“This Message Sent Around The World”

At 7:00 p.m. on August 20, 1911, a commercial telegram was sent by the telegraph operator at the Times, working on the seventeenth level of the newspaper’s headquarters in Times Square. The message made a westward journey from New York, and shortly afterwards, the very same operator received his transmitted message back, having arrived back to him eastwards.

The New York Times had wanted to find out how long a commercial telegram would take to travel around the world, so they tried it!

The message simply said “This message sent around the world.”   And it did indeed go around the world … in just sixteen and a half minutes!

Not bad, but that was a commercial telegram and therefore it wasn’t sent with all the priority that could potentially be mustered.
That honour went to President Roosevelt years before back in 1903 on July 4^th (Independence Day) when his absolutely-top-priority message travelled around the world in just nine and a half minutes.
By way of comparison, that’s faster than it’d take to parcel-up your message, instruct a driver, team-up (& feed) some horses and get a mail-coach out of the yard and onto the road!

Talking of horses, the Pony Express became immediately obsolete and ceased trading just two days after the first trans-continental telegraph was sent many years earlier, during the American Civil war. Of course, sending a telegram in those early days was wildly expensive (a relatively short-distance telegram could likely cost $100 for a modern Twitter-equivalent message.

With the rate of pace of change these days, it’s easy to forget that technological progress even 150 years ago was still pretty awesome. For example, the 98-letter message sent from Queen Victoria to the US President Buchanan (in Pennsylvania, US) was very difficult to decipher and took 16 hours to send. It was nevertheless revolutionary to send electronic communications across vast oceans in 1858 and so the novelty of her message meant it was followed by a hundred-gun salute, street-parades, church-bell ringing and all other sorts of other excitement across the land.

Perhaps take a moment a think about that next time you send an encrypted video-message via WhatsApp to a friend back home whilst you’re abroad on your holidays!

Following the news that US Federal regulators have sued Amazon, alleging that people have been “tricked” into buying hard-to-cancel Prime memberships, we take a closer look at ‘inertia selling’.

What Happened With Amazon Prime Subscriptions? 

Back at the end of June, the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced that it was taking action against Amazon.com Inc, for “enrolling consumers in Amazon Prime without consent and sabotaging their attempts to cancel”. The FTC, which alleged that Amazon had been involved in this kind of inertia selling for years, went so far to say in its complaint that Amazon had been using “manipulative, coercive, or deceptive user-interface designs” which it describes as “dark patterns,” designed to “trick consumers into enrolling in automatically renewing Prime subscriptions.” 

The FTC Chair Lina M. Khan, said in the complaint: “These manipulative tactics harm consumers and law-abiding businesses alike.” 

Denial From Amazon

Amazon issued a statement in response, denying the TFC’s allegations, saying they were “false on the facts and the law” and that “The truth is that customers love Prime, and by design we make it clear and simple for customers to both sign up for or cancel their Prime membership.” 

Inertia Selling 

‘Inertia selling’ is a controversial sales technique which usually applies to a company sending unsolicited goods or services (or a subscription for services) to individuals with the expectation that they will buy or continue to buy the items. The idea is that the inertia of the consumer (i.e., the natural tendency of consumers to avoid taking action and stick with the default option) will mean that they either keep and pay for the item or to continue a subscription service, often without fully understanding the terms and conditions involved.

As the name suggests, this approach relies on the consumer’s inertia to drive sales, rather than obtaining explicit consent or agreement for the transaction.

Making Things Too Difficult 

In the recent complaint against Amazon by the FTC, it was alleged that making the option to purchase items on Amazon without subscribing to Prime was difficult for consumers to locate by not being clear in the transaction that in choosing that option consumers were also agreeing to join Prime for a recurring subscription. Also, the FTC alleged that when consumers tried to cancel Prime membership, they were faced with multiple steps, first having to locate the cancellation flow, and then being redirected to multiple pages that presented several offers to continue the subscription at a discounted price, turn off the auto-renew feature, or to decide not to cancel. The FTC said that only after clicking through these pages could consumers finally cancel the service. In other words, its alleged that consumers may have been tricked into consent in the first place and then the sheer complication of cancellation made consumers give up and opt for keeping the service.

Is It Illegal? 

Although these “dark patterns” (as described by the FTC) sound as though they must be illegal, it’s not quite as clear cut. Inertia selling is generally considered to be an unfair commercial practice under UK law, and it can be illegal. For example, UK consumer protection legislation like the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, is designed to prevent unfair or deceptive practices, including inertia selling. These laws require that businesses provide consumers with clear, truthful information so they can make informed choices.

If a consumer in the UK receives unsolicited goods or services, they generally are under no legal obligation to pay for them. The law typically considers these unsolicited items to be gifts, and the consumer may not be required to return them. Also, companies must not demand payment for items that were not explicitly ordered as doing so could be considered an unfair commercial practice and may result in legal consequences.

However, for the consumer, it’s essential to carefully read the terms and conditions of any contract or agreement entered into, as there can be instances where the business has a legal basis for providing additional goods or services and charging for them. It appears, therefore, these situations can sometimes be nuanced.

Change Is Coming 

Although some areas of these practices may be nuanced, in April in the UK, the government announced that a new Bill will give the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) new powers to clamp down on “subscription traps.” The changes will also require businesses to give consumers clearer information before they enter a subscription contract, issue a reminder when (for example) a free trial or low-cost introductory offer is coming to an end, and a reminder before a contract auto-renews onto a new term, and give consumers a straightforward way to exit a subscription contract.

In March this year, in the US, the FTC proposed a “click to cancel” provision requiring sellers to make it as easy for consumers to cancel their enrolment as it was to sign up. This change looks likely to help tackle hard-to-stop free trials, and auto-renewals (subscription traps).

In the EU, The CPC Network (coordinated by the European Commission) recently asked Mastercard, VISA and American Express to introduce a series of changes in their rules to ensure that traders provide clear information to consumers on recurrent payments before they enter into a subscription.

Others 

Inertia selling is not new but arguably, with the kind of subscription economy we now have, it may be easier for companies to use those practices. It’s worth noting that it’s not just Amazon that allegations of inertia selling of subscriptions have been made about. Other examples (and there are many more than these) include:

– Way back in 2013, when Adobe transitioned to its Creative Cloud subscription service, it received criticism about its subscription-only model and its cancellation policies.

– In 2015, Sky faced an Ofcom investigation for allegedly making it difficult for customers to cancel, e.g. cancellation requests not being “verified” without a call by the customer.

– In 2019, a Guardian newspaper report highlighted many companies which let customers sign up online but required a phone call to leave, e.g. Weight Watchers (WW), Ocado Smart Pass, British Gas Homecare, Which?, and others. The point was that requiring cancellation via phone call could be something that consumers forget.

– In 2020, the CMA took action against Roland for not making it sufficiently easy for online customers to cancel their digital piano rental agreements.

– Three, Vodafone, and EE all came under scrutiny from the CMA in the UK for the terms of their mobile phone contracts, some of which allegedly made it difficult for customers to switch providers or cancel their services.

– As in the US, gym chains in the UK have faced scrutiny for their cancellation policies. The CMA has now taken steps to ensure that gyms are transparent about their terms and conditions.

– In 2021, while the primary concerns with Viagogo (the multinational ticket exchange and ticket resale brand) surrounded ticket reselling, some consumers also complained about subscriptions that were difficult to cancel. This led to investigations and enforcement action by the CMA.

– Last year, as part of its investigation into the online console video gaming sector, the CMA identified concerns about some features of Microsoft’s auto-renewing subscriptions. For example, the CMA was particularly concerned about whether it was clear upfront that contracts would automatically renew, how easy it was to turn off automatic renewal, and whether people may not have realised they were still paying for services they no longer used.

What Does This Mean For Your Business? 

As we have moved more into becoming a subscription society, regulating all the practices has become more complicated. One of the chief concerns is how to protect consumers from business practices that essentially make the barriers to entry of a subscription contact incredibly low (or virtually invisible) and the barriers to exit extremely high through means such as excessive complication – two key characteristics of inertia selling.

In the US, UK, and EU matters such as hard-to-stop free trials, auto-renewals (subscription traps), and making consumers work hard to cancel are all being addressed with new proposed laws and new powers being given to regulators. For businesses offering subscriptions and wanting to avoid penalties, this will mean a review of their subscription process paying particular attention to clarity and options in sign-up and providing an easy way to cancel (with enough reminders along the way). Although Amazon is the latest to come under the regulatory spotlight it is by no means the only company to have been warned or had action taken against it by regulators over how subscriptions are sold, handled, renewed, or cancelled.

Although more legislation is in the pipeline and scrutiny more intense than ever, there is still some way to go in successfully tackling the many practices and nuances related to inertia selling. In the meantime, in the UK, customers who believe they have been the victim of inertia selling can report the practice to the CMA or their local Trading Standards office for further investigation.

A free-standing AI road safety camera system deployed in Cornwall caught 300 drivers in the first three days.

How It Works 

The camera system, on the A30 near Launceston, implemented by road safety tech firm Acusensus in partnership with Vision Zero South West, records clear images of passing vehicles (and of the driver) thanks to a series of cameras with high shutter speeds, an infra-red flash and a lensing and filtering system.

AI Reviews And Sorts Images 

The AI aspect of the system is used to quickly review each image (the cameras are monitoring the road continuousiy) and to identify images which could contain evidence of an offence. The (anonymised) images identified as containing offences are then sent to sent for review by a person to confirm whether an offence has actually occurred.

Catching Distracted Drivers 

The system (which has also been trialled recently by Hampshire Constabulary and Thames Valley Police) was deployed in Cornwall as part of the ‘Heads Up’ solution, i.e. using AI cameras to identify distracted drivers and those not wearing a seatbelt. This is because the AI camera’s are able to capture clear images of the driver and what they are doing, such as using a phone while driving.

Two Cameras Focused On Seatbelt & Mobile Phone 

The AI system uses two cameras to specifically capture suspected distraction and seatbelt offences. The first camera is set at a shallow angle to identify mobile phone use to the ear, and to see is the seatbelt is across the body or hanging down behind the driver.

The second camera uses a steep view to capture visibility of mobile phone use low down, and to detect behaviour like texting near the steering wheel or door. The second camera also provides evidence of seatbelt use by being able to check the presence of the lap portion of the belt, and to confirm that the seatbelt is clipped into the buckle.

Using this camera setup, in the first three days of being in operation in Cornwall, the new AI camera system detected 117 mobile phone and 180 seat belt offences.

Can Be Moved 

The fact that the new AI camera system is free standing (mounted on a van) means it can be easily moved and can be deployed at other locations on some of the region’s most used roads.

AI Improving Road Safety 

Geoff Collins, UK General Manager for Acusensus, said: “The ‘Heads Up’ system is a perfect example for how AI technology can be used to improve road safety. Distracted drivers are a significant hazard for everyone, whilst those not wearing a seatbelt are far more likely to be killed in a collision – the Acusensus technology can help to change behaviours, reducing the casualty toll on our roads.”

Adrian Leisk, Head of Road Safety for Devon & Cornwall Police, said: “We are employing this new technology to send a clear message to anyone who continues to use their phone behind the wheel – you will get caught.” 

“Whether it’s by the Acusensus cameras, a passing officer or on video footage submitted through Op Snap, the result will be the same and you will end up with a hefty fine and six penalty points – which could be enough to cost some drivers their license and livelihood.” 

What Does This Mean For Your Business? 

In the UK, it’s been illegal to use a mobile phone while driving since 2003 but many motorists still do it, representing a major distraction risk, and causing many accidents and fatalities. It’s also been a legal requirement to wear a seatbelt while driving since 1983 but it seems that many motorists still fail to do so. Finally, the mobile AI camera system has provided UK police with a means to collect reliable evidence for these offences because the camera system can actually see into the car and has two cameras specifically focused on the seatbelt and the driver’s lap areas – something not possible before with conventional cameras. The AI aspect of the system also means that cameras can run continuously and the image of each car can be quickly processed and sorted, which is another aspect that would not have been possible with conventional camera systems.

The fact that the camera system is free standing and operated from a van is also a major advantage as it can be moved and used quickly on trouble-spots anywhere in the country and so motorists won’t simply be able to learn where cameras are (as they do with fixed speed cameras). This could, therefore, be an example of AI saving lives and making the roads safer by changing driver behaviour. Furthermore, it could provide job and investment opportunities in a growing market for AI based surveillance technology, as it has for companies like Acusensus (i.e. the makers of the cameras).

For those who are worried that AI is ‘taking over’ and being trusted fully with important decisions (e.g. whether a driver gets points on their licence, thereby affecting their livelihood), the Acusensus system used by the Police in Cornwall uses human checks for each image flagged as showing a potential offence, thereby providing a failsafe stage. Judging by the success in Cornwall and in other trials, we may well see more specialised AI camera systems, focused on tackling specific problems, deployed in the near future.

Apple has issued a warning to iPhone users about the dangers of practices like charging a phone under a blanket or pillow at night, risking overheating and posing a fire risk.

Danger From Prolonged Heat Exposure 

In a wide ranging post on the iPhone user-guide section of Apple’s website, the company warns about the dangers of “prolonged heat exposure” in relation to skin contact with an iPhone, its adapter, or wireless charger. For example, Apple says that “sustained contact with warm surfaces for long periods of time may cause discomfort or injury” and ask users to “use common sense to avoid situations where your skin is in contact with a device, its power adapter, or a wireless charger when it’s operating or connected to a power source for long periods of time”. 

Don’t Sleep On Your Phone 

One specific example of a high-risk heat exposure situation given by Apple is “don’t sleep on a device, power adapter, or wireless charger, or place them under a blanket, pillow, or your body, when it’s connected to a power source. Keep your iPhone, the power adapter, and any wireless charger in a well-ventilated area when in use or charging.” 

Also, Apple warns iPhone users to “Avoid prolonged skin contact with the charging cable and connector when the charging cable is connected to a power source because it may cause discomfort or injury,” saying that “Sleeping or sitting on the charging cable or connector should be avoided.” 

What Could Happen? 

There have been many reports over the years of mobile phone-related accidents and incidents caused by overheating. For example, back in 2016, Samsung announced an (informal) recall of its Galaxy Note 7 phones following the discovery of a manufacturing defect in batteries which caused some phones to generate excessive heat and combust. There have also been high profile examples of phone batteries/chargers catching fire on aircraft, e.g. in January when a phone power-bank aboard an aircraft about to fly from Taoyuan International Airport spontaneously ignited. The fire filled the cabin with smoke, caused panic, there were 2 (minor) injuries, plus all 189 passengers and crew had to be to be evacuated.

Apple Examples 

As for Apple devices specifically, there are many anecdotal and isolated incidents on the Internet where Apple iPhones reportedly caught fire due to issues with the battery or charger. A couple of examples which relate to overheating caused by/when covering the phone/charger include:

– In 2017, a woman in Tuscon, Arizona reported that her iPhone 7 Plus exploded due to battery issues. The incident drew attention when she shared images of her burnt phone on social media.

– In 2019, a young girl (an 11-year-old) in California reported that her iPhone 6 caught fire while she was lying on the bed and burned holes through her blanket. It was reported that after the incident, the girl said she didn’t plan to sleep with her phone next to her in future and suggested that the phone may have caught fire after overheating.

– In January this year, a family in Cincinatti posted photos and video captured by security cameras which allegedly showed an old iPhone 4 in their possession catching fire and exploding while charging.

Lithium-Ion Batteries 

Although (as highlighted by Apple’s warning on its website whereby adapters and wireless chargers can be the source of fires) it’s long been known that Lithium-ion (Li-ion) phone batteries can pose a risk of overheating under certain circumstances. For example, known causes of overheating and fire in Li-ion batteries include excessive charging, using high current-drawing apps, exposure to high temperatures, using inferior quality (third party) chargers, old or degraded batteries, physical damage, software bugs, poor battery design or manufacturing, plus even exposure to direct sunlight.

What Does This Mean For Your Business? 

For mobile manufacturers like Apple and others, identifying known risks to users is important for safety and compliance and the announcement and information on their website covers a wide range of potential risk areas.

However, the main point for users to remember in relation to covering phones while they’re charging (e.g. with pillows or bedcovers) or even leaving them on the bed, is that this should be avoided because an iPhone, its power adapter, and any wireless charger need to be used in a well-ventilated area when in use or charging.

There have been many stories circulating of phones overheating and the potential dangers of lithium-ion batteries in certain circumstances are widely known by most people, so it’s more a case of users taking (as Apple suggests) a common-sense approach, if possible, to minimise risks. That said, many people charge their phones overnight, and many have them on or near the bed when they fall asleep and there’s an argument that mobile phone manufacturers need to make batteries and charging safer as well as focusing on matters like the circular economy and the right to repair (and replace their own batteries).

Although other battery designs are being tested (e.g. stacked, graphene, solid state, and more) heat still appears to be the problem and until a battery design that is more efficient, effective, greener, affordable and safer can be introduced at scale, mobile phone users need to take responsibility and be aware of how best to mitigate the risks of overheating, thereby ensuring their own safety and the safety of others around them.

A new VentureBeat survey has revealed that 70 per cent of companies are experimenting with generative AI.

Most Experimenting and Some Implementing 

The (ongoing) survey which was started ahead of the tech news and events company’s recently concluded VB Transform 2023 Conference in San Francisco, gathered the opinions of global executives in data, IT, AI, security, and marketing.

The results revealed that more than half (54.6 per cent) of organisations are experimenting with generative AI, with 18.2 per cent already implementing it into their operations. That said, only a relatively small percentage (18.2 per cent) expect to spend more on the technology in the year ahead.

A Third Not Deploying Gen AI 

One perhaps surprising (for those within tech) statistic from the VentureBeat survey is that quite a substantial proportion of respondents (32 per cent) said they weren’t deploying gen AI for other use cases, or not using it at all yet.

More Than A Quarter In The UK Have Used Gen AI 

The general popularity of generative AI is highlighted by a recent Deloitte survey which showed that more than a quarter of UK adults have used gen AI tools like chatbots, while 4 million people have used it for work.

Popular Among Younger People

Deloitte’s figures also show that more than a quarter (26 per cent) of 16-to-75 year-olds have used a generative AI tool (13 million people) with one in 10 of those respondents using it at least once a day.

Adoption Rate of Gen AI Higher Than Smart Speakers 

The Deloitte survey also highlights how the rate of adoption of generative AI exceeds that of voice-assisted speakers like Amazon’s Alexa. For example, it took five years for voice-assisted speakers to achieve the same adoption levels compared to generative AI’s adoption which really began in earnest last November with ChatGPT’s introduction.

How Are Companies Experimenting With AI? 

Returning to the VentureBeat survey, unsurprisingly, it shows that most companies currently use AI for tasks like chat and messaging (46 per cent) as well as content creation (32 per cent), e.g. ChatGPT.

A Spending Mismatch 

However, the fact is that many companies are experimenting, yet few can envisage spending more on AI tools in the year ahead which therefore reveals a mismatch that could challenge implementation of AI. VentureBeat has suggested that possible reasons for this include constrained company budgets and a lack of budget prioritisation for generative AI.

A Cautious Approach 

It is thought that an apparently cautious approach to generative AI adoption by businesses, highlighted by the VentureBeat survey, may be down to reasons like:

– A shortage of talent and/or resources for generative AI (36.4 per cent).

– Insufficient support from leaders or stakeholders (18.2 per cent).

– Being overwhelmed by too many options and possible uses – not sure how best to deploy the new technology.

– The rapid pace of change in the generative AI meaning that some prefer to wait rather than commit now.

What Does This Mean For Your Business? 

Although revolutionary, generative AI is a new technology to businesses and, as the surveys show, while many people have tried it and businesses are using it, there are some challenges to its wider adoption and implementation. For example, the novelty and an uncertainty about how best to use it (with the breadth of possibilities), an AI skills gap / talent shortage in the market, a lack of budget for it, and its stratospheric growth rate (prompting caution or waiting for new and better versions or tools than can be tailored to their needs) are all to be overcome to bring about wider adoption by businesses.

These challenges may also mean that generative AI vendors in the marketplace at the moment need to make very clear, compelling, targeted usage-cases to the sectors and problem areas for prospective clients in order to convince them to take plunge. The rapid growth of generative AI is continuing with a wide variety of text, image, voice tools being released and with the big tech companies all releasing their own versions (e.g. Microsoft’s Copilot and Google’s Bard) so we’re still very much in the early stages of generative AI’s growth with a great deal of rapid change to come.

A new partnership between Octopus energy and sustainable housebuilder Verto aims to develop new homes across two south-west sites that will have no energy bills because all their energy and heating will come from with solar, battery and heat pumps.

Ground-Breaking ‘Zero Bills’ Proposition

Octopus says the 70 new homes built across two sites in Cornwall and Exeter are part of its “ground-breaking ‘Zero Bills’ proposition to all housing developers, enabling more new homeowners to make energy bills a thing of the past”.

How? 

The ‘Zero Bills’ homes will be made achievable by having them fully kitted out with green energy technology including solar panels, home batteries and heat pumps. At the back end, Octopus’ proprietary technology platform, Kraken, will connect to the clean energy devices and optimise their energy usage to deliver a zero bill.

Octopus says this system will mean the new homes will have no energy bills for at least five years, guaranteed.

600 Other Homes Now Accredited & 1200 Submitted For Assessment 

A previous successful ‘Zero Bills’ pilot with ilke Homes in Essex has meant that Octopus Energy has accredited almost 600 homes (affordable, shared-ownership, private, and rented) through contracts with other developers. Also, 80 more developers have started their accreditation process with Octopus and more than 1200 homes have been submitted for assessment.

Make Energy Bills And Home Emissions A Thing Of The Past 

Michael Cottrell, Zero Bills Homes Director at Octopus Energy, said of the new developments: “We’re on a mission to make ‘Zero Bills’ the new standard for homes. By partnering with developers like Verto, we’re scaling this efficient green technology to homes everywhere while driving down costs for consumers.”  Mr Cottrell also said that, “Together with forward-thinking developers, we can make energy bills and home emissions a thing of the past.” 

UK’s First Zero Bills Development 

Tom Carr, Co-Founder at Verto said of the ‘Zero Bills’ partnership: “We’re thrilled to be partnering with Octopus to launch the UK’s first fully Zero Bills developments. Verto has been delivering its Zero Carbon Smart Home™ product for over a decade: combined with Zero Bills, it represents a sea-change in sustainable housing. But this is just the beginning – we have several other exciting projects in the pipeline with Octopus, and we’re proud to be at the forefront of this movement.” 

Heat Pumps Questions 

Although the Octopus / Verto ‘Zero Bills’ proposition sounds very promising, many questions have been raised about heat pumps in the media recently, particularly for current homeowners thinking of replacing their gas boiler with one. Criticisms have included the prohibitive cost of air and ground source heat pumps, a suggestion that they may be slower at heating a home than a conventional boiler or electric heater, and that some homes and flats may not be compatible with them, i.e. they might not work when fitted. Other criticisms are that they may not cut bills by much and may not be particularly effective in well-insulated homes.

That said, the Octopus Verto ‘Zero Bills’ partnership homes are new builds with the entire system (solar panels, home batteries and heat pumps) already set up, integrated and designed-in using both the expertise of the energy company (Octopus) and the sustainable housebuilder (Vetro) so this should be an effective system.

What Does This Mean For Your Organisation? 

Britain’s homes currently account for 13 per cent of the country’s carbon emissions and the government wants to phase out one of the main culprits, gas boilers, and have them replaced with heat pumps.

With high energy prices and a cost-of-living crisis, the solar industry has grown in the UK with more households fitting them to get the cash savings and green benefits. With this as the backdrop, the ability to build new homes with all the low carbon technology already fitted must help (in this case through a partnership) and the prospect of zero bills homes (a first) for at least five years will no doubt be appealing in itself to new build homebuyers, not to mention the feel-good green benefits. At least with the kit already fitted as part of tailored and tested system it should work well, thereby avoiding some of the pitfalls that trying to retrofit low carbon tech like heat pumps to older homes could uncover.

It’s promising (from a green perspective) that this ‘Zero Bills’ scheme is under way and that many other developers have started their accreditation process, and these schemes may also provide profitable opportunities to the developers and to suppliers of low-carbon tech for homes, thereby helping green industries in the UK to flourish. If all new developments were built with the low-carbon, sustainable tech already installed, it could certainly help cut carbon emissions and bode well for the future but the big challenge for the government is, of course, how to get existing housing into shape in terms of cutting emissions, e.g., replacing boilers with (quite expensive) heat pumps, solar panels, insulation and more.