Digital Matters – 13th February
Apologies – Christine, Iain
u3a Magazine – volunteer please!!!!
Meeting on 27th March – upstairs
Posts on Signal – intensity!!!
Review of previous meeting on Security etc
Blogposts on
Member issues
Phil’s Apple Trade-In
Ian’s new iMac
Other new devices or pieces of kit?
Round the table
Presentation meeting in March – How much Privacy do you need/want? Invite others from u3a??
What subscription services do you use and do you value them (Iain)? It could be services (eg Amazon Prime), blogs (Medium, Substack), news, music, film and software eg apps, OpenSource etc. And have people given up subscriptions to print media etc
Ideas for future meetings (Stella)
Since it’s the season for gifts, we could ask members to recommend any devices or gadgets they have purchased this year.
I believe we have several keen photographers in the group, and members might be interested in learning about the latest digital cameras and how much they have evolved since the Kodak era.
We could also discuss the features that members find helpful or frustrating on their devices.
We might consider a talk on the latest technology in musical instruments. Phil is an expert on this topic and may enjoy sharing his knowledge with us. It could be a fun session!
Restrictions on use, legal impositions and “Best Before or Not After” for software/hardware
Digital terminology
Invite to join the Steering Group (Stella)
My bits and pieces
DM – Apple Pie
Apple’s anti-trust case with UK government over its Mobile platforms (iOS and iPadOS)
https://www.gov.uk/cma-cases/sms-investigation-into-apples-mobile-ecosystem
Iain
Bear in mind that a parallel enquiry has been launched into Google.
I think that this is what the Americans call an “anti-trust” investigation. It’s not uncommon in the tech world (eg the break-up of AT&T into regional companies) and in the economy generally e.g. railway and oil companies when they became dominant.
Economists tend to think that monopoly is bad by definition but I think that there’s an argument to be made that Microsoft, for example, has stimulated economic growth by creating a worldwide standard for personal computing and allowed companies to avoid unnecessary costs in transferring data between incompatible architectures.
Me
I agree. Whilst often saying derogatory things about Amazon and Google, I would defend the way they do business. They are not clandestine in their approach. Amazon make very little out of their online retail, but massive profits out of AWS (Amazon Web Services) and Google don’t attempt to hide that they are an advertising and marketing company (unlike Meta) and provide some very good tools (some chargeable) which you can construct your own privacy around – should you wish to.
I’d further add, just how do these anti-competitive folk think that innovation is funded, and isn’t it justifiable to protect some of your intellectual property rights?
The argument only holds true in relation to preventing new entrants to a market. I would argue that any person seeking to challenge Apple/Google (Android) would be wise to look at what happened to Nokia and Microsoft phones and seriously consider whether they can really compete.
Taking it one stage further. Even with the zillions of dollars that Google is prepared to hand out to make Google search the preferred search engine on Apple’s Safari browser, can one really say the general public is that interested – they just want to “Google it” – a masterstroke in marketing.
What is actually uncompetitive in this case is the reasoning for the “slush money” being given to Apple – it’s to stop them developing their own search engine!
Jonathan
I asked Google Gemini ” are apple and google anti competitive and, if so, is that a bad thing”. Here is the reply
Whether Apple and Google are anti-competitive is a complex question with no simple answer. There are arguments to be made on both sides.
Arguments for anti-competitiveness:
App Store dominance: Both Apple and Google operate dominant app stores on their respective mobile operating systems.
They have significant control over which apps are available to users and the terms under which they can be offered. Critics argue that this allows them to stifle competition and favor their own apps and services.
Default search engine agreements: Google pays Apple billions of dollars to be the default search engine on Safari. This gives Google a significant advantage in search, as many users stick with the default option. Critics argue that this harms competition and consumer choice.
Bundling of services: Both companies bundle their own apps and services with their operating systems, giving them a leg up over competitors. For example, Apple pre-installs its own browser, email app, and music service on iPhones.
Data collection and usage: Both companies collect vast amounts of user data, which they can use to their advantage in various markets. Critics argue that this gives them an unfair competitive advantage.
Arguments against anti-competitiveness:
Innovation and consumer benefit: Both companies have driven significant innovation in their respective markets, benefiting consumers with new and improved products and services.
Competition exists: Despite their dominance, both companies face competition in various areas. For example, there are alternative app stores and search engines available.
Focus on user experience: Both companies argue that their practices are aimed at providing the best possible user experience, even if that means limiting choices in some areas.
Is it a bad thing?
Whether anti-competitive behavior is a bad thing is also a complex question. Some argue that it stifles innovation and harms consumers by limiting choice and driving up prices. Others argue that it can lead to greater efficiency and innovation, ultimately benefiting consumers.
Ultimately, the question of whether Apple and Google are anti-competitive and whether that is a bad thing is a matter of debate. It is important to consider all sides of the issue and weigh the potential benefits and harms before drawing any conclusions.
A BBC response if ever I heard one.
Time machine
Restarting your MacBook
Update of devices for security issue
Invites app for iCloud+ users
Transcribing audio to text in Notes app
Switching-off Apple Intelligence
Using external drives on your Mac
DM – Hardware and Software
How to send large files
How to share files between Mac and Windows
Copilot invading Word docs
Extracting images from PDF files
Battery swelling
Recovering a deleted file
DM – Easy PC
Increase in subscription costs for Office 365
DM – Artificial Intelligence
The arrival of DeepSeek (from Iain)
“Author unknown.
Nevertheless, an interesting read.
Deep seek is on the news every where, for people like me who are not so well informed , I thought this message which I received from a friend, is very very useful. I am sharing it below for those who are interested :
Finally had a chance to dig into DeepSeek’s …
Let me break down why DeepSeek’s AI innovations are blowing people’s minds (and possibly threatening Nvidia’s $2T market cap) in simple terms…
First, some context: Right now, training top AI models is INSANELY expensive. OpenAI, Anthropic, etc. spend $100M+ just on compute. They need massive data centers with thousands of $40K GPUs. It’s like needing a whole power plant to run a factory.
DeepSeek just showed up and said “LOL what if we did this for $5M instead?” And they didn’t just talk – they actually DID it. Their models match or beat GPT-4 and Claude on many tasks. The AI world is (as my teenagers say) shook.
How? They rethought everything from the ground up. Traditional AI is like writing every number with 32 decimal places. DeepSeek was like “what if we just used 8? It’s still accurate enough!” Boom – 75% less memory needed.
Then there’s their “multi-token” system. Normal AI reads like a first-grader: “The… cat… sat…” DeepSeek reads in whole phrases at once. 2x faster, 90% as accurate. When you’re processing billions of words, this MATTERS.
But here’s the really clever bit: They built an “expert system.” Instead of one massive AI trying to know everything (like having one person be a doctor, lawyer, AND engineer), they have specialized experts that only wake up when needed.
Traditional models? All 1.8 trillion parameters active ALL THE TIME. DeepSeek? 671B total but only 37B active at once. It’s like having a huge team but only calling in the experts you actually need for each task.
The results are mind-blowing:
– Training cost: $100M → $5M
– GPUs needed: 100,000 → 2,000
– API costs: 95% cheaper
– Can run on gaming GPUs instead of data center hardware
“But wait,” you might say, “there must be a catch!” That’s the wild part – it’s all open source. Anyone can check their work. The code is public. The technical papers explain everything. It’s not magic, just incredibly clever engineering.
Why does this matter? Because it breaks the model of “only huge tech companies can play in AI.” You don’t need a billion-dollar data center anymore. A few good GPUs might do it.
For Nvidia, this is scary. Their entire business model is built on selling super expensive GPUs with 90% margins. If everyone can suddenly do AI with regular gaming GPUs… well, you see the problem.
And here’s the kicker: DeepSeek did this with a team of <200 people. Meanwhile, Meta has teams where the compensation alone exceeds DeepSeek’s entire training budget… and their models aren’t as good.
This is a classic disruption story: Incumbents optimize existing processes, while disruptors rethink the fundamental approach. DeepSeek asked “what if we just did this smarter instead of throwing more hardware at it?”
The implications are huge:
– AI development becomes more accessible
– Competition increases dramatically
– The “moats” of big tech companies look more like puddles
– Hardware requirements (and costs) plummet
Of course, giants like OpenAI and Anthropic won’t stand still. They’re probably already implementing these innovations. But the efficiency genie is out of the bottle – there’s no going back to the “just throw more GPUs at it” approach.
Final thought: This feels like one of those moments we’ll look back on as an inflection point. Like when PCs made mainframes less relevant, or when cloud computing changed everything.
AI is about to become a lot more accessible, and a lot less expensive. The question isn’t if this will disrupt the current players, but how fast? One of the reason of market fall across the globe”
AI to help in breast cancer diagnosis
Daisy – the granny AI spambot
Mistral ‘Le Chat’ French AI chatbot
ChatGPT as a summariser
Pete’s summary from Chat GPT …
1. Online scamming is a global industry – It is vast, sophisticated, and growing rapidly, with criminal networks operating across borders.
2. “Pig butchering” is a major scam method – Scammers build fake relationships with victims, emotionally manipulate them, and then convince them to invest in fraudulent schemes.
3. Scamming is more dangerous than the drug trade – It operates beyond the reach of law enforcement, lacks regulation, and is highly scalable.
4. Criminal compounds run large-scale scam operations – Many scams originate from compounds in Southeast Asia, where trafficked workers are forced into scamming.
5. Advanced technology enables fraud – AI-generated voices, deepfake videos, and cryptocurrency help scammers operate anonymously and make their schemes more convincing.
6. Scammers exploit human emotions – Victims fall prey to scams due to loneliness, fear, greed, and trust in online relationships.
7. The economic impact is massive – Billions of dollars are stolen annually, affecting individuals, businesses, and economies.
8. Law enforcement struggles to keep up – Scammers move money and people across jurisdictions faster than authorities can track them.
9. International cooperation is needed – Countries must collaborate, working with banks, tech companies, and social media platforms to combat online fraud.
10. Public awareness and education are crucial – Governments should implement stronger warnings and educational campaigns to prevent people from falling victim.
… followed up with …
Pig butchering (shā zhū pán, 杀猪盘) is a sophisticated online scam that combines financial fraud with emotional manipulation. The term comes from the idea of “fattening up” a victim (the pig) before eventually “butchering” them for financial gain.
How It Works:
1. Initial Contact: Scammers approach victims through dating apps, social media, or even random text messages pretending to be a wrong number. They gradually build a friendly or romantic relationship.
2. Emotional Manipulation: Over weeks or months, scammers gain the victim’s trust, often pretending to be wealthy and successful. They encourage casual financial discussions, showing off their supposed investment profits.
3. Fake Investment Opportunity: Once trust is established, scammers introduce the victim to a “lucrative” investment, usually involving cryptocurrency or forex trading. They direct the victim to a fake but professional-looking website or app where they initially see small returns.
4. Encouraging Bigger Investments: As the victim gains confidence, they invest more money, sometimes even taking out loans or draining savings. The scammer keeps reinforcing the illusion of profits.
5. The Exit (Butchering Phase): Eventually, when the victim tries to withdraw funds, they encounter delays, extra fees, or are locked out entirely. The scammer then disappears, leaving the victim financially devastated.
6. Trafficking Connection: Many pig-butchering scams are operated from compounds in Southeast Asia, where trafficked workers are forced to run scams under threat of violence.
Why It’s Effective:
• Long-term manipulation: Unlike quick scams, it relies on slowly building trust.
• Emotional exploitation: Victims often feel emotionally invested, making them less skeptical.
• Convincing fake platforms: Sophisticated websites mimic real investment sites, making the scam seem legitimate.
• Cryptocurrency anonymity: Crypto transactions make it difficult to trace stolen money.
This type of fraud is one of the fastest-growing online crimes, with billions of dollars stolen worldwide each year.
DM – News and Updates
Screen time doesn’t necessarily cause “brain rot”
UK government demands access to Apple’s end-to-end encrypted messages on iCloud
“I’m keeping my powder dry on this one. I’m not totally sure what my position is. On one side I’m a strong advocate for privacy, and therefore support for Apple’s stance. On the other, I feel the large techno. companies don’t do enough to control the nefarious use of theIr platforms. Apple by not having their own search engine, nor social network, nor indeed their totally owned operating system (being based on Unix) can quite justifiable hold their hands up in horror and say – “it’s not me guv” – but they do provide a platform in iCloud which is a safe haven for the material of “bad people”.
There must be a solution that satisfies both the individuals right to privacy, the states right to protect the greater good, and the corporations right to sell products that the individual wants/requires.
I don’t use the encrypted offering on iCloud+. Why do/should I need it? In many ways it gets in the way of usability.
Instead of blanket bans/prohibitions, why not a more nuanced approach, where the user is required to apply for the use of such a service on the basis of recognising (with their agreement on a case-by-case basis) that they agree to give-up total privacy upon lawful request.
This would prevent the possibility of fishing like intrusions, trawling through private encrypted data in the hope of finding something. As we all know, preventing one thing – in this case on iCloud would just shift the data somewhere else, and who would suffer? The honest user of course who had a valid reason for encryption.”
DM – Scams, privacy and security
“I’ve just come off the u3a Trust Zoom call on “Staying Safe Online”. Any one else watch it apart from Ian???
Some points I made notes of.
1) Seriously distrust QR Codes – the scams are much more than just parking meters, and can be quite sophisticated [I forget the example quoted]
2) I must buy a RFID Screening device for my “man bag”, and others should check whether their wallet/purse/handbag has one supplied in the bag. I was quite shocked at my ignorance on this one and how open I might be to scamming from a passing stranger.
3) Added to this, get a Faraday cage like device to put my passport in – much more sensitive info on that than I’d been aware of.
4) I like to think I wouldn’t fall for an ATM skimmer – a device on the front of an ATM cash dispenser, but I’ll be much more vigilant when using any device I don’t know.
5) The speaker, and now I, stress just how important it is to keep your email password secure. I’m going to reviewing mine again as a result, and just because one hasn’t been pwned doesn’t mean I shouldn’t change it. I’m using the Apple iCloud Keychain these days which generates passwords for me and holds them securely “in the cloud” in the same way as a password manager does. An incentive for me to double-check.
6) The risk of leaving your Facebook profile unprotected was highlighted. So, even though I don’t use Facebook/Instagram – I should either delete my account -not a bad idea, or go through the security/privacy settings with a fine-tooth comb. Same applies to Google. [This could be worth a blog post probably, when I’ve researched what the most appropriate settings should be.]
12:03
7) Lastly, and one I’ve never thought of doing, but now I will most certainly – switch off WiFi when I’m away from a known and safe network. These would be ones where you have to provide authentication to access the network, or behind your home router. It’s just too convenient to not switch-off WiFi, but as I reported last week … you don’t need a VPN when using your cell network – it’s secure; the cost of using mobile data is coming down – use that allowance and only connect to WiFi when you have to authenticate to an encrypted service.”
Ian …
“Overarching message:
Human beings are the point of weakness!
Action points-
1. Turn off WiFi on phone when leaving home. Unencrypted free WiFi that the phone will automatically connect to makes you vulnerable (even in hospital waiting areas).
4G/ 5G mobile data is encrypted, thus safe.
2. Your email password is your greatest vulnerability.
Emails are most frequently used as usernames on websites.
Once an email password is hacked they gain access to your entire contact list and work through using the ‘forgotten password’ facility to reset passwords and gain access.
Secure email accounts with very strong passwords (combination of at least three words + capitals, numbers and characters).
3. PW managers- a couple of things to consider. (a) may only work on one device, not multi-platform (b) protect master password.
4. Email scams-
Checking senders’ email address on desktop/ laptop is easy (hover).
Not so on phone (requires double tap to reveal; be careful).
5. QR codes can be intercepted + they are capable of altering settings on phones.
Be very cautious (esp with cafe menus and the like).
6. Websites
Links to actual websites may not appear at the top of Google searches.
Third parties often pay Google to get their website (intermediaries) to the top of the list. Looks like the real thing unless you read the fine print. Using them results in extra, unnecessary charges.
7. Never let your credit card leave your hand. Be very suspicious of card machines that “don’t work” or require a second swipe (skimmer’s ploy).
8. As David mentioned use RFID blocking cards in your wallet, use RFID blocking pouches to protect your passports (all your personal and government-held data is in your passport chip), and use Faraday cages to protect your keyless entry car keys.
I learnt a lot. Lots of homework to do now.”
Passkeys
Quishing
Protecting yourself from scams
Nectar points protection
Changing passwords
