Category: ethics | 倫理 | 윤리학

Ethics: moral principles that govern a person’s behavior or the conducting of an activity. I went to school with people who ended up on the wrong side of the law. I knew more of them when I used to DJ which was my hobby since before I went to college.

I probably still have some post-it notes around the place that I used as bookmarks from when I used to work at a call centre but that was about the extent of my ethical transgressions.

My business experience meant that I dealt with a lot of unpleasant unprofessional clients, but didn’t necessarily see anything unethical in nature. When I started writing this blog I was thinking about culture rather than ethics and the most part still do.

But business and work changed. Ethics became more important:

  • When I started in social and digital campaigns I didn’t think about ethics as a standalone thing. It was just part of doing a good job. It went without saying.
  • I don’t think any of us back then would have foreseen slut shaming, trolling, online bullying, dark patterns and misinformation

Now things are different. The lack of ethics is impacting all parts of business life.

  • How ad tech data is used
  • How content is created
  • How services are designed
  • How products are made

I think that much of the problems with ethics is cultural and generational in nature. The current generation of entrepreneurs have perverted knowledge in the quest of growth hacking and continual improvement and change for its own sake. Its a sickness at the centre of technology

  • Matured digital strategy + more

    Mediatel: Newsline: Vodafone’s ‘matured’ digital strategy reappraises adspend“Many advertisers, including Vodafone, have come to realise that a lot of the social platforms are high frequency but very, very low attention,” she said. “When you are launching a new brand or proposition you can’t communicate it in one and half seconds.” – stating the bleeding obvious dressed up as industry thought leadership. You could have realised that a decade ago. Social is poor for brand building, but what are Vodafone going to do with it?

    Vodafone taxi

    Dubai Ports World and a New Form of Imperialismreport examines Gulf expansionism through a case study of the Emirates-based company Dubai Ports World (DP World). This multinational is one of the world’s leading global port operators and logistics giants—and a source of power for the United Arab Emirates. A close look at its operations in the Horn of Africa reveals the ways that a government can exert control through a modern state-chartered company. A closer look at the operations of DP World also casts light on a key driver of disastrous state fragmentation in the Horn of Africa and the Red Sea. DP World functions like a modern-day version of the British East India Company, serving as both a foreign policy tool and a profit engine – which makes Chinese run ports and Belt and Road projects even scarier

    Project MUSE – China and World Order: Mutual Gain or Exploitation?signs are that an assertive realpolitik is China’s leitmotif. Frankopan’s New Silk Roads lays out the wide scope of China’s ambitions and hints at some of their genuinely internationalist dimensions, but it also documents the case for viewing China’s role as a wolf in sheep’s clothing—at least as rapacious as European and other imperialists in previous centuries. The latter view is supported by Burnay’s Chinese Perspectives on the International Rule of Law and the anthology Building a Normative Order in the South China Sea. Still other studies show that China’s cyber networks are establishing foundations for Chinese dominion over foreign resources and potential dependencies that, in time, can be pressured to do more than kowtow

    China and Hollywood: Is the romance over? – SupChinathe upcoming sequel to Top Gun, a 1986 American action drama film, made headlines following the release of its first trailer, where two patches that had originally shown the Taiwanese flag appear to have been swapped out. Produced by Paramount Pictures, the movie has Chinese tech giant Tencent as its investor and primary promoter in the Chinese market.

    The “New” Private Security Industry, the Private Policing of Cyberspace and the Regulatory Questions – Mark Button,the growth of the “new” private security industry and private policing arrangements, policing cyberspace. It argues there has been a significant change in policing which is equivalent to the “quiet revolution” associated with private policing that Shearing and Stenning observed in the 1970s and 1980s, marking the “second quiet revolution.” The article then explores some of the regulatory questions that arise from these changes, which have been largely ignored to date by scholars of policing and policy-makers

    Privacy, People, and Markets | Ethics & International Affairs | Cambridge CoreMost current work on privacy understands it according to an economic model: individuals trade personal information for access to desired services and websites. This sounds good in theory. In practice, it has meant that online access to almost anything requires handing over vast amounts of personal information to the service provider with little control over what happens to it next. The two books considered in this essay both work against that economic model. In Privacy as Trust, Ari Ezra Waldman argues for a new model of privacy that starts not with putatively autonomous individuals but with an awareness that managing information flows is part of how people create and navigate social boundaries with one another. Jennifer Rothman’s Right of Publicity confronts the explosive growth of publicity rights—the rights of individuals to control and profit from commercial use of their name and public image—and, in so doing, she exposes the poverty of treating information disclosure merely as a matter of economic calculation

    ‘Influencing is heading into the void’: Natasha Stagg and Kate Durbin on the future of social mediaauthor Natasha Stagg joins Kate Durbin to discuss the Kardashians’ quest for immortality, ‘it girls’, and maintaining identity in the content economy

    Data and Digital Intelligence CommonsThe digital economy can be understood as comprising intelligent systems running whole sectors, employing data based digital intelligence to re-organise and coordinate them. Within such a macro understanding, it is possible to apply the framework of Institutional Analysis and Development (IAD) developed by Elinor Ostrom to examine the management of data and digital intelligence resources at the community level in a given sector, like transport, under the dominant model. Such an analysis reveals very suboptimal results on almost all the key IAD evaluation parameters; from efficiency and equity to accountability and sustainability

    Social factory as prosaic state space: Redefining labour in China’s mass innovation/mass entrepreneurship campaign – June Wang, Yujing Tan,Redefining labour in China’s mass innovation/mass entrepreneurship campaign

    Steering capital: the growing private authority of index providers in the age of passive asset management: Review of International Political Economy: Vol 0, No 0with the shift towards passive investing, the three big index providers have become actors that exercise growing private authority in capital markets as they steer investments through the indices they create and maintain. Index providers define the criteria according to which companies or countries are included into an index. Thereby, they influence investment decisions and corporate governance norms as well as strategies of those companies and states (that seek to be) included into their indices. We argue that rather than technical expertise, the main source of authority are their powerful brands that are trusted by the international investment community and which are entrenched via network externalities

    Noncompete agreements | Economic Policy InstituteOur survey results show that somewhere between 27.8% and 46.5% of the private-sector workforce—between 36 million and 60 million workers—are subject to noncompete clauses. High and low level employees are being covered by noncompetes. Given the ubiquity of noncompetes, the real harm they inflict on workers and competition, and the fact they are part of a growing trend of employers requiring their workers to sign a variety of contracts that take away their rights, the authors believe that they should be abolished – having been hobbled by one, I couldn’t agree more

    Telegraphic Revolution: Speed, Space and Time in the Nineteenth Century* | German History | Oxford Academicthe impact of the ‘communications revolution’ upon experiences of time and space during the nineteenth century. Focusing upon the first three decades of telegraphic communication, it unpacks the assumptions underlying linear narratives of ‘acceleration’ and ‘time-space compression’ to understand the roots of Germany’s fraught relationship to modernity. In doing so, it highlights the importance of the changes which took place between the 1848 revolutions and the early years of the Kaiserreich and which laid the foundations for the peculiarities of the Wilhelmine Era. During this period, it argues, the perceived impact of telegraphic communication, the ‘expansion’ or ‘contraction’ of space and time, varied from one person and place to another, reflecting the technology’s progressive and uneven expansion across Germany. Access to new networks of communication was dependent upon, and in turn influenced, the changing status of individuals, towns and the countryside experiencing the forces of industrialization, market capitalism and globalizationmore on the central idea behind this

    Jazz Wars in the ’70s | The Village Voicejazz in the ’70s boiled down to a debate between the non­compromising eclectics and the compromising eclectics, a debate that escalated into a class war. Monied groups with major record label affiliations played concert halls; a middle class of dependable mainstream-modern attractions monopolized the established jazz clubs; the new and avant were accom­modated briefly by the loft scene, and then by a network of new clubs and theatres. Numerous exceptions to this pic­ture don’t alter its veracity. Jazz radio became fusion radio, while the record in­dustry, puffing away at the jazz-is-back myth with one overproduced confection after another – this explains Kenny G

    Beyond scandal? Blockchain technologies and the legitimacy of post-2008 finance | Finance and SocietyHarnessing the concepts of ‘moral economy’ and ‘scandal’, we identify both possibilities and limits for blockchain applications to legitimate a range of monetary and investment activities. However, we also find that a persistent individualisation of responsibility for failures and shortcomings with ‘live’ blockchain experimentation has undermined the potentially legitimating aspects of this technology. Combining a reliance on technological fixes with a persistent individualist moral economy, we conclude, works against efforts to confront head-on the tensions underpinning the on-going legitimacy crises facing finance – sociological reasons why much of fintech wouldn’t work even if the tech could

    Swiping right: face perception in the age of Tinder – ScienceDirectjudgments of physical attractiveness are assumed to drive the “swiping” decisions that lead to matches, we propose that there is an additional evaluative dimension driving behind these decisions: judgments of moral character. With the aim of adding empirical support for this proposition, we critically review the most striking findings about first impressions extracted from faces, moral character in person perception, creepiness, and the uncanny valley, as they apply to Tinder behavior

    What’s love got to do with it? Passion and inequality in white‐collar work – Rao – – Sociology Compass – Wiley Online Librarywe argue that the passion schema has become a critical marker in the labor market for sorting individuals into occupations, hiring and promotion within organizations, and assigning value to people’s labor. Emergent research suggests that because the expression and perception of passion remain ambiguously defined in the workplace and varies by context, it is pivotal in reproducing social inequalities. In this review, we focus on how privileging passion in the workplace and interpreting it as a measure of aptitude impacts social inequalities by race, gender, and social class

    CMA lifts the lid on digital giants – GOV.UK – interesting points: Each year, about 15% of queries on Google have never been searched for before. Other search engines like Bing will not have the same access to these queries, putting Google in a powerful position of being able to better train its algorithms and provide more accurate search results than its rivals. The CMA has also found that the default settings people are faced with online have a profound effect on choice and the shape of competition. Last year in the UK, Google was willing to pay around £1 billion – 16% of all its search revenues – where it was the default search engine on mobile devices such as Apple phones. – Looking at the the 15% of queries that are new to Google every year, is this cultural evolution, new brands and products or a combination of both?

    Explainer: Behind the climb in Chinese companies’ defaults on bond payments – Reuters state and private companies have missed payments on more than 100 billion yuan ($14.2 billion) of bonds in the year to end-October, not far off the 111 billion yuan for all of 2018, according to S&P Global. Reuters calculations show six state-owned firms and 42 private companies defaulted on payments this year.

    Marketers warn they could be ‘priced out’ of Facebook advertising | Advertising | Campaign Asia – overheating in developed markets? Really interesting when you read Mediatel: Newsline: Starcom: TV is now twice the price… but not twice as good“There’s still nothing better than [a 30 second ad],” Dan Plant said on a panel at Future of TV Advertising Global. “Unfortunately it costs twice as much now – and it hasn’t got twice as good at what it was doing. You pay twice as much to achieve the same thing.” – is this really taking into account the long term brand building role of (good) TV advertising? Also the inflation doesn’t seem to be nearly as bad as Facebook for instance

    China’s social credit system: The Chinese citizens perspective | UCL ASSAThe question of who to trust, and social trust more broadly is one that is pertinent to every modern society, not just China. Although the idea of someone being ‘trustworthy’ (chengxin) has long existed in the Chinese traditional moral system, it is widely believed this was fundamentally damaged in the past 50 years, starting with Mao’s Cultural Revolution (1966-76), now seen as a period characterised by the ‘breakdown of public morality’.  A turbulent period characterised by families turning on each other and being forced to denounce any friends or family members deemed counter-revolutionary, the Cultural Revolution has also had the effect of eroding the concept of chengxin and therefore also mutual trust over time

    Unilever warns it will miss 2019 sales growth target | Financial Timeseconomic slowdown in south Asia — one of its biggest markets — and “difficult” trading conditions in west Africa. It also said trading in developed markets remained “challenging” and that while there were signs of improvement in North America, a recovery there would take time.

    Apple faces shareholder vote on human rights policies | Financial Times – shit, meet fan….

    China’s TV, Film Industry Shrinks Amid Ongoing Censorship | RFAAround 65 percent of 9, 841 actors and celebrities in mainland China, Hong Kong and Taiwan hadn’t been on television lately, while the high-profile roles are generally shared among less than one percent of the profession, the report said.Around 95 percent have had more than a year without being offered work, it said. – It’s RFA so you have to take a certain amount of it with a pinch of salt but the numbers fit with what I’ve heard. The Chinese film industry has put its eggs in fewer and fewer baskets

  • Dark mode + more things

    Opinion | Living in Dark Mode – The New York Times – of the Hong Kong liberation movement was a plot device in a William Gibson novel, I would expect him to write a character like Karen. (Paywall) – dark mode is a great metaphor for the dystopian ennui. Yet I find it much easier to work in dark mode on my computer, which provides an interesting contradiction to idea

    Hong Kong Protests (October 31)

    As facial recognition tech races ahead of regulation, Chinese residents grow nervous about data privacy | South China Morning Post – interesting that concerns are starting to appear around privacy and biometrics

    Will Reddit Ads or Facebook Ads Have Lower CPC? – yes

    The white working class is a political fiction | The OutlineIt turns the working class into something people are, not a function of what they do. It becomes a cultural description totally divorced from labor and wealth, only to be gleaned from outward displays of “class” that come with intelligence, appearance, taste, and all those things that make up meritocratic ideas of “workers.”

    The Uber Bubble: Why Is a Company That Lost $20 Billion Claimed to Be Successful? – early similar to a lot of dot com businesses

    An update on YC China – Silicon Valley retreating from China.

    Daring Fireball: Tim Cook Appears Alongside Trump in Re-Election Campaign Ad Shot in Mac Pro Plant in Austin – ironic given Apple’s actions in Hong Kong

    How a Zara shirt raises ethical issues in sustainable fashion — Quartzy – (paywall)

    Is TikTok really a national security threat? | Slate – yes it is

    Dynamic Norms Promote Sustainable Behavior, Even if It Is Counternormative – Sparkman & Walton – Association for Psychological Science paper on dynamic messaging

    Mobile: Social – Unpacking what holds the loyalty industry back… from what it could be. | LinkedIn – wider implications around people who’ve been conditioned by mobile ( and other technologies towards internet, multi-channel TV etc) to expect instant gratification in general

    Zuckerberg’s Anti-China Rhetoric Roils Facebook Employees — The Information – Facebook is grappling with its large community of Chinese employees, some of whom are becoming more vocal and critical in internal company forums over what they claim is a bias against mainland China. (paywall)

    Chinese netizens think Mark Zuckerberg betrayed China – The Facebook CEO has been widely admired in China, but his more recent negative comments about the country aren’t going over well | Abacus – why should Zuckerberg care

  • Internet freedom

    Sacha Baron Cohen won an award and made a speech on internet freedom at the Anti-Defamation League awards. He’s a really good orator. Sufficiently good that the likes of Alphabet, Facebook and Twitter must be thankful that he doesn’t have a political office (yet). Check it out, its well worth half an hour of your time.

    It feels like things are coming to a head.

    #wirsindmehr

    The landscape

    China has been preaching cyber-sovereignty (and taking advantage of the laissez faire western platforms for its own dark ends). The parallels between 1930s Germany and the current Han nationalist policies of China’s communist party can’t be overstated.

    The British government is afraid, and has failed to release its own report on whether Russian influence operations shaped UK election outcomes.

    In the US, we have an armed man driving across the country and opening fire in a restaurant to investigate the veracity of a conspiracy theory posted online.

    Baron Cohen outlines his own examples:

    …when Borat was able to get an entire bar in Arizona to sing “Throw the Jew down the well,” it did reveal people’s indifference to anti-Semitism.  When—as Bruno, the gay fashion reporter from Austria—I started kissing a man in a cage fight in Arkansas, nearly starting a riot, it showed the violent potential of homophobia.  And when—disguised as an ultra-woke developer—I proposed building a mosque in one rural community, prompting a resident to proudly admit, “I am racist, against Muslims”—it showed the acceptance of Islamophobia.   

    Sacha Baron Cohen’s keynote speech at the ADL
    The internet’s role

    The internet has come a long way since the Clinton administration heralded its rollout as a sign of great things to come. It has worked its way into our homes, replacing brown goods in the living room and empowering the home computer and games console. From there it has slipped into our pockets and on to our wrists through our cellphones and watches.

    For many people, the internet mediates many of their daily social interactions. It is the channel for popular culture and current affairs. All of which has been curated by algorithms for them. It takes a considerable effort to step out of that.

    I still:

    • Buy my music rather than subscribe to it
    • Pay for a news reader to curate my own online reading
    • Try and limit my reactions on social media to my own curation of content for others, rather than taking in content there

    I work within the media industrial complex. I have a good idea of what’s possible.

    That isn’t to say that there was a golden age where the internet was a haven of enlightened thought and polite debate. If you believe that, you’re wrong. As Baron Cohen eluded to in his keynote:

    Conspiracy theories once confined to the fringe are going mainstream.  It’s as if the Age of Reason—the era of evidential argument—is ending, and now knowledge is delegitimized and scientific consensus is dismissed.  Democracy, which depends on shared truths, is in retreat, and autocracy, which depends on shared lies, is on the march. 

    Sacha Baron Cohen

    Firstly, the move to the fringe had been a relatively recent phenomena. Following his 1968 ‘rivers of blood’ speech, Enoch Powell had a 74 per cent approval rating amongst British people according to a poll done by The Gallup Organisation.

    About the same time, my parents told me about the ‘No Blacks, No Irish, No Dogs’ signs. These were found in many British towns at the same time that hippies were advocating peace and love

    The fringe that Baron Cohen talks about existed in live music venues and concert sold music merchandise for bands like Skrewdriver. I was just that bit too young to see the National Front marches that happened in various cities in the 1970s. Rock Against Racism again was something I just missed out on. The 1980s had the right wing skinhead movement as much more on the fringes. This was complicated by the various tribes

    • ‘Traditional’ skin heads who loved ska, loved their mates and weren’t afraid of a good fight
    • Left wing skin heads who tended to be more of a European thing
    • Anarchist affiliated skin heads, who were similar to anarchist affiliated punks
    • Skin heads who were affiliated with progressive causes such as animal liberation and gay rights

    There were fanzines passed around. Books were given limited private pressings and sold via mail order. A guy I went to college with had a reputation being a ‘weirdo’. Everywhere he went (in US army surplus clothing including a cold war era steel helmet. Everywhere in his wake he left Combat 88 stickers and warned anyone who would listen of the coming race war.

    European games programmers developed a concentration camp manager simulator with a game play mechanism similar to The Sims. This was distributed over bulletin boards and the ‘sneaker net’ – copied on to diskette and shared with other people.

    Stormfront set up a dial-up bulletin board in the US, which then moved on to the nascent web.

    There was hate speech, conspiracy theorists, paedophiles and worse on the internet. At first a certain amount of technical skill, provided a barrier between the mainstream user and the content. Not everyone had a handle on Usenet groups or IRC channels for instance.

    Then as the volume of web sites increased massively there wasn’t an effective way to have these ideas served to you unbidden unless you had a dig around to find forums of likeminded people like Stormfront.

    Stormfront’s founder said

    “provide an alternative news media” and create a virtual community for the fragmented white nationalist movement.

    From hope to hate: how the early internet fed the far right – The Guardian

    Google’s search engine made it a bit easier to find web-based forums for pretty much anything under the sun.

    Baron Cohen isn’t trying to remove all the fringe content from the web. It would be an almost insurmountable battle. It takes the Chinese government a lot of effort. And that’s dealing with:

    • One written language
    • A limited amount of internet companies
    • Absolute control over the country’s internet infrastructure
    • Tens of thousands of censors and engineers working full-time on maintaining a harmonious internet that still has a lot of hateful sentiment under the guise of Han nationalism
    When platforms become publishers

    The first thing that comes through about the the platforms that Baron Cohen discusses:

    • Alphabet (Google, YouTube)
    • Facebook (Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp)
    • Twitter

    All of these platforms (like Yahoo! before it) are afraid of being considered to be publishers. Being a publisher brings a host of obligations that require resources to address. Things like:

    • Editors
    • Respecting intellectual property rights
    • Defamation and slander law liability (outside US)

    All of these things put you inside the remit of often contradicting laws of different countries. So it is in the financial interests of these companies to back ‘extreme free speech’.

    As the popularity of these platforms increased a few things happened:

    • On social platforms, the amount of content available to view increased to a point that it became unmanageable for the average consumer
    • The situation is similar with video platforms
    • On search platforms, providing the best search provided competitive advantage by serving up whatever consumers wanted. If consumers don’t find what they want through your search engine, they may build up a habit with someone else’s service
    • They started to have a large amount of audience knowledge which they parleyed into targeted advertising
    Why algorithms?

    Algorithms are all around you.

    • They amplify easy paths. It’s when you start looking at a shopping site and they suggest other products that it thinks you might be interested in
    • It’s when Google knows that there are cats in a picture when you go looking for cats
    • It’s when you’ve finished Narcos and Netflix suggests that you might like Peppa Pig because parents fail to set up a separate profile for their children and have watched Narcos once the kids are in bed
    • On social it’s more subtle. It sees what you, or people it thinks are like you engage with ad serves up more of it. That way you no longer have to worry about wading through everything your contacts have shared

    The problem is that this creates filter bubbles. And in the filter bubble it reinforces everything it thinks that you want to see. You’re no longer the one alien obsessed guy down the pub, but connected to alien conspiracy nuts just like you.

    However all is not what it seems. Marketers, particularly agency marketers like myself when we get together bemoan the effectiveness of Facebook in particular.

    • Organic reach of a given post has declined massively. Ogilvy did some great research on it five years ago, aggregating data on client accounts of different sizes from around the world.
    • An appreciable amount of the audience for content on Facebook isn’t real. Viewable impressions could be only 60% of the total impressions served. Maybe less.
    • The average view time will be less than 5 seconds
    • In terms of brand building metrics such as memorability and landing messages it terms to be no great shakes
    • It can be great if you have a particular call to action like ‘buy now’

    But it makes it much harder for us to believe fully in the picture that Baron Cohen portrays.

    • Is Facebook (and other social platforms) a horrible place. Yes it can be
    • Do the leadership of these companies have values that are way out of step with the countries that they live in. Absolutely.
    • Are they as powerful as Baron Cohen believes? Again, they can be. But probably not the universal power of evil overlords that the media would have you believe. That’s not about intent, I am sure they’d love the power. Instead, they’re just not that good.
    Lets have a chat about machine learning

    The secret sauce that a lot of these companies are trying to use is something called machine learning. Its the stuff that the media says will steal your job. You might hear the phrase AI or artificial intelligence used interchangeably with it.

    It is good for some specialist things, but not nearly as sophisticated as the media would have you believe. Its no good in tasks that have a degree of uncertainty or ambiguity. Its not perfect at making judgement calls – just look at your email account’s spam email filter.

    This is the technology that people expect to make calls about the kind of ethical issues Baron Cohen discusses – its not going to happen any time soon.

    It’s not all about the internet

    In Baron Cohen’s own words:

    Zuckerberg says that “people should decide what is credible, not tech companies.”  But at a time when two-thirds of millennials say they haven’t even heard of Auschwitz, how are they supposed to know what’s “credible?”  How are they supposed to know that the lie is a lie?

    Baron Cohen’s point is that when truth and alt facts are put together with equal weighting, the audience finds it hard to differentiate or retain the content. That lack of knowledge or mass ignorance isn’t solely a failure of technology. Collectively society has failed to make everyone air of shared objective truths.

    Solutions?

    Baron Cohen talks about freedom of speech not being equal to freedom of reach. The reality is that social content typically reaches 1% of followers. The exception is if the content becomes popular with that 1%. It is not algorithms on their own.

    He also talks about regulating platforms in a more similar way to newspapers or TV stations. In truth social media is closer to public access television in the US around about the time of the 1984 Cable Communications Act. All be it, with advertising and reach that CNN could only dream of.

    Slowing down the posting of content, Baron Cohen talks of this as a possible solution. It will certainly remove some of the heat. It’s not certain if he wants this to included a review of every post prior to publication. If so, that will require a lot of people to augment a lot of machine learning.

    If a service becomes less agile, it would also leave the space open for new services to pop up – creating Mark Zuckerberg’s worst nightmare. Chinese companies stealing his market share and money that should go into Facebook’s coffers.

    Not that simple

    Let’s talk about shared truths for a bit. We can all agree on scientific truths such as the earth going around the sun, Newtonian physics and even quantum physics. Things start to come apart when one considers real world events. The Chinese will have a very different view to people in the west.

    Imagine for a moment if China through the Hong Kong government could deprive the pro-democracy protestors of their ability to organise online? The Chinese government narrative would be something along the lines of:

    • They’re splittists
    • Spreading hate and violence against innocent Chinese
    • Racists against their own people

    Or what happens to Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny when he was recently interviewed by the Financial Times. Then there is the issue of what nation states do to each other

    …the Kremlin’s success was less in manipulating the west than creating the perception it was able to do so. “You can spend $500,000 on Facebook ads and for several years the whole establishment of a huge western country will go nuts about interference, even though its real effect is risible. The investments are minimal but they give you front pages and power.

    Alexei Navalny: ‘Why don’t they come and sit in jail with me?’ | Financial Times 

    Most of the world would probably beg to differ, but once we go down the road of regulation it will open up new problems and dilemmas. Regulation wouldn’t save the Rohinga from the counter insurgency (COIN) operations of the Myanmar government.

    The problem needs to start with people. We’re at our technologically most advanced and yet we seem to be living in the dark ages. A secondary issue might be the technological devices that we use to access the internet. Baron Cohen talks about the need to slow down the posting of content. This would be to reduce the frenzy of views and instant venting of pure emotion.

    Part of that is down to the platforms, but part of it might be device design. I have been giving some thought to that last point. More in it another time.

     

  • Car into a smartphone + more

    Horace Dediu on the transformation of the car into a smartphone. Turning a car into a smartphone isn’t a technology revolution that particularly excites me. I prefer things that can kill me to be using highly reliable real time operating systems with no real time network connectivity – if they have to run software at all. Former Thai finance minister Suchart Jaovisidha who was locked inside his BMW limousine by its onboard computer is a lesson to us all.

    China Mobile 5G launch video is absolutely terrifying and probably the best advert for LTE that I’ve ever seen.

    China Mobile Hotspot

    Consumer use case doesn’t seem to be that high on their priority. So there’s no downloading of Netflix style TV in a flash.

    So what is the killer app? It isn’t autonomous cars, or life saving tele-medicine. But dystopian omnipresent Chinese security. There’s no way I’d be buying a Huawei 5G handset after watching this. It has extra resonance with the current ‘Be Water’ protests going down in Hong Kong. More wireless related posts here.

    I am guessing that China Mobile won’t be handing out copies of Shoshana Zuboff’s The Age of Surveillance Capitalism. Here some of the books main topics are discussed by Shoshana Zuboff, Carole Cadwalladr, Paul Hilder and Shahmir Sanni.

    VCCP’s first campaign for Cathay Pacific is interesting. It has moved away from the professional business traveller to focus on the leisure travel market. This might be a bet on where the Hong Kong economy is going and a ploy to try and tap into the burgeoning Chinese luxury travel market. I suspect that a good deal of it is Cathay Pacific not being price and service competitive with the likes of Oatar Airways on premium long haul flights.

    For me this was a generic ad highlighting Cathay’s overall service rather than the business class experience. which is wedged in awkwardly on the end.

    Finally, Robin Sloan’s short story The Sleep Consultant | The Meteor – feels like as if William Gibson started writing for Monocle.

  • Apple souled out to China

    Apple designed in California and sold in China. Is it now Apple souled out to China? Apple is often cited as being a technology brand with a purpose and profiitable. It is unique in mobile phones, computers, tablets and set top boxes. It has a throw back model to the pre-Windows age of computing. It is vertically integrated.

    Quisling

    They make key software for their computer. They make the hardware. And in the case of every device except the Mac, they make the key components. It does all this without owning the means of production.

    Apple doesn’t own its factories. It owns some of the machines in assembly plants. But if a legal dispute broke out, it would struggle to get those machines out of a partner factory. It’s production volumes are so vast; this puts a further constraint on partner choice. Apple’s electronic components are made around the world:

    • Germany
    • Japan
    • Korea
    • Taiwan
    • China
    • USA

    The device chassis, battery and assembly happens in China.

    In software, Apple is reliant on two types of partners:

    • The open source community. iOS, macOS, watchOS and tvOS are all built on open source software. Apple takes them building blocks and innovates on top of them
    • The Apple developer community. Apple’s computers are nothing without software. On the iPhone about half the game developers are China based

    The Apple difference

    Their differentiator for the first thirty years or so was computing for non-technologists. Over time this has been articulated as:

    • Computing for the rest of us. Computers with expert product design that made them friendly in consumer eyes. This was to try and portray computing as an appliance or piece of consumer electronics. Brands as diverse as Sony and Cuisinart cited as inspiration. Critics of the Mac interpreted this focus on product design to call it a toy. They didn’t think that it represented ‘serious’ computing
    https://youtu.be/C8jSzLAJn6k
    • Think different. Apple needed to keep a fraying customer base together. They came up with the brand anthem that highlighted the diverse range of users. This ranged from technologists and scientists to artists and creatives

    https://youtu.be/cFEarBzelBs

    • It just works. It just works was initially used as a way to describe the intuitive Mac interface. My key attraction to the Mac was discovering thoughtful design at every aspect of the software. Even now, once you learn a keyboard short cut it works consistently in all software. In contrast, Ctrl + Q on Windows is inconsistent between some Microsoft apps

    Apple extended this process from the iMac onwards, making it easier to:

    • Get online. The modem was in the iMac’s case. You plugged your phone line into the computer. You plugged the computer in and followed the software instructions. Apple even carefully curated high quality dial-up ISPs (internet service providers)
    • Set your email up
    • Get your address book on to your phone – something that became even easier with the iPhone
    • Get your music on to your phone or iPod

    https://youtu.be/rnzCnPSQM7c

    The pivot to privacy started back in 2003 with the launch of FileVault. It makes it easy to encrypt a hard drive partition, CD ROM or USB key. This was to help the Mac find acceptability within business. It also benefited consumers. Eight years later Apple launches the iMessage service which encrypts text, image and video messages by default. It also launched FaceTime video calling with encryption. Two years later, Apple builds Secure Enclave into the iPhone; encrypting the entire device. Over time, the technology moved from being business friendly, to consumer differentiator. It gave Apple clear separation from Google and Facebook. Privacy fitted into a Cook narrative about a company that promoted social good. This was part of the move to a post-Jobs Apple. One that thought social purpose was more than addressing the education market with high quality products. Tim Cook and Apple stood up for American civil rights and progressive ideals.

    Concepts that in retrospect look rather naive when going into China.

    Compromises in China

    Apple has already given over control and cryptographic keys of its services in China. Apple users in China do not enjoy the kind of privacy and security protections of users elsewhere. Apple has not gone to the mats on behalf of users. Apple’s service offering has been severely restricted. Apple’s book offering had to be withdrawn. The app store is without whole categories of applications. Apple Music has a much reduced catalogue due to censorship. Check out Six times Apple gave in to China | Abacus for more information.

    Compromises to China

    The protests in Hong Kong shone a light on corporate kowtowing that has been going on for years. HKMap Live is similar to map / data mashups done for other protest movements. It plotted crowd sourced reports of police on a map.

    The data offered is not granular in nature. It might give you a pointer if you commute is going to pop-up in the middle of tear gas and baton rounds.

    This means that Tim Cook was gullible, or compromised when he made the following false statement about HKMap.live

    “…we received credible information, from the Hong Kong Cybersecurity and Technology Crime Bureau, as well as from users in Hong Kong, that the app was being used maliciously to target individual officers for violence and to victimize individuals and property where no police are present.”

    Tim Cook internal memo to staff

    The problem is no one has come out and said in public what these instances were. Apple hasn’t provided any supporting evidence. One could guess that Apple’s calculus was that people can still use Safari to access the HKMap.live site.

    But this comes on the back of Apple removing the Taiwan emoji from all iPhones using Chinese language input. That affects:

    • Chinese
    • Hong Kongers
    • Macau residents

    Tim Cook has gone from progressive corporate citizen to Tolkein’s Gríma (Wormtongue). So what’s Apple’s pay-off?

    Apple’s prospects in China

    You could argue that Apple’s best days are behind it in China. WeChat has effectively built a smartphone OS inside its application. This has meant that the iPhone’s differientators and real world performance compared to Android are moot.

    • Domestic manufacturers are squeezing Apple and Samsung out of the market
    • Tablets are less relevant due to Chinese preference for large smartphones.
    • Apple TV is crowded out of the market by Tencent content deals.
    • The Mac is a niche product that Apple is likely to maintain

    In the face of a changing political environment and rising Han nationalism; Apple is in decline. It’s a question of how fast, which means that Apple feels obliged to placate a mercurial Chinese state.

    Apple’s prospects on Capitol Hill

    Big technology companies under the magnifying glass by lawmakers. Apple doesn’t have the issues that Facebook has. But it did develop most of the tax avoidance measures now used by Facebook, Google and Amazon. And the one thing both Republicans and Democrats can agree on is that China is a bad actor that needs to be confronted. Apple sits nice at the intersection of these two issues. Tim Cook took a high risk gamble positioning Apple in political crosshairs – in the run up to an election. I guess like Mark Zuckerberg, Tim Cook is hoping Elizabeth Warren doesn’t get in.

    This also offers other technology companies a unique proposition. Their lobbyists could throw Apple under the regulatory bus for commercial advantage. Amazon’s lobbyists managed to blunt the threat of Apple Books to the Kindle book store. Do you think they or Facebook won’t offer Apple up as the sacrificial lamb?

    Thinking about trade specifically. Apple has already moved up to a third of iPhone assembly outside China due to the US | China trade difficulties. This leaves the rest of its products under threat:

    • From Chinese government action in the supply chain
    • From US government action against the supply chain

    If you’re an American politician, Apple looks like a corporate Quisling. On the right wing, it acquiesces to Chinese government pressure, yet won’t help the FBI. On the left, it avoids its tax responsibility and kowtows to an authoritarian regime that wants to displace America.

    Apple’s prospects with western consumers

    One can understand why Apple has thought it could get away with Chinese practices. It was something that other companies do:

    • Nike
    • Tiffany
    • Dolce & Gabbana
    • Starbucks
    • Mercedes-Benz
    • Marriott
    • Cathay Pacific
    • Muji
    • Versace
    • Dolce & Gabbana
    • United Airlines
    • Swarovski
    • Gap
    • Google

    Apple hasn’t had significant pushback or scrutiny of its Chinese practices. Unfortunately, Chinese government hubris, 愤青 (fenqing) and the NBA has brought Apple into sharp focus.

    The HKmap.live app is just the tip of a China iceberg:

    • It has handed over all the cryptographic keys for iCloud services in China to the government
    • iCloud hosting in China has been handed over to a Chinese state-owned company
    • Apple has censored books and music on behalf of the Chinese government
    • Apple has got rid of whole categories of apps like VPNs at the request of the Chinese Communist Party
    • It has pulled the Taiwan flag emoji from many devices
    • It’s handing over data to Tencent that bundles IP addresses with URLs. Apple claims its technique protects privacy, unlikely from the Chinese government technologists. Given a wide enough data sets and enhanced interrogation, you can whittle it down
    • Apple has requested that content providers on its new TV service censor themselves – not to offend the feelings of 1.4 billion Chinese people. Guessing South Park won’t be making content for Apple TV+

    This makes Apple look like a hypocrite.

    The San Bernardino lawsuit looks less like a stand for privacy a la Edward Snowden. Instead Apple looks like it prioritises the interests of the Chinese government over the US.

    There is a breach of trust for some Apple customers. Can you now trust Apple in other areas such as privacy?

    • How much of a threat would China have to make in order for Apple to hand over the keys to mail and messaging globally?
    • Or maybe just countries along the Belt & Road, which would include the European Union

    What would China do?

    • Banning the sale of iPhones?
    • Banning Apple Watches in China?
    • Ban the sale of AirPods?
    • Spiking Mac sales?

    Access to Apple’s global data would be an intelligence trove of kompromat. China wouldn’t be able to resist.

    If you’re an Apple customer, you know Apple just isn’t cool. The trust in Apple’s privacy USP is blown. You can’t be sure what Apple won’t do to make China or other governments happy.

    Western consumers are waking up to Apple having shattered an unwritten moral covenant, set by its progressive actions.

    In trying to avoid hurting the feelings of 1.4 billion Chinese people, Apple has burnt the trust of everyone else. And most of those 1.4 billion Chinese people Apple avoids offending won’t buy an Apple product. Which doesn’t look that great when you’re a shareholder.

    Apple and developers

    Prominent developers like Maciej Cegłowski (founder of pinboard.in) have been active in supporting Hong Kong protestors. It has put Silicon Valley developers on the opposite side to Apple. Cook will realise that there will be Apple insiders who sympathise with the Hong Kong protest movement.

    Taking the morality out of the equation for the moment, if you’re an Apple developer or employee; you know Apple won’t have your back. Why should you help them? Why would you help facilitate them use your open source code to build their products?

    More information

    Apple’s China Nightmare Just Got Even Worse | Forbes

    Apple Told Some Apple TV+ Show Developers Not To Anger China | Buzzfeed News

    How safe is Apple’s Safe Browsing? – A Few Thoughts on Cryptographic Engineering

    Apple insists it’s totally not doing that thing it wasn’t accused of: We’re not handing over Safari URLs to Tencent – just people’s IP addresses • The Register

    Apple’s decision to pull an app used by Hong Kong protestors shows how much it needs China – Vox 

    Daring Fireball: Tim Cook’s Company-Wide Memo on HKmap.live Doesn’t Add Up

    Apple in eye of China-Hong Kong storm | Digital | Campaign Asia

    Apple ditches Hong Kong maps app as China expands ‘loyalty test’ – Nikkei Asian Review

    Hong Kong Is the Latest Tripwire for Tech Firms in China | WIRED

    Chinese online retailers slash iPhone prices for second time this year | Reuters

    Apple’s spectacular $5 billion China black hole | Techinasia

    Apple’s Sales Drop in China Means $5 Billion in Lost Revenue – Bloomberg

    Apple in China Report 2017: A Deep Dive Into Apple’s China Troubles – China Channel

    Apple Starts Selling their HomePod in China, a Very Tough Market owned by Chinese Vendors – Patently Apple

    China retailers slash iPhone prices after Apple sales warning | Reuters

    Apple China warning: US businesses could lose out – CNN

    Apple Faces `Informal Boycott’ From China Consumers, BAML Says – Bloomberg

    Apple’s China Problem : 12 Reasons – Counterpoint Research

    Chinese Smartphone makers took advantage of Apple’s Out-of-Touch Pricing on iPhones & now Apple’s Supply Chain is Worried – Patently Apple

    Apple Warning: Seven Charts That Show the Pressure on China’s Consumers – WSJ

    Chinese Values Are Changing America – The Atlantic – China is transforming the US rather than the other way around