xxx

While benchmarks such as the UN’s goal to drive average cross-border remittance costs below 3 percent provided highly visible targets, it was mostly the pressure from fintech specialists who led the charge by competing on price, speed, and margin transparency.

From: Cross-border payments: Beyond transactions | McKinsey.

xxx

xxx

Thirty-eight per cent of 18- to 40-year-olds believe it is fine to make an investment decision based solely on the outputs of AI, according to the FCA’s survey of nearly 700 UK adults in this age group who either currently own investments or would consider buying investments soon.

From: Nearly half of young Britons wrongly think AI financial advice is regulated.

xxx

xxx

Some 44 per cent of 18- to 40-year-olds surveyed by the Financial Conduct Authority said they thought financial information from AI chatbots was regulated, while 32 per cent wrongly thought they would get compensation if the AI advice went wrong.

From: Nearly half of young Britons wrongly think AI financial advice is regulated.

xxx

 

National Wealth Service

Paddington Bear stood on the shiny marble floor of the Big Bank, clutching a large, slightly sticky envelope in his paw. Outside, the red double-decker buses trundled past, but inside, the air smelled strongly of floor polish and caution.

“Good morning,” said Paddington, tipping his red hat politely. “I have come to deposit a royalty check. My Aunt Lucy says one must always keep one’s marmalade pennies in a safe place.”

The clerk, a very neat chap with a sharp-looking tie, looked down over his spectacles. “Certainly, sir. We will just need to verify your identity and proof of address. Do you have a recent household utility bill?”

Paddington blinked. “A utility bill? Oh dear”. But then he remembered! “I do have a gas bill. It arrived this morning.”

He reached deep into his suitcase and carefully produced a piece of paper. Unfortunately, it bore the unmistakable, sticky golden fingerprints of an emergency marmalade sandwich he had eaten on the Tube. The address was completely obscured beneath a thick layer of citrus preserve.

The clerk frowned, stepping back slightly. “Ah. That appears to be… heavily fruited, Mr. Brown—er, Bear. We cannot accept a document covered in breakfast preserves. Do you have a government-issued photo ID?”

“Of course,” Paddington said brightly.

He pulled a shiny smartphone from his coat pocket and tapped the screen with a furry paw. “My Peruvian Digital ID. It uses the official framework managed by RENIEC, complete with cryptographic security safeguards and a temporary dynamic QR code to prevent unauthorized screenshots.”

The clerk leaned over the counter, squinting at the glowing screen. He tilted his head to the left, then to the right, looking entirely bewildered.”I’m sorry,” the clerk said, blinking slowly. “A digital what?”.

“A digitial identity” said Paddington.

The clerk was sceptical “I’ve never heard of a digital identity in my life. Is it some sort of photograph? “”

“Oh, no, it’s linked directly to the national registry in Lima,” Paddington explained helpfully, holding the phone closer. “It has my biometric authentication and everything.”

The clerk took a deep breath, rubbing his temples. His supervisor will laugh at him if he starts talking about “digital identities”.

“Please wait a moment Sir”, the clerk said, and then went to back room to call the AML hotline. He explained the situation. “A digital what?”, came the baffled response. There’s no such thing. He is clearly a member of the Marxist Shining Path guerilla movement hoping to engage in money laundering, terrorsit financing and, I wouldn’t not be surprised to hear, political corruption. No account, no way”.

The clerk returned.

“Sir, we are a bank. We don’t know anything about so-called verifiable credentials. Do you happen to have a UK photocard driving licence?” Paddington looked deeply alarmed. “A driving licence? Oh, goodness me, no. If I were to drive a car, the city would be in terrible trouble. I can barely manage a shopping trolley when the wheels stick to the left.”

Sighing heavily, the clerk slid the sticky gas bill back across the counter. “I’m afraid without a standard utility bill or a document we actually recognize, we cannot open an account today.”

Paddington slumped his shoulders. “This is a very sticky situation,” he muttered.Suddenly, his eyes lit up. He remembered Mrs. Brown’s emergency smartphone instructions. Stepping out of the queue, he called Mr. Brown

“Mr. Brown!” Paddington whispered urgently into the phone. “The bank requires proof of a proper address, but my gas bill has met with an unfortunate accident involving a jar of extra-chunky, and they have never even heard of a digital identity like we use back in Peru! Can you make make a gas bill with my name on it on your computer”?

Twenty minutes later, a breathless Mr. Brown rushed into the lobby, waving Paddington’s gas bill. Paddington was finally able to pay his cheque into a bank account and it would only be three days before he could use the money for marmalade.

Paddington called his publisher. “I say Mr Harper, could you tell Mr. Collins that I want Tether only from now. Send the royalties to 0xdAC17F958D2ee523a2206206994597C13D831ec7″.

Notes

Historical accuracy: the noted Russian warlord Yevgeny Prigozhin passed his London AML checks with his mother’s gas bill from St. Petersburg.

No bears were harmed during the writing of this blog post.

Mark van Rijmenam talks about BigTech “dismantling” the consumer metaverse while shifting the spatial computing focus on to” hospitals, factories, and defense ministries”. I think “dismantling” is the wrong word here (I think “reconfiguring” is better, given the consumer preferences for augmented reality, smart glasses and so on) but I understand what he is saying. Anyway to his point about the growth of the industrial metaverse, he is clearly right. Here I mist point out that in our book “Money in the Metaverse”, Victoria Richardson and I noted that the opportunities for the hopistals, factories and defence ministries would be considerably greater than the consumer opportunities (here is a chart from the book) in the strategic timescale that we were thinking about.

 

 

The last consumer computing platform to mature this way, the smartphone, also arrived through the enterprise before it reshaped daily life. Spatial computing is walking the same road, growing up at work first.

xxx

the residual correlation between AI adoption and recent productivity growth falls to essentially zero

From: AI and productivity – by Ernie Tedeschi – Stripe Economics.

xxx

xxx

First, solopreneurship is growing faster than employer-business formation, and the acceleration is validated by multiple independent data sources, making it unlikely to be driven by a fraud wave. Second, both the number and share of solopreneurs reaching meaningful income thresholds is rising. And third, early signals indicate that AI is filling the capability gaps that once made hiring necessary—and doing so fast enough to show up in the income distribution.

From: The age of the solopreneur.

xxx

The issue of privacy is complex and I think we all understand that it has nuances, edge cases and issues around rights and responsibilities that need society as a whole to consider and come up with new ethics and etiquette to see us through the coming era of always on, continual surveillance. This may have seemed a somewhat abstract discussion for privacy enthusiasts and policy wonks, but it really isn’t. And the imminent mass market explosion in smart glasses use means that we need to deal with ethics and etiquette as an absoute priority.

There is a need for urgency because of improvements in biometric identification, improvements in AI and improvements in camera technology. The issues around face recognition demand attention. There are already some illustrative use of the technology in the mass market that I’ve talked about before and used to sharpen my own thinking. So let’s just begin some thinking here with a few of those examples to help us calibrate

First of all, there’s the example of the devoted father in New York, who when he saw his daughter walk into a restaurant with her new boyfriend, immediately did what any loving parent would do. He took a picture of the young man and uploaded it to a face recognition service that reported back with the man’s name and details. He turned out to be a VC from San Francisco. I laughed out loud when I read that in response to this news, the father (who presumably had never met a VC) said “at least he wasn’t a charlatan”.

A second example, also from New York, concerns the furore around Madison Square Gardens using facial recognition technology to deny entrance to lawyers working for their opponents in a lawsuit. Now, while some people might regard barring lawyers from certain spaces to be an entirely reasonable adjustment to modern life, it does raise some serious questions about the ability of private companies to carry out and act on surveillance.

Finally, I’d like to raise the more recent example of the police use of facial recognition cameras in London. In the particular case of Croydon, the one that was in the news most recently, there is no doubt that the cameras did enable the police to catch and detain wanted persons. Most members of the general public, on the grounds that they’re generally speaking not criminals, seem to be in favour of the police using this technology. But again, it undoubtedly raises serious questions about the use of the technology and the circumstances under which the police are allowed to exploit it. 

Back to the smart glasses. Earlier this year I was at a conference in the Asia Pacific region where a speaker asked the audience to raise their hands if they were wearing glasses. I suppose about a third of us did. The speaker then predicted quite confidently that at the same conference two years from now, half of the audience would be wearing glasses. His reasoning was that smart glasses are a very natural and convenient interface. This idea of looking through the internet rather than looking at it is quite appealing. And you can see just how Metas sales of the smart glasses accelerated, not because of improvements in camera technology or battery technology or lenses or anything else like that, but because of the arrival of AI. I’m thinking about getting a pair and the only thing that is stopping me is that they don’t allow face recognition, which is my principal reason for wanting them.

I would love to be able to walk into a conference and, when someone comes up to me and says “Hi Dave”, be able to respond confidently with “Hi Steve, great to see you” instead of staring blankly while desperately tryign to recall the name of someone I’d met before, had liked, am interested to talk to. If my smart glasses could put a display in the bottom right of my vision scrolling “This is Tom Noyes. You read two of his articles last week. You last spoke to him a month ago and you have a Zoom meeting with him in the diary for next Friday”.

I can imagine how just such a service could work in such a way as to enhance secuirty and privacy together. Suppose it went something like this. The person in my field of view is Tom Noyes. The glasses take his picture and upload it to the services that have a privacy framework that I have agreed to. Let’s say these are LinkedIn and Signal. LinkedIn matches the picture to Tom Noyes and then checks Tom’s settings. He has “Smart Glasses Discovery” turned on. So the glasses can tell me anything about him that it on LinkedIn and then use his identity to check my LinkedIn activity, my e-mail, my calendar and so on. All good, and if LinkedIn offered this for £9.95 per month then I’d sign up for life right now.

If system had gone to LinkedIn and discovered that Tom had smart glass discovery turned off, then they would display in yellow “this person is known to you, but requests privacy”. And that’s fair enough. If the system can’t find his face on LinkedIn or Signal, then the glasses can display a message in red saying “person not known”.

That may not be exactly how things would work, but along those lines. And obviously we would want real security underpinning it all with verifiable credentials and whatnot. But you get my general point. This is kind of how things could work. But how does that scale? How would that work for society at large? If I’m walking down the street and I have Facebook face recognition turned on, and my glasses spot people in the street, should Facebook list their profiles for me? Add them to a list on Facebook that I can look it in the evening? Hhhmmm….

When I go somewhere and I don’t want anyone to know that I’m there could I just reach for my phone and turn off smart glass recognition and then turn it back on when I get home? It seems not beyond the bounds of human ingenuity to come up with a workable framework here. But that’s just the starting point. How would that framework interact with society’s wider demands? And how might they contribute?

While you’re thinking about that, let me divert you away for a moment.

TAGS

What if smart glasses allow you to turn people into Tiles? Suppose there is a missing child or a murderer on the loose. Could the police go to LinkedIn and Facebook and Instagram with a court order and tell them to override the privacy settings? To report to them if anyone’s smart glasses see the missing child or the fleeing murderer? That seems like a useful service for society. I’m walking down the street. My glasses see a child who is reported as missing. My glasses don’t tell me anything about this because it’s none of my business. They just send the face, as with all other faces, to Apple. Apple match the face to social m edia profiles, police databases, government repositories and so on. They flag the missing child back to Apple, Apple send the pictures and the time and location to the police. I don’t know anything about this, any more than I know that my iPhone has reported an AirTag.

Great! But… to raise an obvious red flag, what if an arrest warrant is issued in a foreign country, with whom the UK has some form of agreement, to arrest a journalist because they wrote something in that foreign country, what should happen? Or what if the system gets hacked by agents of a foreign power who want to track down and murder a dissident? Or a disgruntled IT worker who wants to see his boss arrested on entirely bogus grounds?

People have already gone to jail becase of mistakes in face recognition and given that face recognition is a) unlikely to be 100% perfect in any foreseeable timeframe and b) vulnerable to adversarial camouflage, we might reasonably expect the problem to get considerably worse if half the population are walkign round with the smart glasses on and billions of faces are being sent to Apple, Meta and others every day.

. have a look at what Simon and his colleagues. They just have a look at what Simon and his colleagues are doing over at Blur ID. Full stop. Oh comma and by the way comma if anyone from Facebook is reading this and thinking about launching the people tag service. I’ve already left my desk and I’m heading down to the patent office.

xxx

ules for tracking parties and monitoring secondary activity create a compliance regime that burdens every party with the need to understand the provenance of a coin. Can you imagine accepting $2000 for a new TV, shipping it out, then having your stablecoins burned?

From: FIncen / OFAC 303 Page Rule Squashes Stablecoin eCom Ambitions | Noyes Payments Blog.

xxx

xxx

Elder fraud is a rapidly growing problem in the U.S. In 2024, Americans aged 60 and older lost $4.9 billion to scams — more than any other age group, according to the FBI. The average loss was $83,000.

From: Should a bank ever be liable when a customer gets scammed? | American Banker.

xxx