Blog post: The solace of secure quantum computing

“The only way to beat a machine is with another machine.” – Alan Turing

A recent story that physicists reversed time using quantum computing immediately grabbed my attention. It is a great read about how scientists restored a quantum computer to the state it had been in a moment earlier. I find this mind-blowing and confusing in a nice way, and there has been a fascinating debate around whether the experiment has anything to do with reversing the flow of time – or nothing at all.

I have to admit that I do not have a very clear opinion on whether time might be theoretically reversible. I kind of hope that it is, but equally I hope it isn’t. But what is clear to me is that the possibilities of quantum computing are vast and as a field it is simply very different to “normal” computing. Quantum computers calculate things simultaneously rather than going through calculations in sequenced, chronological order, where speed is limited by the laws of physics. If a “normal” computer is an Aston Martin, a quantum computer is a supersonic speed rocket. It is much, much faster.

This new understanding of computer speed results in two views: one that acknowledges how “good” causes can be accelerated, such as pharmaceutical discoveries or more accurate atmospheric models to help us understand and combat climate change. This idea of “humanizing quantum computing” is diametrically opposed to the one which predicts chaos and problems, for example by using quantum computing to crack the encryption mechanisms we currently consider sophisticated and secure.

Computers typically break passwords by going through combinations of characters and numbers – a process known as “brute forcing”. The time it takes for a computer to find the right combination is defined by password complexity and length. A password with eight random lowercase characters should take a contemporary supercomputer – a machine which is 100,000 times faster than a desktop computer – no longer than two seconds to break. Passwords with lower and upper case characters are broken in less than eight minutes; lower and upper case characters with numbers in around half an hour. Adding symbols increases this to some four hours. If you want to be on the safe side, use at least 10 characters and include a mix of numbers, lowercase letters, uppercase letters and symbols. This will keep one of today’s mid range supercomputers busy for three years, in which time hopefully you will have changed your password anyway.

Supercomputers will continue to gain speed and power, so the time taken to complete tasks like breaking passwords will be revised down significantly in the coming years. But whatever speed supercomputers gain, quantum computers will make them look like novices, like an under-8 football team taking on Juventus Turin. So going back to the password cracking task and considering the extra power of quantum computers, the theory is that quantum computing can break passwords much more easily – including the ones we think are extremely long and complex. Another theory argues that quantum computing could turn into supervillains, able to break the security mechanisms on which blockchain relies. As more and more applications such as loyalty cards or personal health records are built on underlying blockchain technology, the concern is that quantum computing might put our health and finances in danger.

All of this seems plausible to me, more or less. But the development of quantum computing is driven by the motivation to achieve benefits for us as people. Its objective is to make our world cleaner, better and safer. Whilst quantum computing might be used by criminals, its emergence is likely to accelerate the development of powerful new mechanisms which will be more secure and quantum-proof. It is likely that these will be developed well before quantum computing becomes a reality.

For now, time travel and password cracking make great headlines. They also give quantum computing and science as a whole a negative image. If the public thinks that a technology is incredibly esoteric, they will feel confused. And confusion can often lead to rejection and fear. This is why technology needs to be explained carefully and in a non-sensationalist way. Quantum computing may still be in its infancy but it is only a matter of time for it to be more widely deployed. When it arrives, we might be shaken, but should not be stirred. We should understand the risks it carries, but even more so embrace the opportunities it will bring.

Published 03 May 2019 on hkstrategies.com:
https://hkstrategies.co.uk/the-solace-of-secure-quantum-computing/

Mention: PR Place December 2018

PR Place quoted me and my recent blog post on the future of cash in their weekly summary:
https://www.prplace.com/blog/posts/2018/december/this-week-in-pr-21-december/

Blog post: Going, going, gone: the future of cash

I love thinking about my 1980s family holidays in Italy. Weeks spent on beaches, in ice cream shops, pizzerias and gaming arcades. Phone calls back home were strictly kept to three minutes as they were so ridiculously expensive. Everything was paid in cash. I remember how excited I felt when I was a Lira millionaire. It was exotic and precious.

As you can see, I have a very emotional attachment to cash. I like that I have much better control over how much I spend and that my children can use to learn how the financial system works. But I do not think that cash is very practical. I actually very rarely have cash with me. At a fun fair a few weekends ago, I had to hurry 10 minutes to a cashpoint and back so I could buy tokens for the rides, as the organisers did not accept cards. Without enormous pressure from various children, I would have walked on for sure.

I do not think cash is safe either. The number of people I personally know who have had cash stolen from them is in the dozens. Including myself. The number of people I know who had their bank card stolen and money taken from their account is – one. And their bank paid back the money within days as it could easily spot an unusual spending pattern. So if carrying cash is more risky, would it not make sense to get rid of it? It is exactly what Sweden does. But going completely cash-free is politically sensitive.

Cash does have its prize

Governments keep cash alive because it is a social method of making payments. It is accessible to everyone and it does not discriminate against anyone. It is the key payment method for the millions of people who do not have a bank account and are not able to use a card or mobile phone to make payments. When I was a teenager, my grandmother gave me the ‘secret handshake’. What made this gesture so meaningful was that there was an immediate tangible and therefore emotional result. Had she transferred money to my bank account it would have had a very different emotional effect on me. Yet, money is money, and the way it is being handled and passed on does not define its value.

What defines value though is cost. And cash is expensive. It needs to be designed, manufactured, transported, protected, counted and destroyed. Numbers that circulate indicate that the cost of cash is £130 per person per year. Many of us use price comparison websites to shave off a few pounds of our monthly mobile phone bills. If we add cost to the cash equation, it makes increasingly less sense to use it.

Cash – the only stalwart of privacy

A key argument for cash is the anonymity it provides. I am very much pro-privacy and try to avoid giving too much data about myself away. I do not, really, want anyone or any business to know how, where and when I spend my money, and to predict or even influence what I am going to do next. Yet I still prefer cards over cash. They are simply more secure and more convenient.

But for me, cards are transitional only. Once crypto-currencies evolve into a mainstream payments method and can be used for day to day financial transactions, the discussion around convenience vs security vs anonymity will become irrelevant. We will then be able to make payments in a private, anonymous and secure way. No more cards, no more cash needed. These currencies will likely be issued by national central banks, but neither private banks nor card providers can then control, dictate or profit from the way we choose to pay for goods and services.

When talking to our clients, most agree that this will take many years to get there, but the current state of payments is unsustainable and will drive adoption. The current situation is neither cashless-friendly nor cash-friendly. Most shops accept cards and sometimes only accept card payments, yet we still need cash machines to pay at festivals, market stalls or fun fairs. Having parallel payment infrastructures in place is neither efficient nor helpful.

The future is digital. It is not cash

Our lives have become digital. We WhatsApp our friends rather than calling them, and we send emails rather than writing letters by hand. Digital has not completely replaced the physical, and should never fully do so. But it is impacting the way we think, work and interact with each other. This is how we describe what it is our clients do when we speak to the media and other audiences: they create something new and “better” that has an impact on our lives.

Exchanging physical coins and notes is not contemporary anymore. In a few years, carrying around a small card made out of plastic will not be seen as contemporary either. Our digital lifestyles create massive shifts in our behaviours and these shifts will continue to affect the way we make payments. A recent example is the launch of Apple Pay in Germany – a country which traditionally has been cash friendly.

When it comes to cash, there is emotion on one side and practicality, convenience, security and anonymity on the other. We as human beings would not exist without our ability to have and share emotions. But if we see transactions, such as buying or selling products, as a rational way to deal with other human beings, then the way we fulfil these transactions should be rational too. Cash may not be gone yet. But it is only a matter of time before it will be a thing of the past, evoking pleasant memories.

Published 18 December 2018 on hkstrategies.com:
http://www.hkstrategies.com/united-kingdom/en-uk/going-going-gone-future-cash/

Article: Telecoms must stress how they make life better

Telecom providers go through another challenging year of competition, consolidation and contraction. To be successful, telcos need to focus on other c-words: providing compelling and unique content, adjusting to consumption patterns and delivering convenience to consumers.

To do this, they will need to re-define their place in the era of tech giants that are diversifying in the experiences they bring to people and the things they talk about. More than ever, telcos now need to move the conversation away from mobile data plans and connectivity to playing a more central role in the lives of humans and societal progress. Some brands have already started with this, by talking about technologies such as Artificial Intelligence and 5G and why they are important for our lives - rather than talking about the technologies themselves. We will see more of this.

Consumers will align with telecom providers only when they understand what they stand for. Communicating their purpose clearly will be vital for telco brands. Expect more business-to-human communications from them.

My comments on the c-words that matter for telcos in this BrandZ100 report:
http://online.pubhtml5.com/bydd/rxhd/#p=244