Shared posts

15 Dec 17:50

Five tipping points that show why our current banking system is doomed

by FuturistSpeaker

When is the last time you set foot into a bank?

While many of us have a love-hate relationship with our bank, where we love the people but hate the fees, we still tend to go there.

According to a recent survey by Fiserv of 3,000 bank users, over the past 30 days, more than 80% said they logged into their bank’s website an average of 11 times. But 61% said they had also visited their bank during the same timeframe.

Normally we would think that they made the trip to do something they couldn’t online, but that would be wrong. According to their research 53% of customers prefer online banking, but 44% still like to go there in person.

As an industry, banks have studied their customers from thousands of different angles to determine if there are any cracks in their thinking. They all intuitively know that banking industry is in the second half of the bell curve, but so far haven’t spotted the fault lines they all know are coming.

As example, FMSI is an organization that studies bank visits and concluded that the average number of teller transactions have declined more than 45% in the past 20 years. Over the past ten years, teller-transaction volume per hour at banks has dropped over 32%, from 7.1 to 4.8.

In 2007, the average cost per-transaction was 85¢, but has risen to over $1.08, an increase of more than 25%.

Banks also know that when they close a branch, 40% of their customers will switch to a new financial institution and the number of new small business loans drops by 13%. In low-income neighborhoods, lending activity shrinks by 40%.

According to Accenture, 40% of millennials would consider banking without a branch. Ironically, Gen-Z, those between ages 18-21, use their branch bank more regularly than any other groups, with 25% visiting at least once a week.

So what are the telltale signs that branch banks will follow the path of Kodak? Here are some of the major tipping points looming in the near future.

Will cash still be an option in the future?

Five Critical Tipping Points for Banks

Since the financial crisis in 2007, banks have closed over 10,000 branches, an average of three a day. In the first half of 2017 alone, a net 869 brick-and-mortar entities shut their doors.

Over the next couple years, bank closures will accelerate to 10-15 per day or 3,000-5,000 per year. Here are some of the primary reasons.

1.) By 2025 the largest banks will be tech companies

Many in the tech world still blame the banking industry for the 2007 recession, even though many techies were also involved.

One-click ordering from Amazon, tracking deliveries on Etsy, auto-populating information on Google Chrome, stored account information on Uber, and other innovations have changed our understanding about what is possible and what is expected in ecommerce. With tech and retail sites setting new standards, customers increasingly expect interactions with their banks to be easy, fast, transparent, and done on their own terms.

Even in the past 6-12 month our expectations have changed dramatically, with frustration rearing its ugly head when things are not as easy as we expect.

These demands and other competitive factors are pushing banks inexorably toward a new model. By 2025, leading banks will be operating as digital financial superstores that blur the line between technology companies and banks. All these developments have left banks in a tough spot.

Bank failures have created an opening for nonbank lenders and fintech providers to leverage cutting-edge technology and their largely unregulated status to deliver the type of service and experience consumers have come to expect from the best Internet and mobile sites.

Even as large banks attempt to reassert themselves in a digital age, they face competition from new market entrants eager to apply far-reaching networks, artificial intelligence, cloud-computing platforms and other tech advantages to the world of banking.

2.) Banking deserts are forcing rapid adaptation

In June 2017 the U.S. Federal Reserve Bank estimated there were over 1,100 banking deserts in America, defined as a census areas at least ten miles from a bank. That number could easily double if small community banks continue to close.

This situation may seem more dire than it actually is since banking deserts still only represent 1.7% of the population. For most of the country, banks are still within easy reach, typically just two miles away. Nine out of ten Americans live within five miles of a bank. Half live within one mile.

That said, the U.S. is one of the heaviest banked nations in the world with 32 branches for every 100,000 adults, far more than countries such as Germany and The Netherlands.

However, as banking deserts grow, so will the tools for interacting with a financial institution from a distance. Many fintech companies view this as an opening, the perfect proving ground for their latest offering.

Next generation ATMs will be a tipping point for the banking industry

3.) Live human-robot ATMs

Bank tellers will be the telegraph operators of 21st century when we look back in 100 years.

The largest banks in the US have been investing millions in updating the capabilities and physical appearances of thousands of ATMs, an invention that turned 50 earlier this year.

As ATM capabilities grow, customers at bank branches will spend more time interacting with machines for their day-to-day needs, while bank personnel will move from behind the counter and focus more on complex transactions such as coordinating loans for homes or small businesses.

The next wave of ATMs with larger, digitally enabled screens akin to tablets will offer almost all of the services human tellers now provide as well as new capabilities like setting up cash withdrawals on your phone that you can be easily completed at a nearby ATM.

ATMs are already outfitted with more flexible denominations — $1, $5, and $10 bills instead of only $20 bill — and introduced cardless transactions, wherein customers can log in more securely just with their phone.

Very soon, having a remote conversation on an ATM with a live loan officer or bank executive to handle more complicated banking matters will make hanging on to most existing bank properties superfluous.

4.) The law of accelerating tipping points

Overall, customers interact with their banks an average of 17 times a month. Yet only two of those interactions involve human contact. In the U.S. only two out of 15 monthly bank dealings involve going to a branch.

JPMorgan Chase, which operates a network of more than 16,300 ATMs and 5,300 branches across the U.S., saw its teller transactions fall by 25% from 2014 to 2016.

In 2013, an Accenture survey found that 48% of Americans would switch banks if their current bank branch closed. In last year’s survey, that share shrank to just 19%.

Visiting a bank has increasingly become a long tail activity. Virtually every branch manager can describe a customer interaction that is impossible to cope with over a phone or online. But these edge cases are proving to be less of a compelling argument as online capabilities improve and attitudes change.

5.) Cryptocurrencies are paving the way for circumventionist thinking

If you’ve ever had a conversation with your bank about handling fractional cent micropayments, coming from a rapidly scaling online business where the transaction volume can approach hundreds of million per hour, you’ll quickly understand how ill-equipped today’s banking industry is in dealing with next generation business models.

Even though today’s cryptocurrency industry is deeply flawed, it has a way of pointing a glaring spotlight on the structural limitations buried in our existing bank infrastructure.

On one hand, stealing bitcoins is the perfect crime. No one has ever been convicted of stealing bitcoin and there are no bitcoin-cops or bitcoin-justice systems. A lost bitcoin is not recoverable.

However, national currencies are becoming increasingly dysfunctional. It’s no longer possible to use cash for many transactions like purchasing airline tickets, hotel rooms, or rental cars.

The idea of using a personal signature to secure a payment by check is fairly preposterous with our ability to use phones to copy and replicate nearly everything.

Massive data breeches have become a daily activity with headlines about Equifax, Chipotle, Gmail, Arby’s, Verizon, Yahoo, and Uber showing us how vulnerable we’ve become as a digital society.

With no perfect solutions to point to, we are left with a heavily regulated and rapidly decaying banking system whose days are clearly numbered and a fledgling and faceless cryptocurrency industry trying to usurp the power and authority of today’s banking elite.

Is coexistence even an option?

Final Thoughts

Yes, we will still have banks for many years to come, but I have yet to come up with a compelling reason why we need so many branches and tellers.

If JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, and Citigroup were all to close their branches tomorrow, what effect would that have on the financial health of the nation?

Besides the obvious loss of jobs and vacant real estate, how will this change the way business is done?

39% of bank customers like the idea of going bank-less, but that still leaves many who don’t.

With easy-to-use smartphones to manage most transactions and clickless payment systems like Uber, Lyft, and the Bodega vending machine, our need to interact with bank personnel is fading.

Bank closures are about to shift from linear to exponential, and to some this will be disconcerting. But in this transition we will find countless opportunities for new business and industry, and by 2030 we’ll be wondering why we ever needed them in the first place.

By Futurist Thomas Frey

Author of “Epiphany Z – 8 Radical Visions for Transforming Your Future

08 Dec 09:37

Nvidia announces $2,999 Titan V, 'the most powerful PC GPU ever created'

by Sam Byford

It seems like Nvidia announces the fastest GPU in history multiple times a year, and that’s exactly what’s happened again today; the Titan V is “the most powerful PC GPU ever created,” in Nvidia's words. It represents a more significant leap than most products that have made that claim, however, as it's the first consumer-grade GPU based around Nvidia’s new Volta architecture.

That said, a liberal definition of the word “consumer” is in order here — the Titan V sells for $2,999 and is focused around AI and scientific simulation processing. Nvidia claims up to 110 teraflops of performance from its 21.1 billion transistors, with 12GB of HBM2 memory, 5120 CUDA cores, and 640 “tensor cores” that are said to offer up to 9 times the...

Continue reading…

08 Dec 04:10

Almost every major cryptocurrency not named bitcoin is falling

by Seth Archer

roller coaster

Bitcoin has been taking traders on a wild, highly volatile ride on Thursday.

The cryptocurrency rocketed past $16,000 early Thursday, just hours after clearing $15,000 and about 12 hours after hitting $14,000. On some exchanges, bitcoin was trading above $19,000 on Thursday. Crypto exchange  Coinbase showed a $3,000 per coin jump on Thursday before the site went down amid "record high traffic." It is now showing a price closer to $16,000. Data from Markets Insider show the price hitting an all-time high of $16,623,64 per coin.

As bitcoin price fluctuates wildly, other cryptocurrencies like ethereum and litecoin are falling. Here's the scoreboard as of 1:06PM ET.

Track the price of all the major cryptocurrencies in real time here.

bitcoin stock price

SEE ALSO: Bitcoin tops $15,000 - 12 hours after clearing $14,000

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: This is why you should be buying gold

08 Dec 04:05

'Whole cloud' revenues projected to hit $554B in 2021

The "whole cloud" market includes public, private and hybrid cloud offerings as well as cloud-based services, software and infrastructure-related hardware.

07 Dec 17:43

Bitcoin price reaches $16K+ despite bubble warnings, with a total market capitalization of ~$270B (David Meyer/Fortune)

David Meyer / Fortune:
Bitcoin price reaches $16K+ despite bubble warnings, with a total market capitalization of ~$270B  —  Bitcoin broke through the $15,000 barrier on Thursday morning as it continued what has been a remarkable run even by the cryptocurrency's usual bubblelicious standards.

07 Dec 16:38

IoT & UC: Under the Hood of Mitel's Charles de Gaulle Deployment

by Brian Riggs
By Brian Riggs
The Paris airport has put IoT-triggered communications to the test, and keeps finding new use cases.
06 Dec 21:46

AI is biased: Who's to blame?

AI collects data and produces answers without explanation, so resolving the bias problem could take years, according to researchers. 

06 Dec 21:46

The magic recipe for making AI possible? A sprinkle of cloud, intelligence and data

While intelligent and advanced systems are already used in production in businesses across sectors, technologists have a tendency to hype AI’s capabilities, thinking first of the long-term promise it shows.  

06 Dec 05:01

Up-and-Coming Tech of the Year: Democratized AI

AI may have moved from fantasy to reality, but for most companies this reality is still not accessible. Democratized AI tools are beginning to hit the enterprise and change this.

06 Dec 04:58

Phablets will become the most popular smartphone type by 2019

by Rayna Hollander

Smartphone market by screensize

This story was delivered to BI Intelligence Apps and Platforms Briefing subscribers. To learn more and subscribe, please click here.

Phablets — smartphones with a screen size between 5.5 and 7 inches — are on track to lead the global smartphone market in terms of shipments by 2019, according to a forecast by IDC.

Phablets accounted for 40% of all smartphones shipped in 2017, and that share's expected to reach 59% by 2021.

While sales of phablets will grow at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 18% to reach 1 billion units in 2021, up from 611 million in 2017, regular-sized smartphones will decline 7.4% over the same period.

The shift toward phablets as the dominant smartphone form factor is significant because smartphones with larger screens tend to drive more mobile usage:

  • Phablet owners open more apps. Phablet owners launch 21% more apps than owners of 4-inch smartphones. As mobile user behavior increasingly shifts toward visual-heavy activities such as online video and gaming, the growing popularity of phablets could offer businesses more opportunities to reach consumers.
  • Phablet owners use apps longer. Phablets also have a 3.5% higher average session length than 4-inch devices. This is likely a result of an improved mobile experience derived from the device's larger screen size, which makes everything from navigating menus to playing games more enjoyable.

This shift is happening more rapidly in the Android smartphone market, which offered a range of phablet-sized smartphones roughly three years before Apple did.

  • Android has a robust lineup of phablet devices. Android wasn't only the first to offer phablets, but it also currently offers a greater range of devices with larger-sized screens. By 2021, phablets are expected to represent 91% of Android shipments, up from 75% in 2016. Samsung was the first to enter the phablet market with the Galaxy Note in 2011. 
  • Although Apple was late to the phablet game, its recent launches are helping to drive phablet adoption in the iOS ecosystem. Apple’s phablet lineup is limited compared with Android's and tends to be pricey. But phablets are becoming more popular for Apple; its larger-screen iPhones and the iPhone X will represent 41% of the company's shipment volume in 2017 and 50% in 2018. This growth will in part stem from price cuts across older-generation phablet models, which enable Apple to offer devices at lower price points.

The greater availability of device financing options and smartphone trade-in programs are helping to spur the growth of phablets and other high-end smartphones, according to IDC research manager Anthony Scarsella. The flagship lines — which phablets tend be part of — from Apple, Google, Samsung, and other vendors surpassed the $850 price point for the first time in 2017. But despite the growing costs of these devices, they’re becoming more attainable to consumers in numerous markets thanks to financing and trade-in programs.

To receive stories like this one directly to your inbox every morning, sign up for the Apps and Platforms Briefing newsletter. Click here to learn more about how you can gain risk-free access today.

Join the conversation about this story »

05 Dec 21:54

Google Blocks YouTube Access on Amazon Devices: The Irony is Astounding

by Gary Kim
Google now is blocking YouTube access on Amazon Amazon Echo Show or Amazon Fire TV devices. Blocking: as in, Google denies Amazon Echo Show or Fire TV users access to a lawful app.

Ironic is it not? That is the sort of “not neutral” practice Google has argued internet service providers must be prohibited from attempting, under “network neutrality” rules.

To be fair, it is one matter when a government blocks access to an otherwise  lawful app such as Google search. That bothers supporters of internet freedom, and should bother them.

It is quite another matter if an internet access provider were to try and block a lawful app. Despite all the heated rhetoric, in the U.S. market that has happened--briefly--twice to three times, with rapid reaction by the Federal Communications Commission and equally rapid retraction of those efforts by ISPs.

And, as a matter of policy principle, all U.S. ISPs understand that the FCC will not allow blocking of lawful apps.

Many have argued that internet freedom applies to all in the ecosystem: consumers, app providers and ISPs. Many also have argued that many practices said to be violations of network neutrality (quality of service mechanisms,  free and subsidized app access, zero rating of apps) are in fact, not violations of network neutrality, but only business practices that ecosystem participants are free to experiment with.

So Google’s blocking of its lawful YouTube app from Amazon devices is not, strictly speaking, a network neutrality violation. It might be a dumb business practice that conflicts with the company’s “don’t be evil” ethos, but actual app blocking does not violate existing network neutrality rules.

Nor, some of us would argue, should network neutrality rules be extended to Google and other app providers. But some also would argue that freedom in the internet ecosystem belongs to all, not some.

In actually blocking YouTube access--something no ISP would anymore attempt--Google is acting as a gatekeeper. That is its business right, one might argue.

But neither is Google acting in a way it demands others behave: “not blocking any lawful app.”

It must be said. There are businesses that enjoy the best of all worlds: they are monopolies in practice, but not regulated, as others might be. Cable TV industry executives used to say that, entirely in private.

I am not saying Google or others need to be regulated. They should be free. So should consumers, other app providers, device suppliers and access providers.
05 Dec 01:58

Apple agrees to pay Ireland $15.4 billion in back taxes to appease EU

by Nick Statt

Apple today reached an agreement with the European Union to begin depositing the €13 billion ($15.4 billion) in back taxes it was ordered to pay Ireland last year, following the landmark decision to crackdown on tax shelter policies and profit offshoring, according to The Wall Street Journal.

Despite the ruling having been issued more than a year ago, in August of 2016, Ireland has resisted collecting the money. The country strategically uses low tax rates to spur domestic investment from foreign corporations. But the practice has resulted in companies like Apple effectively using Ireland as a tax shelter, paying rates of as little as 0.005 percent on all European profits between the years 2003 and 2014 thanks to subsidiaries and shell...

Continue reading…

04 Dec 20:40

The Winklevoss twins are now Bitcoin billionaires

by Thuy Ong

The Winklevoss twins, famously known for suing Mark Zuckerberg after claiming he stole their idea for Facebook, are now Bitcoin billionaires, according to a few reports. Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss won $65 million from the Facebook lawsuit, and invested $11 million of their payout into Bitcoin in 2013, amassing one of the largest portfolios of Bitcoin in the world — 1 percent of the entire currency’s dollar value equivalent, said the twins at the time. Their slice of the Bitcoin pie is now worth over $1 billion after Bitcoin surged past $10,000 last week to now trade at $11,100, according to CoinDesk. The cryptocurrency has surged over 10,000 percent since the Winklevoss’ investment, when one coin traded at around $120.

"If Bitcoin is a...

Continue reading…

04 Dec 20:37

Google is giving Pixelbook and Samsung Chromebook owners six months of free Netflix

by Chaim Gartenberg

If you've picked up a Google Pixelbook or Samsung Chromebook Pro or Plus recently, then Google has a little gift to help sweeten the pot (or soften the blow of buying a $1000 Chrome machine, depending on your perspective). That bonus comes in the form of six months of free Netflix.

The offer is pretty straightforward: if you own one of the three eligible Chromebooks mentioned above, just go to Google's Chromebook offer site to redeem it. You'll get six free months of Netflix's $10.99 per month “Two Screens at a Time" plan, or, if you've already got a Netflix plan, you can apply the value of the offer to that instead. The only other rule is that you've got to claim the deal before the the end of December.

Along with free Netflix, Google...

Continue reading…

01 Dec 20:35

Google says this $45 cardboard box has artificial intelligence that can watch your dog and guard your house (GOOG, GOOGL)

by Ben Gilbert

Google AIY Vision Kit

  • Google created an inexpensive solution for AI-powered computer vision.
  • The AIY Vision Kit costs $45, is adorable, and can learn to distinguish your dog from your cat.
  • Beyond just home monitoring, the AIY Vision Kit can be used to make your home smarter.


Here's your chance to be the first person on your block to have a house with artificial intelligence. 

All you need is $45 and the patience to put together a weird cardboard kit that Google announced on Friday.

Google's got a thing for cardboard gadgets — it made headlines a few years ago when it released a cardboard headset that transformed your phone into a rudimentary virtual reality device. 

This time, Google's cardboard/electronic hybrid is an AI-powered camera that can learn all sorts of useful stuff. It can learn to distinguish between your pets, and learn how to identify various types of plant and animal species. It can tell you when your car was in the driveway, and when someone else's pulled up. 

It can become your personal security assistant, essentially, or it can help monitor the various animals roaming around your house — be they dog, cat, or human.

The idea is to enable so-called "machine learning" — electronic devices that "learn" from experience — on a small scale. Paring this concept with a camera enables vision-based machine learning, in the same way you might learn from seeing something with your eyes. 

Google AIY Vision Kit

It's even got a weird name: the "Google AIY Vision Kit."

That's largely because this isn't a device aimed at casual electronics consumers. It's for people that like to tinker. "Vision Kit is a do-it-yourself build," Google's director of AIY projects Billy Rutledge wrote in the announcement blog post

To that end, you have to buy several other components to make the Vision Kit work — they total about $45 to $60, depending on what you get. These components are literal circuitry, so you have to be pretty comfortable with electronics.

Google AIY Vision Kit

And even after you've done that, this is a DIY project for people who are either willing to learn a lot about Raspberry Pi, the computing platform based on plug-and-play circuit boards, or those who already have that knowledge. If you're not familiar with what Raspberry Pi is, chances are that Google's Vision Kit isn't for you.

That said, if you're at all inclined towards learning more about how electronics work, this is a great way to start. The AIY Vision Kit will be sold through Micro Center starting soon — you can pre-order one right here.

SEE ALSO: Google's new Cardboard headset proves that good virtual reality doesn't have to be expensive

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: What happens when vegetarians eat meat for the first time

01 Dec 20:30

Samsung’s new luxurious smart flip phone has the widest aperture camera lens yet

by Shannon Liao

Samsung unveiled a new expensive flip phone, the Samsung W2018, during a launch event in China today, as first reported by GizmoChina. Many of the W2018’s specs are on par with the S8 and Note 8, with one exception: the camera lens.

The W2018 is the latest addition to Samsung’s W line, which gets updated with a new flip phone every year. It’s also the 10th anniversary of the W series, which is still popular in Asia. They are priced higher than typical Samsung global flagships, like the S8 and Note 8. A cheesy Chinese ad for the phone reads, “Hi Bixby, what’s true luxury?”

With an aperture of f/1.5, Samsung claims that the W2018’s 12-megapixel rear camera can capture sharp images in less light than the cameras on rival phones can. It...

Continue reading…

01 Dec 17:53

In Colorado, do more votes for municipal broadband networks mean instant internet access? Not so fast.

by John Aguilar

For nearly a decade, voters across Colorado have made it clear that when it comes to having access to high-speed internet service in their businesses and homes, they want all options on the table.

Elections in county after county and city after city across the state have cast aside a 2005 state law that prohibits local governments from using taxpayer money to build their own broadband networks but allows communities to opt out of those restrictions at the ballot box.

During last month’s election, 19 more cities and counties — including Vail, Louisville and Kremmling — chose to override Senate Bill 152, bringing to 116 the number of Colorado municipalities and counties to do so since Glenwood Springs voters cast the first vote on the issue in 2008.

Colorado Municipal League deputy director Kevin Bommer said industry players haven’t been willing or able to extend their data pipes to all corners of the state, leaving many parts of Colorado — especially rural areas — with substandard connection speeds that make it hard to do business and enjoy high-bandwidth experiences such as Netflix viewing or online gaming.

“People, businesses, schools and rural hospitals are getting left behind,” he said. “When the private sector cannot or will not provide the service, the law allows for local governments to look to find a way to do it.”

But simply overturning the 2005 law — it was backed by cable and internet providers in the name of maintaining a level playing field in the deployment of expensive fiber-optic networks — doesn’t mean publicly funded broadband will suddenly appear. For most cities and towns, high cost, rough topography and dispersed populations make going it alone on construction of a high-speed network too tall an order.

Which is why some communities are finding that the best way to get moving on high-speed internet is to find a partner in the private sector — be it giant telecoms such as CenturyLink or any of a number of tiny rural phone companies — to share the costs and risks of building a fiber-optic network.

Related Articles

That’s what Wray, a city near the Nebraska border, is doing. Having done away with the 2005 law three years ago, it is now working with the Plains Cooperative Telephone Association to give its 2,300 residents access to affordable high-speed connections.

The city is spending $1.4 million — half of it from state grants — to put in 14 miles of “middle mile” fiber-optic in Wray, while Plains Cooperative takes care of the “last mile” connections to homes and businesses. The network should be complete by next year.

“It’s a unique opportunity to form partnerships that will improve service that could never happen if (SB) 152 was still in place,” Wray City Manager James DePue said. “If we didn’t do something, Wray’s business district would totally dry up.”

Plains Cooperative said it took coming together with Wray to make the project financially feasible for both sides.

“It took those additional funds to make it a workable business plan,” said Ronny Puckett, general manager of the 65-year-old Joes-based company.

On the Front Range, Centennial is also turning to the private sector for development of its fiber-optic network. The city is building an internet line to connect city offices and businesses, but for residential service it is leaning on third-party services, such as Ting Internet, to handle the last mile.

Ting, which is pitching residential 1-gigabit-per-second service starting at $90 a month, has hosted community sessions and is accepting pre-orders. But so far, no launch date has been set, a company official said.

On the Western Slope, Rio Blanco County has made a successful foray into municipal broadband, offering 1-gps service to its 6,500 residents across a sparsely populated 3,200-square-mile area that borders Utah. The $12 million effort is county-led but involves contracts with a network operator and two local internet service providers.

“What most counties are seeking is a public-private partnership where the county can help with the middle mile that will then attract an internet service provider to hook up their communities,” said Eric Bergman, policy director with Colorado Counties Inc. “The vast majority of counties do not intend to get into the broadband business.”

But some cities have.

Many point to Longmont, with its 1-gps NextLight internet service, as the city with the most aggressive response to an SB 152 opt-out vote. Residents there voted to override the state statute in 2011.

Now the city serves 17,000 residents and businesses with some of the highest internet speeds in Colorado — at a base price of $50 a month.

“Cities don’t do this because they want to compete with the incumbent — they do it because the incumbent refuses to,” said Tom Roiniotis, general manager of Longmont Power & Communications, which runs the network. “We didn’t have any interest (in network construction) from the private sector. Lifting the burden of (SB) 152 gives you the opportunity to explore those options.”

The Delta-Montrose Electric Association is heading up its own multiyear effort to build a high-speed fiber-optic network for the 28,000 residents it covers in southwest Colorado. Much of Delta and Montrose counties — including Paonia, Crawford, Delta and Cedaredge — cast off the state-sanctioned restrictions in the fall of 2015.

Virgil Turner, director of innovation and citizen engagement for the city of Montrose, said the churn of voters across the state overturning SB 152 amounts to a “rallying cry” for Coloradans desperate for an amenity that for many has become as vital as electricity and phone service.

“We’re not going to stand by as a city and allow our businesses and residents to fall behind Front Range communities,” Turner said.

Montrose’s electric utility says on its website that it will take six years to fully build the network, which it is calling Elevate Fiber. Speeds of 100 megabits per second to 1 gigabit per second will be offered. Talks with Charter Communications and CenturyLink about lighting up both counties with high-speed connections bore no fruit, Turner said.

“Our goal is ubiquitous fiber to the premise,” he said. “And we want a price point that is affordable.”

Mark Soltes, CenturyLink’s assistant vice president in Colorado for public policy and government affairs, said the gaps in service across the state are due to rugged landscapes and far-flung population centers.

“You’re looking at deployment in some places where there’s no payback,” he said.

Soltes said his company is discussing public-private partnerships with municipalities in Colorado, although he wasn’t ready to disclose specifics. CenturyLink, he said, has reached a deal with a neighborhood in Granby to provide high-speed internet to the 250 homes that will one day be built there.

Soltes said SB 152 is meant to prevent municipalities from using taxpayer money to unfairly crush private-sector competition or unnecessarily duplicate fiber-optic where companies have already spent millions putting a network in place.

Cities and counties have an inherent advantage over the private sector because they often own the right-of-way where the industry lays its conduit, he said.

“Your competitor is your regulator, too — that’s an unlevel playing field,” he said.

Pete Kirchhof, executive vice president of the Colorado Telecommunications Association, said voters need to know what they are getting into before committing millions of dollars to build a municipal fiber-optic network. SB 152 opt-out language, he said, is often “very generic” and rarely addresses cost, price, debt and risk.

“Long-term sustainability is the question. You can’t just throw fiber in the ground and be done,” Kirchhof said. “These are very expensive and complex networks that require constant maintenance and upgrades.”

Greeley is taking the extra step of spearheading an online survey of its residents — who last month voted to override the state-imposed restrictions — about whether they would be willing to team up with nearby Windsor to provide a gigabit service such as Longmont’s or whether a joint broadband effort with the private sector is the better route.

That kind of data could have been helpful in expediting the efforts of Glenwood Springs — which did away with SB 152 limitations nine years ago — to build out its Community Broadband Network. Run by the Glenwood Springs Electric Department, the network provides broadband to nearly 250 businesses but hasn’t been linked to residences yet.

Mayor Mike Gamba said the Great Recession curtailed network plans for years and that previous city councils didn’t make the initiative the high priority it needed to be. The city is getting back on track now, with plans next year to spend $320,000 on the first phase of its strategic broadband plan.

“Councils change, priorities change — you have to have a concerted political will,” he said. “By voting for the opt-out doesn’t make it immediately happen.”

01 Dec 17:48

AWS brings in new customers with AI, ML, security tools

While Amazon's spot as the No. 1 IaaS provider has never been in question, Microsoft and Google have been able to tout their own cloud platforms thanks to the wide array of AI, ML and Big Data tools.

30 Nov 19:34

WeWork has big plans for Alexa for Business

by Jordan Crook
 Amazon is soon to announce Alexa for Business, and WeWork is one of the first partners to have hopped on the platform. WeWork’s vision is to use technology to help businesses make the most out of their physical space, all while customizing that space to each individual’s personal needs. The co-working giant has been on the Alexa for Business platform for about a month now, as part… Read More
30 Nov 19:31

Automation threatens 800 million jobs, but technology could still save us, says report

by James Vincent

A new report predicts that by 2030, as many as 800 million jobs could be lost worldwide to automation. The study, compiled by the McKinsey Global Institute, says that advances in AI and robotics will have a drastic effect on everyday working lives, comparable to the shift away from agricultural societies during the Industrial Revolution. In the US alone, between 39 and 73 million jobs stand to be automated — making up around a third of the total workforce.

But, the report also states that as in the past, technology will not be a purely destructive force. New jobs will be created; existing roles will be redefined; and workers will have the opportunity to switch careers. The challenge particular to this generation, say the authors, is...

Continue reading…

30 Nov 19:18

Amazon's CTO thinks the Alexa-powered Billy Bass points to the future of how we'll interact with computers (AMZN)

by Becky Peterson

Werner Vogels AWS

  • Speaking to the crowd at the Amazon Web Service user conference on Thursday, Werner Vogels, Amazon's chief technology officer, envisioned a world free from keyboards, screens, and remote controls.
  • Vogels said so-called natural interfaces such as voice and visual signals will become predominant in human-computer interactions. 
  • Vogels announced a new product, Amazon Alexa for Business, which will adapt the popular voice assistant to offices and conference room environments. 


When you're interacting with computers in the not-so-distant future, you'll probably be talking to them instead of using a keyboard or a smartphone app. 

At least that's the view of Werner Vogels, Amazon's chief technology officer. Speaking at the Amazon Web Service user conference in Las Vegas on Thursday, Vogels said keyboards and screens will die out in favor of more intuitive ways of interacting with devices, most notably voice communication. 

"This is not a Slack channel. I'm actually talking to you," Vogels joked to his live audience. "And apparently you came here to hear someone talk."

In coming years, surgeons will guide machines in the operating room with just their voices, he said, and home chefs will check recipes without having to wash their hands between steps. That will be a boon to people like him, he said.

"I'm a stupid European. I can never remember how many milliliters go in a cup," Vogels said. 

Billy Bass Werner Vogels AWS Re:Invent

Vogels and Amazon, of course, think the company's Alexa voice assistant will be an ideal way for consumers to interact with computers in this brave new world. As part of his talk, Vogels announced a new product called Alexa for Business that will allow enterprises to tap into the popular voice assistant. 

To be sure, voice won't be the only way we interact with computers, Vogels said. Instead, we'll see other kinds of so-called natural interfaces, he said, envisioning a world free from light switches, remote controls, and specialized apps.

Instead of relying on a smartphone app to track gas or electricity consumption, for example, Vogels said it would make more sense to have a light on the wall that changes colors. Depending on the colors it displayed, the light could indicate if you're within your home energy goals.

"Just like Billy Bass, all of our environment will become active," Vogels said, referencing the animatronic singing fish which one hobbyist famously linked up with Alexa.

SEE ALSO: Amazon kicked off its huge cloud conference with a big dig at Oracle's Larry Ellison

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: How couples improved their sex lives in just one week

30 Nov 17:26

A 'Big Four' accounting firm is accepting bitcoin payments

by Frank Chaparro

bitcoin atm

  • PwC, the accounting firm and consultancy, announced Thursday it is accepting bitcoin payments from its clients.
  • Accounting firms have shown more interest in digital coins than Wall Street banks. 


PwC, the consultancy and "Big Four" accounting firm, announced Thursday that it accepted its first payment in bitcoin.

The announcement, which was reported first by The Wall Street Journal, was made by Raymund Chao, chairman of PwC Asia-Pacific. 

“This decision helps illustrate how we are embracing new technology and incorporating innovative business models across our full range of services," Chao said in a statement. 

Bitcoin, the red-hot cryptocurrency, has dominated financial news cycles as more Wall Street firms dive into the nascent market for digital coins. It blew past $11,000 per coin Wednesday before falling back below $10,000. 

As for PwC, this isn't the firm's first foray into the world of cryptocurrencies. In 2014, the company wrote a report exploring how digital coins like bitcoin could impact a wide-range of industries, including travel and gambling.

"Bitcoin as the ideal casino chip? Possibly. It provides a high level of user privacy, immediate access to funds and irreversibility — to the casino’s and player’s benefit," the firm wrote.

Accounting firms such as PwC and rival Ernst Young have shown more interest in digital currency than Wall Street banks. EY, for instance, joined the Bitcoin Association, a Switzerland-based bitcoin advocacy firm, in May. 

"It is important to us that everybody gets on board and prepares themselves for the revolution set to take place in the business world through blockchains, smart contracts and digital currencies," Marcel Stalder, CEO of EY Switzerland, said. 

Bank CEOs have had a less favorable view of cryptocurrencies. JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon famously called bitcoin a "fraud." Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein said Thursday his firm is in no rush to develop a strategy on bitcoin, according to a Bloomberg News report. 

Read more about blockchain, the technology powering bitcoin, here

SEE ALSO: Bitcoin keeps sliding a day after wild trading

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: This is what you get when you invest in an initial coin offering

30 Nov 09:22

Stories are coming to YouTube next

by Chris Welch

YouTube is testing a new feature called “Reels” that, at least in concept, will be similar to the Stories you see every day on Snapchat and Instagram. According to TechCrunch, Reels will be given their own tab — separate from a creator’s main list of videos. YouTube’s reasoning for introducing them is not unlike what we’ve heard from Snap and Instagram: people want a way to share content without having to go the full mile and publish a traditional YouTube video. Reels are being tested among a small group of the site’s creators, and the company isn’t yet saying when this “new format” will be more widely rolled out.

YouTube is diverging from the typical Stories formula in several ways. Most notably, Reels won’t disappear after 24 hours or...

Continue reading…

30 Nov 05:27

Google’s new Android app stops other apps from wasting your data

by Jacob Kastrenakes

Google is launching another stylish and simple Android app designed to help people manage one of the core functions of their phone — in this case, data usage.

The app is called Datally, and it’s supposed to help you understand where you data is going and cut down on how much you’re using. Datally will show which apps are using data the most and at what times your data is getting used up; it’ll also recommend ways to cut down data usage based on your own activity and suggest nearby Wi-Fi networks for you to connect to.

More importantly, there’s a big button at the top of the app that lets you stop all background data usage, so only the app that’s actively onscreen can use mobile data. A chat-head style bubble will also pop up to let you...

Continue reading…

29 Nov 16:32

Microsoft, Cisco, Huawei team up on blockchain data marketplace

The partnership with IOTA, an open-source blockchain company, will create a secure data marketplace for companies to share and profit from IoT data. 

29 Nov 16:28

Nasdaq is set to launch bitcoin futures

by Frank Chaparro

adena friedman

  • Nasdaq, the exchange operator based in New York, is preparing to launch a bitcoin futures contracts. 
  • Bitcoin, the red-hot cryptocurrency, soared over $11,000 on Wednesday. 
  • Bitcoin futures would allow investors to bet on the future price of bitcoin.

 

Nasdaq is hopping on the bitcoin bandwagon. 

The exchange operator is set to launch a bitcoin futures product next year, a person familiar with the matter told Business Insider. 

Two Chicago-based exchanges, CME and Cboe, have announced their own bitcoin futures products. Such products would allow investors to bet on the future price of bitcoin. They would also likely dampen bitcoin's spine-tingling volatility and help the coin further push into the mainstream. 

The move appears to be a change of tune for Nasdaq, which has been less bullish on crypto than other Wall Street firms. In October, Adena Friedman, the firm's CEO, described initial coin offerings as "bleeding edge."

She added, "Nasdaq doesn’t tend to get engaged in the bleeding edge."

Bitcoin has been on a tear since the US Thanksgiving holiday, blowing past $10,000 on Monday and then $11,000 on Tuesday. 

It is up more than 900% year-to-date. 

The story is breaking. Check back for updates.

Read more about blockchain, the technology powering bitcoin, here.

Capture.PNG

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Gary Shilling: Here's how I'd fix the Fed

29 Nov 03:43

Someone in 2010 bought 2 pizzas with 10,000 bitcoins — which today would be worth $100 million

by Rob Price

bitcoin pizza day

  • Bitcoin has just hit all-time highs of $10,000.
  • Back in 2010, a developer bought two pizzas for 10,000 bitcoins.
  • Today, those bitcoins are worth a whopping $100 million.


On May 22, 2010, a developer bought two pizzas using 10,000 units of a then-little-known digital currency called bitcoin.

Today, the price of a single bitcoin has hit $10,000 — making 10,000 of them worth a staggering $100 million (£75 million).

Bitcoin is going nuclear. Just a year ago, it was trading at less than $750, after deflating from what was then seen as the giddy highs of about $1,100 (£847) in late 2013. It has since embarked on an epic bull run.

"10k is a seminal moment for bitcoin and cryptocurrencies in general," CryptoCompare CEO Charles Hayter said in an emailed statement, "highlighting the supernormal returns and speculative like nature of the industry as well as the potential and growing adoption."

The digital currency has come a long way since 2010, when the purchase of the two Papa John's pizzas by Laszlo Hanyecz from another bitcoin enthusiast marked what is believed to be the first "real-world" bitcoin transaction.

He posted on the Bitcoin Talk forum on May 22, 2010, writing (emphasis ours):

"I'll pay 10,000 bitcoins for a couple of pizzas.. like maybe 2 large ones so I have some left over for the next day. I like having left over pizza to nibble on later. You can make the pizza yourself and bring it to my house or order it for me from a delivery place, but what I'm aiming for is getting food delivered in exchange for bitcoins where I don't have to order or prepare it myself, kind of like ordering a 'breakfast platter' at a hotel or something, they just bring you something to eat and you're happy!

"I like things like onions, peppers, sausage, mushrooms, tomatoes, pepperoni, etc.. just standard stuff no weird fish topping or anything like that. I also like regular cheese pizzas which may be cheaper to prepare or otherwise acquire.

"If you're interested please let me know and we can work out a deal."

Ten thousand coins were then worth about $40 (£30). A British user agreed to buy the pizza for him, and even at the time the buyer got a good deal out of it: The person paid only $25 (£19) for the two pizzas.

The date is now marked on an annual basis by bitcoin users in a lighthearted celebration known as "Bitcoin Pizza Day."

And today, 10,000 bitcoins add up to about $100 million (£75 million).

"It wasn't like Bitcoins had any value back then, so the idea of trading them for a pizza was incredibly cool," Hanyecz told The New York Times in 2013. "No one knew it was going to get so big."

bitcoin price november 28

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: A running coach explains the 2 most important activities runners should do to avoid knee pain

28 Nov 20:17

Google has learned the proper way to make a cheeseburger in Android 8.1

by Ashley Carman

Google CEO Sundar Pichai promised to look into the great cheeseburger emoji debate, and he's made good on his word. Apparently Android 8.1 ships with a new and improved cheeseburger emoji in which the cheese is placed atop the patty, as opposed to underneath it. Emojipedia first spotted the fix.

Google previously pictured the cheese at the bottom of the sandwich, which we can all agree is incorrect. But it wasn't until someone named Thomas Baekdal called the emoji out in October that the world woke up to this extremely incorrect cheeseburger depiction.

Continue reading…

28 Nov 16:44

Comcast Spent Millions Repealing Net Neutrality, Now Wants You To Believe It Won't Take Full, Brutal Advantage

by Karl Bode

Despite the nation's biggest ISP and cable company having spent millions of dollars and lobbying man hours on repealing broadband privacy rules and soon net neutrality protections, executives at the least-liked company in America hope you're dumb enough to believe they won't be taking full advantage.

Comcast has spent months now falsely claiming that it will still adhere to "net neutrality" once the FCC's rules are gutted by Ajit Pai. But the company's pet definition of net neutrality is so narrow as to be effectively meaningless. For example, last week as the FCC was trying to hide its obvious handout to telecom duopolies behind the cranberry and stuffing, Comcast issued a tweet again insisting that you can trust them to be on their best behavior despite the fact there will soon be no meaningful rules holding their feet to the fire:

Comcast would have you ignore the fact that net neutrality violations are just a symptom of a lack of competition in the broadband market. They'd also like you to ignore that there's a myriad of ways that ISPs like Comcast have taken advantage of this lack of competition to engage in even worse anti-competitive behavior, with "throttling" and "blocking" just being a small subsection. For example, a lack of competition lets Comcast impose arbitrary and unnecessary usage caps and overage fees, then exempt its own content from those caps while penalizing direct competitors like Netflix.

Comcast also hopes you've forgotten this debate began, in part, when Comcast decided to throttle the upstream traffic of all BitTorrent users on the Comcast network without telling anybody, then lied about it repeatedly. Similarly, Comcast hopes you don't realize that as people grew wise to ham-fisted throttling and blocking, ISPs began abusing net neutrality in other, more "creative" ways -- like intentionally letting peering points congest in order to drive up costs for transit and content operators who foolishly wanted their traffic to reach consumers unimpeded (aka "double dipping," or less generously: extortion).

There's a reason Comcast and other large ISPs are happily promising not to throttle or outright "block" websites: large ISPs now know it's hard to get away with either now that the public and press are more savvy to what they've been up to. They know that blatantly throttling or blocking a website completely would generate a tidal wave of negative PR.

That's why they've long-since moved on to more creative technical abuses of limited competition they can hide behind half-baked techno-babble and semantics, whether that's usage caps and zero rating, charging you more money for privacy, or strangling innovation via their lucrative cable box hardware monopoly.

Anybody that honestly believes that uncompetitive duopolies won't take full, brutal advantage of limited competition and incompetent/corrupt regulators is ignoring history and fooling themselves. Fortunately, most people seem to understand that when it comes to not abusing a lack of competition, large, incumbent telecom providers are the very last companies in America you should trust:



Permalink | Comments | Email This Story
28 Nov 03:59

There's a big math problem with the FCC chairman's main argument for repealing net neutrality

by Steve Kovach

ajit pai

  • The FCC will vote on a repeal of its net neutrality rules December 14.
  • FCC Chairman Ajit Pai has argued that the rules need to be repealed because they've caused a decline in broadband investment.
  • But Pai's own data doesn't back up this assertion.


Ajit Pai says the Federal Communications Commission needs to ditch its net neutrality rules because they're hindering investment.

The rules the agency put in place in 2015 bar broadband providers from blocking, throttling, or offering preferential treatment to particular sites or services. Hampered by those rules, broadband companies are cutting back on investing in things like expanding their services to new customers or upgrading their networks, Pai, the FCC chairman, argues.

If that's really what's been happening, that would be terrible, especially in a country that's become ever more dependent on the internet and one where the digital divide remains pronounced.

But there's no evidence to prove Pai's point. In fact, the data that Pai himself points to doesn't show anything close to a marked decrease in broadband investment. Instead, it shows that while broadband investment has risen and fallen a little bit over the years, it's essentially been flat since 2013.

And that's if you believe the data Pai himself cites. A study in May by consumer advocacy group Free Press, which opposes the repeal of the rules, actually reported that broadband investment has increased since 2015.

Historical Broadband Provider Capex 2016

The debate over broadband investment is coming to a head as the vote nears over repealing the rules. With Pai and his Republican allies outnumbering Democrats on the commission 3-2, his proposal is expected to sail through when the FCC votes on it on December 14.

Investment is a key point in the net neutrality debate

Broadband investment can take many different forms. It can mean building out high-speed wireless LTE networks so you have a zippy connection no matter where you are in the country. It can mean building wired broadband networks in rural areas that are underserved compared to urban and suburban regions. It can mean increasing the speed and bandwidth of existing connections so you can download files faster or stream ultra-high resolution videos with little lag time.

Regardless of the form it takes, broadband investment is generally considered a good thing, because it promises faster internet speeds and more access to more people. As such, it's become a key point in the debate over net neutrality.

Those in favor of net neutrality have sought to show that the rules haven't affected investment or have actually encouraged it, that they provide consumers positive benefits without any harms. By contrast, those opposing net neutrality, such as Pai, have tried to show how bad the rules are for consumers by pointing to investment declines.

But those claims that investment has decreased thanks to net neutrality seem to be rooted in anything but reality.

Taking a closer look at a complicated picture

They also ignore the complexity of the investment picture. Not all companies increase or decrease broadband investments at the same time. And declines in investment often are due to the completion of large projects, such as when AT&T finished its LTE rollout, rather than changes in government regulations.

This chart from Free Press gives a clearer picture of recent broadband investment than the FCC's data and places it in the proper context. Even if overall investment may decline from one year to another, examining investments by individual companies can give you a better picture what's really going on in the industry:

Broadband investment 2015 and 2016

By the way, Free Press gathered all that data from the public records of the telecommunications companies, which just so happen to be the biggest cheerleaders of Pai's effort to repeal the net neutrality rules. Those companies' own data shows the rules haven't had an impact on overall industry investment.

Pai's ignoring the facts

During a conference call FCC officials held with reporters last week, I asked them about this discrepancy between Pai's assertion that investment is declining and what the actual data shows. They dismissed my question, saying I had my facts wrong. But they didn't offer any data that would prove Pai's point.

Reached later, an FCC spokesperson simply pointed back to the USTelecom data posted above that Pai referenced previously. The spokesperson declined to make the chairman or anyone else on his staff available for an interview.

Pai's FCC has ignored much of the data that contradicts his key rationale behind repealing net neutrality, Derek Turner, the author of the Free Press report on broadband investment, said in an email Monday.

"[The FCC] came into this with a preconceived notion, latched on to data that supported that notion, and ignored every single piece of conflicting evidence," Turner wrote.

There are many ways to measure broadband investment. It's easy to pick and choose numbers that can bolster either side of the argument about net neutrality.

But even when you look at the data that's the most favorable to Pai's position, it doesn't prove net neutrality regulations have resulted in significantly lower broadband investment from telecom companies. At worst, investment has been flat since 2013. At best, it's increased.

It's a leap in logic on Pai's part to use two years of cherry picked data to make the case that broadband is getting worse for Americans because of the net neutrality rules.

But it's that leap in logic that's likely to result in the repeal of those rules.

SEE ALSO: Here's why AT&T's proposed $85 billion merger with Time Warner is a bad deal for you and me

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: A running coach explains the 2 most important activities runners should do to avoid knee pain