand, paradoxically, they offer a possible lever to escape path dependence." Making knowledge less sticky In the Oxford University Press-published Strategic Management: State of the Field and Its Future, researchers Henk Volberda, Tatjana Schneidmuller and Taghi Zadeh point to the role of managerial knowledge and strategy in escaping path dependence and achieving innovation. "Knowledge stickiness" describes the tendency of organizations – even within research and development – to rely on existing knowledge rather than seeking new. The three researchers propose triggers for organizations breaking out of their knowledge cycle: Diverse audiences, regulation and regulators, internal strategic misalignment and the strategist's role. Many would understand more diverse audiences can trigger organizations to change, but regulation is often assumed to harm innovation. The researchers argue history shows regulation often spurs innovation, so organizations might consider 'leaning in' to regulation, considering it an opportunity rather than a pain in the neck. They also propose innovation benefits when different parts of an organization are pulling in different directions. "Organizations can thrive by embracing misalignment between internal components and promoting inconsistent mentalities and structures." Misalignment could make organizations more flexible and adaptive. "Firms that can embrace misalignment can steer a path through their technological developments when they do not have a clear view of what the future might hold. They can accommodate differing views of the future among their managers." CameraCorp's story shows how businesses that become too focused on narrow goals become path dependent. It follows that being strategically diverse, or in other words a bit scattered, could be an advantage. All businesses want to innovate, but success is often followed by getting stuck on the same path that led you there. Studies in path dependence give insight on how organizations get stuck and how they can free themselves. When organizations fall victim to their own success, breaking patterns means undoing before building new. How will you start to break down your business's path dependence, allowing disruptive ideas into the light?
space infrastructure cybersecurity

Why aliens might be the next big cyber-hackers

  • min read
    • On Earth, we depend on what we've put into space. And like all critical infrastructure, space infrastructure needs cybersecurity. It's a vital backbone for sensitive systems and tasks that support economies, communication and science. Increased technology in critical infrastructure means improved service, but it also means more ways for intruders to attack. We use satellites to communicate and monitor weather, but also to explore space. Increasing space missions also bring new ways to attack. And whenever a new technology emerges, it attracts hacktivists, organized state cybercriminals and cyber mercenaries. We must learn from past mistakes and put cybersecurity front and center while expanding space operations. Layers of space infrastructure Like typical critical infrastructure, space infrastructure has three main layers. Corporate network or user segment Typical critical infrastructure has a corporate network that hosts email, file servers, digital services and so on. In space infrastructure, it's called the 'user segment,' and it's where administrators and systems operators process data from all segments. Field layer or space segment Space probes, sensors, satellites and other things that collect data from the environment are the 'space segment.' In traditional critical infrastructure, it's the field layer. The space segment facilitates long-range communication and monitoring services to the ground segment. Supervisory or ground segment We need a layer between connecting field devices with the corporate network for monitoring and processing data. It's called the supervisory segment in critical infrastructure or the 'ground segment' in space. The ground segment receives space communications, and monitors and controls spacecraft like satellites, telescopes and probes. Each segment hosts systems, networks and devices and provides a set of services to other segments. When a service or device is network-connected, it's exposed to cyber threats. Cyberthreats in space Cyberattacks can enter space infrastructure through corporate networks (the user segment,) satellites, satellite communication and any system that connects to the space network. As early as 2022, 4G towers on the moon could be another entry point. We don't often hear about cyberattacks on space infrastructure, but they happen, which is why some countries are expanding their space cyber defense. In 2019, the US government established the Space Force as its sixth armed force. The Space Force protects US interests in space, including cyber operations. In the same year, NASA found a rogue device, a Raspberry Pi, stealing sensitive information undetected for 10 months. Cyberattacks affect space agencies like all big organizations. Cybercriminals target their networks for many reasons. As well as targeting space networks' user segment, threat actors target communication between ground stations and satellites, eavesdropping and spying. We also see an arms race in space warfare. Global powers are establishing space units within armed forces, while others are taking it to the next level with kamikaze satellites. But seriously, alien cyber-hackers So far, we've discussed human-generated threats. But there are also non-human and unintentional threats like space junk, solar flares and thunderstorms that affect space infrastructure and cause disruptions on Earth. Future of space exploration More countries than ever are launching missions to space. In 2020 alone, China, the United Arab Emirates and the US launched missions to Mars while China's rover has been exploring the Martian surface. NASA's Artemis program aims to place the first woman and next man on the moon by 2024, to study and collect information for planning a base camp on its south pole for the next giant leap – sending humans to Mars. Once, only governments were in space, but private companies are now taking over the space race. Here are my predictions for the future of space exploration. We'll fly by rocket instead of airplane We're always looking for the fastest way to travel. On the ground, the proposed Hyperloop could reach speeds of 760 miles an hour – 50 percent faster than commercial jets. Meanwhile, Elon Musk wants to fly people in rockets instead of airplanes, avoiding friction and air resistance to make speeds up to 17,000 miles per hour, or London to Dubai in under 30 minutes. Space tourism will be a norm Space tourism is right around the corner. We'll see hotels in orbit as our newest 'getaway' on a whole new level. Gateway Foundation announced plans to open the first space hotel, Voyager Station, as early as 2027. As we learn how to survive in conditions different from Earth, we'll also see vacation destinations on the moon and Mars. Robots are the new astronauts Artificial Intelligence is prominent in our lives today. It's just a matter of time before we have robots capable of doing anything humans can do, including becoming astronauts. We can design robots to withstand harsh conditions on different planets. There are already semi-autonomous machines like Perseverance on Mars, but their computational intelligence is limited. As technology advances, we'll send robots powered by supercomputers to discover the unknown. Human colonies on planets and moons Humans will venture into space and start colonizing solar system planets and moons. We're already planning bases on the moon and Mars, so it's just a matter of time until we see sustainable colonies hosting thousands, if not millions, of people. Infrastructure will also progress to host hospitals, farms and schools. We'll mine space resources To settle on a planet, we'll need to mine its raw materials. Water could be highly valuable on other planets because it can be broken down to hydrogen for rocket fuel and oxygen to breathe. Space mining will be one of the most crucial industries for humans going interplanetary. This space future, or any other we imagine, will need IT infrastructure and communication, and like space infrastructure today, will have ways for cybercriminals – alien or human – to attack. We must remember space infrastructure is already crucial to life on Earth and protect it accordingly. Cybercriminals have already shown they can hide a Raspberry Pi from NASA, and they'll have many more tricks up their sleeves. Let's make sure we explore the solar system and the universe in the safest way we can.
space law

How space law keeps cowboys and rogue satellite drivers out of orbit

  • min read
    • Space law is a fascinating area. As part of new Tomorrow Unlocked audio series Fast Forward, I'm talking to Assistant Professor and Deputy Director of the International Institute of Air and Space Law at Leiden University, Tanja Masson-Zwaan (@tanjamasson) about the challenges of using space law designed for the old space race in the new world of space exploration. Ken: What have been the biggest changes in space exploration since the Moon landings 50 years ago? Tanja: Nowadays, it's not two superpowers – the US and the Soviet Union – but many more countries and start-ups, companies, even universities. That change raises legal issues because space law is based on states rather than corporations or entities. Under the many space treaties, resolutions and so on, states are responsible and liable, and must perform their activities in certain ways. Companies becoming involved, maybe becoming the main actors, stresses the system. That's why we see new national legislation: States are making sure their companies and entities don't break the principles they signed up to. Ken: Are you saying if I launch a satellite that damages someone else's satellite, my government is liable, rather than me? Tanja: When a private entity launches and operates a satellite, it first needs state authorization and supervision – for instance, through a license from the government. If their satellite crashed into a satellite owned by another state, the state that launched the object is liable, not the private entity. That's different from aviation. If you lose your suitcase, you can sue the airline. If your satellite is damaged, you will go to your Ministry of Foreign Affairs, who would present a claim to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the state that launched the satellite that caused the damage. Ken: What's the legal position on mining and mineral rights in space? Tanja: It's an exciting time with missions to the Moon and Mars. The potential for resource extraction and commercialization is creating a buzz, although it's a scientific and technical challenge, as well as a financial and legal one. Extracting and commercially using space resources is also essential for establishing a semi-permanent human presence on these bodies or for using the Moon as a stepping stone to Mars. You wouldn't have to bring all the water you need from Earth – you could use water on the Moon and transform it into fuel to go to Mars. But whether you can use those resources or commercialize them is a legal question not addressed in the space treaties. The treaties also have a principle that benefits from space must be for all countries. Many conditions must be guaranteed. But how? That's the debate. Ken: When the US planted its flag on the Moon in 1969, did that have legal validity? Did they claim anything? Tanja: The US explicitly said putting their flag on the Moon was an expression of pride about being the first nation to the Moon, not claiming to own the Moon. To claim the Moon is contrary to a cardinal principle of space law: You cannot own any part of outer space – but owning a part of space isn't needed to use it and its resources. Ken: Low earth orbit is getting crowded. There are functioning and non-functioning satellites and all kinds of space junk. What legal space do they occupy? Tanja: If anyone wants to use that space, they must follow rules. For example, states must coordinate with a United Nations specialized agency, the International Telecommunication Union, to get rights to use frequencies or orbits, which they can then give to their satellite operators. The 1967 Outer Space Treaty says the use and exploration of outer space are free, so states can put satellites in space if they follow rules, but they can't claim to own that space. The state must also authorize and supervise if private entities carry out activities. Ken: You mentioned in a blog post the Permanent Court of Arbitration, which could decide on outer space disputes. What kind of issues are brought to the court? Tanja: Over 100 states are party to the Permanent Court of Arbitration. It has special rules for solving disputes about space activities. Disputes could arise about collision damage or signal interference, but also product liability and intellectual property. Diplomacy usually solves space disputes because there are always other interests at stake, like friendly trade relations. So far, no case has been brought to the Permanent Court of Arbitration, nor to any other international court such as the International Court of Justice – the highest judicial organ of the UN. Ken: Is lawmaking in front of technology, for once? Tanja: It's an interesting question, should law precede technology, or should technology evolve and law follow? I think they should follow each other closely. It doesn't make sense to make laws when we don't know how something will work. For example, we don't know if suborbital flights will have horizontal takeoff, vertical drop from a plane or something else. On the other hand, you must look ahead to preserve the future use of outer space. Having a dispute settlement mechanism can prevent disputes because parties are confident there's a way to settle it if something arises. Ken: Growing up with the space race, I don't think many thought about the environmental impact. It seems like laws are needed in that area now. Tanja: When the space era started, it really was a space race – neither side worried about what was going up. Scientists were excited just to be launching things into space. But space is getting polluted. There are also concerns about going to another celestial body and spoiling its pristine environment with bacteria. The Committee on Space Research has established a planetary protection protocol. There are rules about what level of protection you must apply depending on the mission and where you're going. The rules evolve as we gain knowledge. If there will be a sustained human presence, will we have a landfill on the Moon? Are we going to put garbage into orbit around the Moon? We'll have to find a solution to keep it sustainable, now that we're all super dependent on space. Ken: Is there a fundamental question, beyond nations and corporations, about our rights as a species to go into space? Some people feel passionately that we have no business on Mars because it's not our planet. Tanja: And some cultures have special connections with the Moon and other celestial bodies. It's important to respect that. But humankind is driven to push frontiers and to discover. I like the quote: We should go out and explore, but also show respect for other cultures and beliefs, and the environments of other planets. Ken: What is possible within the law to restrain corporate buccaneers from taking advantage of space? Tanja: There are some space cowboys out there doing things that may raise concerns in the community. Is that what we want? I think we should appreciate the good being done alongside the issues it raises. Elon Musk's company SpaceX now operates a third of all satellites, and that happened in a year. If SpaceX launches the planned 42,000 satellites, how will we deal with that? He also says he will provide broadband to places on Earth that don't have it, and that's good. And he's developed reusable rockets, so he's contributing to space sustainability. I think there needs to be a regulatory counterweight. The US authorities should ask those in Elon Musk's position to do environmental impact assessments and find ways to develop their plans without disrupting science and astronomy. It's give and take, but you have to appreciate what these people are doing – they have the money states never will. Ken: What's next in your space law work? Tanja: I've just started a big EU project researching the European position on space traffic management. We don't have rules on space traffic management nor space security and safety, like retrieving objects from outer space. We need these rules for sustainable space exploration. Ken: Is there money to be made in space salvage – bringing satellite components back to Earth? There must be some mineral wealth up there. Tanja: An analogy is salvaging wrecks on the sea. A ship owner can abandon a ship, and a salvage company can salvage it, selling the scrap metal. We have an extra problem in space because space object ownership is eternal – you can't abandon anything. We need to get a space debris-removal industry going, but they'll need approval for every piece they retrieve. The state that launched it will be eternally liable if something else is damaged during space salvage. We also need to make it possible to refuel or repair in space. It's hard to tighten a screw on a satellite without putting the satellite in jeopardy. So as well as space salvage, space sustainability may mean a new industry of in-orbit servicing. Ken: So there are wider benefits to a focus on sustainability in space. Thank you, Tanja, for filling us in on space law. Tanja: You're welcome. Listen to the full Fast Forward audio series for more interviews with featured experts.
phygital business

How ‘phygital’ tech could save post-pandemic retail stores

  • min read
    • COVID-19 has had a monumental impact on retail worldwide. While everyone has found lockdowns and social distancing challenging, stores are working hard to adapt to shifting consumer expectations and a new reality. It's make-or-break for many bricks-and-mortar outlets. How will savvy stores stay safe from the crumbling façade of face-to-face shopping? One way is by using interactive shopping experiences that combine physical and digital – or 'phygital' shopping – to keep, win and wow customers. Storefronts shutting, ecommerce booming In the UK in 2020, according to research by professional services firm PwC (formerly PricewaterhouseCooper,) around 10,000 more chain stores closed than opened – that's around 27 closures every day. The US fared better within this downward trend, with Coresight research finding 5,437 more stores closed than opened in the same year. Meanwhile, the Office for National Statistics reported UK ecommerce grew by 46 percent in 2020 – its strongest annual growth since 2008. The global picture was similar, with eMarketer estimating worldwide ecommerce sales grew 28 percent in the same year. Adding interest to physical shopping Phygital retail isn't entirely new. Stores have been experimenting with these new technologies for a few years. The 2021 opening of 'frictionless' grocery store Amazon Fresh in London shows the potential of phygital technology to change physical shopping beyond recognition. Customers at Amazon Fresh scan a QR code when they enter, place items in a basket and leave when they've finished shopping. In-store cameras and sensors track what's placed in the basket, and the shopper is automatically charged. Forget lines and self-checkouts announcing "unexpected item in the bagging area." Neil Saunders, managing director and retail analyst at GlobalData Retail, thinks more consumers will want both ease and inspiration from their shopping experience, post-pandemic. "Technology can make the shopping process more convenient and enhance it with the likes of augmented reality or location-based push notifications with offers." Starting the phygital journey doesn't mean an overnight transition to fully digitized business. It may mean introducing relatively simple tools that enhance the consumer experience. Letting shoppers check when their order will be ready to pick up or alerting customers when their favorite item is on sale can go a long way to making shopping more convenient. New audio documentary Fast Forward by Kaspersky Tomorrow Unlocked explores more phygital experiences in retail, with analysis from expert technology futurists, in episode 2: Scan purchase for maximum score. Not just for the biggest players More ambitious retailers who have embraced technologies like augmented reality can expand their digital horizons by giving customers new ways to understand products. Sportswear brand Adidas launched three augmented reality experiences at their flagship store on Oxford Street in London, letting shoppers use their smartphone camera to explore new product features. While high-tech retailers like Samsung and Amazon undoubtedly pioneered digital in physical retail, small and medium-sized businesses and non-tech firms can benefit from this emerging trend – if they ask the right questions. Bart Veen, Founder and Creative Director of event company BART, has created technology-led events for brands like Tommy Hilfiger and the Mall of the Netherlands. He believes technology shouldn't be used for technology's sake. There must be a well-defined understanding of the impact the technology will have on the business. Improving the customer experience is more than a nice-to-have for high street stores – it may give a much-needed edge in a competitive market. According to Salesforce's 2020 State of the Connected Customer report, 80 percent of customers think the experience a company provides is as important as its products and services. But the same research found two in three customers felt impersonally treated in their interactions with stores. There's a fine line between using technology to refine customer experience and overusing digital tools that take away the personal touch shoppers want. On their phygital journey, stores should work with experts in tech who know how to avoid crossing the line. "Innovation is doing something that hasn't been done before, and it's all about collaborating. If you have the best experts together and you all have the same goal in mind, you can create something extraordinary," says Veen. Post-pandemic retail Like many industries, the banking sector doubled down on digitization as COVID-19 limited access to face-to-face banking. But as online banking keeps growing, branches are still vital to many, especially older people and small business owners. Yet, most provide few services beyond the traditional offering of paying in cash and checks, activating cards and buying foreign currency. The UK's Barclays bank saw an opportunity and converted 25 closed branches into Eagle Labs: Spaces for co-working, mentoring and networking, as well as getting banking advice. They also used digital technologies to enhance start-ups' experience and make services faster and more convenient, while bank staff offered valuable personal customer interaction and support. As retail bounces back after COVID-19, there's a need to reassess what physical stores do. Barclays is just one of many companies looking to move beyond its traditional services. Fashion, grocery and electronics are all accelerating their digital transformation to meet customer expectations better. Mark Thomson, Director of Retail and Hospitality Solutions for Europe, the Middle East and Africa at retail technology provider Zebra Technologies, believes the most effective phygital solutions enhance the physical experience with digital benefits. An effective shopping experience blends in-store and online. "Customers measure an in-store experience against an online one, so it needs the right technology to let retail staff host an experience rather than just attend," says Thomson. "Physical stores have a future, but as part of a more digital world." As the lines between physical and digital retail blur, retailers in all industries can capitalize on recent tech innovations that make in-store shopping less stressful and more convenient. From cashier-less shopping to augmented reality to location-based push notifications, future retail will pair the best of technology with personalized experiences.
by Innovating leaders.
Innovative tech.
About Secure Futures

Secure Futures magazine is your go-to business guide for opinions, trends and insight into the world of technology and cybersecurity. We help your business to bring on the future. Brought to you by Kaspersky, the global cybersecurity experts.

  • For all other countries