Want to send HD videos? Well, now you can with WhatsApp …

You may not know that the Windows Calculator app also includes several hidden features such as scientific, programmer, date calculation modes, a currency converter, and more … making it a versatile tool for various tasks. Here’s how to use the hidden features:

To Open The Calculator

– Press Win + S and type Calculator, then open the app.

To Access Different Modes

– Click the menu icon (three horizontal lines) in the top left corner.

– Select from different modes like Scientific, Programmer, Date Calculation, Currency Converter, Volume Converter, and more.

– Use these modes for advanced calculations, converting between number systems, or calculating the difference between dates.

Following an investigation into whether the big tech companies are complying with the new Digital Markets Act (DMA) rules, the European Commission’s preliminary findings say that Meta’s ‘Pay or Consent’ model for data-sharing is in breach of its new rules.

Investigation 

The European Commission (EC) launched an investigation into Google, Apple, and Meta to determine if their practices comply with the DMA. This (still ongoing) inquiry has been focused on potential violations by these tech giants that may undermine fair competition and consumer protection in the digital market.

Google and Apple, for example, are under scrutiny over their app store policies and possible restrictions on third-party developers, which could inhibit competition. The investigation into Meta centres on its ‘pay or consent’ model.

The Commission is essentially aiming to ensure these companies do not misuse their ‘gatekeeper’ positions to engage in unfair practices, restrict consumer choice, or impose discriminatory conditions. The investigation could result in significant penalties and mandated changes to their business practices to comply with the DMA.

What Is Meta’s Pay Or Consent Model? 

The ‘pay or consent’ model is a business practice where users are given a binary choice between two options – either pay a fee for a service or consent to having their data collected and used for targeted advertising. In November 2023, in response to regulatory changes in the EU, Meta introduced its binary ‘pay or consent’ offer. This means that EU users of Facebook and Instagram must choose between: (i) the subscription for a monthly fee to an ads-free version of these social networks or (ii) the free-of-charge access to a version of these social networks with personalised ads.

The Preliminary Findings – Why Is ‘Pay or Consent’ Not Acceptable Under The DMA Rules? 

The European Commission says it has informed Meta of its preliminary findings that its ‘pay or consent’ advertising model fails to comply with the Digital Markets Act (DMA). The Commission says, in its preliminary view, “this binary choice forces users to consent to the combination of their personal data and fails to provide them a less personalised but equivalent version of Meta’s social networks”. 

According to the European Commission, Meta’s ‘pay or consent’ model breaches Article 5(2) of the Digital Markets Act (DMA) because:

– It doesn’t allow users to opt for a service that uses less of their personal data but is otherwise equivalent to the “personalised ads” based service.

– It doesn’t allow users to exercise their right to freely consent to the combination of their personal data.

The EC says that to ensure compliance with the DMA, “users who do not consent should still get access to an equivalent service which uses less of their personal data, in this case for the personalisation of advertising.” 

What Next For Meta? 

Further to being informed of the EC’s preliminary findings, Meta can now exercise its rights of defence, i.e. by examining the documents in the EC’s investigation file and replying in writing to the EC’s preliminary findings. The EC’s investigation is scheduled to conclude within 12 months from the opening of proceedings (on 25 March 2024).

What If Meta Is Found To Be Breaching EU Rules? 

If the EC’s preliminary views are found to be confirmed and it decides Meta’s model really doesn’t comply with Article 5(2) of the DMA, it could impose fines up to 10 per cent of Meta’s total worldwide turnover! For repeated infringement, this fine could even be increased to 20 per cent. In the extreme case of “systematic non-compliance”, the EC could take additional measures such as obliging Meta to sell a business (or parts of it) or to ban Meta from acquisitions of additional services related to the systemic non-compliance.

Constructive 

For the moment, however, the EC says it is continuing “constructive engagement with Meta” to identify a satisfactory path towards compliance.

What Does This Mean For Your Business? 

The European Commission’s investigation into Meta’s ‘pay or consent’ model is a significant development with broad implications for businesses in the UK and beyond. The Commission’s findings highlight the increasing regulatory scrutiny on how tech giants manage user data and the necessity for compliance with stringent data protection laws like the Digital Markets Act (DMA).

For Meta, this scrutiny could potentially lead to substantial operational and financial changes. If the investigation confirms the preliminary findings, Meta may face hefty fines, as much as 10 per cent of its global revenue, or even 20 per cent for repeated offences. Such financial penalties would not only impact Meta’s profitability but could also mean a restructuring of its business model in the EU – certainly things that Meta would want to avoid.

At the moment, however, these are only preliminary findings and ‘constructive’ negotiations are under way. It has nevertheless sent a warning shot across their bows that the EC is watching and is serious about enforcement from the outset, thereby underscoring the importance of adhering to regulatory requirements and maintaining transparent data practices.

Other big tech companies, particularly those operating within the EU, should take note of this investigation. The EC’s rigorous approach is also a signal of a broader regulatory trend that takes consumer rights and fair competition more seriously. Google, Apple, and similar companies must therefore ensure their policies align with DMA provisions to avoid similar investigations and potential penalties. This will mean proactive compliance strategies, where businesses regularly audit and adjust their data handling practices to meet evolving regulatory standards.

For UK businesses, particularly those in the tech and digital sectors, the implications are twofold. First, understanding and complying with EU regulations remains crucial, especially for businesses with a significant user base or operational presence in Europe. The DMA’s focus on fair competition and consumer protection could lead to stricter data governance requirements, necessitating adjustments in how data is collected, stored, and utilised.

Secondly, this development may offer a competitive edge to businesses that adhere to ethical data practices and who are transparent. By aligning with regulatory standards and demonstrating a commitment to user privacy, UK businesses can build trust and differentiate themselves in a market increasingly concerned with data protection.

In essence, therefore, this ongoing investigation into Meta’s practices (as well as Google and Apple) serves as a reminder of the critical importance of regulatory compliance in the digital age, and that the EU area is getting serious about data protection and competition where tech firms are concerned. Businesses should, therefore, stay informed about legal developments, proactively engage with regulatory frameworks, and pay serious attention to matters of user privacy and data governance.

In this insight, we look at how recent reports have revealed how the UK’s public sector is facing the dual challenges of potentially losing £300 million through restrictive cloud licensing and the limitations of an open-source software skills gap.

Restrictive Cloud Licensing Costs 

A report from the cross-party think tank, The Social Market Foundation (SMF), has shown that due to restrictive rules on cloud software licensing, the public sector looks set to waste more than £300 million over the next 5 years (£60 million per year over the next five years). According to the report, this is because current software licensing rules are making it harder to switch between providers, thus keeping public sector organisations locked into pricey deals.

The SMF says its report has only accounted for the costs of restrictions to users’ ability to freely use Office 365 and the overcharge of using SQL Server on third-party infrastructure, yet the actual additional costs incurred by all software licensing practices may be much higher.

The Benefits Of One Provider Wiped Out By Costs 

The UK government mandates that central departments adopt cloud services and, therefore, encourages public sector organisations to improve technological efficiency and to find savings within public services. One method of achieving savings in the public sector has been to choose one central (cloud) provider that delivers the full range of services required. However, as one IT professional (quoted by the SMF) recently pointed out, there’s “positives to having one provider with a suite of things that work together very well, but the challenge of that is you’re tied in”. 

Effect Worse On Public Sector 

The SMF says that while licensing costs and complications also affect the private sector, the overall detriment is likely to be worse in the public sector. For example, excess costs are financed by the taxpayer and may mean diverting resources from other government objectives or budgets, thereby resulting not just in direct financial costs but also in preventing the UK from achieving its technological, economic, and security goals.

An Economic, Technical, and Social Issue 

Jake Shepherd, Senior Researcher at SMF, said of the report’s findings: “Our research shows that restrictive software licensing practices squander millions of pounds – taxpayers’ money that could fund vital public services and boost national productivity – while interviews with public sector IT professionals reveal the ‘real’ day-to-day operational costs. Software licensing isn’t just a technical issue – there’s an economic and social imperative to ensure it works smoothly and prevents needless wastage of public resources in the future.” 

The Open Source Challenge 

Open source is integral to the UK’s digital economy, contributing significantly to business growth and competitiveness and the public sector is encouraged to increase its participation in open source projects to leverage these benefits further.

However, the recent ‘State of open report’ from OpenUK, a UK-based organisation promoting open source software, hardware, and data, has also highlighted how there is a gap in the skills and understanding of open source in the public sector.

Substantial Public Engagement With Open Source 

OpenUK’s report, which uses a collection of data from NHS Digital, Government Digital Service, and the Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy has revealed the existence of 1780 GitHub repositories with 14,910 stars and 745,000 commits. OpenUK says this is evidence of “substantial public sector engagement with open source software in the UK” and highlights how the public sector embracing open source “aligns with government digital transformation goals, driving better public services and fostering a culture of continuous improvement”. Also, OpenUK says by leveraging open source, the UK public sector can address “complex challenges more effectively, ensuring robust, scalable, and secure digital infrastructure that supports economic resilience and growth”. 

Not Enough 

Despite these levels of engagement in open source by the public sector, OpenUK’s ‘Phase Two: The Open Manifesto Report’ highlights the need for policymakers to build skills in open source software to help the UK (public sector) make better use of open source and to improve AI openness. Some of the challenges to achieving this, identified in the report, include:

– A skills shortage / a significant lack of expertise in open source technologies within the public sector. This skills gap hinders the effective implementation and management of open-source projects. Training and upskilling initiatives could help address this issue. For example, OpenUK’s CEO, Amanda Brock, has said that working with people who learn to code in open source and contribute to open source code repositories is one way to help tackle the UK skills gap.

– A lack of coherent policies and governance frameworks for managing open-source contributions within many public sector organisations. This results in inconsistent practices and potential compliance issues and highlights the need for comprehensive policies and standardisation.

– Security concerns. For example, security is a significant concern with open-source adoption and public sector organisations often struggle with balancing cost and security, leading to vulnerabilities. Security in the development and deployment of open-source solutions is, therefore, crucial.

– Resistance to the cultural shift required for adopting open source technologies. Traditional public sector environments find it challenging to move towards more collaborative and transparent working practices.

– Resource Allocation. Financial constraints and competing priorities make it difficult for public sector organisations to allocate the necessary resources for open-source initiatives. Strategic investment and prioritisation are needed to overcome these barriers.

OpenUK has, therefore, called on the public sector to develop skills to curate open source well, and on policymakers to gain a greater understanding of open technologies to avoid a continued reliance upon multi-year contracts from “legacy IT providers and consultancies”.

AI Too 

In the report, Jennifer Barth, chief research officer at OpenUK, also points to the growth of the UK’s AI repositories as evidence of “the dynamism and innovation within the UK’s AI community, bolstered by open source principles”.

What Does This Mean For Your Business? 

For UK businesses, the insights from these reports show a pressing need to address both the challenges of restrictive cloud licensing and the open-source skills gap within the public sector. The repercussions of these issues are multifaceted, affecting financial efficiency, technological advancement, and overall competitiveness.

The substantial costs associated with restrictive cloud licensing (estimated at £300+ million over the next five years) highlight the importance of flexibility in software procurement. Businesses can learn from this by advocating for more open and competitive licensing agreements. This approach not only reduces costs but also fosters innovation by avoiding vendor lock-in. By negotiating contracts that allow easier transitions between providers, businesses can ensure they are not overpaying for services and can quickly adapt to better solutions as they emerge.

The public sector’s struggle with open-source software adoption due to a skills shortage could be seen as an opportunity for businesses to invest in training and upskilling their workforce. Open-source technologies can offer significant benefits, including cost savings, enhanced security, and the ability to drive innovation through collaboration. By developing in-house expertise in open source, the public sector and the private sector, businesses can improve their technological resilience and reduce dependency on proprietary solutions. This, in turn, can lead to more agile and responsive IT strategies, essential in today’s fast-paced digital landscape.

The identified lack of coherent policies and governance frameworks for open source usage in the public sector could also be seen as a cautionary tale for private enterprises. The challenges faced by the public sector in allocating resources to open-source initiatives show a need for strategic investment in technology. Businesses should, therefore, look at investment in open-source projects and technologies to remain competitive.

These findings from the SMF and OpenUK reports appear to offer valuable lessons not just for the public sector, but for all UK businesses. Embracing flexible licensing agreements, investing in open-source skills, establishing robust governance, fostering a collaborative culture, and strategically allocating resources can improve flexibility, scalability, security, and cost-efficiency.

A team of Researchers at Tokyo University have found a way to bind engineered living skin tissue to robots with the hope of benefitting the cosmetics industry and helping to train plastic surgeons.

New Method Of Adhesion 

The team (led by Professor Shoji Takeuchi) has reported that whereas previous methods to attach skin tissue to solid surfaces involved mini anchors or hooks, which limited the kinds of surfaces that could receive skin coatings, the new successful method mimics human skin-ligament structures. The new method uses specially made V-shaped perforations in solid materials, thereby enabling the team to bind skin to complex structures. The natural flexibility of the skin with this effective method of adhesion means that the skin can move along with the mechanical components of robots without tearing or peeling away.

Created A Smiling Face 

Professor Takeuchi highlighted how, in their latest research, the team was able to “replicate human appearance to some extent by creating a face with the same surface material and structure as humans”. The photos of the prototype robot’s skin-covered face show it with a smile (achieved through actuation and via anchors).

New Challenges Identified 

Professor Takeuchi said that although the team has undertaken previous research on a finger-shaped robot covered in engineered skin tissue, this new research identified new challenges for future efforts. For example, the team discovered the need for skin surface wrinkles and a thicker epidermis to achieve a more humanlike appearance, suggesting that creating a thicker and more realistic skin could actually be achieved by incorporating sweat glands, sebaceous glands, pores, blood vessels, fat and nerves.

Looking to a future where robots could be covered in their own living skin layer, Professor Takeuchi acknowledged the importance of movement. He highlighted the challenge of creating humanlike expressions “by integrating sophisticated actuators, or muscles, inside the robot” and expressed how “incredibly motivating” is the thought of being able to create “robots that can heal themselves, sense their environment more accurately and perform tasks”. 

Professor Takeuchi also highlighted the scale and scope of the challenge of creating living skin for robots that’s self-healing, saying that “Self-healing is a big deal – some chemical-based materials can be made to heal themselves, but they require triggers such as heat, pressure or other signals, and they also do not proliferate like cells.” 

He added that “Biological skin repairs minor lacerations as ours does, and nerves and other skin organs can be added for use in sensing and so on.”

Goal 

Although they created a smiling skin face in the research, Takeuchi and his lab are keen to emphasise that they have a serious goal in mind for this application in terms of helping in several areas of medical research. For example, Takeuchi suggests that something like a “face-on-a-chip” could be useful in “research into skin aging, cosmetics, surgical procedures, plastic surgery and more”. Also, Takeuchi said that if sensors could be embedded, robots may be able to gain a better environmental awareness and improve their interactive capabilities.

What Does This Mean For Your Business? 

The apparent breakthrough achieved by Professor Shoji Takeuchi and his team at Tokyo University could signify a profound transformation in various industries, particularly cosmetics and medical training. For businesses in these sectors, the integration of living skin tissue onto robotic platforms presents exciting opportunities.

In the cosmetics industry, for example, this innovation could revolutionise product testing and development. Traditionally, cosmetic products undergo testing on synthetic materials or live animals, both of which have limitations and ethical concerns. However, the use of robots with human-like skin could offer a more accurate and ethical alternative. Companies could test how their products interact with human skin, including how they are absorbed, how they affect skin texture, and their long-term impacts. This method may not only ensure a higher fidelity of results but also align with increasing consumer demand for cruelty-free products.

For businesses involved in medical training and plastic surgery, the ability to simulate human skin on robotic models could be a real game-changer. These advanced robots could provide surgeons and medical students with realistic practice scenarios that better prepare them for real-life procedures. The potential to replicate various skin conditions, responses to surgical interventions, and healing processes on these models could enhance the educational experience and lead to better patient outcomes. Also, the development of self-healing skin technologies could extend the lifespan and utility of these training models, reducing costs and improving training efficacy.

This innovation could also open new avenues in fields such as robotics and human-computer interaction. Robots equipped with human-like skin and the ability to heal and sense their environment more accurately could lead to advancements in service robotics, elderly care, and rehabilitation. Businesses in these areas could see improvements in the functionality and acceptance of their robotic products, as the ability to mimic human touch and appearance enhances the user experience and trust.

The research also hints at future possibilities where robots could be more seamlessly integrated into daily life, performing tasks that require a human touch. For instance, in hospitality or customer service industries, robots with human-like skin could provide more personalised and engaging interactions, setting new standards for customer experience.

Overall, the development of robots with living skin tissue is not just a scientific curiosity but appears to be a significant leap forward with practical implications. Businesses that adapt and integrate this technology early may expect to lead in their respective fields, offering innovative solutions that were previously unimaginable. Whether through enhancing product testing, improving medical training, or advancing interactive robotics, this breakthrough could provide a unique competitive edge and open up a world of new possibilities.

NASA has given Elon Musk’s SpaceX the contract to ‘deorbit’ (and destroy) the International Space Station at the end of its operation as NASA transitions to commercially owned space destinations closer to home.

SpaceX To Develop The Deorbit Vehicle 

US space agency NASA has chosen SpaceX to develop and deliver the U.S. Deorbit Vehicle that NASA says will “ensure a safe and responsible transition in low Earth orbit at the end of station operations”, i.e. it will tow the space station into low earth orbit before it burns up on re-entry. NASA reports that while SpaceX will develop the deorbit spacecraft, NASA will take ownership after development and operate it throughout its mission. NASA also says that along with the space station, SpaceX’s Deorbit Vehicle “is expected to destructively breakup as part of the re-entry process.” 

When? 

The International Space Station has been in operation since 1998 and NASA says the United States, Japan, Canada, and the participating countries of ESA have committed to operating the station through 2030.

How Much? 

The contract for SpaceX to make the Deorbit Vehicle is thought be worth $843 million.

Whose Responsibility? 

Although SpaceX is to make the Deorbit Vehicle, NASA says the safe deorbit of the International Space Station is the responsibility of all five space agencies – CSA (Canadian Space Agency), ESA (European Space Agency), JAXA (Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency), NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration), and Russian State Space Corporation Roscosmos.

Where Will It Land? 

It is expected that any parts of the space station and Deorbit Vehicle that don’t fully break up on re-entry will land in the ocean with NASA saying the actions of the Deorbit Vehicle will “ensure avoidance of risk to populated areas.” 

What If It Hits Your House? 

Although NASA’s plans sound good, try telling that to a Florida family who are currently suing NASA after a 1.6lb (725g), 4ins by 1.6ins part from the International Space Station crashed through their roof and floor. Thankfully, none of the family, who are seeking $80,000 (£63,000) for the stress and impact on their lives, were physically injured. According to NASA, the metal part that hit their home was the result of ground controllers using a robotic arm on the space station to release an almost 3-ton cargo pallet containing “aging batteries” back in March 2021.

Mica Nguyen Worthy, the lawyer for the Oteros family, has been quoted as saying: “Here, the U.S. government, through NASA, has an opportunity to set the standard or ‘set a precedent’ as to what responsible, safe, and sustainable space operations ought to look like. If NASA were to take the position that the Oteros’ claims should be paid in full, it would send a strong signal to both other governments and private industries that such victims should be compensated regardless of fault”. 

Space Debris 

Space debris has become a significant problem due to the increasing number of satellites and space missions, leading to a crowded orbital environment. For example, it’s estimated that there are approximately 36,500 pieces of space debris larger than 10 centimetres, about 1 million pieces between 1 and 10 centimetres, and around 130 million pieces smaller than 1 centimetre currently orbiting Earth.

This debris poses risks to active satellites, spacecraft, and indeed, the International Space Station, potentially causing collisions and generating more debris in a dangerous feedback loop known as the ‘Kessler Syndrome’. With this danger in mind, the ‘Space Liability Convention’ of 1972 was created to establish the liability of countries for damage caused by their space objects.

What Does This Mean For Your Business? 

The decision by NASA to entrust SpaceX with the task of deorbiting the International Space Station (ISS) heralds a new era in commercial space operations, signalling some perhaps significant implications for businesses. As the ISS’s operations transition to commercially owned space destinations, companies in the aerospace sector are poised to gain unprecedented opportunities. SpaceX’s $843 million contract not only highlights the increasing role of private entities in space but also the potential for lucrative government contracts and partnerships in an evolving space economy.

For businesses, this shift could mean an expanding market for innovation in space technologies. Companies involved in developing deorbiting vehicles, space debris mitigation, and sustainable space operations may expect increased demand for their expertise. The collaborative approach required by the five space agencies overseeing the ISS deorbiting operation also suggests a growing need for international cooperation and compliance with space liability conventions, making regulatory and legal expertise in space law more valuable than ever.

Also, the challenges highlighted by incidents such as the Oteros family’s lawsuit against NASA underline the importance of risk management strategies. The outcome of this lawsuit could, for example, set a significant legal precedent for how liabilities from space debris impacts are handled, potentially influencing policies and compensation frameworks globally. Businesses need to be prepared for potential liabilities associated with space operations, including debris impact on Earth, and adapt their operations to mitigate such risks effectively.

This scenario presents an opportunity for businesses to develop advanced tracking, monitoring, and risk mitigation solutions to ensure the safety and sustainability of space activities. The case also demonstrates the need for companies to engage in proactive legal and insurance planning to manage potential claims and safeguard their operations.

In essence, the move to commercialise space destinations and manage space debris responsibly potentially opens many of avenues for businesses to innovate and expand. Staying ahead in this competitive landscape will require agility, a commitment to sustainability, and an understanding of the complex regulatory environment governing space operations. As space becomes a more integral part of our economic infrastructure, businesses that can perhaps seize new opportunities position themselves as significant players in the growing space industry.

Finally, on the subject of space, it’s also worth noting here that NASA’s plans to return to the Moon, through the Artemis program, may also bring commercial opportunities. For example, the lunar missions will require new technologies, habitats, and supply chains, presenting another vast market for companies involved in space exploration and infrastructure. A move to greater lunar exploration will undoubtedly bring a need for innovative solutions and partnerships to support sustainable operations, e.g. on the Moon and beyond.