Frost & Sullivan's Information & Communications Technology (ICT) team conducted a small-scale survey, Global Next Wave Technology Disruptors, 2018, of 112 thought leaders from around the world to seek opinions on the technologies that will have a profound transformative impact on existing industry dynamics, value chains, and business models across multiple vertical markets in the next 10 years.

In addition to providing quantitative insight, the study also provides a top-level assessment of eight emerging technologies: 5G, Artificial Intelligence (AI), Blockchain and Distributed Ledger, Human Brain-Computer Interface, Human Intelligence Augmentation, Internet of Things (IoT), Natural Language Interfaces (NLIs) and Quantum Computing.

"Numerous technologies with limited adoption/availability at present will rise in relevance over the next ten years. 5G will play an important role over the next five years as commercial deployments commence, while Quantum Computing is set to have a huge impact in the coming decade," said Adrian Drozd, Research Director, ICT. "However, thinking of these emerging technologies in isolation will limit their effectiveness. For instance, IoT cannot reach its potential without AI, and AI can be powerful only by accessing the data generated by IoT."

"Technologies will reach maturity at different times; while some are already widely used, others are still in the development phase," noted Drozd. "Technology development should be guided by the use cases and real-life deployments that the solutions promise to enable."

New technologies are emerging at an unprecedented rate, each promising to be the next transformative force that will drive fundamental shifts across industries and society. Companies looking to tap growth opportunities in their respective sectors should consider joining Frost & Sullivan's global IoT & Digital Transformation Growth Partnership Service program.

Casinos and gambling websites, already adept at tilting long-term odds in their favor, are getting a leg up from technology that could inject even more certainty into their profit calculations.

The Catch. Experts worry that tweaks nudging gamers to play more – and bet bigger – could propel some toward excess and addiction.

The Big Picture. AI and data analytics are making it easier to forecast even the most uncertain outcomes. Technology firms have built a massive new economy on the ability to predict people's behavior accurately.

• For marketers, this means unprecedented access to the tiny, personalized levers that are most likely to get you to buy or do something.
• If you're being sold ice cream, no big deal. But for the millions of people with gambling problems, a lot can ride on a $50 offer for free play or a comped hotel stay – perfectly tailored and timed to hit home.
• https.//www.leg.state.mn.us/docs/2018/mandated/180251.pdf
  
  

"For youth or players with serious gambling problems, the negative impacts of AI-based marketing and gambling operations can be devastating and even life-threatening," says Keith Whyte, executive director of the National Council on Problem Gambling.

What's Happening. Where pit bosses once kept tabs on players and doled out offers by feel, technology is now supercharging marketing and promotions that best influence each gambler.

• Casinos are "tracking everything you do," says Andrew Engel, general manager for gaming at DataRobot, an AI startup. "They know how much you're in for, how much you play, how long you play, what types of games you like to play." 
• They've been collecting information for decades, mostly through longstanding loyalty programs. "It's a hell of a lot of data," says Anthony Chong, CEO of data analytics startup IKASI.
  
  

Details. To entice people to spend more, casinos use their troves of data to tweak every aspect of the gambling experience – from marketing and casino layout to the incentives and freebies that get people through the door and then keep them inside. 

"From a public health perspective, this is a big concern," says Silvia Kairouz, director of the Lifestyle and Addiction Research Lab at Concordia University in Montreal.

• "The vast majority of gamblers gamble with a budget," says James Whelan, co-director of the Institute of Gambling Education and Research at the University of Memphis.
• But for the minority prone to gambling problems, targeted marketing "can be destructive," Whelan says.
  ​
  

What Casinos Are Saying. Casino defenders say the worries are overblown, and that analyzing playing data can help problem gamblers rather than hurt them.

• "I don't believe that more efficient offers are just all of a sudden going to trigger problems for large numbers of people," says Alan Feldman, a former MGM executive who chairs the Nevada State Advisory Committee on Problem Gambling.
• Several companies, like BetBuddy and Mr. Green, say they can automatically flag problematic gambling habits based on dozens of risk factors and intervene.
• "The industry is constantly exploring new and emerging technologies, like artificial intelligence, to gain a deeper understanding of our customers and provide the right resources for our customers to enjoy our products responsibly,” says Elizabeth Cronan of the American Gaming Association.

A bipartisan act designed to rein in unwanted robocalls in the U.S. passed through the House of Representatives in a decisive 429-3 vote last Wednesday, pushing the legislation one step closer to ratification.

The Stopping Bad Robocalls Act, sponsored by Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ), aims to put an end to spam phone calls by leveling carrier requirements and bolstering Federal Communications Commission authority to take action against offenders.

Under the bill, carriers must implement call authentication technology like STIR/SHAKEN and offer call-blocking services to customers free of charge. Further, the FCC is directed to issue rules protecting customers from unsolicited communications, enact safeguards against robocall exemption abuse and report back to Congress on program effectiveness.

A provision also grants the FCC a more robust set of punitive options when dealing with robocallers. For example, the commission can take action against an offender up to four years after an initial violation, up from the one year afforded under the current statute of limitations.

The legislation passed with immense support from members on both sides of the aisle.

"Today, the House of Representatives voted to restore Americans' confidence in the telephone system and put consumers back in charge of their phones," the bill's sponsors said in a statement. "We're proud of the strong support our bipartisan Stopping Bad Robocalls Act received this afternoon and look forward to working with our colleagues in the Senate to produce a bill that the President can sign into law. The American people are counting on us to help end the robocall epidemic, and we will deliver for them."
​
Apple, too, is working on technology to slow the robocalling plague, which according to an FCC report resulted in some 48 billion unwanted calls in 2018. The Cupertino tech giant's upcoming iOS 13 operating system includes a new feature that uses artificial intelligence to identify and silence incoming calls from unknown parties.

If you are planning any trips that are off the grid and yet still want access to phone and internet, then you need to become familiar with the Iridium satellite constellation. With satellites orbiting approximately 485 miles above the earth, this network offers global phone and data coverage, no cell towers or Wi-Fi hotspots required.

There are several kits that allow you access to the Iridium system, and one of the best is the Iridium GO! Package. The basic package comes with the Iridium GO! base station, carry case, and AC travel charger with international adapter and is suitable for those who have access to electricity. 

It's priced at $699 but remember that there are additional activation fees and a Iridium network subscription plan required (and this can be quite expensive).

The Iridium GO! Offers 15.5 hours of standby battery life, and up to 5.5 hours of talk time.

For those who genuinely want to go off-grid, there's also a special package that includes not only the Iridium GO! base station and AC travel charger with international adapter, but also comes with a solar charger, two batteries additional, and a desktop charger. This is priced at a heftier $1,095.

There are also marine and aviation equipment packages available.

Iridium GO! supports a full range of global communications using optimized apps:
                    •   Voice calls
                   •   Text messaging
                   •   Email access
                   •   Weather updates
                   •   Customized third-party apps
                   •   Emergency alerts (SOS)
                   •   Photo sharing
                   •   GPS tracking
                   •   Posting to Facebook/Twitter
​
If you need to be in communication when off the grid, this is the perfect kit. Yes, it's expensive, and the subscriptions add a great deal more to the cost, but you are accessing a satellite network, not a router in the back of a café!

One of the highlights of MIT’s Emtech Next Conference in June was a debate on whether we should tax robots. We heavily tax human workers, so why not the machines that replace them? Then, goes the theory, that tax money could help provide training or benefits for workers who’ve lost their jobs to automation.

Ryan Abbott, a law professor at Surrey University, presented a convincing case for such a tax– or, more precisely, for removing the tax incentives that favor automation over human labor. Many business decisions to automate processes, argued Abbott, are driven by these tax advantages, not because the robots are more productive. If automation is more efficient, suggested Abbott, let that be the reason businesses decide to use it – not some tax break.

The counter-arguments from Ryan Avent, economics columnist at the Economist, were that taxes (or ending tax breaks) would slow innovation, and, in any case, there is little economic evidence that robots are taking over jobs. While these points appear to be less convincing, a robot tax alone won’t solve the lack of good jobs. But removing the financial incentives that favor automation over humans will at least create a level playing field.

Even more erroneous is the argument that a robot tax is a slippery slope: are they going to tax my Roomba or smart toaster next? Somehow, we manage to tax labor, and yet you can still mow your lawn and clean your house without paying the government.

Alas, the Emtech Next attendees disagreed, with 70% voting against the robot tax after hearing the debate.
One of the recurring themes at the conference was that businesses could better exploit automation and AI not just for their own efficiency, but to improve productivity and grow the economy as a whole. How? A pair of engineers, Meera Sampath at the State University of New York and Pramod P. Khargonekar at the University of California, Irvine, presented their plan for “socially responsible automation,” which starts with getting technologists to think harder about how their creations will actually be used and how those uses can benefit workers and society.

A shout-out to workers: Too often in these discussions of how automation and AI are affecting jobs, the voices of workers themselves are absent. MIT’s Thomas Kochan, speaking at the conference, at least provided a reminder to listen to such views, even in the early stages of product designs, and to involve them more in automation decisions. And, he argued, companies need to take the time to give their existing workforce the skills and training necessary to integrate them with changes in automation better.

Let’s admit it, every time we hear the word “co-bot” we cringe. Yes, there have been remarkable advances in robotics over the last decade that allow these machines to more safely and comfortably work alongside people and do more human-like tasks. And, yes, we know the promise is that, by taking over mundane tasks, these robots will free people up to do more interesting and, hopefully, productive ones.

But that’s a business decision that too often companies are not taking; instead, many are simply replacing their workers. If robots do 20% of the tasks that a worker was doing, then you need 20% fewer people to get the job done.

It’s become increasingly clear to economists that this one reason we’re facing a crisis: wages are flat, and job opportunities are limited for many workers.

MIT economist Daron Acemoglu blames this on what he calls “so-so” automation and technologies. Advances like automation should be a boon to productivity, but productivity growth has been sluggish for more than a decade. That, says Acemoglu, is because too often companies are automating jobs even when the machines are not more productive, because of the tax mentioned above distortions and a general enthusiasm for robots. So, you have a double whammy; not only are robots replacing workers, they’re not particularly adept at growing the economy.

The way out is to create new, productive tasks for the workers replaced by the automation. (That’s what happened in the past). And that’s where AI could be useful. Examples are not that hard to imagine. For instance, if you free up healthcare workers, such as radiologists and nurses, from routine tasks, they could use AI systems to collect and analyze far more patient data, expanding their capabilities and giving them new ways to advise and treat patients. Acemoglu cites similar examples existing in education and manufacturing.
​
But, and this is key, Acemoglu warns that this won’t necessarily happen on its own. You can’t leave this up to the markets or the technologists. We need to pursue this goal deliberately.

Microsoft’s Windows 10 OS has been facing multiple problems in recent months. In the latest development, Microsoft has now released an important new Windows 10 warning to 800 million users. 

The company has identified a serious and long-running bug on its OS platform. The bug is more of a problem that was inadvertently introduced through design implementations. Microsoft has admitted to quietly switching off Registry backups in Windows 10. It has been observed that Registry backups would randomly show that backup operation has been completed despite no backup file being created. 

For users and businesses, Registry Backups are critical, as they are the last line of defense. If the Windows System Restore point fails, the registry backup is the only option for users. According to Microsoft, “Starting in Windows 10, version 1803, Windows no longer automatically backs up the system registry to the RegBack folder. If you browse to the WindowsSystem32configRegBack folder in Windows Explorer, you will still see each registry hive, but each file is 0kb in size.” 

Windows 10 1803 was released in October last year. While users flagged the issue to Microsoft, the company never admitted it. The disclosure comes just two months after Microsoft pledged to offer control, quality, and transparency to Windows 10 users. 

According to Microsoft, the company has done this to reduce the overall disk footprint size of Windows. The registry backup is usually 50 to 100 MB in size. To recover the system with a corrupt registry hive, Microsoft recommends using a system restore point. You can enable the period registry backup by manually editing the registry entry. 
​
Windows will back up the registry to the RegBack folder when the computer restarts. Windows stores the task information in the Scheduled Task Library in the Registry folder.

Microsoft and Oracle recently said they reached an agreement to make their two cloud computing services work together with high-speed links between their data centers, targeting significant business users and uniting against cloud computing leader Amazon Web Services. 

The two companies said the high-speed link between their data centers would start with facilities in the eastern United States and spread to other regions. They will also work together to let joint users login to services from either company with a single user name and get tech support from either company. 

The move comes as both Oracle and Microsoft are courting large businesses and government customers considering moving computing tasks currently handled in their own data centers to cloud providers. 

“With Oracle’s enterprise expertise, this alliance is a natural choice for us as we help our joint customers accelerate the migration of enterprise applications and databases to the public cloud,” Microsoft’s cloud chief Scott Guthrie said in a statement. 

AWS, the largest cloud computing provider, is encroaching on many of those customers, including in Oracle’s historical stronghold in the database market. 

“With this alliance, our joint customers can migrate their entire set of existing applications to the cloud without having to re-architect anything, preserving the large investments they have already made,” Don Johnson, executive vice president of Oracle’s cloud infrastructure unit, said in a statement. 

Microsoft has previously inked a deal with German software maker SAP SE and Adobe to make their services work better together. 

Ed Anderson, a Gartner research analyst, said the move was a clear “jab” at AWS, especially for Oracle. “It’s no secret that Oracle views AWS as a major competitor in the database market,” he said. 

Anderson also said there remained some unanswered questions about the deal, such as whether customers would face data transfer fees for moving large amounts of information back and forth between services. 

But overall, Anderson said the move would likely benefit Microsoft and Oracle by helping their pitch to large businesses already using services from both. 
​
“It’s a great way for both companies to be able to hitch their cloud offerings together,” Anderson said.

Regulators in the US have taken a big step toward bringing antitrust suits against American tech giants, but they face a long road ahead.

Amazon, Apple, Google, and Facebook are facing unprecedented scrutiny in their own backyard. The US Department of Justice (DoJ) and the Federal Trade Commission are preparing antitrust investigations into the companies, and plan to divvy up the work. As the news emerged, the firm’s share prices were hammered, a clear signal that Wall Street believes the Feds mean business.

Congress also plans to put the companies under the microscope. The Judiciary Committee of the House of Representatives said it's launching a wide-ranging investigation of the market power of the tech giants.

The obvious question is: why now? The European Union has been sounding the alarm about Big Tech’s super-sized influence for years – and imposing massive fines on Google in particular for anti-competitive behavior.

The most likely answer is American politics. Some prominent Democrats, including senator and presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren, have been calling loudly for tech giants to be broken up to stop them harming consumers’ interests. With a presidential election on the horizon, the Republicans likely want to be seen as tough on Big Tech, too. There’s also a widespread suspicion of Silicon Valley’s liberal tendencies. President Donald Trump has a history of trading barbs with Jeff Bezos, Amazon’s boss, and regularly rails against what he sees as social media and search companies’ anti-conservative bias.

Politics aside, there’s plenty for antitrust watchdogs to sink their teeth into. Amazon is accused of using data from its online platform to gain an unfair advantage over other sellers. The EU has already punishedGoogle's manipulation of search results to favor its businesses. Apple’s fighting a private lawsuit which alleges its 30% take on apps sold in its apps store is an abuse of monopoly power. And Facebook dominates the digital ad market together with Google.

Critics such as Warren have used sporting analogies to justify calls for breaking up the tech giants. “You can get to be the umpire in a baseball game, or you can have a team in the game, but you don’t get to be the umpire and have a team in the game,’ she tweeted earlier this year.

If any of the tech giants are found guilty of anti-competitive behavior, they’re likely to be hit with Hefty fines and other sanctions. That may not be enough to satisfy people like Warren, but trying to force through a breakup of one or more of the companies will be tough to do because:

1.Big tech firms have generally made their services available for free. US antitrust law focuses primarily on whether a monopolist has harmed consumers by driving up prices and restricting investment in a market. While firms like Facebook and Google certainly aren’t paragons when it comes to things like privacy, they’ve provided a cornucopia of free stuff to consumers and invest heavily in R&D. That doesn’t mean they can’t be sanctioned for abusing their market power to, say, manipulate search results in ways that drive up prices. But it would be hard to prove they have harmed consumers broadly in the eyes of the law.

2.They aren’t “natural monopolies” like those found in, say, the utility industry, where the cost to enter a market is so vast other companies are dissuaded from doing so, allowing incumbents to drive up prices. The challenge would-be rivals face is to overcome the “network effects” that underpin the big tech companies’ success. A service like Amazon has a magnetic attraction for buyers because they know they will find plenty of the sellers on its platform. And as more buyers roll up, even more sellers will want to join. This will undoubtedly deter competition, but it’s not illegal.

3.Big tech firms dominate data gathering and use insights to provide even more free services. The vast number of customers using their products mean Big Tech firms benefit from what’s helpful to think of as a data snowball. The more customers they attract, the more data they can harvest from them. That information is then used to tailor new services that attract even more users. This cycle is even more powerful in the era of AI, which relies on crunching vast amounts of data for its efficacy.
​
The Microsoft precedent: None of this may deter US regulators, who can draw on Microsoft’s experience in the 1990s for inspiration. The DoJ tried to split Microsoft up to stop it bundling its Internet Explorer web browser with its dominant Windows operating system. The effort failed, but the bruising court battles harmed the company’s reputation and curbed its anti-competitive instincts. History could be about to repeat itself in the internet era.

On the heels of Google buying analytics startup Looker last week for $2.6 billion, Salesforce today announced a huge piece of news in a bid to step up its own work in data visualization and tools to help enterprises make sense of the sea of data that they use and amass: Salesforce is buying Tableau for $15.7 billion in an all-stock deal.

The latter is publicly traded, and this deal will involve shares of Tableau Class A and Class B common stock getting exchanged for 1.103 shares of Salesforce common stock, the company said, and so the $15.7 billion figure is the enterprise value of the transaction, based on the average price of Salesforce’s shares as of June 7, 2019.

This is a significant jump on Tableau’s last market cap ($10.79 billion two days earlier.)

This is a massive deal for Salesforce as it continues to diversify beyond CRM software and into deeper layers of analytics to offer a 360-degree view of the customer and become a de facto data stack for the enterprise.
The company reportedly worked hard to buy LinkedIn but lost out to Microsoft. While there isn’t a whole lot in common between LinkedIn and Tableau, this deal will also help Salesforce extend its engagement (and data intelligence) for the customers that Salesforce already has — something that LinkedIn would have also helped it to do.

Even with Google’s move to buy Looker, one could argue that analytics is a big enough area that all major tech companies are getting their ducks in a row with stronger data analytics strategies and products. It’s unclear whether the two deals were made in response to each other, although it seems that Salesforce has been eyeing Tableau for years.

 “We are bringing together the world’s #1 CRM with the #1 analytics platform. Tableau helps people see and understand data, and Salesforce helps people engage and understand customers. It’s truly the best of both worlds for our customers – bringing together two critical platforms that every customer needs to understand their world,” said Marc Benioff, chairman, and co-CEO of Salesforce. “I’m thrilled to welcome Adam and his team to Salesforce.”

Tableau has about 86,000 business customers, including Charles Schwab, Verizon, Schneider Electric, Southwest and Netflix. Salesforce said Tableau would operate independently and under its own brand post-acquisition. It will also remain headquartered in Seattle, Wash., headed by CEO Adam Selipsky along with others on the current leadership team.

Indeed, later during an analyst conference call, Benioff let it drop that Seattle would become Salesforce’s official second headquarters with the closing of this deal.

That’s not to say, though, that the two will not be working together.

On the contrary, Salesforce is already talking up the possibilities of expanding what the company is already doing with its Einstein platform (launched back in 2016, Einstein is the home of all of Salesforce’s AI-based initiatives.) 

“Joining forces with Salesforce will enhance our ability to help people everywhere see and understand data,” said Selipsky. “As part of the world’s #1 CRM company, Tableau’s intuitive and powerful analytics will enable millions of more people to discover actionable insights across their entire organizations. I’m delighted that our companies share very similar cultures and a relentless focus on customer success. I look forward to working together in support of our customers and communities.”

“Salesforce’s incredible success has always been based on anticipating the needs of our customers and providing them the solutions they need to grow their businesses,” said Keith Block, co-CEO, Salesforce. “Data is the foundation of every digital transformation, and the addition of Tableau will accelerate our ability to deliver customer success by enabling a truly unified and powerful view across all of a customer’s data.”

Following its release of a pocket-sized handheld camera late last year, DJI – the Shenzhen-based tech company best known for its drones – has recently launched its first action camera, the Osmo Action. While the new camera is a latecomer to the game, it should compete well with similar products, such as the GoPro.

Design and Hardware.The Osmo Action doesn’t stray too far from conventional action camera design – it is small, rectangular-shaped and made of rugged composite material that combines plastic and rubber.
It is waterproof, shockproof and, at 124g, can be easily mounted on top of helmets, skateboards or bicycle handlebars.

There’s a 12-megapixel fisheye lens with a wide 145-degree field of vision. All of this is standard fare for action cameras and is neither better nor worse than GoPro’s Hero 7 Black in any meaningful way.

There is, however, one stand-out feature: in addition to the main screen on the backside of the camera, there is a secondary front-facing display, which has never been offered before on an action camera.

Having a front-facing screen improves shooting selfie videos significantly as it allows the user to see precisely what they’re recording. It makes so much sense in today’s selfie-centric vlogger generation that, in hindsight, it’s baffling why GoPro has never thought of this before.

The camera has three hardware buttons – power, shutter, and mode switch – and a responsive main screen that supports swiping and tapping. The bright, 2.3-inch main screen is large enough to let the user easily tweak shooting modes and settings.

The camera runs on a relatively small 1,300mAh battery, which offers about 90 minutes of recording time, but it is removable, and thus, interchangeable. The footage is stored on a micro-SD card, which is not included with the camera.

Software.The Osmo Action can connect to DJI’s Mimo app, available on both iOS and Android, and once linked; the camera can be controlled remotely with a mobile device. However, the device’s touch screen interface is so intuitive that most reviewers found little need to sync up the app.

The camera can capture videos at a wide range of resolutions, from 720p up to 4K/60fps. Shooting in lower resolution, such as 1080p, allows the camera to bump the framerate up to 240fps, ideal for capturing fast-moving moments.

Performance.Electronic image stabilization (EIS) is crucial for action cameras as they’re meant to shoot on the move, so it’s just as well DJI has years of experience writing EIS algorithms for its high-flying drone cameras.

The camera’s EIS mode is called “Rock Steady,” and it can be activated with a couple of taps. The reason DJI gives the option to toggle EIS on or off is that there are trade-offs.

Footage with “Rock Steady” on have a slightly smaller field of vision (digital cropping is essential for EIS) and dynamic range suffers due to lack of HDR (high dynamic range). You should turn the mode off to get the best video quality and colors if you’re shooting with the device in a stationary position, but anytime you’re moving, turn it on as the difference in fluidity and stability is drastic.

Conclusion.
At $380, the Osmo Action initially seemed expensive for someone who might not participate in extreme sports and who has tested fully capable smartphones for around that same price range.
​
Extreme sport participants who like to document their adventures used to have their options dominated by GoPros. At $349, DJI’s Osmo Action is offering a cheaper alternative to the GoPro’s Hero 7 Black at $420, and you get the front-facing second screen. Not surprisingly, GoPro has now reduced the price of the Hero 7 to $349! The Osmo Action may have just taken GoPro’s throne.