Category: Reviews

Today, Nigeria’s telecommunication industry stands at a crossroads. It is facing pressure on a thousand different fronts. On the inside, it is battling with the challenges of sustainable operations and shareholders demands and on the outside, raising costs and regulatory constraints.

The Nigerian telecom industry has immense potential. The recently launched GSMA digital economy report made this point. It projects a rise of 15 million new internet users by 2028. It equally highlights the industry’s significant contribution to the nation’s GDP.

Industry players, in the light of existing reality, have determined that a tariff increase will provide some succour and allow it to breathe. The Association of Licensed Telecom Operators of Nigeria (ALTON), an umbrella organisation for telecom and allied services providers, is at the forefront of the push for tariff increase.

ALTON argues that current tariffs, unchanged for over a decade, are insufficient to maintain operations and may indeed hinder vital investments in network infrastructure and possibly impact service quality. This assertion gains traction against a backdrop of foreign exchange losses, declining profits, and the increasingly challenging economic environment

Within the same decade, electricity tariff was raised, at least, three times; the price of fuel has gone up by over 300 per cent and inflation has effectively climbed to over 33 per cent. Yet, operators’ demand for telecom tariff increases has sparked a contentious debate among industry stakeholders. For many, the crux of the matter is that the economy is already hard, so telcos should not compound things by increasing tariffs at this time. Economists will take a dim view of this argument.

The telcos’ reason for pushing for tariff increases hinges on three main points. One, rising costs. Inflation, currency devaluation, increase in the pump price of fuel, electricity tariff increases and a general economic downturn have significantly increased operational expenses. The cost of maintaining and upgrading infrastructure, alongside acquiring foreign equipment, has outpaced current price structures.

The second is the investment challenges. Without a price adjustment reflecting economic realities, investors become hesitant. This stagnation in investment will limit the industry’s ability to expand networks, adopt new technologies like 5/6G and ultimately serve a growing population. The bulk of investment in the sector is dollar-denominated.

Then thirdly, unsustainable business environment. The industry contends with a multitude of charges and levies (the perennial multiple taxation). ALTON reveals that there are over 45. This burden, coupled with a perceived lack of regulatory independence, creates an unfavourable business climate.

The government, however, has firmly rejected the proposal for a tariff hike. The NCC has refused to approve it. Bosun Tijani, Minister of Communications, Innovation and Digital Economy, emphasizes the need for a comprehensive solution. He argues that higher prices would disproportionately affect affordability and hinder inclusion, particularly for low-income Nigerians. This outcome will no doubt widen the digital disparity in the country.

In my mind, to move forward, we must be able to strike a balance between the financial viability of telecom companies and ensuring service affordability for consumers. This path likely involves a multi-pronged approach.

We can start by reviewing the levy landscape. 45 is definitely too many. Reducing the number of charges levied on telecom operators could free up resources for investment. This can potentially create a more attractive business environment.

Secondly, regulation must be streamlined in line with global best practices. Experts concede that enhancing regulatory clarity and promoting an environment that encourages responsible risk-taking by investors would be crucial.

Moreover, operators have the option of exploring alternative revenue streams. This means that telecom companies can explore value-added services or targeted data packages to generate additional revenue without burdening core services.

The government is not left out. It must consider incentives. The federal government should as a matter of urgency consider targeted incentives that encourage network expansion and technological advancements. This will encourage operators to seek growth without solely relying on price hikes. The NCC must step up to the plate here.

At the heart of the debate lies the delicate balance between consumer affordability and industry sustainability. While tariff increases may alleviate financial strains for telecom operators, they also raise concerns about affordability and access for consumers, particularly in a country where digital inclusion remains a priority.

To ensure that the telecom sector achieves its potential, we can’t play the ostrich anymore. Constructive dialogue and collaboration between government, industry stakeholders, and regulatory bodies are indispensable at this point. Adjustments must be made, if the sector is to maintain its contribution to Nigeria’s GDP, currently eight per cent, and thus continue to boost the broader ICT ecosystem growth.

By implementing cost-reflective tariffs, telecom companies can enhance their financial viability, enabling them to make essential investments in infrastructure, technology, and service quality.

Eromosele, a corporate communication professional, writes via: elviseroms@gmail.com

The Nigerian telecommunications sector, a dynamic landscape driven by innovation and increasing connectivity, stands out as a high-performing industry within the country. It is, however, not without its share of challenges. The perennial issues around ‘right of way’, multiple taxation and absence of power persist. A new one is emerging in the realm of interconnection agreement settlements.

An interconnect agreement, according to Wikipedia, is a business contract between telecommunications organisations to interconnect their networks and exchange telecommunications traffic. It invariably involves settlement fees based on call source and destination, connection times and duration, when these fees do not cancel out between operators.

Typically, interconnection agreements and the settlement are business-to-business (B2B) issue that would have little or nothing to do with the subscribers. But in extraordinary circumstances, it can involve the subscriber. The recent threat by the Nigeria Communications Commission (NCC) to permit one telecom operator to disconnect subscribers from another player brought the issue home to the subscribers. Thankfully it did NOT happen.

But it important, in light of recent events, to shed light on regulatory intricacies, financial uncertainties, and technical hurdles that encumber or else aid the interconnection agreement settlement.

The challenges in settling interconnection charges stem from many things including the complex regulatory frameworks that oversee the Nigerian telecommunications sector. Despite the progress made in creating regulations to support interconnection agreements, enforcing these agreements faces obstacles. Stakeholders are contending with challenges related to compliance, interpretation, and the efficacy of the regulatory body in ensuring adherence to established guidelines.

The NCC harps constantly on the importance of adhering to the terms and conditions outlined in interconnection agreements, urging Mobile Network Operators (MNOs) and telecom industry licensees to uphold these standards. Whether the operators listen is another matter entirely.
Interconnection agreements, while crucial for fostering collaboration among telecom operators, can become breeding grounds for disputes. Disagreements over tariff structures, traffic volumes, and other terms often lead to protracted negotiations. Resolving these disputes promptly is imperative for maintaining a healthy telecommunications ecosystem, yet the complexities involved can impede swift settlements.

The long-term contention between Glo and MTN over interconnection fees confirms this point. It has sparked considerable debate and requiring regulatory intervention to settle. The clash reached its zenith when the NCC threatened disconnection, forcing both telecom giants to the negotiation table.
Glo’s interconnection charge settlement dispute came to the forefront when it was revealed that, under the looming threat of disconnection, the company reluctantly paid N1.6 billion to MTN. However, this payment was only a temporary resolution, as the underlying issues persisted. The subsequent reconciliation and negotiation process saw MTN accepting N2 billion as a compound interest dating back to 2009, a compromise from the initial demand of N3 billion.

A critical standpoint emerged from the observation that celebrating the payment of N2 billion in compound interest seems counterintuitive. Glo’s contention that it is only celebrating a reduced payment raises questions about the company’s adherence to timely payments and proper financial processes. The argument is that if Glo had fulfilled its interconnect obligations promptly, the accrual of interest could have been avoided altogether.

One intriguing aspect of the dispute lies in the Value Added Tax (VAT) payments made on behalf of Glo, which are slated for recovery through engagement with the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS). This adds a layer of complexity to the financial intricacies surrounding the interconnection fees.

It’s imperative to note that the regulatory authority, the NCC, played a pivotal role in the disconnection process. MTN, unable to independently enforce disconnection, sought the intervention of the NCC, which was approved in December 2023 after reviewing the case. This underscores the regulator’s role in ensuring fair practices and resolving disputes within the telecom sector.

News reports indicate that the genesis of the conflict dates back to November 2022, when the process for disconnection was initiated due to an accumulated debt owed by Glo to MTN. Glo’s strategy, as revealed, involves paying a sum significantly less than the due amount after an agreed timeframe, leading to a continuous increase in the total debt and interest.

The telecom subscribers dodged a bullet. The underlying issues must now be resolved to prevent a reoccurrence.

The truth is that inaccuracies in billing systems and delayed invoicing equally pose significant obstacles to the seamless settlement of interconnection charges. The precision and efficiency of billing mechanisms are paramount, requiring continuous improvement and oversight. Operators must navigate through the intricacies of call data records, ensuring accuracy and transparency in financial transactions. The interconnection clearing houses must step up to the plate here and play their role.

The telecoms clearinghouse refers to central exchanges where calls from different Mobile Network Operators are interconnected, billing and reconciliation are carried out and Call Data Records are produced. The key players in this space are Medallion Communications Limited and Interconnect Clearinghouse Nigeria Limited. One wonders what role they played in this Glo /MTN imbroglio.

Furthermore, the long-drawn settlement challenge makes one question the financial stability of operators in the industry. The financial stability of telecom operators plays a pivotal role in the timely settlement of interconnection charges. So, we must ask, who checks the financial health of these telecom behemoths? How much can the NCC do in this space?

Some argue that technical challenges, including discrepancies in call data records and interoperability issues, contribute to the complexity of interconnection charge settlements. But this is precisely what the interconnect clearinghouses are meant to do. Their robust technical infrastructure and standardized protocols are supposed to facilitate a seamless exchange of information between networks. The service level agreements (SLAs) should ensure minimal network disruptions and technical discrepancies that can lead to delays in reconciliation and settlement processes.

The NCC needs to do more. And it certainly needs to do, whatever it does much faster. Imagine if the NCC had stepped in decisively in this Glo/MTN controversy a decade ago. Precisely. It won’t have dragged this long. Interconnection charges should be settled within an established time frame, say the end of a calendar year. This will help reduce ambiguity, curb bad blood and lead to speedy resolutions.

Addressing the interconnection charge settlement challenges in the Nigerian telecommunications sector calls for a holistic approach. Stakeholders, including the regulator, operators, and industry experts, must collaborate to streamline the regulatory frameworks, enhance dispute resolution mechanisms, and fortify financial and technical foundations. Only through concerted efforts can the sector overcome these challenges and continue its journey towards a more interconnected and resilient future.

Eromosele, a corporate communication professional and public affairs analyst, wrote via: elviseroms@gmail.com

A new initiative to better identify child predators who obscure their activity by jumping among tech platforms was announced Tuesday by The Tech Coalition, an industry group that includes Discord, Google, Mega, Meta, Quora, Roblox, Snap, and Twitch.

The initiative, called Lantern, allows companies in the coalition to share information about potential child sexual exploitation, which will increase their prevention and detection capabilities, speed up the identification of threats, build situational awareness of new predatory tactics, and strengthen reporting to authorities of criminal offenses.

In a posting on the coalition’s website, Executive Director John Litton explained that online child sexual exploitation and abuse are pervasive threats that can cross various platforms and services.

Two of the most pressing dangers today are inappropriate sexualized contact with a child, referred to as online grooming, and financial sextortion of young people, he continued.

“To carry out this abuse, predators often first connect with young people on public forums, posing as peers or friendly new connections,” he wrote. “They then direct their victims to private chats and different platforms to solicit and share child sexual abuse material (CSAM) or coerce payments by threatening to share intimate images with others.”

“Because this activity spans across platforms, in many cases, any one company can only see a fragment of the harm facing a victim,” he noted. “To uncover the full picture and take proper action, companies need to work together.”

Gathering Signals To Combat Child Exploitation

Here’s how the Lantern program works:

• Participating companies upload “signals” to Lantern about activity that violates their policies against child sexual exploitation identified on their platform.
• Signals can be information tied to policy-violating accounts like email addresses, usernames, CSAM hashes, or keywords used to groom as well as buy and sell CSAM. Signals are not definitive proof of abuse. They offer clues for further investigation and can be the crucial piece of the puzzle that enables a company to uncover a real-time threat to a child’s safety.
• Once signals are uploaded to Lantern, participating companies can select them, run them against their platform, review any activity and content the signal surfaces against their respective platform policies and terms of service, and take action in line with their enforcement processes, such as removing an account and reporting criminal activity to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children and appropriate law enforcement agency.

“Until now, no consistent procedure existed for companies to collaborate against predatory actors evading detection across services,” Litton wrote. “Lantern fills this gap and shines a light on cross-platform attempts at online child sexual exploitation and abuse, helping to make the internet safer for kids.”

Significance of the Lantern Initiative

“This initiative holds immense significance in forging a path towards industry-wide collaboration to combat child sexual exploitation and abuse,” observed Alexandra Popken, vice president of trust and safety at WebPurify, a cloud-based web filtering and online child protection service in Irvine, Calif.

“Each platform faces its unique set of challenges, whether related to knowledge, tools, or resources, in addressing the escalating issue of CSAM,” she told TechNewsWorld. “Lantern symbolizes a unity among platforms in combating this issue and offers the practical infrastructure needed to pull it off.”

Lantern builds on the existing work of tech companies sharing information with law enforcement, added Ashley Johnson, a policy analyst with the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, a research and public policy organization in Washington, D.C.

Popken explained that malicious actors weaponize platforms through a range of tactics, employing various strategies to evade detection.

“In the past, platforms were hesitant to signal-share as it would imply an admission of exploitation,” she said. “However, initiatives like this demonstrate a shift in mindset, recognizing that cross-platform sharing ultimately enhances collective security and safeguards users’ well-being.”

Tracking Platform Nomads

Online predators use multiple platforms to contact and groom minors, meaning each social network only sees a portion of the predators’ evil actions, explained Chris Hauk, a consumer privacy champion at Pixel Privacy, a publisher of consumer security and privacy guides.

“Sharing information among the networks means the social platforms will be better armed with information to detect such actions,” he continued.

“Currently, when a predator is shut down on one app or website, they simply move on to another platform,” he said. “By sharing information, social networks can work to put a stop to this type of activity.”

Johnson explained that in cases of online grooming, it’s very common for perpetrators to have their victims move their communication off one site and onto another.

“A predator may suggest moving to another platform for privacy reasons or because it has fewer parental controls,” she said. “Having communication to track that activity across platforms is extremely important.”

Responsible Data Management in Child Safety Efforts

Lantern’s potential to speed up the identification of threats to children is a critical aspect of the program. “If data uploaded to Lantern can be scanned against other platforms in real time, auto-rejecting or surfacing content for review, that represents meaningful progress in enforcing this problem at scale,” Popken noted.

Litton pointed out in his posting that during the two years it has taken to develop Lantern, the coalition has not only designed the program to be effective against online child sexual exploitation and abuse but also to be managed responsibly via:

• Respect for human rights by having the program subjected to a Human Rights Impact Assessment (HRIA) by the Business for Social Responsibility, which will also offer ongoing guidance as the initiative evolves.
• Soliciting stakeholder engagement by asking more than 25 experts and organizations focused on child safety, digital rights, advocacy of marginalized communities, government, and law enforcement for feedback and inviting them to participate in the HRIA.
• Promote transparency by including Lantern in The Tech Coalition’s annual transparency report and providing participating companies with recommendations on how to incorporate their participation in the program into their transparency reporting.
• Designing Lantern with safety and privacy in mind.

Importance of Privacy in Child Protection Measures

“Any data sharing requires privacy to be top of mind, especially when you’re dealing with information about children because they’re a vulnerable population,” Johnson said.

“It is important for the companies that take part in this to protect the identities of the children involved and protect their data and information from falling into the wrong hands,” she continued.

“Based on what we’ve seen from tech companies,” she said. “They’ve done a pretty good job of protecting victims’ privacy, so hopefully they’ll be able to keep that up.”

However, Paul Bischoff, privacy advocate at Comparitech, a reviews, advice, and information website for consumer security products, cautioned, “Lantern won’t be perfect.”

As an ex-IBM competitive analyst, one of the things I enjoyed the most was making a competitive comparison, particularly when it was between any company but my own. The reason for this is that, even in business, no one likes to hear their baby is ugly.

Meta is bringing Threads to market, which looks like a Twitter clone. Typically, an effort like this would likely fail because you generally can’t pull customers from a service by merely offering something similar; you have to disparage the competing product successfully to force behavior change.

But Elon Musk has upset so many users that there is significant potential for him to lose users en masse to a similar service that doesn’t have Musk connected to it.

Let’s explore the battle to come and why it could be catastrophic for Twitter. We’ll close with my Product of the Week: the new m18 gaming laptop from Alienware, an amazingly powerful notebook with an awesome 18-inch screen.

IBM vs. Sun Microsystems Example

When looking at a future competition, starting with something similar that occurred in the past is often helpful. The 1980s battle between Sun Microsystems and IBM, which I watched first-hand, is a good example.

In the 1980s, IBM concluded that customers were so locked-in to IBM that they couldn’t move, so IBM could do anything it wanted. I once brought this up to the head of marketing for my unit as a huge potential problem because customer surveys indicated our customers were extremely upset. He laughed at me and said, “What we do is like selling air. The customers don’t get a choice.”

But Sun Microsystems was pushing a solution that didn’t even work and still almost put IBM out of business by providing an alternative. Folks were so sick of being mistreated that they jumped at it with the help of Sun salespeople, who leaned in on IBM’s bad behavior and forced the change.

The switch was neither quick nor easy, and as I’ve noted, the replacement technology didn’t work yet. Still, IBM, the most powerful technology company in the world until then, almost went under, fired its CEO, and had to endure massive layoffs.

Since then, IBM has reclaimed its reputation as one of the most trusted vendors in tech by not locking in customers and excelling at treating them well, but it has never fully recovered to the level of power it once held.

In short, what saved IBM and gave it time to recover was the excessively high switching cost that was inherent to the products and services IBM supplied.

Twitter

Twitter’s problem is that it isn’t an enterprise vendor like IBM, where there are contracts and massive dependencies, making it difficult to move between services. Elon Musk’s policy and operational changes to Twitter have driven away many users even though replacement services like Mastodon, Truth Social, and others are nowhere near the same.

Twitter has been bleeding users at a high rate. Whenever it looked like Twitter was turning a corner, Musk seemed to make another questionable decision, causing more users to leave. The latest decision is limiting the number of Tweets a user can read for free, even though Twitter doesn’t create its own content.

Additionally, Twitter policies have driven away advertisers during a time when there wasn’t a good alternative for that ad’s expenditure. With ad spend, once it is done regularly, it tends to be somewhat grandfathered effectively by locking the advertiser to the medium on which it advertises.

While it’s hard to get the advertisers at first, once you have them, they’ll typically stay with you for a time, even if the ads aren’t working, unless you do something to upset them. Twitter has largely become an unsafe platform for advertisers.

Most of these advertisers also advertise on other social media platforms like Facebook, making it exceedingly easy for them to discontinue their relationships with Twitter and move to Threads which, to them, comes from a known entity with less brand risk than Twitter now seems to have.

Threads

Threads, which officially launched last Thursday, looks to be a near clone of Twitter. Threads focuses on the issues that upset Twitter users most and promises to treat them better. While Facebook hasn’t been without problems, particularly regarding seemingly uneven moderation, it remains night-and-day less annoying than Twitter has become.

There are clearly those that don’t trust Zuckerberg or Facebook, but not to the point where there have been mass defections. While initially concerned about low conversion rates on Facebook, advertisers appear to be happier with Facebook than they are with Twitter.

This combination of aggravation with Twitter, the low switching cost for users and advertisers, and the belief that Facebook is more stable, reliable, and trustworthy than Twitter set up what could be a perfect storm for this new service.

However, there are two potential downsides.

Meta/Facebook may not have properly anticipated loading, and it is likely — because it has undoubtedly happened before — that enough users may jump on the platform so quickly that it fails. Meta has massive resources and should expect this, yet other companies have had similar problems only to find they didn’t correctly anticipate loading. The services were subsequently unreliable at first, which slowed migrations.

Another issue is that Meta doesn’t market well or often. Without marketing, the speed of migrations may be slowed. However, given the prior problem and potential for overloading the service, this disadvantage may initially work to Meta’s advantage, helping assure that the servers running Threads aren’t overcome and won’t initially fail. We should know soon if it hasn’t already crashed.

Wrapping Up

Elon Musk’s management of Twitter has set up a near-perfect storm that could cause Meta’s Threads platform to do to Twitter what Facebook did to Myspace. Remember Myspace and how quickly it failed? This perfect storm provides the potential to make Twitter non-viable as a company if Threads can take the load (and that’s a big if), causing Twitter to lose more users and advertisers than it can sustain.

This failure will be very visible and could create problems for Musk’s other properties in terms of reliance and valuation and drive media coverage on Musk that will be anything but favorable. In short, a truly catastrophic collapse of Twitter could cause cascading problems for Musk’s other firms, some or all of which may reconsider having Musk as CEO.

If this happens, I expect it will happen reasonably quickly. Twitter and Musk’s future outcome should be apparent before the end of the quarter and possibly even this month. The next few weeks should be fascinating to watch and, regardless of how things turn out, will be a lesson that perhaps challenging a competitor to a cage match isn’t the best way to address a massive competitive disadvantage.

I should add that this match, from Zuckerberg’s perspective, is a no-brainer. He’s already trained for it, and it will distract Musk from creating a better Twitter defense. Zuckerberg isn’t critical to Threads’ success, but Musk is crucial to Twitter’s defense, suggesting Zuckerberg is maturing in his CEO role better than Musk has.

Many technology leaders agree that while AI could be hugely beneficial to humans, it could also be misused or, through negligence, terminally damage humanity. But looking to governments to address this problem without guidance would be foolish given that politicians often don’t even understand the technology they’ve used for years, let alone something that just made it to market.

As a result, when governments act to mitigate a problem, they could do more damage than good. For instance, it was right to penalize the old Shell Oil Company for abuses, but breaking the company up shifted control of oil from the United States to parts of the world that aren’t all that friendly to the U.S. Another example was correcting RCA’s dominance of consumer electronics, which shifted the market from the U.S. to Japan.

The U.S. has held on to tech leadership by the skin of its teeth, but there is no doubt in my mind that if the government acts without guidance to regulate AI, they’d simply shift the opportunity to China. This is why Microsoft’s recent report titled “Governing AI: A Blueprint for the Future” is so important.

The Microsoft report defines the problem, outlines a reasonable path that won’t reduce U.S. competitiveness, and addresses the concerns surrounding AI.

Let’s talk about Microsoft’s blueprint for AI governance, and we’ll end with my Product of the Week, a new line of trackers that can help to keep track of things we often have trouble locating.

EEOC Example

It is foolish to ask for regulation without context. When governments react tactically to something it knows little about, it can do more damage than good. I opened with a couple of antitrust examples, but perhaps the ugliest example of this was the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).

Congress created the EEOC in 1964 to rapidly address the very real problem of racial discrimination in jobs. There were two fundamental causes for workplace discrimination. The most obvious was racial discrimination in the workplace which the EEOC could and did address. But an even bigger problem existed when it came to discrimination in education, which the EEOC didn’t address.

When businesses hired on qualification and used any of the methodologies the industry had developed at the time to reward employees with positions scientifically, raises, and promotions based on education and accomplishment, you were asked to discontinue those programs to improve your company diversity which too often put inexperienced minorities into jobs.

By placing inexperienced minorities in jobs they weren’t well trained for, the system set them up to fail, which only reinforced the belief that minorities were somehow inadequate when in fact, to begin with, they weren’t given equal opportunities for education and mentoring. This state of affairs was not only true for people of color but also for women, regardless of color.

We can now look back and see that the EEOC didn’t really fix anything, but it did turn HR from an organization focused on the care and feeding of the employees into an organization focused on compliance, which too often meant covering up employee issues rather than addressing the problems.

Brad Smith Steps Up

Microsoft President Brad Smith has impressed me as one of the few technology leaders who thinks in broad terms. Instead of focusing almost exclusively on tactical responses to strategic problems, he thinks strategically.

The Microsoft blueprint is a case in point because while most are going to the government saying “you must do something,” which could lead to other long-term problems, Smith has laid out what he thinks a solution should look like, and he fleshes it out elegantly in a five-point plan.

He opens with a provocative statement, “Don’t ask what computers can do, ask what they should do,” which reminds me a bit of John F. Kennedy’s famous line, “Don’t ask what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.” Smith’s statement comes from a book he co-authored back in 2019 and referred to as one of the defining questions of this generation.

This statement brings into context the importance and necessity of protecting humans and makes us think about the implications of new technology to ensure that the uses we have for it are beneficial and not detrimental.

Smith goes on to talk about how we should use technology to improve the human condition as a priority, not just to reduce costs and increase revenues. Like IBM, which has made a similar effort, Smith and Microsoft believe that technology should be used to make people better, not replace them.

He also, and this is very rare these days, talks about the need to anticipate where the technology will need to be in the future so that we can anticipate problems rather than constantly and tactically merely respond to them. The need for transparency, accountability, and assurance that the technology is being used legally are all critical to this effort and well spelled out.

5-Point Blueprint Analysis

Smith’s first point is to implement and build on government-led AI safety frameworks. Too often, governments fail to realize they already have some of the tools needed to address a problem and waste a lot of time effectively reinventing the wheel.

There has been impressive work done by the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in the form of an AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF). It is a good, though incomplete, framework. Smith’s first point is to use and build on that.

Smith’s second point is to require effective safety brakes for AI systems that control critical infrastructure. If an AI that is controlling critical infrastructure goes off the rails, it could cause massive harm or even death at a significant scale.

We must ensure that those systems get extensive testing, have deep human oversight, and are tested against scenarios of not only likely but unlikely problems to make sure the AI won’t jump in and make it worse.

The government would define the classes of systems that would need guardrails, provide direction on the nature of those protective measures, and require that the related systems meet certain security requirements — like only being deployed in data centers tested and licensed for such use.

Smith’s third point is to develop a broad legal and regulatory framework based on the technology architecture for AI. AIs are going to make mistakes. People may not like the decisions an AI makes even if they’re right, and people may blame AIs for things that the AI had no control over.

In short, there will be much litigation to come. Without a legal framework covering responsibility, rulings are likely to be varied and contradictory, making any resulting remedy difficult and very expensive to reach.

Thus, the need for a legal framework so that people understand their responsibilities, risks, and rights to avoid future problems, and should a problem result, find a quicker valid remedy. This alone could reduce what will likely become a massive litigation load since AI is pretty much in the green field now when it comes to legal precedent.

Smith’s fourth point is to promote transparency and ensure academic and nonprofit access to AI. This just makes sense; how can you trust something you can’t fully understand? People don’t trust AI today, and without transparency, they won’t trust it tomorrow. In fact, I’d argue that without transparency, you shouldn’t trust AI because you can’t validate that it will do what you intend.

Furthermore, we need academic access to AI to ensure people understand how to use this technology properly when entering the workforce and nonprofit access to ensure that nonprofits, particularly those focused on improving the human condition, have effective access to this technology for their good works.

Smith’s fifth point is to pursue new public-private partnerships to use AI as an effective tool to address the inevitable societal challenges that will arise. AI will have a massive impact on society, and ensuring this impact is beneficial and not detrimental will require focus and oversight.

He points out that AI can be a sword, but it can also be used effectively as a shield that’s potentially more powerful than any existing sword on the planet. It must be used to protect democracy and people’s fundamental rights everywhere.

Smith cites Ukraine as an example where the public and private sectors have come together effectively to create a powerful defense. He believes, as I do, that we should emulate the Ukraine example to ensure that AI reaches its potential to help the world move into a better tomorrow.

Wrapping Up: A Better Tomorrow

Microsoft isn’t just going to the government and asking it to act to address a problem that governments don’t yet fully understand.

It is putting forth a framework for what that solution should, and frankly must, look like to assure that we mitigate the risks surrounding AI use upfront and that, when there are problems, there are pre-existing tools and remedies available to address them, not the least of which is an emergency off switch that allows for the elegant termination of an AI program that has gone off the rails.

Whether you are a company or an individual, Microsoft is providing an excellent lesson here on how to get leadership to address a problem, not just toss it at the government and ask them to fix it. Microsoft has outlined the problem and provided a well-thought-out solution so that the fix doesn’t become a bigger problem than the problem was in the first place.

Nicely done!

source: TechNewsWorld

Waving your hand to pay after shopping at a store or simply placing your mobile phone on the checkout counter could seem strange – at least to a number of people in Nigeria. But it is possible and already standard practice in some countries.

This, and other cashless methods, can also be possible in Nigeria if the right technologies are adopted. After all, some people already use tollgates where, courtesy of an e-tag, they are let through without waiting to pay every time. It is a form of cashless technology too.

Global cashless payment volumes are set to increase by more than 80% from 2020 to 2025, from about 1tn transactions to almost 1.9tn, and almost triple by 2030, according to an analysis by PwC. Asia-Pacific will grow fastest, with cashless transaction volume increasing by 109% from 2020 to 2025 and then by 76% from 2025 to 2030, followed by Africa (78%, 64%) and Europe (64%, 39%). Latin America comes next (52%, 48%), and the US and Canada will have the least rapid growth (43%, 35%).

Here are some technologies Nigeria should be looking into to strengthen the move towards being cashless.

QR code

Have you ever encountered a sign that says ‘scan to pay’ (with a pattern of black squares) after shopping at a store? Any business or individual receiving payment can provide this option, derived from Quick Response codes, which are machine-readable barcodes that store information.

In 2020, Ghana became the first African country to introduce a universal QR code. In South Africa, the Payments Association of South Africa (PASA) has identified a need to streamline the experience of both payer and payee and is in the process of standardising QR codes across the sector.

In 2021, the Nigeria Inter-Bank Settlement System Plc (NIBSS) launched the New Quick Response (NQR) payment solution code, which it describes as “an innovative payment platform implemented on behalf of all financial service providers.” The New Quick Response code solution offers a robust platform that delivers instant value for P2B and P2P transactions by simply scanning to pay.

Generally, making QR codes more widely used will create another easier way for people to transact without cash and make it cheaper for merchants to receive money.

Mobile money

Despite the successes recorded in other African countries, Nigeria still hasn’t fully hacked Mobile Money. In 2021, CBN data shows Nigeria recorded 1.2 billion mobile money transactions with a value of N15 trillion (about $34 billion using official rates).

However, in Ghana, with a fraction of Nigeria’s population, the volume of transactions was 4.25 billion in 2021, with a value of GH¢ 978.32 billion (about $75 billion).

Let’s not even compare with Kenya or other African countries blazing the trail in mobile money. It is clear that this technology remains largely underexplored in Nigeria. With the country’s large rural population and low internet penetration, mobile money offers those who would otherwise be disadvantaged a way to send and receive money electronically and with less sophistication required.

Digital wallets

iPhone users should be familiar with Apple Pay and their Android contemporaries, Google Pay. But, whenever you are sceptical of inputting your card details on a website, has it occurred to you to use that Apple or Google Pay function (which you already trust) on your device?

There are other options which PwC described in a report as ‘super-apps’, such as WeChat Pay and Alipay in China, and in different countries, local options abound with different names. While many people already use these platforms it is still not a widespread means of payment in Nigeria.

Read also: Here are some ideas for solving the open market payments collection problem in a cashless Nigeria

These digital wallets allow consumers to load and store payment methods and access funding sources, such as cards or accounts, on their mobile devices. The use of digital wallet–based transactions grew globally by 7% in 2020, according to a report by FIS, a financial services technology group, which predicts that digital wallets will account for more than half of all e-commerce payments worldwide by 2024 as consumers shift from card-based to account- and QR code–based transactions.

Nothing stops the growing fintech industry in Nigeria from introducing similar platforms to take advantage of the immense opportunities.

Contactless payments

This has been referenced a few times earlier, and it is one innovative way to not only get more people to go cashless but also in a way that would excite them.

Imagine that you have finished shopping at a supermarket, and the cashier tells you to simply hold your phone near theirs and with the tap of a button, payment is done.

This movement of money from you as a customer to the merchant happens through near-field communication (NFC) technology, a function you may have seen on your phone never utilised and probably been curious as to what it does.

A Tappit article further explains that instead of swiping or inserting your bank card into a reader and typing a PIN, you simply ‘tap-and-go’ or ‘wave and pay’. You place your bank card or contactless-enabled mobile phone near the reader to pay.

These technologies and other existing cashless payment methods, like regular bank transfers and card payments, can help drive Nigeria’s cashless economy further.

Technext

Adopting generative AI into technology is potentially more significant than when the internet was introduced. It is disrupting most creative efforts and isn’t near as capable as it will be by the end of the decade.

Gen AI will force us to rethink how we communicate, how we collaborate, how we create, how we solve problems, how we govern, and even how and whether we travel — and that is far from an exhaustive list. I expect that once this technology reaches maturity, the list of things that have not changed will be far shorter than the list of things that were.

This week, I’d like to focus on three things we should begin discussing that represent some of the bigger risks of generative AI. I’m not against the technology, nor am I foolish enough to suggest it be paused because pausing it would be impossible now.

What I suggest is that we begin to consider mitigating these problems before they do substantial damage. The three problems are data center loading, security, and relationship damage.

We’ll close with my Product of the Week, which may be the best electric SUV coming to the market. I’m suddenly in the market for a new electric car, but more on that later.

Data Center Loading

Regardless of all the hype, few people are using generative AI yet, let alone using it to its full potential. The technology is processor- and data-intensive while it is very personally focused, so having it reside only in the cloud will not be feasible, mainly because the size, cost, and resulting latency would be unsustainable.

Much like we have done with other data and performance-focused applications, the best approach will likely be a hybrid where the processing power is kept close to the user. Still, the massive data, which will need aggressive updating, will need to be more centrally loaded and accessed to protect the limited storage capacities of the client devices, smartphones, and PCs.

But, because we are talking about an increasingly intelligent system that will, at times — like when it is used for gaming, translation, or conversations — require very low latency. How the load is divided without damaging the performance will likely determine whether a particular implementation is successful.

Achieving low latency won’t be easy because while wireless technology has improved, it can still be unreliable due to weather, placement of the towers or user, maintenance outages, manmade or natural disasters, and less than complete global coverage. The AI must work both online and offline while limiting data traffic and avoiding catastrophic outages.

Even if we could centralize all of this, the cost would be excessive, though we do have underused performance in our personal devices that could mitigate much of that expense. Qualcomm is one of the first firms to flag this as a problem and is putting a lot of effort into fixing it. Still, expect it will be too little and too late, given how fast generative AI is advancing and how relatively slowly technology like this is developed and brought to market.

Security

I was an internal auditor specializing in security and a competitive analyst trained in legal ways to penetrate security. I learned that if someone can get enough data, they can more accurately estimate the data they don’t have access to.

For instance, if you know the average number of cars in a company parking lot, you can, with reasonable accuracy, estimate the number of employees a firm has. You can generally scan social media and figure out the interests of the firm’s leading employees, and you can watch job openings to determine the kinds of future products the company is likely developing.

These large language models collect massive amounts of data, and I expect many of the things these LLMs scan in are or should be confidential. In addition, if enough information is collected, the gaps resulting from what’s not scanned in will be increasingly derivable.

This scenario does not apply only to corporate information. With the kind of personal information that is readily available, we’ll also be able to determine much more about the private lives of users.

Employers will be able to locate whistleblowers, disgruntled or disloyal employees, bad employee behavior, and employees who are taking advantage of the firm illicitly with greater accuracy. Protecting against a hostile entity deriving confidential information about you, your company, or even your government is becoming more viable with far greater accuracy than I enjoyed as either an auditor or competitive analyst.

The best defense is likely to create enough disinformation so that the tools don’t know what is real and what isn’t. However, this path will also make the connected AI systems far less reliable overall, which would be fine if only the competitor used those systems. However, it is likely to compromise the systems of the company that wants protection might use, resulting in a growing number of bad decisions.

Interpersonal Relationships

Companies like Mindverse with its MindOS and Suki with its employee supplementing avatars are showcasing the future personal use of generative AI as a tool that can present as if it is you. As we progressively use tools like this, our ability to determine what is real and what is digital will be reduced significantly, and our opinions of the people that use these tools will reflect more on the tool than on the person.

Imagine having your digital twin do a virtual interview, be the face of your presence on a dating app or take over for much of your daily virtual interactions. The tool will try to be responsive to the person interacting with it, it will never get tired or grumpy, and it will be trained to present you in the best possible light. However, as it advances down this path, it will be less and less like who you really are — and likely become far more interesting, attractive, and more even-tempered than you could ever be.

This will cause problems because, much like actors who date someone who has fallen for a character the actor once played, the reality will create subsequent breakups and a loss of trust.

The easiest fix would be to learn either to behave like your avatar or to use them for interactions with friends and co-workers. I doubt we’ll do either, but these are the two most viable approaches to mitigating this coming problem.

Wrapping Up

Generative AI is amazing and will significantly improve performance as it ramps into the market and users reach critical mass. Yet there are significant problems that will need to be addressed, including excessive data center loading, which should drive hybrid solutions in the future, the inability to prevent deriving secrets from these enormous language models, and a considerable reduction in interpersonal trust.

Understanding these coming risks should help avoid them. However, the fixes aren’t great, suggesting that we’ll likely regret some of the unintended consequences of using this technology.

Nigeria, the most populous country in Africa, boasts a youthful population. According to the National Population Commission, about 64 per cent of Nigeria’s population is below the age of 25. This presents an opportunity for the country to harness the energy and creativity of its youth towards building a digital and innovative future.

The world is currently experiencing a rapid shift towards digitalization, and Nigeria cannot afford to be left behind. To move the country forward, there is a need to focus on new technologies, social media, digital marketing, agriculture, fintech, and other emerging industries.

We must proactively explore ways for Nigeria to harness the power of its youth to achieve this goal.

New Technologies:

Nigeria has a growing tech industry that is already making waves on the global stage. The country’s tech ecosystem is home to several startups and tech hubs, including Andela, Flutterwave, and Paystack. To ensure that Nigeria continues to innovate, there is a need to invest in science and technology education at all levels. This investment will help to equip the youth with the skills they need to develop cutting-edge technologies that can solve the country’s challenges.

Social Media and Digital Marketing:

Social media has become a vital tool for businesses to connect with customers and grow their brands. Nigeria’s youth are digital natives who are familiar with the various social media platforms. This presents an opportunity for them to leverage social media and digital marketing skills to create new businesses and grow existing ones. The government can support this effort by providing training and funding opportunities for young entrepreneurs.

Agriculture:

Agriculture is one of Nigeria’s most important sectors, accounting for a significant portion of the country’s GDP. However, the sector is still largely dominated by subsistence farming, which limits its potential. Nigeria’s youth can play a vital role in transforming the agriculture sector by leveraging technology to increase productivity and efficiency. The government can support this effort by providing funding opportunities for young farmers and investing in agricultural research and development.

Fintech:

Fintech is another industry that is rapidly growing in Nigeria. The country’s fintech startups are already disrupting the traditional banking sector by providing innovative solutions that are accessible to more Nigerians. Nigeria’s youth can contribute to this growth by developing new fintech products and services that can address the country’s unique financial challenges. The government can support this effort by providing a regulatory environment that is conducive to innovation and entrepreneurship.

The truth is that preparing Nigerian youths for the digital future requires a multi-faceted approach that encompasses both education and practical experience. Here are some suggestions to help prepare Nigerian youths for the digital future:

Encourage STEM Education: Nigerian youths should be encouraged to take courses in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). STEM courses provide the foundational skills needed to work in the digital field.

Increase Access to Technology: The Nigerian government and private sector can provide more access to technology in schools and communities, such as computer labs and internet connectivity. This can help young people gain hands-on experience with technology.

Promote Digital Literacy: Digital literacy is the ability to use and understand digital technologies. Nigerian youths should be taught the basics of using computers, the internet, and other digital tools. This can be done through practical workshops, seminars, and online resources.

Provide Mentorship Programs: Mentorship programs can help Nigerian youths gain practical experience and guidance from experienced professionals in the digital field. These programs can provide opportunities for young people to learn from industry leaders and receive advice on how to succeed in the digital sector.

Support Entrepreneurship: Nigerian youths should be encouraged to start their digital businesses. The government and private sector can provide resources and support for young entrepreneurs, such as access to funding, mentorship, and networking opportunities.

Collaborate with Industry Partners: Collaboration with industry partners can provide Nigerian youths with opportunities for internships, job shadowing, and other practical experiences. Industry partners can also guide the skills needed to succeed in the digital sector.

By following these strategies, Nigerian youths can be better prepared to take advantage of the opportunities presented by the digital future.

In conclusion, Nigeria’s youth represent a tremendous resource that can help to propel the country towards a digital and innovative future. However, this can only be achieved through concerted efforts by the government, private sector, and civil society to invest in the education and training of young people, provide funding opportunities, and create a regulatory environment that is conducive to innovation and entrepreneurship. By harnessing the power of its youth, Nigeria can become a leader in the digital economy and achieve sustainable economic growth.

                                                                                                                                                                                                   Elvis Eromosele, a Corporate Communication professional and public affairs analyst lives in Lagos.

BBC

The year 2023 offers lots of promise and a whole lot of insecurity on the digital pathways — both for personal and business encounters.

Technology continues to bring innovative business solutions while it also poses seemingly unsolvable cybersecurity challenges.

Retail website crashes and supply chain disruptions used to be seasonal annoyances. Now they result from targeted cyberattacks. The FBI is keenly concerned by the rapid growth in targeted and sophisticated cyberattacks coordinated by threat actors.

The threat landscape is poised to grow as decentralized work environments drive companies to adopt more web-based tools. As enterprises look to optimize their work environment, how can they make sure to take their browser and communication channel security into the twenty-first century?

Given this litany of runaway cyber threats, it is never too soon for companies and consumers alike to think about how to prepare better for bad actors to snag them with a cyberattack or online fraud scam. The frequency of cyberattacks in 2022 reportedly increased by almost three million, and the average cost of a data breach globally reached an all-time high of $4.35 million.

Annual joint alerts released by the FBI and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) warn businesses and consumers alike about the increased security risks expected in 2023. Still, organizations are choosing to leave their digital doors unlocked for cybercriminals.

Recent findings by Cybereason revealed the majority of companies reduce their security staff by as much as 70% on weekends and holidays, exponentially increasing their risk and the aftermath of a ransomware attack.

CIOs to the Rescue

The flip side of the cybersecurity landscape for this year offers some good news, nonetheless. An October 2022 Gartner report highlights that CIOs are looking to increase their cyber and information security investments in 2023. That prognosis beats business intelligence and analytics goals, in which 55% say they plan to increase investment.

This bodes better for companies and governments worldwide facing ongoing threats and cybercrime damages of US$6 trillion globally in 2021, according to a Homeland Security report. Increased internet connectivity of people and devices has created an ever-expanding attack surface that extends throughout the world and into almost every American home. As a result, cyberspace has become the most active threat domain in the world and the most dynamic threat to the Homeland, according to that agency.

Gartner’s data indicates that worldwide information security and risk-management spending will exceed $188 billion in 2023, up 11.3% from last year, noted Jon Geater, co-founder and chief product officer at Rkvst.

While the economy pushes companies to cut costs, leading enterprises are keeping cybersecurity and risk management budgets intact. Forward-thinking organizations are shifting from a checkbox-based approach to a risk- and outcomes-based method of cybersecurity.

“We see companies and governments around the world waking up to the fact that with data-driven and connected operations now the norm, significant risks can enter their business from their supply chain. The Log4j threat and Kaseya and SolarWinds supply chain attacks have made that very clear,” Geater told TechNewsWorld.

Old-fashioned static checkbox compliance cannot defend against these risks. Geater urged organizations to demand strong, reliable, provenance information from key supply chain partners to more accurately assess and address their risks and implement supply chain integrity, transparency, and trust across all aspects of their operations.

A Matter of Scale

The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency warns that cybercriminals are prepared and ready to target online shoppers with fake websites, malicious links, and fake charities. As the nation’s cyber defense agency, its goal is to ensure Americans are safe online, noted CISA Director Jen Easterly.

“By following a few guiding principles like checking your devices, shopping from trusted sources, using safe purchasing methods, and following basic cyber hygiene like multi-factor authentication, you can drastically improve your online safety this year.

“Your cyber safety should be treated like your physical safety. Stay vigilant, take steps to protect yourself, and trust your instincts. If you see something that does not look right, there is a good chance it is not,” she offered.

For consumers, tighter budgets this year make phishing lures more attractive. Plus, shoppers must dodge a hefty onslaught of scam-related deals, warned Melissa Bischoping, director of endpoint security research at Tanium.

“Attackers know that social engineering and phishing are still the most effective initial access point, and they leverage a combination of economic uncertainty and desire for a good deal to prey upon individuals.

She added that this goes beyond just retail, so be mindful of scams and phishing related to charity donations.

“Instead of blindly clicking on links in emails, be sure to go directly to the official website or app,” she cautioned.

On the Cyber Horizon

Web security will become vital as we increasingly rely on web-based applications and SaaS services, suggested Michael Calev, vice president of corporate development and strategy at Perception Point. In this vein, cyber defenders are seeing problems with phishing, spearphishing, and, more importantly, evasion-related attacks.

“We can expect an increasing number of threat actors to target web users through these vectors [this] year. More cross-channel attacks can be expected, and we will see multi-layered attacks that start at one point and then spread across additional vectors.

This will lead to the advancement of extended detection and response (XDR) tools, and more companies will start scanning internal traffic to mitigate attacks as best they can, predicted Calev.

“Unfortunately, ransomware is here to stay, and we will see more double- and triple-extortion attacks. This will be accompanied by a growing number of account takeovers, with threat actors taking hold of legitimate accounts and attempting to mislead users and security vendors,” he warned.

Although other threat vectors will see significant growth in 2023, email will remain the largest, added Calev. Email is where the majority of attacks originate.

Paying Up, Not Fighting Back

According to a Perception Point-Osterman report, organizations pay an average of $1,197 per employee to address successful cyber incidents across email services, cloud collaboration apps or services, and web browsers.

This means that a 500-employee company spends $600,000 on cybersecurity annually. The figure excludes compliance fines, ransomware mitigation costs, and business losses from non-operational processes.

“Changes brought by digital transformation and remote work increased ecosystem complexity. As organizations invest in tools that monitor, detect, and provide information on their IT environment, they should invest in the processes that leverage this information.

Solutions exist to wage a successful battle against cybercriminals. Consider a recent partnership between CafeX’s incident response solution Challo and CyCognito’s SaaS platform to provide organizations with just that.

CyCognito discovers risk across a company’s attack surface. Challo unifies the relevant people, processes, and information to remediate threats fast, noted Musallam.

The combination lets businesses address threat intelligence and management with a single automated workflow. This optimizes their response activities and cybersecurity postures.

“There is a natural symbiosis between the Challo and CyCognito platforms,” said Josh Hogle, director of Technology Alliances at CyCongito.

2023 a Busy Year for CISOs

This year may prove to be a more volatile year for chief information security officers (CISOs). They deal with the pressures of maintaining a ridged security posture while also dodging the bullet of blame when attacks are successful, suggested Daniel H. Gallancy, CEO and Co-founder of cybersecurity firm Atakama.

“Cyberthreats will continue to proliferate in number and grow in sophistication throughout 2023. While basic security practices will prevent many breaches, organizations will need more advanced solutions to protect themselves from the devastating consequences of a successful attack,” Gallancy said.