Verizon sells social media network Tumblr

Verizon revealed on August 12 that it is selling Tumblr, an early social media unicorn, to Automattic, the parent company of WordPress. The highly visual blogging platform – home of memes, fandoms and artistic communities – was acquired by Yahoo for $1.1bn in 2013. Three years later, Yahoo wrote down the value of that acquisition by $482m.

Verizon, which acquired Yahoo and its affiliated websites in 2017, has now sold Tumblr for well below $20m, according to Axios. Later reports indicated that the selling price could even be as low as $3m.

It’s been a steady fall from grace for a platform that once commanded significant influence in the social media sphere. As sites like Facebook, Instagram, YouTube and Reddit have grown in popularity, Tumblr has seen its traffic wane.

As sites like Facebook, Instagram, YouTube and Reddit have grown in popularity, Tumblr has seen its traffic wane

Verizon’s decision to ban porn from the platform last year further dented Tumblr’s popularity, as many saw the site’s tolerance of adult content as one of its key selling points, distinguishing it from more public platforms like Instagram. This also made it a refuge for the LGBTQ community, some of whom saw it as a safe space where they could freely express their sexuality. According to Sensor Tower, the number of Tumblr’s first-time users declined 33 percent year-over-year last quarter.

Automattic said in a statement that it did not plan on bringing huge change to Tumblr, implying also that the adult content ban would not be reversed. Instead, it hoped Tumblr would serve as a “complementary” site to its flagship brand, WordPress. As part of the sale, Automattic also takes on Tumblr’s technologies and 200 employees.

Despite Tumblr’s financial woes and diminishing influence, the 450 million blogs on the platform tend to be run by highly engaged and active users. It’s hoped that Automattic could be a better partner for the blogging site in the long-term. For Verizon, on the other hand, this marks a significant scaling back of its operations within the spheres of media and digital advertising.

Scientists create world’s thinnest gold

Scientists at the University of Leeds have created a form of gold that is only two atoms thick, making it the thinnest gold ever to be developed. The metal is one million times thinner than a human fingernail.

Because of its green appearance when underwater and its frond-like shape, the researchers behind the ultra-thin material refer to it as ‘gold nanoseaweed’. It is considered to be 2D, since it consists of just two layers of atoms.

Gold is highly effective as a catalytic substrate and is used to speed up chemical reactions in a number of industrial processes. This ultra-thin gold would be 10 times more efficient as a catalyst than the currently used gold nanoparticles, which are much larger.

Researchers believe the new ‘gold nanoseaweed’ could have a range of uses in the medical device and electronics industries

Researchers believe the new metal could have a range of uses in the medical device and electronics industries. It could also form the basis of artificial enzymes for use in water-purification systems and in point-of-care medical diagnostic tests.

It was announced on August 6 in the journal Advanced Science that the ultra-thin gold had been successfully synthesised. The journal paper’s lead author, Dr Sunjie Ye, described the work as a “landmark achievement”.

In 2004, graphene became the first 2D material to ever be created. It is promised to have a wide range of applications, from wearable technology and batteries to solar power. However, the fact that much remains unknown about the material’s potential 15 years after its discovery is testament to how long it can take for new materials to become widely adopted.

The research team behind the new gold is currently looking to scale up the synthesising process. It believes its work will not only open doors for the more efficient use of this precious metal across industries, but that it could also help material scientists to develop other 2D metals in the future.

Google increases its rewards for hackers

On July 18, Google increased its financial rewards for hackers who reveal vulnerabilities in Chrome and Google Play. So-called ‘bug bounty programs’ have become an established method among tech companies for incentivising individuals and hacker groups to find flaws in their systems. They help companies like Google to not only improve their services, but also disincentive hackers from selling or exploiting the flaws they uncover.

Google first began its bug bounty program in 2010. Since then, it has paid out over $15m. The Chrome Vulnerability Rewards Program alone has received more than 8,500 reports and given security researchers over $5m.

Bug bounty programs have become an established method among tech companies for incentivising individuals and hacker groups to find flaws in their systems

Needless to say, the work can be relatively lucrative for these researchers. One of the success stories of 2018 was Tomasz Bojarski from Poland. After discovering a security bug that could allow an attacker to alter a website, steal private data and even perform actions on behalf of a user, he earned enough reward money from Google to open a lodge and a restaurant.

Now Google is making its rewards even more tantalising. The company is tripling the maximum baseline reward from $5,000 to $15,000 and doubling the maximum reward from $15,000 to $30,000 for reports it deems to be of a high enough quality. For Chrome OS, Google is increasing the standing reward from $100,000 to $150,000 for revealing attacks that could compromise a Chromebook or Chromebox in guest mode. The company has also added reward categories for finding bugs that allow attackers to bypass Chrome OS’ lock screen.

Although these may seem like eye-watering sums of money to give to non-contracted workers, the programme is reasonably cost-effective for Google: hiring even a single programmer can often cost the company hundreds of thousands of dollars each year. More importantly, the financial and reputational damage that cyberattacks can cause more than legitimises this expenditure. When it comes to security, Google simply can’t afford to tighten its purse strings.

Artificial snow could save the Antarctic, researchers suggest

A new study released on July 17 put forward a radical plan to slow down climate change. Its authors propose bolstering the melting ice caps with 7.4 trillion tons of artificial snow, in a process known as ‘surface mass deposition’.

The gigantic West Antarctic Ice Sheet is melting at a faster rate than scientists previously predicted. If it disintegrates – as it is currently on course to do – it could cause the global sea level to rise by at least three metres, potentially submerging coastal cities such as Shanghai, Tokyo and New York.

The study proposes using wind turbines to power pumps that would transport vast amounts of seawater to the surface of the ocean. The water would then be desalinated and frozen into ‘snow’

The new study, which was published in the journal Science Advances, proposes using 12,000 wind turbines to power pumps that would transport vast amounts of seawater 1,500m up to the surface of the ocean. The water would then be desalinated and frozen into ‘snow’. The scientists behind the study argue that this snow would weigh down the ice sheet and slow its disintegration.

This is far from a foolproof solution, as the authors themselves point out. Pumping seawater up to the surface would require enormous amounts of energy and could risk dropping the global sea levels by several inches or disrupting the ocean’s circulation patterns.

The fact that this drastic proposal is being put forward is testament to an increasing sense of urgency and desperation among climate scientists. Until recently, geoengineering projects like this were usually dismissed on account of their costliness and impracticality. However, the scientific community is increasingly viewing such radical interventions as necessary to stave off a climate catastrophe.

“We are already at a point of no return if we don’t do anything,” Anders Levermann, co-author of the study and a professor at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, told Reuters.

Nonetheless, climate scientists warn that interventions like this should not be used as an excuse to forgo much-needed economic and societal changes, such as switching from fossil fuels to renewable energy. Ultimately, governments need to prioritise tackling global warming at its root cause rather than treating the symptoms.

Elon Musk unveils chip that will merge human brains with computers

At a live-streamed event on July 16, SpaceX and Tesla CEO Elon Musk revealed plans for a brain chip implant currently being developed by his start-up Neuralink. The company, which was launched in 2017, has so far raised a total of $158m to build computer-brain interfaces, but this is the first time the firm’s technology has been revealed to the public.

The Neuralink implant would enable humans to control computers using only their brain. Although not the first of its kind, Musk claims that his device has a superior design and a higher data processing capacity than other similar technology. It uses thin, flexible threads that, at four to six micrometres in width, are smaller than a strand of human hair. This means they could move with the brain instead of damaging the tissue in the same way that larger, more rigid implants might.

It’s likely that Neuralink has a long way to go in terms of earning trust and proving its viability before the implant becomes commercially available

The implant would be embedded using a surgical robot that was also debuted during the presentation. This works like a sewing machine by weaving the threads through the brain tissue without breaking any blood vessels.

With the help of brain implants, it’s hoped that paralysed humans could learn to control phones, computers or robotic limbs. The implants could be also be used to treat Parkinson’s disease through deep brain stimulation.

Another reason for developing the technology, according to Musk, is safeguarding humans against the existential threat of artificial intelligence. Rather than humans getting “left behind” by the technology, Musk wants to achieve a “symbiosis” between the two.

The implant has already been successful during animal trials, Musk announced at the event. Neuralink now hopes to begin human trials as early as next year, although the company has not yet received the FDA permission it needs to carry them out.

Musk is notorious for making grand claims about his companies’ technology only to experience setback after setback: both Tesla and SpaceX have received huge amounts of funding, and yet have so far struggled to demonstrate sustainable profitability. It’s likely that Neuralink has a long way to go in terms of earning trust and proving its viability before the implant becomes commercially available.

Amsterdam halts the creation of new data centres

Until recently, Amsterdam has been experiencing a data centre boom. Ultimately, this is a symptom of the city’s thriving tech sector: an increasing number of international tech companies have established themselves in Amsterdam, drawn by cheap electricity and attractive taxes.

However, the Dutch capital now believes it has too many data centres, with the Amsterdam Metropolitan Area announcing that it is preventing any more from being set up in the region until the end of the year.

The Amsterdam region is home to 70 percent of the data centres in the Netherlands and a third of all data centres in Europe

As more tech companies have moved to Amsterdam, the demand for data storage facilities has increased. Today, the region is home to 70 percent of the data centres in the Netherlands and a third of all data centres in Europe, with many of them having only opened in the last five years. Microsoft and Google each have data centres in the Netherlands, although they are outside the capital.

These centres are notorious energy guzzlers; the grid operator Liander estimates that data centres could use as much as 37 percent of the energy in Amsterdam by 2030. In addition to placing a significant strain on the region’s power grid, data centres take up a substantial amount of space and put pressure on the real estate market. Amsterdam’s property prices have hit record highs, partly driven by the demand for commercial property. The creation of new data centres only exacerbates this problem.

The data centre sector in Amsterdam has spoken out against the government’s decision: in a statement, the Dutch Data Centre Association warned that the move has “serious national consequences for the ambition of the Dutch Government to become a digital frontrunner”.

Amsterdam promises to resume the setting up of data centres once it has developed a new policy for the sector. It’s likely this new policy will aim to make facilities more energy efficient and climate-friendly. According to the Amsterdam Metropolitan Area’s official statement on the decision, it hopes to use the large amount of “residual heat” produced by data centres to “heat homes and thus contribute to the sustainability of the Amsterdam heat supply” in future.

Xi Jinping unveils world’s longest sea bridge

Chinese President Xi Jinping officially opened the world’s longest sea bridge on October 23, connecting Hong Kong and Macau with China’s Guangdong province.

The Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macau Bridge comprises a 35km overwater crossing, several kilometres of link roads and a 6.7km undersea tunnel between artificial islands to accommodate existing shipping lanes.

The $20bn bridge is part of a larger initiative by Xi to create a ‘Greater Bay Area’, which aims to connect the gambling hub of Macau and Hong Kong’s financial centre with the western reaches of the Pearl River Delta to create a $1.5trn ‘mega-region’.

Vice Premier Han Zheng said in a speech at the opening ceremony: “We firmly believe that the opening of this bridge will further develop the special advantage of Hong Kong and Macau.”

The bridge comprises a 35km overwater crossing, several kilometres of link roads and a 6.7km undersea tunnel

Shuttle buses and trucks will be allowed to use the bridge from October 24. Foot and cycle traffic is prohibited, while private vehicles will have to obtain a special permit to cross.

The bridge was first proposed in the late 1980s, but was opposed at the time by the British Government amid concerns that it would bring Hong Kong – which was at the time a British colony – closer to communist China. After Hong Kong returned to Chinese rule in 1997, the initiative was given the green light.

Construction of the bridge began in 2009 and was scheduled to finish in 2016, but was delayed as a result of budget and safety concerns. At least 18 workers died during the building process, officials have claimed.

Some critics have voiced concerns that the bridge may make Hong Kong more subservient to China, as the country has attempted to exert more control over its semi-autonomous neighbour in recent years. Hong Kong authorities, however, have quelled concerns by claiming that the initiative will consolidate its position as a regional aviation and logistics hub.

The bridge is located in the southern economic powerhouse of Guangdong, a key growth region for China that accounted for $1.42trn of annual GDP in 2017.

Many media commentators have noted the symbolic date of the bridge’s opening, which marks 40 years since the launch of significant economic reforms in China that transformed the economy from centrally planned to market-driven.

Chinese officials have claimed that the bridge will generate up to $1.44trn for the local economy, but Hong Kong policy officials are unconvinced as to whether the bridge will be widely used given the permit structure for private vehicles. It remains to be seen whether the bridge will bring additional prosperity to the region, or rather will be little more than a symbolic connecting structure between the politically and economically separate states of China and Hong Kong.

A history of Russian hacking

Russia is now seen as the global hegemon in cyber warfare – a staggering feat for a country that, less than 30 years ago, experienced a total political upheaval that practically flattened its technology sector. Over the past 10 years, it has orchestrated a vast number of coordinated and uncompromising cyberattacks across governmental and private organisations.

This year alone has seen parties such as Barack Obama, the UK and Dutch governments and the Swiss attorney general condemn Russia for causing worldwide chaos through a series of brazen hacks. Russia’s methods have advanced technologically over the years, from rudimentary email-server hacking to the creation of tailored social media messages carrying destructive malware viruses. However, it is still not clear why the nation chose to embark upon such an injurious hacking campaign in the first place.

Some have said it is a demonstration of technical prowess; others have claimed it is symptomatic of the evolution of modern warfare. The experts all agree on one thing, though: that Russia’s cyber offensive shows no sign of slowing.

History matters
In order to understand why the number of Russian hacks has accelerated so rapidly in the past few years, it’s vital to take a look back at the country’s history. Russia as we know it was formed in 1991, when the fall of the Soviet Union brought an end to one of the 20thcentury’s foremost geopolitical powers. In its short history, the country has suffered immense economic hardship, beginning with that very collapse and exacerbated by a number of recessions that have hit Russia’s fragile economy particularly hard.

In comparison to the rest of the world, which was experiencing the dotcom boom at the time, post-soviet society was reverting to the technological dark ages

The Soviet Union had a highly developed science and technology (S&T) infrastructure that was driven by state demand and focused on military and national security needs. “Russia, and before it the USSR, was very adept at information warfare – using information against people, and to confuse enemies – and the growth of the internet has made that a lot easier,”said Charles Arthur, former technology editor atThe Guardianand author of Cyber Wars: Hacks that Shocked the Business World. However, there was no semblance of a private technology sector, primarily due to the collectivist nature of the political regime.

The S&T sector was severely damaged by soviet ruin, as domestic investment sank and talented scientists left the discipline and even the country. In comparison to the rest of the world, which was experiencing the dotcom boom at the time, post-soviet society was reverting to the technological dark ages.

This lasted for some years, and with the Russian state being notoriously impenetrable, it is difficult to know what sort of technological progress took place during that time. David Manners glimpsed through a crack in the facade when he wrote for Electronics Weekly in 2005: “Russian big business is under control, taxes are being collected, and the oligarchs are turning their attention to the high-technology sector.” Manners also detailed a number of state-sponsored measures to encourage technological innovation, which included a “national investment fund with nanotechnology as a priority” and the establishment of “four new technoparks”. It seemed Russia had got its domestic affairs in order and was embarking on a programme to catch up with the rest of the world.

State intervention
It’s important to note, however, that Putin’s government sought to impose innovation from the top down – this meant heavy state involvement at all levels of the technological ecosystem. There was also an implication that innovation by private companies must serve to consolidate Russian power across the globe and incorporate an aspect of national security protection.

In approximately 2005, Russia began investing heavily in private sector technology companies, encouraging them to expand overseas. The additional injection of cash allowed them to take more risks with their international business, but also permitted the government to exert control outside of Russian borders. The state also set up corporations of its own, such as Rostekhnologii: established in November 2007, the company acts as a holding enterprise and unites more than 700 businesses, 80 percent of which operate in the defence sector. Now known as Rostec, the company has over 453,000 employees and operates in more than 60 countries. Many have speculated that its extensive overseas presence allows the company – and by extension, the state – to exert actual as well as symbolic control on a global scale.

The science and technology sector was severely damaged by soviet ruin. Domestic investment sank and talented scientists left the discipline and even the country

“The government’s heavy investment in technology is related to a political goal to influence global trade and to become highly competitive in many important areas,” said Dr Alexandra Smith, a reader in Russian studies at the University of Edinburgh. She continued: “As Putin mentioned a few years ago, he believes that the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 was the biggest tragedy that happened in the world in the 20th century. It seems to me that the Russian Government and state-sponsored companies are keen to regain some sort of control over many previous areas of influence.”

But despite this intensive state investment in what it hoped would become a burgeoning technology industry, Russia’s GDP lagged woefully behind on the world stage. Statistics from World Bank reveal that in 2007, Russia’s GDP stood at $1.29trn, compared with the UK’s $3.07trn, China’s $3.55trn, and the US’ staggering $14.47trn. Russia, realising that no amount of investment would grow its economy fast enough to uphold the sort of global power it desired, resorted to incapacitating other countries instead.

Stars align
The ongoing Russian programme of cyberattacks is broadly accepted to have begun 11 years ago, and was facilitated by a number of factors that fortuitously aligned at that time. The 1998 financial crash meant a huge number of IT professionals were out of work: their talents could then be utilised by the government, and so many of them went on to become state-sponsored hackers.

Arthur explained to The New Economy: “Russia has a long history of really good programmers. Don’t forget that the first really addictive computer game, Tetris, was written by a Russian programmer.”

He added: “They’ve had to make do with very little, in programming terms, so have figured out ways around the system. And working for the state is at least a steady job – not like working for an oligarch who might get jailed at a moment’s notice. So recruitment isn’t a problem if someone meets the grade.”

The dotcom boom and the acceleration of technology worldwide made sure that the country wasn’t short of targets, while state sponsorship of technological manufacturers meant there was an abundance of cheap equipment available.

The first large-scale cyberattack that Russia orchestrated was targeted at Estonia in 2007, following a diplomatic war over a soviet war memorial. Russian hackers carried out a type of attack known as a ‘distributed denial of service’ (DDoS), which block the intended users of a machine or network by disrupting internet access with a flood of bogus traffic. Russian hackers made online banking unavailable, shut down government email systems and prevented Estonian media outlets from distributing news.

What was particularly shocking about this initial attack was its brazenness. Russia made no attempt to conceal that it was behind the hack, as instructions for how to restore sites appeared in Russian, and Estonian officials were quickly able to trace the IP addresses of the hackers to Russia. This impudence has remained a hallmark of Russian’s cyber warfare in the years since the Estonian attack: hacks on Georgia’s presidential website during the 2008 Russo-Georgian War contained the phrase “win+love+in+Rusia”, and in August 2009 Russian hackers shut down Facebook and Twitter in Georgia to commemorate the first anniversary of the Russian invasion.

What was particularly shocking about the Estonia attack was its brazenness. Russia made no attempt to conceal that it was behind the hack

For the first few years of its state-sponsored hacking programme, Russia mainly stuck to smaller targets such as ex-soviet countries. That changed in 2015, though, when the country turned its attention to Europe and orchestrated a mass-scale attack on the German parliament. Russia’s penetration of the Bundestag’s computer network was the most significant hack in German history and marked the beginning of a programme of political interference by Russian hackers.

Increased efforts
In 2016, Russian hackers embarked upon their biggest task yet: altering the outcome of the US election. Their activities were wide-ranging and included systematic distribution of ‘fake news’ on social media sites, alleged financial contributions to Trump’s campaign, and – the centrepiece of their interference – a phishing attack on Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

In March 2016, hackers sent a virus-laden email to Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta, giving them access to 60,000 emails from his private account. These emails were then passed through a third party to Wikileaks, which released the emails on a daily basis leading up to the date of the election. The hack irreparably damaged Clinton’s campaign and was a strong contributing factor in bringing about Trump’s election victory.

Since their success in changing the course of the US’ political history, Russian hacks have increased in frequency across the globe. In the past two years alone, the UK, Netherlands, US, France and Canada have all accused Russia of attacking various governmental institutions and private corporations, including the World Anti-Doping Agency, the Organisation of the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, Ukrainian banks and energy infrastructure firms, and the US power grid.

Ongoing threat
As recently as October 4 this year, western nations pledged to work together to combat Russian hacking following the release of an explosive new report by the British National Cyber Security Centre. It definitively attributed a number of recent hacks to the Russian state, with the GRU – Russia’s foreign military intelligence agency – named as the perpetrators of the attacks. The report claimed that cyberattacks have become “the Kremlin’s chosen clandestine weapon in pursuing its geopolitical goals”.

Use of the term ‘weapon’ captures the fundamental reason behind Russia’s decision to aggressively pursue a cyberattack programme. Arthur explained: “Jaw-jaw might be better than war-war (to quote Churchill), but cyber-cyber is better than both. Physical warfare is imprecise – buildings and people tend to get damaged – where hacking is generally easy to target.” He continued: “[It] has simply become like owning nuclear weapons – it’s table stakes for modern nation-craft, and especially modern spycraft.”

Cyber-hacking has become a deadly tool in the modern world of warfare – one that Russia has become adept at using to great advantage. As the country goes after larger targets, it has become increasingly clear that it is on an unrelenting path for global hegemony, using these myriad attacks to consolidate its technological and economic power. Both states and corporations must therefore find more sophisticated ways to protect themselves in cyberspace, as well as safeguard their most precious possession in the modern era: their data.

The life of Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen

If it has the potential to do good, then we should do it.” From neurological research and climate-change initiatives to the transformation of Seattle’s cultural scene, Paul Allen left no stone unturned in his mission to make the world a better place.

The philanthropist and co-founder of Microsoft passed away on October 15 aged 65, due to complications from Non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

Bill Gates, his former business partner and long-time friend, said in a statement: “Paul loved life and those around him, and we all cherished him in return. He deserved much more time, but his contributions to the world of technology and philanthropy will live on for generations to come.”

Gates added: “I will miss him tremendously.”

Allen’s role in Microsoft has often been overshadowed by that of his former business partner, due to Gates’ bullish and somewhat aggressive business approach

Allen met Gates at the private Lakeside School in Seattle, where they immediately bonded over their love of technology. After graduating from high school, Allen attended Washington State University, but dropped out after two years and joined Boston computing firm Honeywell, where he worked as a programmer.

After seeing an early personal computer on the cover of Popular Electronics magazine, Allen convinced Gates to drop out of Harvard University, where he was studying at the time, to develop an operating system with him. The two travelled to Albuquerque, New Mexico, where they founded Microsoft in 1975.

The company’s first product was a computer language, MS-Basic, designed to suit the under-developed personal computers of the time. The duo had a little success selling MS-Basic to hobbyists, but their big break came in 1980 when IBM announced that it was moving into the personal computer sector. The firm approached Microsoft to design the operating system.

Gates and Allen spent $50,000 buying a system called QDOS from a start-up in Seattle, then modified it to fit IBM’s hardware. It was a resounding triumph, and catapulted the company into the technological spotlight.

Microsoft’s two most famous products, Word and Windows, were released in 1983. Allen left the company that same year as he was diagnosed with Hodgkin’s disease. However, by that time he was to be forever ingrained in technological history: by 1991, the Microsoft operating system he had helped to design was present in 93 percent of personal computers worldwide.

Allen’s role in Microsoft has often been overshadowed by that of his former business partner, due to Gates’ bullish and somewhat aggressive business approach. When the company was founded, Allen accepted a 40 percent share in comparison to Gates’ 60 percent. Allen’s share was later reduced to 36 percent.

Despite this, it would be hard to describe him as hard done by. Wired magazine called him the “accidental zillionaire”, while Bloomberg estimated his net worth to be $26.1bn at the time of his death.

Allen’s exit from Microsoft gave him the freedom to pursue myriad philanthropic projects through his firm Vulcan, which he founded in 1986. Over the following years, he gave more than $2bn to various education, science, technology, environmental conservation and community projects. These included the foundation of the Allen Institute for Brain Science in 2003, and the Allen Institute for Artificial Intelligence in 2014. He also assisted with the revitalisation of several of Seattle’s cultural institutions.

Allen had a keen interest in aerospace research, funding designer Burt Rutan’s SpaceShipOne, which in 2004 became the first privately manned craft to reach space.

Gates described Allen’s philanthropy as a “second act” after his exit from Microsoft. He praised his friend’s “focus on improving people’s lives and strengthening communities in Seattle and around the world”.

Microsoft’s current chief executive Satya Nadella said in a statement: “In his own quiet and persistent way, he created magical products, experiences and institutions, and in doing so, he changed the world.”

Bank of International Settlements report highlights issues with cryptocurrencies

On June 17, the Bank of International Settlements (BIS) released a report that highlighted the risks and issues associated with the ever-rising use of cryptocurrencies such as bitcoin.

The report, Cryptocurrencies: looking beyond the hype, was released as part of BIS’ annual economic report and cites the “range of shortcomings” surrounding bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies of the same ilk. It noted how “it is hard to quantify the extent to which they are being used… to engage in illegal activity” and the idea that “trust can evaporate at any time because of the fragility of the decentralised consensus through which transactions are recorded”.

The BIS report highlighted the “easily replicable” nature of digital currencies and how ‘double spending’ could increase if bitcoin usage continues to rise

The report from BIS also highlighted the “easily replicable” nature of digital currencies and how the issue of ‘double spending’ (where people fraudulently spend their bitcoin more than once) could increase if bitcoin usage continues to rise as it has been. This quality also lends itself to tax evasion and the avoidance of capital controls, leading to a potential increase in these crimes.

Furthermore, the amount of energy that is needed to power bitcoin transactions is phenomenal. The BIS report stated that an “environmental disaster” has been caused by the excessive amount of electricity used, with the total electricity needed for bitcoin mining being equivalent to that of a mid-sized economy, like that of Switzerland.

Despite such drawbacks, the report also pointed out the advantages of bitcoin, such as its potential use as part of “low-volume cross-border payment services”, rather than as part of everyday transactions. These types of transactions are important for companies with large workforces abroad, and could make their payment systems faster and more efficient.

The report also considered the growing need for a “redrawing of regulatory boundaries”, which considers the drawbacks and limitations of cryptocurrency in line with the boundaries of its usage.

While many are hailing the use of cryptocurrencies such as bitcoin, Ether and Litecoin as the future of mainstream transactions, BIS suggests that perhaps it poses simply too many risks in order to make it a viable way to exchange money.

Apple strikes a deal with Steven Spielberg’s Amblin Television

In an aggressive move to position itself in the video streaming market, Apple has struck a deal with Hollywood heavyweight Steven Spielberg that will see it begin to produce original content.

According to the terms of the agreement, which was made public on October 10, the creator of box office hits such as Jaws, ET the Extra-Terrestrial and Jurassic Park will make 10 new episodes of his 1980s science fiction series Amazing Stories. The series was first aired by NBC in the 1980s, but its revival will be exclusively part of Apple’s digital content offering.

In its first ever television project, Apple will disburse “significantly more” than $5m per episode, sources told The Wall Street Journal. This amount is not rare in the industry: other competitors are also investing heavily, with HBO spending as much as $10m per episode of the seventh season of Games of Thrones.

How and when Apple will deliver the new series is still unknown. For now, Apple’s video offering is contained in its platform iTunes, better known for its music. However, even though nothing has been revealed yet, rumours about an Apple-branded service similar to Netflix have been spreading since the company set a $1bn budget to acquire and produce video content.

Rumours about an Apple-branded service similar to Netflix have been spreading since the company set a $1bn budget to acquire and produce video content

Moreover, Apple made strategic new hires in June, when Jamie Erlicht and Zack Van Amburg – two former Sony executives related to productions like Breaking Bad – joined the company. The Cupertino-based giant gave them new positions as co-heads of video programming.

The deal between Apple and Spielberg’s Amblin Television – along with Universal Television, a unit of Comcast’s NBCUniversal – has been billed as Erlicht and Van Amburg’s first big bet.

“We love being at the forefront of Apple’s investment in scripted programming,” Jennifer Salke, Entertainment President at NBC, said in a statement.

While other companies such as Netflix and Amazon are moving fast to conquer the global video streaming market, Apple is still trying to catch up. Furthermore, the recent foray also represents an attempt by the tech giant to diversify its business.

At present, its flagship product – the iPhone – accounts for more than half of Apple’s revenue. The new deal therefore demonstrates the firm’s decision to get a slice of the rapidly growing video streaming market.

 

Look out for a special report on the growth of the video streaming market in the upcoming issue of The New Economy

Micro-investing app Stash secures $40m in investments

Stash, a New York-based mobile app that allows users to save or invest very small sums of money, has secured a $40m investment in a round led by fund manager Coatue Management.

The size of the investment demonstrates the growing popularity of such apps, which use fintech developments to open up the world of investing to those on low and middle incomes.

Apps such as Stash use fintech developments to open up the world of investing to those on low and middle incomes

As individuals can open a Stash account with as little as $5, the app breaks down the financial barriers that used to prevent those without access to substantial capital from investing. Stash also eradicates knowledge barriers by giving users a curated choice of 30 exchange-traded funds to place their money with, doing away with the massive choice of investment options that can overwhelm first-time investors.

The cheap simplicity of Stash’s approach to investing has seen the platform soar in popularity, with more than half a million investors joining the app since the start of this year alone. Stash currently hosts 850,000 accounts, with a user base that is 86 percent first-time investors, as reported by Reuters.

The steadily growing user base makes Stash an attractive investment option. Including this latest funding round, the company has raised $78m in the past two years, with existing investors including the likes of Goodwater Capital and PayPal co-founder Peter Thiel.

In an interview with Reuters, Brandon Krieg, CEO and co-founder of Stash, described how the company’s subscription-based business model is also attractive to investors since it generates a constant revenue stream and does not depend on pursuing aggressive investment options to grow user money very rapidly.

Stash’s subscription service charges accounts containing less than $5,000 a $1 monthly fee, while those accounts worth more than $5,000 are charged an annual cost of 0.25 percent. This means that for users investing in Stash, risk levels are kept relatively low.

The popularity of platforms such as these, made possible by the prevalence of smartphones and developments in technology allowing fast fund transfers, is set to grow over the coming years, particularly among the largely untapped market of low and middle-income potential investors. Krieg noted: “Stashers look like America, they look like people you meet every day: they are nurses and teachers and Uber and Lyft drivers.”