83a951146d11486ca7c8c6dd642bf988

Better Internet Search – Alpha 2

Thu, 12 Mar 2020 12:40:00 GMT

Better Internet Search Ltd has a license to use the 1-timeline technology developed by Trisent. They have just announced that the second alpha version of their alternative search engine is to be launched on 18th March .

This version includes general web searches plus news, images, video, maps and shopping. The development has been supported by the EC based Next Generation Internet Trust and the search engine algorithms have been developed in collaboration with the Department of Computing and the Blockpass Identity Lab at Edinburgh Napier University.

You can use this link to sign up as an Alpha Tester and try out their alternative search.

The post Better Internet Search – Alpha 2 appeared first on Trisent .

How to Protect Your Small Business from Cyberattacks

Mon, 09 Mar 2020 23:52:00 GMT

Did you know that as a small business owner, you are one of the primary targets for cyberattacks? Cybercriminals are everywhere, and there are more and more ways in which they can prey on you.

We all have vulnerabilities, and we can all be victims, but that doesn’t mean that we should just lay in waiting. There are things you can do to protect yourself and your business. Here are a few tips on how you can ward against cyberattacks.

Internet connection

Do this: Your internet connection should always be trustworthy. When you’re at the office or in the comfort of your own home, you’re probably connected to your own network. On the go and in public places, however, you rely on Wi-Fi.

Always make sure to connect to networks that are trusted and password protected. If you do not have access to protected networks in places like coffee shops or airports, ask an employee for the password. That way, you make sure that any information you are exchanging is completely secure.

In absence of access to a secure network, use your phone to create a hotspot with the data on your device. It’s expensive, but it’s worth the protection.

Not that: You will be tempted to connect to random open Wi-Fi networks that are not password protected. That could be a massive mistake. You see, anyone can connect and gain access to the information you are sending via this channel.

Important information such as passwords and personal data can be intercepted and used for nefarious purposes, such as theft, impersonation, blackmail, etc. It seems very convenient to just connect to the free airport Wi-Fi, but this can be the precise moment when someone takes advantage of your vulnerability and steals valuable company info.

Websites

Do this: Thankfully, Google does some of the heavy lifting for you and clearly flags trustworthy websites and risky ones. Google gives priority ranking to websites that are safe and SSL-protected.

You can recognize secure sites, because they will typically have a padlock on the left-hand side of the search bar. That will indicate that you can trust this site, that it’s encrypted, and that any information you share will be in safe hands.

Not only that, but you can rest assured that you won’t pick up any weird malware or trojans while you’re browsing and clicking away.

Not that: On the opposite end of the spectrum, a red, crossed out padlock indicates a website that is not properly secured. Google cannot ensure your safety when navigating to this page and will issue advertisements about the potential risks.

If you do venture onto pages like this, you do so at your own risk. It’s not indicated to ever access this kind of page, much less provide them with information about yourself, your clients, or your business. Every click or download can be suspicious, so it’s best to refrain and look for a more trustworthy source.

Passwords

Do this: You probably know by now that passwords are becoming easier and easier to crack, so you need to really reinforce them. That means that you have to get serious about setting strong passwords . Here are some tips:

Not that: Stay away from the passwords that are easy to guess, find out, or hack. Here’s what you should be avoiding:

Devices

Do this: We’re using so many different devices for work nowadays, and it’s super important to protect them all. There are some good practices that you should be using to make sure that you are not experiencing any loss of data.

Not that: Sometimes, working in public places like coffee shops and such is unavoidable. What is avoidable, however, is leaving your devices on the table while you go to the bathroom or out to take a call or a smoke break. The same goes even if you’re working in an office, or at home.

It’s not just about strangers breaking into your work computer, but about co-workers mistakenly seeing something they shouldn’t, or kids playing on your laptop and inadvertently deleting something important, etc.

Sensitive data

Do this: Okay, but what do you do when it comes to data storage? Especially when you’re dealing with sensitive information, or client data, you need to find a way to store this info as securely as possible. While keeping information on an external hard drive (especially if it’s encrypted) or on a USB stick is adequate enough, cloud storage is the safest solution.

Cloud storage allows you to keep information outside your office or your own devices, so you don’t need the physical space. It’s the most secure storage solution. It’s easy to set up: you just need to pay for the service and upload your files and voila – they are perfectly secure.

Not that: Whatever you do, do not keep this type of data on your hard drive. You’ll also not want to keep physical files in your office, or CDs lying around. Basically, any type of medium that can become easily compromised or stolen is a bad idea.

If you do have data that you store on CDs, for example, be sure to upgrade this storage solution as soon as possible. CDs are known to deteriorate after a certain amount of time, especially if the storage conditions are improper (for example, exposed to sunlight).

Final thoughts

As a small business owner, you must be on the lookout for cyberattacks. Small businesses are less likely to have proper security set in place, so cybercriminals take advantage of that and try to hack into your system and wreak havoc. But that doesn’t mean you can’t protect yourself. There are lots of ways to minimize the risks and fend off prying eyes. A lot of it is a matter of exercising safety practices and learning to protect your devices, your information, and the way you go about working, both remotely and at the office.

The post How to Protect Your Small Business from Cyberattacks appeared first on Trisent .

Better Internet Search Ltd is announced.

Fri, 04 Oct 2019 16:55:00 GMT

Today, 4th October 2019, the new start-up company – Better Internet Search Ltd – was revealed through an exclusive article in Scottish newspaper The Herald . The new company is based on technology originally developed by Trisent and licensed to them.

As the name suggests they are developing a better internet search engine and have secured funding from the Next Generation Internet Trust to develop their ad-free monetisation model. You can read the full Herald Article here.

The company are currently looking for users to be the very first ‘guinea pigs’ to try out the alternative search engine in Edinburgh this month. You can register your interest here .

The post Better Internet Search Ltd is announced. appeared first on Trisent .

Hiring Software Developers Now

Fri, 06 Sep 2019 14:25:00 GMT

We will soon be making an announcement about an exciting new project we have been working on. We are looking for talented software developers to join us on this project and hope to recruit a full-stack developer immediately and we will also looking for skills in a number of other areas as the project develops. Knowledge of cloud platforms (ideally Azure) and AI/Machine Learning would be really useful too (but not essential).

To work with us you must have a “can-do” attitude and be looking to stretch yourself and contribute to our start-up culture. We offer an enjoyable working environment and big opportunities for the right people that share in our vision.

If you are interested please do get in touch and feel free to share with friends or colleagues that might be interested in having an informal chat with us.

Vector Illustration by Vecteezy!

The post Hiring Software Developers Now appeared first on Trisent .

Search engine bias is particularly insidious

Thu, 25 Jul 2019 18:09:00 GMT

“Currently, the predominant business model for commercial search engines is advertising. Th e goals of the advertising business model do not always correspond to providing quality search to users. …., w e expect that advertising funded search engines will be inherently biased towards the advertisers and away from the needs of the consumers. ….. , search engine bias is particularly insidious.”

Larry Page and Sergey Brin – 1998

These are direct quotations taken from a 1998 paper by Sergey Brin and Larry Page [1], the founders of Google, when their company was in its infancy. The quotes can all be found in “Appendix A: Advertising and Mixed Motives” of the paper. I agree 100% with the quoted statements but wonder if Brin and Page are still aligned to these, and has Google abandoned their original ideals to become what some may consider to be a “particularly insidious” behemoth?

I hope to be able to post some details soon of one project I am investing a lot of time in that will remove advertising from the search business model and deliver quality user-focussed search with no commercial bias. So watch this space!

[1] The Anatomy of a Large-Scale Hypertextual Web Search Engine, Sergey Brin and Lawrence Page, Stanford University, 1998, http://ilpubs.stanford.edu:8090/361/1/1998-8.pdf

The post Search engine bias is particularly insidious appeared first on Trisent .

Trisent is to benefit from the European Erasmus Programme

Fri, 01 Mar 2019 13:55:00 GMT

TRISENT is strengthening its collaboration with Edinburgh Napier University through two student projects supported by the Erasmus Programme.

Two final-year students from Spain are coming to Edinburgh in March as part of the European Erasmus Programme . They will both be working with Trisent Ltd and Edinburgh Napier University on Proof-of-Concept projects which demonstrate the benefits that internet users can gain from the use of consolidated personal data.

You can read the full story here on All Media Scotland.

The post Trisent is to benefit from the European Erasmus Programme appeared first on Trisent .

Goodbye Google, Hello Qwant!

Tue, 05 Feb 2019 16:16:00 GMT

This is a guest blog post by Jack Warner of TechWarn.

The French government bids farewell to Google and adopts Qwant.

At the end of last year, the French National Assembly announced that they are not going to use Google anymore. All the devices belonging to the French government will adopt a new search engine called Qwant, which is privacy-focused.

It seems the French government wants to protect itself from the surveillance of Google and the U.S. government (and their associated comprehensive data-retention policies) and are prepared to take some big steps to do so.

France’s watchdog for data protection has also fined Alphabet’s Google $57 million (€50 million) on 14th of January, 2019 for breaches of the EU’s online privacy rules. This penalty is the biggest ever to be levied to tech giant like Google in the U.S under the EUs new GDPR legislation.

Advantages of using a private search engine

You can enjoy the benefits of search engines which are privacy-oriented in the following ways:

Top recommendations for private search engines

The following are some of the best privacy-oriented search engines available right now:

Private search engines versus incognito mode

On the other hand, a private search engine offers added layers of protection and its users will not be tracked while it delivers the search results. Some even use local encryption for extra privacy protection.

The problem with Google

Google privacy breaches are not unheard of. From your search history to your browsing behavior, Google knows it all. If you stand by your right to remain private and anonymous online, you may want to start looking for alternative privacy-oriented search engines.

Despite the company’s size and industry influence, Google still managed to commit a data breach that seriously violated corporate compliance last March. The shocking breach was discovered early last year when the personal data of 500,000 Google+ users was exposed to hundreds of third-party developers working on new apps on the network. The exposed data includes usernames, birth dates, email addresses, work histories, and photos. It’s possible that more users were exposed as the glitch is believed to have existed since 2015 according to engineers at Google+.

Imagine the damage if all that you’ve trusted in Google to keep private, such as your search history, browsing habits recorded on the Chrome browser and traffic from your Google Pixel, was leaked accidentally. Not only does Google violate your privacy by collecting more data than it should, but it also doesn’t do a good job of protecting it. It could be time to look beyond the horizon for newer and better options.

Jack Warner is an accomplished cybersecurity expert with years of experience under his belt at TechWarn, a trusted digital agency to world-class cybersecurity companies. A passionate digital safety advocate himself, Jack frequently contributes to tech blogs and digital media sharing expert insights on topics such as whistleblowing and cybersecurity tools.

The post Goodbye Google, Hello Qwant! appeared first on Trisent .

Can blockchain solve the problem of trust?

Wed, 19 Dec 2018 13:48:00 GMT

The answer is no! … Okay, that would be a very short read so maybe I should provide the reasoning behind this short answer. Also, to avoid appearing too negative on the issue, I should first state that I do believe that blockchain has a lot to contribute positively around the issue of trust.

The internet has connected the world ( well over half of the world’s population can now access the internet ) we can communicate and transact with almost anyone on the planet. The problem is that a small proportion of the people feeding us information or attempting to transact with us cannot be trusted. So, the internet may well have solved a worldwide communication problem but in so doing a large problem of trust has emerged – i.e. we can now connect with billions of people we don’t know, we know that some of them will be dishonest, but we don’t know who specifically we can trust. The traditional way to address the “who do we trust” problem is to use people we do trust as intermediaries to check information or to police transactions and, of course, this is expensive and time consuming.

Today with the use of blockchain we can now make financial transaction successfully without using a trusted intermediary – except we are using blockchain’s distributed ledger as the trusted party. We trust the ledger because it is distributed, transparent and the code that created it is open for verification. In the case of bitcoin the code is relatively simple and generally trusted, however as blockchain is now being used for more involved tasks, the code can become complex and will inevitably require updates to fix bugs and improve functionality – thus it is helpful to have a trusted party with the authority to make such changes (albeit with high levels of transparency through visibility of the code).

The holy grail for many blockchain evangelist is the Decentralised Autonomous Organisation (DAO) where the organisation hierarchy is flat (i.e. there is no board or government that sits at the top of a hierarchical pyramid to manage the organisation). The governance is automatically orchestrated by smart contracts, the evolution of the organisation is through the members (typically token holders) having voting power and any changes to the organisation would be by consensus of the members. Even fixing a bug in the constitutional code requires new code to be proposed, and that a consensus of members agree to accept the new code. Reaching consensus quickly on complex issues in a dynamic organisation is not always practical and so the ideology begins to crumble somewhat. In the future entire countries could perhaps be run as DAOs, but today’s technology is simply not advanced enough to allow the removal of key decision makers.

For complex systems to be based on blockchain today there needs to be many trusted elements in the system, and completely flat hierarchy organisations are not yet practical for all but the simplest of systems run by smart contracts. This might not sit well with many of today’s blockchain evangelists, but the reality is that we have shifted a problem of “who do we trust” to a problem of “do we trust this code” – or even do we trust the person that wrote the code. The public visibility of code and consensus to accept it helps greatly. However, most software developers would agree that you cannot always trust your own code to do exactly what was intended once it has reached more than a few tens of lines, even with rigorous reviews and testing (just ask NASA!).

So, it seems we cannot eliminate the problem of involving a trusted party, but we can greatly improve the confidence in the trusted party through transparency and consensus. What this means is that if a trusted party commits a dishonest or negligent act that is not immediately detected, there may not be a direct mechanism to stop the impact of this, but there is an indirect mechanism that will reveal wrongdoing or incompetence and therefore encourages the trusted party to act honestly and diligently in the first place.

Let me use a true story to illustrate this in practice. Estonia is believed to have the most advanced digital society in the world . Everyone has a digital identity and access to most of their own digital information. Access to certain sensitive personal information is only permitted for legitimate reasons by certain parties and all data access is recorded on an immutable ledger. An Estonian police officer once decided to use his privileged access to citizen data for the purposes of checking on his partner. He had no right to view her data for this purpose but had been trusted with access to this system. His partner was able to see that her records had been accessed by the police on a particular day. She questioned the reason for this and on investigation by the authorities it was revealed that it was her partner that had looked at her records. His improper actions had been recorded on a trusted ledger and resulted in him being sent to prison. This story has even been retold by their president and serves as a powerful deterrent to any other trusted person in Estonia considering abusing their privileged access to personal data.

So, although a system with this type of transparency may not, in all instances, stop improper behaviour by trusted parties, the fact that the wrongdoing could be easily detected reduces the likelihood of future abuses and increases trust. In a nutshell, transparency becomes the basis for trust; and the blockchain’s immutable distributed ledgers and open source code are excellent for transparency.

In summary, blockchain is not a panacea for trust. In a simple sense it seems to be a partial solution to the problem of distrust. i.e. we can actually transact directly with untrusted individuals without a trusted intermediary if we can trust the blockchain technology that oversees the transaction. Blockchain and smart contracts cannot be inherently trusted – they must establish trust in the architects, the coders the participants, and anyone involved in the implementation and operation of the system. However, the transparency and consensus mechanisms built into the technology are a significant aid to building that trust.

The post Can blockchain solve the problem of trust? appeared first on Trisent .

When will Google’s search engine monopoly be broken?

Thu, 29 Nov 2018 00:20:00 GMT

In the 1990s I was an academic at the University of Edinburgh teaching electronics and computing. In 1998 a colleague introduced me to the Google search engine and as a result I made the shift from my previously preferred search engine, Alta Vista, to Google. Twenty years on, despite trying many others, I still use Google regularly. I was delighted by the Google experience 20 years ago, but today I dislike Google search for several reasons but I have yet to find a noticeably better alternative.

In a recent poll conducted by the Search Engine Journal (SEJ) it was revealed that that Duck Duck Go (DDG) is the most popular alternative to Google (based on 1097 SEJ Twitter followers who responded). However, according to Statcounter DDG have just 0.32% (October 2018) of the search market and Google have 92.74%. My question is whether Google’s monopoly could be under threat by emerging search engines such as DDG and if so, why have they not yet made a major impact on Google’s market share?

Google has held a monopoly position for around 20 years and in that time ‘to Google’ has become a verb. This incumbent position will not be easy to shift. DDG has a very similar product to Google it has not made much of a dent in the market. Their major differentiator is that it respects user privacy. However, if we are honest it does not deliver truly better search results, in fact in my experience the results are generally less good – and are still tainted by significant volumes of undesirable advertising content. Thus, DDGs market is a niche market segment that believe user privacy is essential and are willing to accept slightly inferior search results to achieve this. This market sector (which I include myself in) is huge in world terms – but remains a niche.

My shift from Alta Vista to Google some 20 years ago was based on it being a better solution to my internet search problem — data privacy was not generally thought about in 1998. For me DDG is not yet a better solution, if better results and less advertising (which I know is how they make money) was delivered alonside its enhanced privacy, then it could be a winner. The other problem for DDG is that the federated results use Bing as a major source of data, so they do not have an independent platform from which they can base an assault on Google.

My current opinion is that Google will slowly lose market share to a variety of small search engines such as DDG. One of these players will emerge as a future challenger to Google within the next 5 years and we may not even have heard of them yet. The successful search engine will likely do their own crawling and indexing so they are not dependent on Bing, Google or Yahoo and they will not rely on pay-per-click (PPC) advertising which most users dislike. It is quite probable that when they do emerge as a leading contender they will be acquired and scaled by a company with a large existing subscriber base and complimentary business activities such as Amazon.

The post When will Google’s search engine monopoly be broken? appeared first on Trisent .

Avoiding the Filter Bubble

Mon, 01 Oct 2018 17:24:00 GMT

For those not familiar with the ‘Filter Bubble’, the term was coined by Internet activist Eli Pariser around 2010 and refers to a state of intellectual isolation resulting from personalisation applied to the delivery of web content. The suggestion is that users become separated from information that disagrees with their viewpoints. This effectively isolates individuals within their own cultural or ideological filter bubble.

While we could debate at length the extent to which this is a problem, few would deny its existence. In his 2011 TED Talk Eli Pariser suggests that search engines should curate results according to the following criteria, not just by relevance:

I personally don’t fully subscribe to this view. It requires that the search algorithms will somehow curate the results according to these ethics. Thus, we have to trust someone to decide what ethical parameters are good for us and code these into the algorithms! Or, of course we could go the other way and completely remove personalisation from any results and some search engines, such as Duck Duck Go , do not personalise results and so offer us this option. However, we then lose the ability to have more relevant results ranked higher and so more manual sifting of results by the user is needed. My view is that the Filter Bubble can be largely avoided if we provide visibility of the personalisation process and control over how our personal data is being applied.

Intellectual isolation resulting from the delivery of personalised content is clearly not peculiar to the Internet. In the western world we have the choices everyday of who to listen to, what to read, the media channels to watch and the ability to switch these on and off at will. If one chooses only to read or listen to right-wing views, then this is a personal right. Each individual is at least aware that not everyone shares these same views, and they can see that alternative reading and viewing material is available. Where Internet personalisation has a real problem is that this isolation can happen (indeed is happening) without there being visibility or self-awareness of it. It becomes especially dangerous if it is used to alter opinions for financial or political gain, and we are now aware of previous abuses of influence in recent elections and referendums.

I believe that users should be given visibility of the data they are revealing for personalisation. This transparency gives the ability for self-observation (see your digital-self as revealed to others), self-measurements (revealing of statistics, trends and actionable insights), and self-comparisons (how you measure up relative to your peers). This can theoretically be achieved using existing rights to data portability under GDPR and would be a useful first step in avoiding the Filter Bubble.

The next step would then be the ability to give the user control over the degree of personalisation delivered by any service. The user regulates the cost-benefit of revealing personal information and sees how the quality of content delivered is being influenced by this. In reality, if someone wishes to live in a state of intellectual isolation this should be a choice they have made, not a situation that they are unaware of or that has been imposed upon them.

The post Avoiding the Filter Bubble appeared first on Trisent .

The California Consumer Privacy Act – CCPA

Thu, 27 Sep 2018 11:40:00 GMT

Oh no, more data privacy legislation is coming! The California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) will kick in on 1st January 2020. For many of us the key questions are; what is the difference between CCPA and GDPR, and will it affect me?

The short answers are that it has similarities to GDPR but is different in several aspects, and secondly – in theory it should only really affect you if you are a citizen of California, or if you are a large company that processes personal information that includes one or more citizens from California. However, its reach will be much broader than this since companies are unlikely to adopt different policies exclusively for their Californian customers.

I am going to elaborate on these points, but still want to keep it short and so have generalised a little – you can read about it in more detail from the links I will give at the bottom.

How will CCPA affect us?

Most individual citizens may not notice much impact from CCPA, even as it comes near to the enforcement date. We may see a small email storm but less than we suffered for GDPR. The reason for this is that CCPA is largely based on opt-out rather than GDPR’s opt-in. American citizens (especially those in California) are likely to see more activity prior to implementation. For most of us, we will be told that service terms & conditions are being updated, but then this happens regularly anyway and few of us read these before agreeing.

After implementation one change we may observe is the appearance of opt-outs regarding the sale of data – a “Do Not Sell My Personal Information” option as default – you will need to select this in order to opt-out. In addition, those aged 13-16 should automatically be opted out and so “I am over 16” might also be ticked as a default. Those under 13 will require parental consent to allow their data to be sold. Interestingly a company could sell the information of a minor without consent if they do not have “actual knowledge” that the consumer is under 16 so it will be interesting to see how this will be interpreted in practice.

In the short-term it is companies with Californian customers that will be most affected. However, the Act only applies to companies of a certain size (turnover of $25 million or more), or that hold personal information on more than 50,000 consumers (or devices). Thus, it will be large companies, most of whom will already have dealt with GDPR compliance, that will be most affected. It is likely that these companies will develop policies for customers that jointly covers GDPR and CCPA.

So, will citizens benefit from CCPA? If we are already under GDPR then I can see little if any benefit. If you are subscriber to services that do not need to be GDPR compliant (e.g. a US citizen who’s personal information is held in the USA) then CCPA can give you GDPR-like rights and benefits regarding the use of your Personal Information. However, CCPA is not the same as GDPR and in many ways it is weaker.

The main differences between CCPA and GDPR

Who it applies to: CCPA only applies to citizens of California, and of course it will apply to companies that hold personal information on any citizen of California and so it will have global impact. GDPR applies to companies operating in the EU, it also applies to companies that hold or process data on EU citizens so GDPR has a greater global impact.

What does it apply to: The Act applies to “personal information”. The definition is quite wide and similar to GDPR but slightly wider in the sense that if “households” can be identified from the data then it is considered “personal information” even although an individual is not identified.

Who is regulated: CCPA only applies to larger for-profit companies that process or hold significant “personal information”. The company will have a turnover of above $25 million; or process/hold personal information of 50,000 or more individuals, households or devices; or make more than 50% of revenues from selling personal information. Any business that is not in California and does not use information on the states citizens is completely exempt. GDPR on the other hand applies to almost all companies (no matter the size) that use personal information in the EU or related to EU citizens.

What rights does it give: Consumers protected by CCPA are entitles to be given notice about the categories of information being collected and the business purpose for which it is being collected, plus any intention to sell this information with the option to opt-out of this sale. Note that CCPA relies on an opt-out policy, whereas GDPR is opt-in. The customer has the right to be told what type of information is being held, although in practice this might be a boilerplate list. The customer may request that their personal information is deleted (and there are a few exemptions to this) so this is similar to, but not quite the same as, GDPR’s ‘right to be forgotten’. CCPA has no direct equivalent to GDPR’s data portability i.e. the right to request a copy of your personal information. To comply a company only needs to disclose information about what has been collected over the last 12 months but the Act does not seem to provide an explicit right to obtain a full copy of the actual data itself. All customers must be treated equally under the Act meaning that a request made under the Act cannot be used as a reason to alter any terms or pricing for that customer.

Penalties: Under CCPA damages of $100-750 per consumer per incident are applicable. For GDPR the penalties can be Up to €20 million, or 4% annual global turnover – whichever is higher. So, although different, both can apply severe penalties.

Expert advice for start-ups: “Feel good about each small step”

Tue, 07 Aug 2018 18:48:00 GMT

Source: Expert advice for start-ups: “Feel good about each small step”

The post Expert advice for start-ups: “Feel good about each small step” appeared first on Trisent .

Data Infographic 2018

Thu, 26 Jul 2018 21:52:00 GMT

Data Infographic 2018

Trisent

Yelling at strangers all day trying to make a living?

Sat, 30 Jun 2018 11:50:00 GMT

Is the internet really broken? Are the days of direct on-line advertising numbered? Could there be a better way to pay for internet services? Are data marketplaces the answer?

There are companies emerging in the personal data space that propose data marketplaces as a revenue generating model – and they have collectively raised a lot of investment. The model assumes you are willing to share your personal data, they will sell your data for you – you get paid for this and, of course, these companies get a cut. The argument goes along the lines of, why should someone like Google get all the advertising revenues from your data. Instead you can use a third party to sell your personal data to advertisers and organisations in order to get a small payback.

Some of these companies claim that “The Internet is Broken” and this is a way to take control of your personal data and fix this. I don’t really buy that, I do believe that the current Internet has significant flaws, in part caused by the ‘free’ services model we have come to expect. However, the idea that getting paid to be advertised to is a potential solution, does not add up for me. There is evidence that we are unhappy with the current advertising model, that we would like improved internet services, but also that we are not willing to pay directly for most services that are currently seen as ‘free’.

In a 2009 blog Seth Godin, the pioneer of permission marketing , was repeating a point about not needing many customers, but needing good loyal customers, to make a living, and he talked about “yelling at strangers all day trying to make a living” which pretty much sums up the current on-line advertising model, and he went on to say “You don’t find customers for your products. You find products for your customers.” which begins to describe an on-line brokerage model that I believe can be used to erode the on-line advertising model. Displacement of the current model will not happen overnight for a number of reasons; first – the on-line advertising oligopolies will defend their current lucrative position, secondly – although the model might be more efficient in the long run it will introduce some inital pain for the seller adjusting to a new model, and finally – it requires the creation of new services to efficiently join up buyers and sellers.

Once we can capture rich data on the client-side we can begin applying brokerage, affiliate and referral models that will benefit the citizen across, not just niche areas, but all products and services. This will provide more efficient sales channels to sellers and ultimately erode the advertising revenues of the existing oligopolies. Machine learning and AI can be much more effective on the client-side where we can trust our that our personal data is only being used by digital agents working to our agenda (we may even use blockchain to make this transparent), as opposed to the current secret agents working to their own agenda.

The post Yelling at strangers all day trying to make a living? appeared first on Trisent .

Why we are not doing an ICO

Fri, 25 May 2018 15:09:00 GMT

Late last year Trisent considered the option of an Initial Coin Offering (ICO) or Token Sale, but having considered this at length we decided not to proceed. In previous companies I have raised working capital from VCs, Angel Investors and private individuals. I have not raised any capital using crowd sourced means and ICOs are, of course, a recent innovation in crowd funding. ICOs come in different forms, and they are fundamentally different from other crowd sourced funding because of the offer of digital tokens as opposed to rewards or equity. If you are unfamiliar with the concept of an ICO there are many articles on the Web here is a link to the Wikipedia entry .

Introduction

Trisent has a product in development based on our core 1-timeline technology that will include a blockchain element along with a lot of data security. It also monitors data storage and accesses and the revenue model lends itself to the use of a utility token. The implementation of our product will result in the decentralisation of control over personal data (i.e. each individual will have full control of their data). We already have a tested prototype, the founders have a good track record and we have an impressive Advisory Board including an international expert on cryptography and blockchain. All of these factors might suggest that we were in an ideal position to raise funds via an ICO.

The reasons

Here are the five main reasons we decided against the ICO route.

Perception

We spoke with many people about the ICO option open to us. For some they seemed excited and encouraged us, but for others it caused either confusion and a lot of explanation, or worse derision. We realised that many people believed that ICOs were scams, a passing fad, or just an improper way to raise funds. The alignment to Bitcoin could not be avoided and if we did an ICO we would certainly be perceived in a different light, and not all positive. Our core business is based on helping citizens to benefit from their personal data. This requires us to be trusted and an ICO could erode this trust with some potential customers, although it would also bring in interest and greater trust from others.

While we believe that the perception would change over time, and the ICO itself would bring new enthusiastic customers, it was clear that Trisent’s reputation would be altered if we went down this path.

Stability

It is clear that most investors in ICO tokens are speculators. Many are attempting to lock some of their digital currency assets into something real, tangible, something more than a currency that could in theory head south to zero. Unfortunately, most ICO investment are so early stage that the value of a token cannot be determined and a scatter gun approach (spread betting) has been used by many investors with very limited diligence. This has led to ICOs raising considerably more than these same companies could have raised from private equity suggesting that they are overvalued – which can create future problems when they try to deliver tangible value inline with the token market price. However, even worse in the short-term is volatility of digital currencies. Public stock markets have volatility issues where external factors (e.g. political and economic issues) can significantly change a company valuation and cause problems for them. However, the changes seen in public markets over months, can be seen in digital currency markets in just hours. Without a strong utility value in a digital token, the value of a company’s token economy is at the mercy of the digital currency rollercoaster.

Stability can be achieved in tokens if they are tied to some utility value (rather then the currency from which they were purchased). However, in early stage companies the utility value is rarely demonstrated and it is all down to external speculation.

Regulation

There is a lot that could be said about regulation. However, the real problems seem to stem, not from the need for new regulation, but around clarity regarding how existing regulation should apply to ICOs and how tokens are classified. This dilemma is potentially serious – in the UK and USA different interpretations of the existing laws applied to a token sale could span from a legitimate tax free funding all the way to – ‘go to jail’. It seemes that the best way to ensure good tax treatment and avoid going to jail, is to set-up the company where there is clarity on how laws will be applied and where ICOs are welcomed – Switzerland, Singapore, Gibraltar and Malta being popular examples.

In reality we had an existing company and were not willing to restructure it and go abroad.

Investor expectations

With private equity investments, including equity crowdfunding, the expectations from investors are reasonably clear. The needs of the company and the investor are not the same but both parties generally understand each other. In the case of token investors, it is not clear that their needs are well aligned with the company. The investor may have made large gains in their digital currency in the past – they have then reinvested profits in a company (whose tokens are probably overvalued) and they are likely looking for more short-term gains. The problem is that the company will take considerable time to deliver value and if the token is overpriced in the first place this is going to make it doubly difficult.

Since ICOs are still in their infancy it is not clear what impact this will have in the longer-term and is likely to be governed by the type of token in play and whether it is traded privately or through digital currency exchanges.

Timing

In late 2017 when we were considering an ICO there was an appetite for token sales from investors. However, a ‘goldrush’ mentality was setting in, many companies were set-up just for the purposes of raising cash in an ICO. There were interesting companies, there were scam companies, there were well intentioned but naïve companies. The crypto-currency markets were rallying and fear of missing out (FOMO) was causing every fool and their dog to rush in, thus artificially sustaining the upward trend that was begining to resemble a Ponzi scheme. Many of the holders of significant crypto-currency realised that this rise was likely to result in a heavy crash and this further encourage them to diversify their now high valued digital currencies into digital tokens and so further fuelling the ICO market.

It was clear to us that something had to give, we did not know exactly when or the end result. However, it was obvious the current trend could not be sustained indefinitely. Therefore, an ICO in early 2018 did not look like good timing. In the end, it could have been worse, but the large falls did occur and the appetite for ICOs has diminished.

Conclusion

I have probably painted a rather negative outlook on the ICO scene here, but that is only because I have presented the reasons why we, an established UK company, did not proceed with our ICO. I have not presented the alternative case in favour of an ICO and there are many potential positives here. The overarching reason, as you can see, is largely due to current uncertainties in a number of areas. I believe that many of these uncertainties will diminish as ICOs become more mature – and just like conventional crowdfunding, after some evolution they will will enter the mainstream and we will look back and wonder what all that fuss was about back in 2017-18.

The post Why we are not doing an ICO appeared first on Trisent .

Prof Bill Buchanan talks about data and trust

Mon, 23 Apr 2018 21:33:00 GMT

Professor William (Bill) Buchanan OBE FBCS CEng FIET is a Scottish computer scientist and world authority on cybersecurity. He currently leads the Centre for Distributed Computing and Security at Edinburgh Napier University and The Cyber Academy .

We are very fortunate to have Bill on the the Trisent Advisory Board. In this short video he talks about how GDPR will force changes on the internet and in particular in regards to personal data, ownership, trust, citizen rights and anonymity, with cyptography and blockchain technology coming to the forefront of the ‘new’ internet.

The post Prof Bill Buchanan talks about data and trust appeared first on Trisent .

Scotland Means Business: Trisent

Mon, 02 Apr 2018 19:45:00 GMT

Scotland Means Business: Trisent

Business feature by Emer O’Toole in today’s National newspaper.

THE recent allegations that Cambridge Analytica harvested Facebook users’ information has made people more aware of the power and misuse of data. This is something Gordon Povey has been concerned about for years. His business, Trisent, aims to make data useful to the individual by putting it in one place and encrypting it.

“Disruptive Companies like ours will change the old data model.”

Read the complete news story here.

The post Scotland Means Business: Trisent appeared first on Trisent .

Blockchain explained in 2 minutes

Fri, 23 Mar 2018 22:50:00 GMT

Following her popular blog post Blockchain for Beginners . We gave Joanne, the Trisent Office Manager (a non-techy) the challenge to explain the blockchain in a video lasting no longer than two minutes, and we think she has done a great job.

Blockchain in 2 minutes from Trisent on Vimeo .

We also found this short video on “Blockchain and the Middleman” pretty good at explaining how blockchain deliver benefits.

The post Blockchain explained in 2 minutes appeared first on Trisent .

Kylie Minogue and the Shed

Thu, 15 Mar 2018 19:26:00 GMT

What has the diminutive Aussie pop star got to do with a garden outbuilding? The answer to that question is most probably nothing. So why is this blog post titled Kylie Minogue and the Shed? The answer to this second question is that in the ‘land of Internet’ they can easily become bedfellows.

When you search for content on the Internet the first thing that normally happens is that your search results are ranked with advertising and sponsored content related to your keywords at the top (annoying, but the advertisers are the paying customers, so their content comes first). So, if you search for Kylie Minogue you will most probably be presented with an advert for Kylie concert tickets as the top result (go on try it!).

Anyway, you scroll down until you find a link to potentially interesting content and you follow this. You are now away from the search engine, the ranked results and sponsored links, the adverts start to look different. They usually do not relate to the content on the page, they relate to what the advertising platform knows about you (or thinks they know about you) and in many cases bears absolutely no relation to the content of interest. So, having found an article about Kylie I find that half of the screen is taken up with adverts for, well, sheds for example.

Then days later while browsing on the internet (I am simply using the example of Kylie). Every time I find online content of interest (e.g. Kylie Minogue ) about 50% of the page is taken up with sponsored content related somehow to sheds. The intelligent algorithms, and all the clever Artificial Intelligence we are told is targeting ads with pinpoint accuracy, and it obviously has me classified as a ‘shed geek’. These advertising systems are so smart that they just know I simply cannot resist a shed, and will be distracted away from Kylie in order to buy another 10. I am after all the ‘shed geek’!

Admittedly, after 3 months or so, the latest online machine learning technology has caught up with me and figured – ‘Okay this guy must have kicked his shed habit, and was looking at blockchain technology so he will absolutely love a Bitcoin scam or two – so hit him with it!” .

Is it just me that thinks online advertising is basically a digital version of roadside billboards – sitting there in the hope that one in a thousand or so might be vaguely interested? It is still just an eyes and numbers game. I think personalisation and customisation could do so much for us. We just need to stop doing it the old stupid and inefficient way. More on this later!

The post Kylie Minogue and the Shed appeared first on Trisent .

Personal Data for Personal Benefit

Thu, 15 Mar 2018 01:02:00 GMT

One upon a time Alice could go straight to the library to search and browse. Now she must go through the shopping mall before she can get to the library. Does this sound familiar?

The post Personal Data for Personal Benefit appeared first on Trisent .

Gordon Povey: Business Man of the Year Award

Tue, 06 Mar 2018 18:59:00 GMT

Trisent CEO, Gordon Povey, has been selected as a finalist for the Business Man of the Year category of the Scottish SME Business Awards 2018.

Speaking of the award shortlist, Gordon Povey, said: “Thanks are due to the entire Trisent team including my Advisory Board. I am really grateful to all of our supporters, the nomination and selection as a finalist was a total surprise and has shown that it is not just our own team that believe in our vision, there are many other people out there following us.”

Trisent was established in 2016 and has developed the Personal Data Browser based on a technology that can automatically gather your personal data form many sources, consolidate this into a single contextual timeline, and allow your digital-self to be queried, searched and analysed. The company is also researching new ways for your private data to deliver other personal benefits.

The Scottish SME Business Awards 2018 will be held at the Crowne Plaza in Glasgow on 28th March. 2018. The awards attracted thousands of nominations from the public, who recognised the achievements of Scottish business professionals and enterprises.

The post Gordon Povey: Business Man of the Year Award appeared first on Trisent .

Equity and tokens – 3 minute video

Wed, 21 Feb 2018 01:36:00 GMT

This 3 minute video is a companion to the blog post on the relationship between shares and tokens.

The post Equity and tokens – 3 minute video appeared first on Trisent .

The relationship between shares and tokens

Wed, 21 Feb 2018 01:11:00 GMT

In this article I look at the differences between equity and tokens when a company wishes to raise working capital and have produced a short 3 minute video introducing the basic concepts.

I also introduce a hybrid model since in a previous article I had suggested the possibility of combining token sales and private equity in order to get the benefits of both and eliminate some of the problems.

Sale of shares

In the case of a company issuing shares in the form of equity. A company’s value is equal to its assets minus its liabilities and this worth is owned by the shareholders — represented by the equity. This is shown below where a company raises new cash by issuing new shares.

Note that the value of the existing shareholders equity does not change with the issue of new shares although their percentage of ownership (and their voting power) is decreased. The above diagrams are a simple representation of what happens to the company balance sheet in a equity funding round. The hope of investors is that the company will grow and so their equity will increase in value. In order to realise this value the equity would need to be sold and this is typically done when there is a trade sale, or when the company is floated on a stockmarket via an IPO.

Sale of tokens

Now consider what happens when a company decides to raise new cash through the sale of tokens instead of selling shares. I have assumed that these are utility tokens, therefore there is a promise that they can (at least in the future) be exchanged for goods or services. This promise represent a liability to the company and can be considered as a form of pre-payment. Thus, the balance sheet of a company after a utility token sale is repesented by the diagram below.

Note that the new cash raised from the sale of the tokens is balanced by the new liability of having been pre-paid for future goods or services. The equity of the company is not altered and there is no dilution (or loss of representation) experienced by existing shareholders. Investors in the company’s utility tokens will not expect to use them all directly in exchange for goods, they expect to sell these when the demand for the tokens increases as more of the company’s goods are sold. This is possible because the tokens are limited in number, and there is an open maket for the sale of these tokens.

Tokens and equity values

Some companies involved in ICOs attach relatively little value to the company equity, and indeed there are ways of forming companies where there are no shareholders and so any increase in company assets (including profit from operating its economy) should in theory be used to increase the token value. In such an arrangement the founders will profit if they own significant tokens — and often they pledged not to sell these immediately.

An attribute of post-ICO companies with low or no equity is that there are often no external stakeholders to influence and assist the management of the company. Whereas, most companies with significant equity will have a board of directors often with experienced non-executives representing the shareholder. This can provide a post-ICO company with a lot of freedom and many companies have a large set of advisors in order to provide this experience and give confidence to the token investors. In companies with smart contract tokens, these can potentially be configured to provide voting rights, so rather than being a utility token they would be a type of equity token.

At the extreme end, a company can be a fully decentralised autonomous organization (DAO) where there is no centralised management and all decisions are made by voting members. This is somewhat ideologically and there there are practical problems associated DAOs. Coindesk’s What is a DAO? gives a simple explanation.

Many, but certainly not all, post-ICO companies or company groups have an equity and token structure — so in a sense they already have a hybrid token-equity stucture. However, few have really considered that these models can be optimised for the stage of the company, and importantly that equity and tokens could be interchanged in either direction. Most tokens issued by ICOs are essentially both a security token (that holds a tradable value) and a utility token (that can be exchanged for goods or services). Strategic Coin has a short article that describes 3 types of token (utility, security and equity).

Investors in tokens are clearly looking for a return on their investment. This value can be increased by two mechanisms, one is speculation and the hodling of tokens in the hope of growth, and this is based on confidence in the second underlying mechanism which is the growth of the company’s utility economy to increase demand for the token. The return on investment is, of course, achieved by the sale of an investors tokens.

Investors in equity are also looking for a return on their investment. This is achieved when the value of their shares increases. Again, the value of the shares can rise by two mechanisms, speculation based on projected revenues and valuations, and also by actual growth in revenue and profits. The return to the investor is achieved when shares are sold in a tradesale of the company, a private share transfer, or through an IPO.

Hybrid equity and tokens model

We have seen a lot of price volatility in cryto-currencies, and also huge token valuations in ICOs where there is still no real utility value for the token. In private equity backed companies we do not see price volatility (because there is very little liquidity in private shares). We can observe it (to a lesser extent) in public companies where there is liquidity but the companies are more mature and have established a ‘real’ value through revenue growth. In general, the overvaluation of assets, and price instability is unhealth for any company especially in the longer-term.

In private companies the equity is generally locked until an exit event, so this is good for stability but not great for many investors. It also means that by taking equity investment, the company is generally commiting to a tradesale or IPO. However, in the case of an ICO that is not the case. We have therefore considered if the benefits of ICOs and private equity fundraising can be combined to give the best of both worlds, without the major pitfalls. In the previous article I presented a table with the different types fundraising and their pros and cons. Here I present the same table extended to show also the hybrid equity-token sale model.

The model suggested is based on the ability to convert equity into tokens, when prudent, to control price volatility and create liquidity for investors. If we consider a start-up technology company that initially has private equity providing good protection to investors. At this stage there is no utility value being offered to customers and so no utility tokens are required.

The balance sheet may look like this with a fair amount of equity having been issued to shareholder. This provides the company with cash to build its technology and thus deliver the service to customers. Once this service has been established, a utility token can be issued by the company in exchange for equity. This effectively is the company buying back equity, and the shareholders wishing to do this exchange will have tokens that can be hodled, sold or use to buy services. Additional tokens can also be released in stages during token sales until all of the minted didgital tokens have been issued.

Since the company knows the level of utility in its economy as it grows, it has a measure of the demand for tokens. It can then control the number of tokens in circulation and heavily influence the number of tokens being hodled. A large proportion of hodled speculation tokens can lead to large price fluctuations since buying and selling activity is dominated short-term price considerations rather than utility value.

A gradual release of tokens according to the utility value of the economy allows it to grow smoothly without the extreme volatility. The investors get liquidity, but with prices related to the performance and growth of the company. The company can raise money using the issue of equity, and later when it has a utility economny it can also raise money but releasing pre-minted tokens.

The company also has two mechanisms to reduce the number of tokens in circulation. It may retain some of the tokens that circulate through its economy (i.e. it reduces the money supply) but must have the cash reserves to be able to do this. Alternatively, it can offer equity in exchange for tokens (either directly or by selling new equity and using the proceeds to limit the tokens in circulation).

An analogy to using tokens and equity to stabilise the companies economy is to consider the instruments used by governments and banks to stabilise national economies. i.e. throught adjustments to the money supply as well as the issue of securities as debt instruments.

Conclusion

I have shown how equity and tokens relate to each other in companies that have both. I have also shown that is it possible to use both equity and tokens to good effect in a company’s economy and that they don’t have to be mutually exclusive. Hopefully, it has helped dispel some of the myths about token backed companies — there are many more so I may write a ‘Myth Buster’ article about token sales soon.

The post The relationship between shares and tokens appeared first on Trisent .

Time to rethink online advertising

Thu, 08 Feb 2018 08:28:00 GMT

In the Wikipedia headline description of advertising it states that “Advertising is an audio or visual form of marketing communication that employs an openly sponsored, non-personal message to promote or sell a product, service or idea.” and is attributed to the book Fundamentals of Marketing by William J. Stanton (McGraw-Hill 1984).

This pre-internet definition supposes that the advertising is “non-personal” and of course that is no longer correct when considering today’s online digital advertising. We do have “personalised” online ads that requires the ad server (not necessarily the advertiser) to know something about you as an individual and will present us with “targeted” adverts and sponsored content. It is claimed that modern artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms are used to produce highly relevant content, but from my observations it is not working well.

Much of the online advertising I see is vaguely connected to internet content I have viewed in the past but not well connected to my actual current needs. Some content comes with links to fake news with sensational headlines often localised to draw you in to some potential sale (or scam). Even with keyword searches aimed to find some relevant information on a topic, the top links are all from sponsors trying to sell me something related to the search topic. I didn’t select ‘shopping’ but I constantly find myself in a virtual shopping mall which previously had been a vast library of encyclopaedias.

Think of it this way, to Facebook and Google, you are not their customer anymore – you have become the product. Advertisers pay for access to you, and the more that is known about you, the higher the value you are as a product. This may seem unfair, but perhaps it is our own fault because we want internet services to be ‘free’ and it all needs to be paid for somehow. So, has the internet shifted from being a great font of knowledge to being a big shopping mall? That might be slightly unfair since everything is still there and accessible, however, in order to get to the (online) library and museum, you must run the gauntlet of the visitor’s shop! And, as if to reinforce this point, in 2017 Google set aside $2.7 billion to pay a record European Union antitrust fine for favouring its shopping service in search results.

The Magna sourced data found in this Recode article below shows that digital advertising spend is now worth $209 billion per annum and in 2017 overtook TV advertising. The Google & Facebook duopoly accounts for 60% of this market !

Online advertising spend has risen exponentially and is now predicted to rise in a linear fashion – but how long before it slows to give the classic S-growth curve and something new kicks in? Here is my take on this; since 2015 there has been evidence that online ads are becoming less effective – as we are exposed to more, we are more inclined to ignore or avoid them. We have promises that AI is being used to improve the targeting of ads (and thus make them more effective) but ‘garbage in – garbage out’ applies to AI too. So, unless there is better information about the target (i.e. about us), then the odds on getting nearer the bullseye will not improve. Most of us have growing concerns about data privacy, and new legislation such as GDPR is kicking in, so perhaps the quality of personal information available to the likes of Google will, actually, get worse rather than better. As a consumer, I believe I am not alone in saying that I want less ads, and so the idea that I can simply be fed more and more advertising in order to continually grow revenues does not really wash. Thus, it is my prediction that online advertising revenues will slow quite quickly, TV advertising has already plateaued and will be driven downwards by pay TV. But, the Google & Facebook duopoly may still increase their market share further because they currently have access to better personal data than all of their competitors.

Long-term we must look beyond display advertising – it is based on an old marketing concept that has been adapted for the digital age, but it is surprisingly wasteful. It currently serves Google and Facebook very well, but it is inefficient for the advertiser and annoying for consumers. Today we have technology enabling us to accurately figure out what people actually want and to make customised products and services for them on demand. So, why don’t we use AI to help deliver a thing that people want rather than trying to make people want a thing?

And this brings us neatly to brokerage. A broker is an agent that takes a fee for matching a buyer’s need to a seller’s offer. Brokers do well if they can quickly and accurately match needs with availability. Good examples of online brokerage services are eBay, Uber, AirBnB, Tinder and in some areas Amazon. Online brokerage companies often provide a digital infrastructure to broker deals, but own very few physical assets – they are simply a matchmaking service. In recent years companies employing good brokerage business models have been among the fastest growing companies in the world since they can scale quickly and provide added value to both buyers and sellers.

Without going into detail, let us consider how a brokerage revenue model might be used to displace an advertising revenue model on the internet. If you, the citizen, rather than the current duopoly, hold the best quality of personal data about yourself, then personalising services is best done on your own client side. Now, instead of using this data to attract ‘hit or miss’ adverts, the citizen gives permission to a broker to use their data for the purposes of finding the services and products that are wanted. Then, when transactions are made, such as the purchase of a product, the seller will pay a fee to the broker since she has supplied a high value sale and avoided the need for advertising spend.

There are winners and loser in this model since advertising spend shifts towards brokerage spend. The citizen clearly benefits by becoming the customer to be served and not the product to be sold. Companies providing services and products best matched to what people are looking for will benefit through higher sales without advertising spend. This shift will also mean that the internet can become more relevant and have less advertising. Companies with business models anchored on heavy advertising spend rather than a focus on customer specific needs may lose out. Clearly the traditional online display advertising companies that fail to adapt will be big losers as the market tilts towards a citizen focussed brokerage model.

And, when will this change happen? I think it is already happening but the incumbents will hang in there for a good few years yet.

The post Time to rethink online advertising appeared first on Trisent .

Insider article on Trisent’s Personal Data Browser

Wed, 07 Feb 2018 12:53:00 GMT

“Gordon Povey set to launch new personal search engine Trisent

The entrepreneur, formerly a lecturer at University of Edinburgh, aims to challenge the current advertising models used by Google and Facebook.”

An introduction to Trisent’s Personal Data Browser

Mon, 05 Feb 2018 20:45:00 GMT

The post An introduction to Trisent’s Personal Data Browser appeared first on Trisent .

ICOs, IPOs, Crowdfunding and Private Equity

Fri, 12 Jan 2018 01:09:00 GMT

Here I take a fresh look at fundraising given that technology companies have a variety of funding options and this has recently been shaken up further with the introduction of token sales or initial coin offerings (ICOs). So I will look at the main funding options, their pros and cons and then consider the possibility of hybrids.

Not all businesses need external funding to start and grow. Some use internal funds – beginging with the founders seed capital and then use revenue generated in the business to grow. This is called bootstrapping and has the advantage that the founders will own 100% of the business, but may lead to slow growth due to the slow investment process. Most family and lifestyle business are bootstrapped.

But let’s consider the needs of a technology company on a trajectory to become an international business. The traditional path is that the company will find some seed money to start the business, then additional money to build, grow and scale the business. The investment at these different stages often comes from different sources. The typical sources, in approximate order of investment scale and difficulty are; 3Fs (founders, family & friends/fools), angel investors, venture capital investors, initial public offering (IPO) and many companies use a number of these during their journey. However, this model has been disrupted recently by a variety of online types of crowdfunding including most recently ICOs.

Crowdfunding is centuries old, but has been reinvented in many on-line guises. Current types are donations (giving to good causes), reward based (advance payment for a planned product), equity (receiving shares), debt (investing in a return from loans), litigation (investing in a return from class actions) and tokens (investing in a company’s economy). The two types of specific interest to me for high growth tech companies are equity based and tokens based crowdfunds.

The funding needs and scale of investment changes as companies develop, and typically the funding amount increases at each stage. The different classification of funding, in very general terms, is given below.

Seed – The creation phase – e.g. to build the idea into an early prototype, demonstrator or basic product. Typically £50k – £2m

Series A – The build phase – having proven the product feasibility, this is to build the business/product value and establish the early beach head market. Typically £1m – £10m

Series B – The growth phase – having proven the product market, this is to growing the business and products to capture a larger market. Typically £5m – £50m

Series C – The scaling phase – having proven the mass market capability, this is to expand the business into all major accessible markets towards a monopoly position. Typically > £20m

The main funding mechanisms for aspiring technology companies are given below.

Private equity. Shares are sold in the company to private sophistocated investors. These investors are typically high networth individuals, angel investors or venture capital investors. This usually involves due diligence being carried out on the company, and the investor will often take a place on the board and charge the company fees. Private equity investors hope to gain a return on their investment via an exit. Normally this exit will be through the sale of the company or via an IPO. There are also management buy outs or sale to other investors. Private equity takes many different form and consequently can be used at any of the required funding stages.

IPO. Initial Public Offerings are the first release of shares onto public markets, sale of these shares typically raises the investment required and the company becomes publicly owned rather than private. There are many investors on these public stockmarkets ranging from individuals to large institutional investors and funds. Unlike private equity, public equity has liquidity in that it can be bought and sold at anytime. The complexity, cost and compliance issues associated with IPOs means that they are generally used in later stages of company development when they wish to raise large sums of investment. Thus, a company will typically have been through a series A funding round at least before considering an IPO.

Equity crowdfunding This has become popular in recent years due to its relative simplicity and the fact that sizeable sums can often be raised from a pool of small investors. Crowdfund investors tend to have a wide portfolio of investments and generally do little or no due dilligence on the company prior to investing. For companies, equity crowdfunding can be successful if the offer looks interesting and is marketed successfully to the correct audience. They can be concluded rapidly with minimal legal costs and there is normally no representative from the crowd community requiring a seat on the board. Equity crowdfunding is well suited to seed and small series A funding, but it is difficult to crowd source very large sums.

ICO Initial Coin Offerings are so called because of their similarity to IPOs, except that it is not equity being offered but a token for use within the company’s economy (normally in the form of a newly minted crypto currency). In common with IPOs the investor has liquidity, in that they can sell or buy tokens at any point after they are listed on public crypto currencies marketplaces. Most tokens have been issued as utility tokens that can eventually be used within the company’s own eco system, but are often held (or hodled) for future sale once their utility value has increased. The table below suggests that ICOs can be used at any stage, but, it is common to use it for seed and early stage companies. The amount being raise by some projects, however, are well into the series B and even series C funding sizes!

On a historical note, every one of these mechanisms has a history that is centuries old. It is probably easiest to accept that of private equity, IPOs and also crowdfunding. However, ICO appear to be a new phenomenon, which they are by name. However ICOs are essentially the minting of a local currency to be use in a closed economy and this is also centuries old. What is perhaps new is their application to fund companies in addition to creating a tradeable token.

Of course, all of these have pros and cons and suit different companies at different stages. To try and compare these I have constructed the table below.

What should be clear from this is that different types of funding have quite different pros and cons. Any advantage to the investor also becomes an advantage to the company too, since the investor will be more willing to invest.

In the case of the private equity, the problem for the investor is that of liquidity issue – investors cannot easily sells their shares as there is no accesible market or known value. Investors have to patiently wait on an exit event to hopefully realise a return on their investment. In their favour, laws governing the issue of shares, and the responsibilies of directors gives the investor a good degree of security around their investment. This can be slightly onerous on the company but is not overly burdensome. There is also the issue that investors often wish to place a director or observer on the board – this can work out well or with the wrong person be a large problem that can be difficult to rectify.

IPOs issue publicly tradable stock which can be bought and sold with relative ease at anytime the relevant stock market is open. There are heavy levels of investor protection in the way a public company must conduct their business and communicate with the investors. Consequently the compliance issues for public companies leads to heavy costs and can also lead to conserative and short-term decision making based on perceived market reactions (and hence stock price).

Equity crowdfunding has become popular and can raise useful amounts of funding quickly and easily without having one large investor or syndicate imposing a director on the board. There is usually no, or limited, due dilligence conducted and the legal process is often standardised and partly taken care of by the online funding platform. Effective marketing can be an issue with so many companies choosing this option but if done properly it can be very efficient.

ICOs do look very attractive for investors in terms of liquidity and many investors hold crypto-currency such as Bitcoin that they wish to diversify into other crypto currencies. In most cases there is no investor protection because of the lack of regualtion or confusion over how existing laws will apply. ICOs can be conducted with little company regulation as you do not even need to be a legal company entity in order to sell tokens. Unfortunately, this slightly lawless situation has led to a number of ICO frauds. One of the attraction of ICOs for companies has been the ease with which they can be raise large investments. Just like with crowd funding the marketing costs for conducting an ICO is increasing and some companies opt for a pre-ICO to generate a marketing budget for a large token sale.

There are more ways to fund companies beyond the main catagories mentioned here, as well as hybrid models. Let me provide one example of this, loans are another way to fund companies and convertible loan notes are a hybrid method that combines a loan mechanism with an equity mechanism. Funds are loaned to the company by an investor with an agreement that it may be converted into equity when there is a future funding round (usually with a favourable interest rate and a discount on the share price). These are found to be useful when a company needs to raise early stage funding but where it is difficult to value the company because it is at such an early stage.

ICOs look attractive in a number of respects, but have become unappealing in others. This leads us to the option to consider a hybrid ICO model in an attempt gain the benefits without the inherent problems. I believe there is a good workable hybrid model involving ICOs and in a future post I will present such a model that I personally beleive is attractive. It combines the best elements of ICOs and uses a private equity model to eliminate the risks to both the compay and investor.

The post ICOs, IPOs, Crowdfunding and Private Equity appeared first on Trisent .

GDPR for the consumer

Fri, 15 Dec 2017 12:41:00 GMT

In a previous blog, I talked about our concerns regarding data privacy and security. I mentioned new legislation coming soon which will address a lot of these concerns. So, what is this legislation and what does it mean for us and the security of our data?

General Data Protection Regulation ( GDP R) is the new legislation which will take effect on the 25th May 2018. GDPR is a set of guidelines which follows on from the current Data Protection Act. Consumers now have more say in how companies and organisations use their personal data and these companies and organisations must make sure they take care of this data.

The GDPR will apply to all businesses based in the EU and any organisations doing business with the EU will also have to comply with the regulations if they collect any personal data from EU citizens. The new regulations will be much tougher and failing to comply will result in companies being fined. It has been created to help improve trust within the vastly growing digital economy.

Some key facts:

1. Pre-ticked boxes and having to actively “opt out” will no longer comply with regulations. Instead, there will be a new “opt in” process and users will have to actively tick a box to sign up for marketing communications. Further email confirmation will also be required.

2. We now have the ‘right to be forg otten’. Any data collected must be erased completely at the consumers request – this includes copies of the data held by other organisations. There are of course exceptions if the organisation has a legitimate reason to have this data to conduct its business – for example law enforcement.

3. We can request access to our data free of charge. An organisation will have 40 days to complete a request and disclose the information.

4. Parental consent will be required to process the personal data of children under the age of 16 for online services.

5. ‘Personal data’ includes IP addresses, bank details, social media profiles, social media posts, photos, emails, home addresses, telephone numbers and medical details.

This new legislation is designed to benefit and protect citizens, and while some older companies may struggle to comply with GDPR, new citizen focused companies will use it as a benefit rather than a burden.

The post GDPR for the consumer appeared first on Trisent .

Adam Smith and the Initial Coin Offering

Thu, 07 Dec 2017 17:07:00 GMT

What does Adam Smith have to do with Initial Coin Offerings or ICOs? If you consider that Smith was the first philosopher to properly study how nations (or economies) become wealthy, then the answer is that he may have a lot to teach us about what companies with a tokenised economy need to do in order to create wealth.

He described ‘laissez-faire’ philosophies where government intervention and taxation are limited, allowing the free markets to operate and create wealth through the ‘invisible hand’ of demand and supply. He understood the need for minimising friction in economies, having easily tradable currency and in creating velocity of that currency. In his book he illustrates why some economies had become wealthy through trading and not directly at the expense of other poorer economies. He showed that wealth is created and clearly not a finite resource, and that ‘laissez-faire’ economies grow faster than those encumbered with layers of regulation and taxation. However, Smith also warns us that monopolies hurt economies because of the lack of real competition, and hence free trade. This makes markets less efficient and so less wealth is created to the detriment of society.

Smith wrote this book in 1776, almost two and a half centuries ago, but the philosophy of economics he wrote about has not changed, other than in some of the terms we might use or the examples we can cite. But what has this got to do with ICOs or token sales.

For some time, I have been trying to figure out the value that might be attached to crypto-assets issued as part of a token sale. Or rather, I was trying to work out why so many ICOs were managing to raise such large sums. What were the token sale valuations based on? Is it economics that arrives us at some expected ROI, or something else. Having read many whitepapers, and understood some, I have realised that few have made a proper attempt to justify the token issue values. I have seen lots of science about the technology yet to be built, and I have seen predictions of values, but very little about the economics behind this. There also seems to be little relationship between the company stage (which is often just at the incorporation stage), the size of the potential market, and the valuation of the initial offering.

In a token sale you are selling a currency that can potentially be traded within your own closed economy. It is assumed that the token buyer is initially a speculator that hopes your currency will increase in value based on your business growing and hence the value of your economy increasing. i.e. the demand for tokens to use in the economy is going to increase since the market for them wii grow and the tokens have a limited supply. So, for the economy to work, it must have a sensible starting value otherwise the currency will be stillborn when it comes a tradable token with utility value. After all, why would I buy your token at a high price if I cannot exchange it for something of a similarly high value in your economy? Of course, this assumes that the value of the tokens must be pegged against a utility value and not purely a currency speculation value. This seems a reasonable assumption otherwise ICOs would begin to look like Ponzi schemes.

From the limited information found in these whitepapers, it is difficult to establish any defensible valuation for these companies, but based on more traditional company valuations they do seem wildly high for companies of this stage. We know from conventional equity scenarios that large over-valuations can lead to future difficulties. So how do you value ICO tokens? Well, I don’t have a specific answer but the best article I have found on this subject is this one by Chris Burniske. Note that, the value of your token is a function of the quantity in circulation, its velocity (i.e. how frequently the token is exchanged) and the total value of all sales. This relates directly back to how Smith measured the wealth of a country. When creating your token, the price will be a speculation about these future values, but if they are over optimistic then the resulting value of the token will reduce and may strangle your company. This could be worse than a down-round with investors since a diminishing token value without good utility might signal a spiral of death in the company’s economy.

So, companies considering ICO should be diligent in their financial projections used to value their crypto-currency tokens, but having raised the initial investment and assuming the product is good, it will be an economist and not a finance officer that is needed to govern a token based economy. They need to stimulate the correct environment for growth, but according to Smith, not interfere with the free trade within your market. You need the ‘laissez-faire’ approach and let the ‘invisible hand’ operate the market for you. If you can achieve this, according to Adam Smith’s teachings, you ought to create wealth.

The post Adam Smith and the Initial Coin Offering appeared first on Trisent .

How to monetise personal data while maintaining privacy

Wed, 25 Oct 2017 12:38:00 GMT

As we know there are moves to help us have more control over our personal data through GDPR. But, having taken control of this data, what then?

Let’s say we manage to collect all of our private data (Trisent is working on technology to enable you to do this automatically), and we successfully deny the likes of Google access to data such as our browser history, what then? What do we do with our data that we now hold. Well, we can look at it, analyse it and search is in a variety of ways (and Trisent also has technology to help you do that), but what other benefits might we be able to get from owning our own data.

One of the common suggestion is that we monetise our data by selling it on a personal data exchange. Datacoup have developed one of the first data exchanges, but there is an understandable reluctance to sell data directly. The danger, of course, is that our data is not used for the purpose that it was sold for, that it is sold on to others or even used for criminal activities. So, trust is a big part of this potential economy and even if we trust the marketplace operator, such as Datacoup, can we trust those that buy our data. Another option is to sell our data as part of a large aggregated dataset where there is apparently no directly attributable data – but that has dangers too. Famously, Netflix release a large dataset where the subscriber’s details were removed, however some academics quickly managed to de-anonymise this data. To quote from their paper “Using the Internet Movie Database as the source of background knowledge, we successfully identified the Netflix records of known users, uncovering their apparent political preferences and other potentially sensitive information.”

Perhaps the solution to monetising our data, is not actually to sell the data directly. If you think about the services provided by large data brokers such as Experion. They only give information you need, and do not give you a dataset to process for yourself. They provide minimal information in the form of an answer which is sufficient for you to complete a task. They avoid giving a full dataset because then they would reveal their data assets – which you could reuse for other purposes, or even sell. Instead companies, like Experion, reuse the data many times themselves to sell more answers to many customers – typically a credit score to see if you are worthy of a loan, or maybe a more detailed report if it is for a mortgage. They can reprocess and re-monetise this same data many times.

So, having observed how the ‘big boys’ monetise their data, how could this be achieved on an individual basis? Perhaps the answer is the same, simply by selling answers rather than datasets. This can be done on an aggregated data basis where you contribute to a data pool that can be queried for answers but the data itself is never handed over. It can also be done on an individual basis where questions can be asked of your personal data. As an example, let’s say that a local Asda superstore was trying to understand their local customers and these customers owned their personal data which includes activity and movement data from their phones. They could then ask – ‘how many people in the KY1 postal area visit Asda each week compared to Tesco?’ and if they know that Mary Gallacher is a local customer they could ask “how many times has Mary Gallacher been to Asda this month and how many times has she been to Tesco?” When Mary’s data is used to answer a question she will receive a credit. For security she could set the type of questions she is willing to contribute answers too, and for transparency she could see a ledger of questions and who has asked them. Note, that Mary did not have to reveal her location data, only the fact that she had been to Asda or Tesco, which she was comfortable to do in exchange for some form of credit.

This method of using personal data allows it to be monetised and provides good levels of security. The Open PDS project at MIT has been pioneering the technology that will allow personal data to be queried safely through what they have termed ‘Safe Answers’.

So, I would conclude that you don’t need to sell your data. To maximise the monetisation and security of your personal data we should simply sell answers to specific questions.

The post How to monetise personal data while maintaining privacy appeared first on Trisent .

It’s not about the data!

Fri, 22 Sep 2017 16:48:00 GMT

In my previous post I wrote about the new data economy and the citizen’s rights regulations that are shaping this new economy. I also mentioned the ‘data is the new oil’ analogies being made which suggests that data is a valued commodity like oil.

I think that the oil-data analogy as a commodity is not a perfect one, since data is becoming more abundant and oil is becoming scarce. Data is neither finite or scarce, but there definitely is a growing economy based on data – think about all the talk of big data, internet of things (IoT), machine learning & artificial intelligence (AI), and virtual reality (VR). All of these are based on data that, in its raw state, tends not to be particularly useful in itself, but you can process it to make it useful and so extract value from it. So, the data can have intrinsic value (just like crude oil) but only because you can turn it into something useful with utility value (like refining crude oil into petrol). So, it’s not really about the data, it’s about the right data and how it can be processed.

As evidence of this note that venture capital is not going to companies with lots of data, it is going to the machine learning, edge computing and data analytics companies that can work their magic on the data. We have not moved from the Information Age which was all about computing and data processing to a Data Age, that would be a step backwards. What I have realised is that when we speak of data today we mean different things since ‘stuff’ stored digitally we consider to be data no matter what it is or how much it has been processed. So, I thought it useful to go back to the classical DIKW diagram (data, information, knowledge, wisdom) which I have updated slightly and used the term ‘raw data’ in place of data for clarity. I added ‘signals’ at the bottom end because advanced sensors and IoT are a part of today’s data economy feeding us with raw data streams, and I also added ‘action’ since AI systems can now make actionable mission critical decisions based on processing data intelligently (so, SDIKWA?).

The diagram may not match entirely with human intelligence but it does match with artificial intelligence. Consider a self-driving car; it has many sensors supplying signals and these signals are organised into data buffers with raw data from the lidar, radar, cameras, wheel rotation sensors, etc. This raw data is processed into information with some meaning (how far away are objects and in what direction, how fast is each wheel rotating, etc). This can then be processed contextually to gain knowledge (we are travelling in a straight line 317° @ 30mph, there is a solid stationary object in the trajectory 320m ahead). The processing for understanding would determine that there is a potential collision risk and know the time and deceleration required if the object remains there and is to be avoided. With this wisdom a decision could be made on whether to brake and if so with what braking force.

So, it’s not about the data – it is about the signals, the raw data, the information, the knowledge, the wisdom and the actions. Or rather, it’s not about the data – it’s about the value created by intelligently processing it.

The post It’s not about the data! appeared first on Trisent .

The new data economy

Wed, 30 Aug 2017 21:20:00 GMT

It is claimed that data is the new oil . The top tier of the world’s most valuable companies are being built on this new economy. In another Economist article the problem of a market place for data is highlighted.

New regulations are recognising the rights of individuals and their personal data in this new economy – GDPR being a recent example. The large data holders such as Alphabet (Google), Facebook, Amazon, Microsoft and Apple have business models built over years that may not easily adapt to the new citizen’s rights in this data driven economy and they will almost certainly fall foul of regulations such as GDPR.

New business models that are compliant with emerging data economy regulations will provide commercial opportunities for small nimble companies and start-ups. Data markets are emerging and some propose the use new crypto-currencies and smart contracts to trade with this data. Again, related to blockchain technologies there are methods that can be used to track the ownership and restrict the use of this data, and new techniques are being developed to fully anonymise data within aggregated datasets. This may look like the technology Wild West right now but there are a lot of smart people out there innovating who are determined to play their part in the new data driven economy.

The enlightened approach is, of course, to develop business models that acknowledge citizen’s data rights, that accept there is value in their data and that with the user’s permission it can be accessed in exchange for services, products, crypto-currency tokens or even cash.

The post The new data economy appeared first on Trisent .

The Bridget Jones diary app

Wed, 12 Jul 2017 21:21:00 GMT

Published in the Dunfermline Press on 11th July 2017.

The Dunfermline app that’s the answer to Bridget Jones

A UNIQUE self-writing diary app, designed and built in Fife, could be the new Millennials’ answer to Bridget Jones.

Orla records the places you went, what was there, what you did, and even how you got there. It also tags places with photographs, local news, weather and although the app can’t count how many Chardonnays you drank, there’s also a scrapbook so Bridget can add random musings. This spark of imagination was created by local company Trisent and built by Ember Technology, who, until five months ago, based their offices in Dunfermline.

Now in Glenrothes, the team have just launched their Orla Beta programme at last month’s EIE’17, the UK’s largest technology showcase where companies pitch to investors. The company thinks it could be on to a winner, competing with social media in a more detailed look at past memories and they are ready to tap into the $4.4 billion lifestyle app market very soon. Trisent and Ember Technology are promising this could be your most memorable app yet and now members of the public will be invited to try out this diary for free and help shape how the app develops.

Dunfermline businessman Steven Wexelstein, co-founder of Ember Technology, said: “It’s been a really interesting application from a development point of view, building algorithms that detect different types of motion such as walking or running and different types of transport, while still making battery efficiency a top priority.”

The £150,000 trial, which has been largely self-funded with the aid of a £99,370 Smart Scotland grant through Scottish Enterprise, runs in the background of mobile phones by using location services and motion detector.

Entrepreneur and CEO of Trisent, Dr Gordon Povey, said: “In future, this app could be used in lots of other ways; in business, for instance, or in tourism, when people want to keep a log of their trip or holiday. So many of us feel that our lives are passing in a blur; a diary would help us record, remember and reclaim all those forgotten days. Orla is completely different from the very brief, very public reviews of the year which social media provides. It is a daily log which, in the best tradition, is private. It’s very important to us that a user’s data is their own private data. Of course, individual users are free to use their written diary in whatever way this wish.”

The post The Bridget Jones diary app appeared first on Trisent .

Orla Beta Programme – phase one update

Tue, 11 Jul 2017 18:23:00 GMT

We are nearing the end of phase one of the Orla Beta Programme.

We have so far release only the fully self-writing component of the diary that notes where you have been (Places) and how you got there (Journeys). This is a fully automated framework for a diary that can capture your ‘digital self’. Even as it stands now, most of our Beta users have been finding the Orla diary both useful and interesting. There will be further ongoing improvements to the accuracy of the information presented as well as further improvements to the battery life.

However, the current functionality is only the ‘tip of the iceberg’. In phase two we will be revealing the scrapbook, an area where you will be able to select what information you want collected about yourself. This will be presented in a clever format that enables you to access all of your ‘digital self’ without the clutter and confusion of information overload.

As part of this process we are currently deciding what information to append the dairy with for phase two (and beyond). We have already obtained feedback from most of our current Beta users. They have told us what current features they like, dislike and new features that they would like. We are also conducting a wider survey that includes people who have not actually used Orla yet and so you can all be of help by completing our short Facebook poll . It will take about two minutes of your time and as a small incentive one respondant will be chosen at random to receive an Amazon voucher (the poll closes on 31st July 2017).

Once we have added some of the new features requested (and removed or changed features that were not liked), we will launch phase two. After a further period of testing we will again be asking our Beta users for more feedback and will also be adding more users into the Orla Beta Programme.

Orla is currently optimised for use in the UK and Ireland but does still work abroad. We do have a few overseas users and many people have also travelled abroad with Orla. Internationalisation will be an area we will be working on in phase three towards the end of this year.

The post Orla Beta Programme – phase one update appeared first on Trisent .

Trisent is the top business story in The Courier today

Thu, 08 Jun 2017 11:01:00 GMT

The top business story in The Courier today (General Election day 2017) is about Trisent and the Orla Beta Programme, by Michael Alexander.

Click here for the full on-line article.

Fife technology entrepreneur has global ambitions for self-writing diary app

Dr Gordon Povey, founder and Chief Executive of Trisent

A unique self-writing diary, designed and built by a Fife start-up software company, is being tested by a group of 100 users on four continents and could be ready to tap in to the $4.4 billion lifestyle app market for real soon.

That’s the prediction of serial entrepreneur Dr Gordon Povey – the chief executive officer and founder of Dunfermline-based Trisent – which launched a beta or test version of Orla at the UK’s largest technology showcase EIE’17 last month, and is now inviting members of the public to give it a try for free.

The £150,000 trial, which has been largely self-funded with the aid of a £99,370 Smart Scotland feasibility grant through Scottish Enterprise, runs in the background of mobile phones by using location services and motion detectors.

Built by Ember Technology, it automatically publishes the owner’s daily diary as an aide-memoire without the user having to lift a finger.

The app uses mobile phone technology to update the diary automatically

Feedback is being obtained from early adopters with equity investment being sought this summer, to fully develop and market a commercial version.

Dr Povey, who already has a track record of success when it comes to developing mobile technology and taking it to market, said the app had global potential for business and leisure use.

He said: “In future this app could be used in lots of other ways. In business, for instance, or in tourism, when people want to keep a log of their trip or holiday. So many of us feel that our lives are passing in a blur; a diary would help us record, remember and reclaim all those forgotten days.”

Dr Povey said Orla is completely different from the very brief, very public reviews of the year which social media provides.

“It is a daily log which, in the best diary tradition, is private,” he added.

“It’s very important to us that a user’s data is their own private data.

“Of course, individual users are free to use their written diary in whatever way they wish.”

Dr Povey said he built the equivalent of this technology more than 10 years ago.

“The problem we had 10 years ago,” he added: “was that not many people had Smartphones, and the Symbian Smartphones were a bit clunky, the data network was a bit flaky, and also it would cost you a lot on data charges to keep the service around.

“So although we found it useful to demo our location technology, it wasn’t commercially viable at that time.

“But I always had it at the back of my mind that one day the technology would catch up.

“That’s where this new company came from.”

*If you’d like to help refine this new product, go to http://orla-diary.com/beta

The post Trisent is the top business story in The Courier today appeared first on Trisent .

Orla Beta Programme is launched at EIE 2017

Fri, 12 May 2017 07:56:00 GMT

Gordon Povey launches Orla at EIE 2017

Engage Invest Exploit (EIE) is the premier technology investor showcase conference featuring Scotland´s most promising high growth companies. Trisent was selected as one of these premier companies invited to pitch to over 700 delegates including 200 investors. Trisent used this opportunity to reveal Orla – the world’s first self-writing diary and in addition to revealing the new name, the Orla Beta Programme was also announced and the first 100 Beta users have been pre-selected. After the platform has been stress tested with the first 100 users, more users will be added to the programme.

Orla has been under development by Trisent since September 2016 and an early prototype diary app was rapidly developed. That prototype was called Codi (derived from co ntextual di ary) and was released to 15 alpha testers just before Christmas 2016 and the test ran until the end of February. The feedback from these tests were used to define the specification for Orla which has now been released as an early Beta.

There is more to Orla than the phone app, it requires a complex cloud server system to process and store the diary data. Smart algorithms are run on the server system rather than by the phone meaning that the processing algorithms can be continuously improved during the Beta programme without the need to upgrade to a new version of the Orla app.

There will be continuous improvements made and user feedback will be regularly sought throughout the programme until the performance of the product is considered suitable for general release. It is currently available in the UK for iPhone only. It will work in other countries without any need for modifications but is only supported in the UK initially. Versions for other phone platforms including Android will be developed although they will not appear this year.

The post Orla Beta Programme is launched at EIE 2017 appeared first on Trisent .

Google Gnome

Sat, 01 Apr 2017 22:27:00 GMT

The post Google Gnome appeared first on Trisent .

Blockchain technology value to exceed $3.1 trillion by 2030

Fri, 03 Mar 2017 20:56:00 GMT

Gartner Forecast: Blockchain Business Value, Worldwide, 2017-2030

Gartner’s new business value forecast methodology quantifies the value of technology innovation rather than the dollars spent on it. The business value-add of blockchain will grow to slightly more than $176 billion by 2025, and then it will exceed $3.1 trillion by 2030

https://www.gartner.com/doc/3627117/forecast-blockchain-business-value-worldwide

The post Blockchain technology value to exceed $3.1 trillion by 2030 appeared first on Trisent .

Facebook made to disclose information about its ads

Mon, 13 Feb 2017 22:36:00 GMT

Facebook now tells each of its users which advertisers are tracking them individually through so-called Custom Audiences . This change was most likely brought by legal actions against Facebook, conducted through PersonalData.IO . This change opens up exciting new possibilities for investigative journalism and the #MyData movement.

Read the complete article on Medium here.

The post Facebook made to disclose information about its ads appeared first on Trisent .

Entrepreneur Gordon Povey aims to bring diaries into the 21st century with Codi

Sun, 01 Jan 2017 14:22:00 GMT

As we all embark on our New Year’s resolutions the Sunday Herald’s reporter Judith Duffy writes about Codi and how Trisent’s self writing diary might be able to help us in the future.

She writes:

FORGET the meticulous detailing of 17th Century life by Samuel Pepys or the frantic fictional scribblings of Bridget Jones – a Scottish technology entrepreneur is aiming to bring journal-keeping into the 21st century through a ‘self-writing’ diary.

For those who make a New Year resolution to record their everyday life – but never manage to find the time – a new mobile phone app which requires no effort has been developed.

The ‘Codi’ self-writing diary automatically keeps a day-to-day record of all the user’s activities – such as how long was spent commuting, where was visited and how much time was spent exercising. It can also draw in information from elsewhere, including what the weather was like, local news reports and photographs of the area.

Read the complete article here.

The post Entrepreneur Gordon Povey aims to bring diaries into the 21st century with Codi appeared first on Trisent .

Trisent secures funding to develop a self writing diary app

Wed, 07 Dec 2016 10:09:00 GMT

Trisent has secured the funding necessary to launch the beta version of Codi, your self writing diary.

You can read about it here .

You can sign up for the beta here .

The post Trisent secures funding to develop a self writing diary app appeared first on Trisent .

So, who writes a diary?

Tue, 29 Nov 2016 17:55:00 GMT

“Okay, hands up who writes a daily diary?” – small show of hands. “Now, hands up who has ever tried to keep a daily diary in the past?” – large show of hands.

Since so many people keep, have kept, or wish they still maintained a diary I was curious about the value and benefits that our diaries can provide. Interestingly I could not find a single benefit – let me rephrase that – I noted multiple benefits but there was no particularly dominant one. People use their diaries in different ways and record different types of things for a variety of reasons. My sample was small (basically family and friends) so I looked for other sources of data about diarists via the Internet.

From a US 1996 survey Ruth Folit of Life Journal established that 50% of people interviewed had kept a diary and that 16% were active diary writers. Statista published UK data for 2014 that showed over 21% of children and young people regularly wrote a diary. Almost a third of all girls kept a diary. In regards to why people keep a diary, the Life Journal article cites a variety of reasons but concludes: Seems to me that most journal keepers are trying to improve their lives. I think people who keep journals agree with Socrates: “An unexamined life is not worth living.”

I confess I have still not bottomed out all of the reasons for keeping a diary, but there is clearly a long list of benefits and I know that I have personally benefited from keeping records and photos that log my life. I stopped writing my own personal diary when I was about 18 after my girlfriend “borrowed” and read it – so lack of security is an issue. My other personal reason for not writing a diary was a lack of time. But, I am using Codi now and find it very interesting and even useful in unexpected ways such as being able to quickly verify the source of expense receipts. With an automatic system I now feel the benefits of being a diarist again without the burden of writing.

Extrapolating the statistics there could be up to 1 billion people worldwide that keep diaries regularly. While that is a very big number I think the more interesting number is the 6.5 billion people that don’t! It looks like many people would like to have a journal of their life but the perceived benefits of keeping a traditional diary are not seen to outweigh the burdens for most. But, there are now over 4.6 billion mobile phone users worldwide and …..

The post So, who writes a diary? appeared first on Trisent .

What is Lifelogging?

Sat, 15 Oct 2016 18:10:00 GMT

What is lifelogging

The general understanding of the term ‘lifelogging’ is the recording of personal data created by our activities and behaviour. Clearly, throughout history these activities have been recorded in diaries and journals manually so lifelogging as an activity has been around a lot longer than the term itself. What is different about ‘modern’ lifelogging is that we can use technology to automate the process. The term ‘quantified-self’ is sometime used in place of lifelogging but tends to mean the information you derive about the person rather than just the data being recorded itself.

In 1981 Steve Mann designed and built a wearable computer with video capability and set about recording aspects of his life with his technology which he continued to improve . In 1994 Mann started to record his life 24/7. He is now considered to be one of the early pioneer of wearable technology or ‘wearables’.

Stephen Wolfram has been storing all of his digital data for a very long time. His file system has files dating back to 1980, he has OCR scans of paper documents dating back even further, his email data goes back to 1989. He also has a record of all his phone calls, his calendar with all his meetings and events and more recently since 2010 activity has been recorded through a pedometer. He has analysed his personal data and derives a personal benefit from having collected all of this data and said “ I suppose my greatest regret is that I did not start collecting more data earlier. ”

Gordon Bell , a researcher at Microsoft began the MyLifeBits project in 2001. This was a lifelogging experiment attempting to fulfil Bush’s vision of the Memex machine. Bell recorded almost everything over a number of years using a variety of input devices, and software was used to index the data for rapid retrieval.

DARPA (the Pentagons agency for new technologies) announced the LifeLog project in 2003 to record an individuals activities and interactions. Indexing of this information would allow them to retrieve the desired information and to mine the data for patterns. This project was cancelled in 2004 after concerns over privacy issues.

Mobilife was a European project that started in late 2004 with 22 partners including Nokia (the dominant mobile phone manufacturer at the time) and also Suunto (a pioneer of early wearable technologies). The project majored on the development of personal area networks, wearable sensors and context-awareness.

Also in 2004 Trisent Communications began development of context aware technology but was best known for its pioneering location based services (LBS) technology and was acquired by Artilium for that reason. However, the company did develop the experimental ‘Contextual Diary’, a lifelogging system using off-the-shelf smartphones to automatically publish your diary every day. Some of the experimental outputs are still in a trial blog called Emma’s Blog .

Lifelogging today

Up until around 2007 there were no commercial lifelogging apps available but through the emerging ubiquity of smartphone platforms (notably iOS and Android) and their associated app stores we now have hundreds of lifestyle apps, many are in the health and fitness sector with a significant number focussed specifically on lifelogging. Lifelogging apps of note are Chronos, Heyday, Instant, Kennedy, Momento, Moves, Saga and Track my Life. In addition to the phone apps there has been a proliferation of wearable technologies such as Fitbit, Googleglass, Apple Watch and many more that can track activities and specific aspects of your life. While sensors such as heart rate monitors and pedometers have been around for more than 10 years, the automated recording and processing of such data into a lifelogging format is more recent.

Factors that have helped the commercialisation of these technologies are; the relentless pace of miniaturisation, improved sensors, increasing processor power, reducing costs of data storage, improvements in the data networks and improvements in battery technology. It is only in the last decade that you or I could easily access lifelogging technology. We can expect this technology to improve significantly in the next decade and for the market to expand rapidly.

The Future

Technology has caught up and lifelogging is now commercially viable, so what will that future bring? Everyone familiar with the subject has their own opinion. The Age of Context book includes a vision that our personal data needs to be widely sacrificed in order to obtain some desired benefits. In the previous post we agreed to differ on that specific point.

We had just scheduled our new company launch for 6 ^th May 2016 and were planning the developed of a new lifelogging app when on 4 ^th April Mike Elgan of Computerworld wrote that “ Lifelogging is dead (for now)” based on the fact that Gordon Bell had given up his long-term MyLifeBits project. Then on 16 ^th April, Chris Anderson, former Editor in Chief at Wired, tweeted the following.

So is their a good future for lifelogging or should Trisent consider pivoting quickly? On analysis, it seems that both Bell and Anderson were not getting the desired benefits from their lifelogging. For Bell, he was trying to record absolutely everything and that is obviously difficult, time consuming and somewhat extreme. In Anderson’s case one of his aims was to improve his sleep, but the quality of the information he was able to record was basically not up to the task and so he gave up.

In contrast Stephen Wolfram, the longest served lifelogger of all, suggested “it won’t be long before it’s clear how incredibly useful it all is — and everyone will be doing it, and wondering how they could have ever gotten by before. And wishing they had started sooner, and hadn’t ‘lost’ their earlier years.” I do agree, but with the caveat that Wolfram is very technologically astute with the ability and motivation to collect and analyse his own data. Not many of us are able to do this ourselves.

Elgan’s Computerworld article, “Lifelogging is dead’, despite the provocative title perceptively points out that “the public appears to be suffering from data fatigue … I believe this apparent impulse to forget is not what it seems. In reality, people are just suffering from information overload.” And I have to strongly agree with that point. Today, trying to record and make sense of all of your data is quite frankly hard work, especially when a host of organisations are keen to grab a slice of it for their own benefit.

More wearables, improved sensors, faster processors with better batteries, all grabbing small bits of your digital life are not automatically going to improve your lifestyle (although that is why many of us buy new devices and download new apps). In reality the recoding of vast amounts of personal data is not a bad thing in itself, but when it is held by different apps and stored in a number of different places with multiple user interface – this frankly makes life more complex and users have been discarding last seasons apps and wearables surprisingly quickly.

Put simply lifelogging needs to deliver a lot more benefit for a lot less user effort to succeed. Fortunately for Trisent, that has been one of our primary aims from the outset. The ‘big reveal’ of a commercial product will happen next year!

The post What is Lifelogging? appeared first on Trisent .

Are we living in the “Age of Context”?

Thu, 08 Sep 2016 16:57:00 GMT

The post Are we living in the “Age of Context”? appeared first on Trisent .

The history of the contextual diary (Codi)

Sat, 20 Aug 2016 10:26:00 GMT

Trisent Ltd, launched on 6 ^th May 2016 to develop Codi, the self writing diary. The Codi name comes from Co ntextual Di ary which was the name of a project that began in 2006 although the origins can be traced back to 2004 when the company Trisent Communications Ltd was first established in Scotland.

The following history gives the background to the original Trisent company and the first Contextual Diary, both direct descendents of new Trisent company and the Codi app.

The founder of Trisent, Dr Gordon Povey completed his PhD in mobile communications at the University of Edinburgh in 1992 and took up a lecturing post there. He completed a number of consulting roles in mobile communications including with BT, Nokia and Elektobit in Finland. In 1999 he set up Elektrobit (UK) Ltd a partially owned subsidiary of the Finnish Elektrobit Group (now called Bittium) with Dr Stephen Churcher who had studied for his PhD alongside Gordon.

The technology and expertise of primary interest to Trisent Communications was in the field of mobile phone location technology. At that time the mobile phone and network technology was pretty clunky and continuous accurate location was a technical challenge, and so the company focused on perfecting this. However, the Trisent vision was wider than being a continuous location aware service provider. The Trisent name actually derives from Tri-Sentient – being aware of 3 things: where, when, what, or, put simply, context aware . When developing the technology over 10 years ago most effort was spent on the where i.e. on location since this in itself was a technical challenge. However, they did create a context aware demo application called the Contextual Diary that sparked considerable interest, indeed it was actually found to be useful to those that tried it. However, very few people had smart phones and data networks were expensive so it remained an internal project used to demonstrate the potential value of Trisent’s continuous location technology.

After almost 6 years of working as CEO in early stage technology companies, Gordon realised that Context Aware technology is on the cusp of become a massive market and made an agreement with Artilium to buy back the rights to the Trisent name. In their 2014 book, Age of Context, Scoble & Isreal talk about 5 forces [technologies] that come together. “Together, they have created the conditions for an unstoppable perfect storm of epic proportion: the Age of Context”. On 6th May 2016 the new Trisent company was launched and has been developing new context aware technology in the form of Codi, a much revised version of the original Contextual Diary.

The post The history of the contextual diary (Codi) appeared first on Trisent .

What’s in a name? Why Trisent?

Mon, 25 Jul 2016 16:06:00 GMT

So why is Trisent called “Trisent” and does the logo have a meaning?

The name

Most company names have a story behind how they came about and Trisent is no different. As this is now becoming an FAQ I thought I would tell the story here. Trisent is a name derived from Tri (meaning; three) and Sentient (meaning; to be aware of). So Trisent means to be aware of three things. So what are they?

So this was the basis for the company name and the original Trisent company successfully built example services based on this three axis context data.

The symbol used in the Trisent logo has three elements on the outside ring representing the three context elements; where, when and what. They are arranged to form a target like symbol with the dot in the middle representing ‘who’ i.e. the smartphone owner to whom the contextual services will be targeted. The arrangement of the target is also orientated to echo the letter ‘T’, the first and last letter in Trisent (that one is possibly a bit more cryptic).

History

The Trisent name and logo was used from 2004-2008 by Trisent Communications Ltd. During that period the logo was always rendered in dark blue colour. In early 2008 Trisent Communications was bought by Artilium plc and the registered company name was changed to Artilium UK Ltd. The logo and Trisent names ceased to be used. In early 2016 I decided the time was right to revive the vision of contextual services and I bought the Trisent name and rights back from Artilium and registered a company in the name Trisent Ltd. The new Trisent logo is almost identical to the old one and is now rendered in black.

The post What’s in a name? Why Trisent? appeared first on Trisent .

Mobile technology entrepreneur returns to his roots

Mon, 06 Jun 2016 16:35:00 GMT

MOBILE phone location technology entrepreneur Gordon Povey is returning to his roots with a service that will help people create a diary and life management tool from the masses of information held online about them.

This article appeared in the Herald on 6th June 2016. It is not particularly accurate regarding the company’s plans but that is journalism for you!

The post Mobile technology entrepreneur returns to his roots appeared first on Trisent .

Welcome

Fri, 06 May 2016 11:00:00 GMT

I am Gordon Povey, the founder of Trisent. Welcome to the website and blog of our newly launched company.

The post Welcome appeared first on Trisent .

83a951146d11486ca7c8c6dd642bf988

Better Internet Search – Alpha 2

You can use this link to sign up as an Alpha Tester and try out their alternative search.

How to Protect Your Small Business from Cyberattacks

Internet connection

Websites

Passwords

Devices

Sensitive data

Final thoughts

Better Internet Search Ltd is announced.

Hiring Software Developers Now

Search engine bias is particularly insidious

Trisent is to benefit from the European Erasmus Programme

Goodbye Google, Hello Qwant!

The French government bids farewell to Google and adopts Qwant.

Advantages of using a private search engine

The problem with Google

Can blockchain solve the problem of trust?

When will Google’s search engine monopoly be broken?

Avoiding the Filter Bubble

The California Consumer Privacy Act – CCPA

How will CCPA affect us?

The main differences between CCPA and GDPR

Read more …

Expert advice for start-ups: “Feel good about each small step”

Data Infographic 2018

Yelling at strangers all day trying to make a living?

Why we are not doing an ICO

Introduction

The reasons

Perception

Stability

Regulation

Investor expectations

Timing

Conclusion

Prof Bill Buchanan talks about data and trust

Professor William (Bill) Buchanan OBE FBCS CEng FIET is a Scottish computer scientist and world authority on cybersecurity. He currently leads the Centre for Distributed Computing and Security at Edinburgh Napier University and The Cyber Academy .

Scotland Means Business: Trisent

Scotland Means Business: Trisent

Blockchain explained in 2 minutes

Kylie Minogue and the Shed

Personal Data for Personal Benefit

Gordon Povey: Business Man of the Year Award

Trisent CEO, Gordon Povey, has been selected as a finalist for the Business Man of the Year category of the Scottish SME Business Awards 2018.

Equity and tokens – 3 minute video

This 3 minute video is a companion to the blog post on the relationship between shares and tokens.

The relationship between shares and tokens

Sale of shares

Sale of tokens

Tokens and equity values

Hybrid equity and tokens model

Conclusion

Time to rethink online advertising

Insider article on Trisent’s Personal Data Browser

“Gordon Povey set to launch new personal search engine Trisent

An introduction to Trisent’s Personal Data Browser

ICOs, IPOs, Crowdfunding and Private Equity

GDPR for the consumer

Adam Smith and the Initial Coin Offering

How to monetise personal data while maintaining privacy

As we know there are moves to help us have more control over our personal data through GDPR. But, having taken control of this data, what then?

It’s not about the data!

The new data economy

The Bridget Jones diary app

The Dunfermline app that’s the answer to Bridget Jones

Orla Beta Programme – phase one update

Trisent is the top business story in The Courier today

Fife technology entrepreneur has global ambitions for self-writing diary app

Orla Beta Programme is launched at EIE 2017

Google Gnome

Blockchain technology value to exceed $3.1 trillion by 2030

Gartner Forecast: Blockchain Business Value, Worldwide, 2017-2030

Facebook made to disclose information about its ads

Entrepreneur Gordon Povey aims to bring diaries into the 21st century with Codi

Trisent secures funding to develop a self writing diary app

So, who writes a diary?

What is Lifelogging?

Are we living in the “Age of Context”?