In order to meet expectations, it is a reality that women often take on many of the daily housekeeping tasks in the office alongside the pressures of their everyday roles. While this is not a new concept, it is a phenomenon that frequently remains unuttered: the surplus emotional labour that women are expected, arguably unconsciously, to carry in the workplace environment, which often goes unrecognised and uncompensated.

Particularly in tech – traditionally, a male dominated sector – this can be a significant barrier to career progression. Only 15% of people working in STEM roles in the UK are female, and only 5% of leadership positions in the technology sector are held by women today. Although much progress has been made, it seems like the underlying behaviours that pigeonhole women into specific roles still persist. So why, in an age of #metoo and #timesup, do these tasks still fall into female hands?

Throughout my career, time and time again I have noticed that not enough consideration is given to the trivium of the everyday: the more commonplace behaviours that might have their hand in the fact that there just aren’t enough women occupying the most senior roles in the tech sector. It is plain to see that we are still thought of as more ‘suited’ to deal with the emotional grievances of our colleagues. Like it or not, women are often the chief caregiving figures of the office, always with a sympathetic ear to lend and a paracetamol to hand. Perhaps this belief just comes down to idle sexism at work – the idea that maybe ‘women are just better at those sorts of things’, or ‘well, you’ll pick a better gift than I would have’.

But even if intentions are well-meaning, all of that extra smiling and taking care of others takes precious time and energy, and it doesn’t help us climb the corporate ladder and into senior roles any more quickly. If anything, it detracts from the important work we could be doing elsewhere.

So, what can we do to release women from their office caretaking roles? I believe that it is important to stay conscious of these more casual instances of sexism, so that we can question them, and address them where possible. It could be as simple as asking yourself, ‘why am I being asked, or expected to do this, and not a male colleague?’. Additionally, a positive measure that companies could take to redress gender parity would be to offer additional training for all employees to improve skills such as communication and empathetic leadership, so that the nurturing doesn’t always fall to female colleagues. Or even devising a rota for organising office events and presents might help to assuage some of the burden.

At Studio Graphene, our stance on challenging the gender diversity crisis hinges on always keeping these questions in mind, in addition to taking a ‘proactively neutral’ approach throughout the recruitment process, rather than encouraging positive discrimination.

Owing to this, we now have an inspiring team led by female engineers at our office in India. As a woman in the tech industry, this is particularly heartening to hear, particularly given the rigid guidelines in India when it comes to offering six months maternity pay; sadly, a prospect shunned by many businesses.

The insights of the women working in our Delhi office should therefore offer some reassurance to women looking to get into the tech industry, and the words of one of our engineers, Sakshi Goyal, are especially pertinent. To properly challenge gender norms in the industry, and in the workforce at large, “we need to think both short term and long term, and break down the walls that institutionally keep women out’.

By Christine Brewis is Head of Digital Marketing at app development company Studio Graphene

The virus first broke out in Wuhan late December 2019, and then spread like wildfire – causing almost 4,700 casualties in less than three months. The virus has now been confirmed in over 116 countries, infecting over 126,430 people worldwide and killed in the hundreds.

The electronics industry and coronavirus

Not only on people, but the virus has a major effect on businesses too. The global electronics manufacturing association, IPC, states that electronics manufacturers anticipate at least five-week product shipment delays from suppliers due to this virus – compared to the expected three-week delays.

“At this time, we have not detected any specific interruptions within our supply chain. However, delivery dates for certain products may ultimately be affected in the future. Therefore, we cannot guarantee them with certainty, and we encourage customers to place new orders in time to avoid coronavirus problems that may affect their business,” SOS Electronic issued a statement.

Whereas, global distributor Digi Key said: “Our business model positions us with substantial inventory to offer minimal disruption to our customers, and we have worked closely with our multiple carrier partners to mitigate impact on cargo plans. We’re providing updates and FAQs on our website for our customers and we’re in constant communication with our suppliers.

Shipping delays from China and other countries are already having negative impacts on manufacturers, however.

“The delays will likely have ripple effects for the rest of the year,” said John Mitchell, IPC’s president and CEO. “The longer China is affected by the epidemic, and the more it spreads to other parts of the world, the supply chain will experience more disruptions.”

The virus is also affecting business meetings, exhibitions and other events. After a series of closures, including the Mobile World Congress 2020 in February, now SEMICON Southeast Asia 2020 has been postponed from 12-14 May 2020 to 11-13 August 2020 due to concerns surrounding the virus.

The global economy and coronavirus

The virus has already caused many knock-on effects for the global economy. From lengthening manufacturing timeframes to fewer sales, there is fear that the global economy might grind to a halt. The Economic Times claims coronavirus could cost world $1 trillion. The worrying prospect that the Covid-19 outbreak could become the first truly disruptive pandemic of the globalisation era is renewing doubts over the stability of the world economy. Wall Street is heading for another slump too – trading in futures contracts have been suspended ‘limit down’, after falling 5%. And yesterday (12^th March, 2020) FTSE100 has suffered its biggest loss since 1987.

Many workers are already facing disruptions to their daily routines as schools, companies and local governments implement precautions to curb the coronavirus outbreak. Already, many organisations have restricted travel along with home-based working arrangements.

On the 11^th March, US president Trump stated that he has suspended all travel from Europe to the US – excluding UK. The travel ban has caused a huge plunge in the markets.

“We have restricted all travels to Asia and within Asia,” Mouser Electronics wrote in a statement. “We have recently also stopped all travels to Italy and are limiting all other travels to Europe, within Europe and to/from USA. It is highly likely that we will see very few people flying for at least the next month, unless exceptional circumstances, and we see the same from most of our supplier partners. As the situation changes, we will review this. We have ensured all offices globally have masks available as well as sanitiser to clean hands plus re-emphasising good hygiene rules.”

By Amy Leary, Marketing Manager, eBOM.com

Now that the UK’s transition from the EU has been kicked into gear, business leaders see it as good news. Indeed, many decisions have been mothballed due to the lack of clarity, and UK businesses can now move forward with renewed confidence.

There is a broadly rosy feeling particularly within the UK tech industry. Studio Graphene recently ran a poll that found that as many as 74% of UK tech startups are positive that their turnover will increase over the coming year.

However, companies do have some procedural, detail-orientated concerns; hiring the right talent remains the top concern for startups, with 73% expressing their reservations — a not insignificant leap of 13% compared to the start of the year. There are other worries, too, surrounding considerations like tariffs. With this in mind, what areas should tech firms pay closest attention to as Brexit proceeds?

Consider a continental branch

Every tech company will have different needs and come across different challenges as Brexit continues, and there’s never a one-size-fits-all approach. However, here at Studio Graphene, opening a European office was one way of ensuring that we can continue to grow, whatever the future may hold. We recently planted one in Lisbon, where our developers, designers and marketers can continue to work alongside our teams in the UK, India and Switzerland. This approach allows us to continue to enjoy unfettered access to the EU post-Brexit, and gives us peace of mind for the future.

Prepare your team

If your team includes members of staff from the EU — which, in the tech space is likely — then make sure you offer them full support during the Brexit process. People management should always be a priority and, in these trying times, it’s crucial that HR teams are on hand to work on issues like visas. 

Model, plan, save

There is still a huge amount to be sorted in the Brexit process, despite the passing of the Withdrawal Bill. As such, the tech sector is still not out of the woods when it comes to Brexit uncertainty; the possibility of increased costs due to Brexit, from tariffs or duties, exists. Prudent business leaders will integrate these kinds of costs into versions of their long-term business plan to find out what impact it might have — and whether it’s time to start saving for a rainy day.

Consider alternative talent streams

As our research showed, one of the biggest concerns for tech firms is finding the best talent post-Brexit, and creative solutions can help. Firms should first consider upskilling their current staff. Doing so has a huge host of potential benefits — it is cheaper due to reduced recruitment costs, and it encourages businesses to invest in employees and build on pre-existing relationships.

If your team does require access to European talent, consider establishing an International Professional Employer Organisation. This can reduce much of the administration of employing overseas, reducing costs and negating the need for a new legal entity. Most importantly, it frees up the C-level to focus on strategy and management. 

Explore your options

If Brexit does allow the UK to form new partnerships with the likes of Canada, Australia and the US, then ‘Brand Britain’ may be exposed to a different international audience. Tech firms must be prepared for this new opportunity and orient themselves as such — market research, for example, could be a useful first step.

On the supply chain side of things, firms could also consider looking inward. Whilst a disorderly No Deal Brexit is off the table for now, forging closer ties with British suppliers reduces any risk of being caught out by punitive tariffs down the line.

Consult an expert

Even after conducting thorough research, confusion can still reign. However, businesses don’t have to struggle through the complexities of Brexit alone. Indeed, there are numerous Brexit and business consultancies on hand, who can offer tailored advice to suit your needs. Whilst they will charge for their services, such firms could be a useful tool to aid the development of your post-Brexit strategy.

In sum, tech firms simply need to prepare, do their research, and prioritise their people. By on-boarding the best talent and saving for a rainy day, the proposition of Brexit may begin to feel less like a risk. I now look to the government to see how they will support UK tech businesses in this period of change.

Ritam Gandhi, founder and director, Studio Graphene

Electronics allow us to monitor global warming changes such as rising sea levels, global temperature increase and greenhouse gas levels. With the advanced technology we have nowadays, it‘s easy to access environmental data and see the impacts we are causing on the planet’s wellbeing. In todays day and age, we can predict and monitor abnormal weather and temperatures. For example, using the most advanced technology, NASA were able to discover that the oceans have absorbed much of this increased heat, with the top 700 meters (about 2,300 feet) of ocean showing warming of more than 0.4 degrees Fahrenheit since 1969. Along with this, the advanced electronics that NASA has created provides us with the data that the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets have decreased in mass. Data from NASA’s Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment show Greenland lost an average of 286 billion tons of ice per year between 1993 and 2016. Without electronics, we probably wouldn’t know of the detailed damage we have already caused to the environment, and nothing would be done to prevent anymore destruction.

Along with this, electronics are used to predict abnormal weather. Some extreme weather events which are likely due to global warming would be heatwaves. According to North Wales Live, there is now a 25% probability of a heat wave in a particularly warm summer. By the middle of this century those chances are expected to increase to nearly 50%. Other extreme weather conditions would be excessive flooding. MP Rachel Reeves says climate change could mean more extreme weather and flooding for Leeds. Electronics monitor and predict abnormal weather which could be an indication of global warming.

Electric cars and drones

Electric cars (EVs) are better for the environment as they produce less greenhouse gasses and air pollutants, since they don’t require petrol or diesel. Vehicles that run on petrol or diesel will produce gases such as particulates (soot), volatile organic compounds, hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide. Electricity for EVs can be produced from solar panels which is a sustainable way to create power rather than the burning of fossil fuels.

Drones help monitor forest health and illegal logging. It is so important to protect the world’s forests to ensure healthy habitats for wildlife and clean air/water. The forests of the world produce clean air and consume harmful gasses such as CO₂ . According to growing air foundation, the amount of oxygen produced by an acre of trees per year equals the amount consumed by 18 people annually. One tree produces nearly 260 pounds of oxygen each year. Drones are partially reliable for detecting abnormal activities such as fires.

Recycling

In this era, people are constantly upgrading their electronic devices for latest models. Old electronic devices can be traded in, recycled or discarded into a landfill. Fortunately, many organisations offer recycling schemes for electronics whereby people can trade in their phones for a cash alternative or credit towards a newer phone. Some of the companies that offer this scheme are Apple, Samsung, Vodaphone and HTC. This scheme is beneficial as potential customers can purchase the phones which have been traded in rather than buying one brand new which has been manufactured. This prevents mining for rare earth materials to manufacture the phone, greenhouse emissions and access packaging which will only be discarded into a landfill. Apple reports that 77% of the greenhouse emissions they produce comes from the manufacturing process alone. Electronics are saving the planet by allowing us to recycle products through extracting methods and technical mining.

AI to track wildlife

According to Jenna Stacy-Dawes, across Africa, giraffe numbers have shrunk by 40 percent in the same period, down to less than 100,000 individuals. Artificial intelligence is being introduced for wildlife preservers to analyse and monitor the health and quantity of animals in each area. This means that biologists can assess their numbers, movements and preferred habitat to ensure safety and wellbeing. Although many people may think that saving wildlife has nothing to do with saving the planet – it really does! Wildlife keeps ecosystems functional which allows us to survive, make a living and have access to food. If certain species fall in quantity, ecosystems will suffer and a snowball effect with begin.

Solar panels

Solar panels create renewable power from the light which is given off from the sun. Solar panels are an alternative to burning fossil fuels such as coal. Overall, solar panels are an efficient and clean way to create power without harming the environment or producing greenhouse gases. However, the downsides of solar panels are that they may need to be installed on large masses of land which could result in habitat loss. Along with this, solar panels are made from hazardous materials within the manufacturing process.

What can I do to help the planet?

In my opinion, it would advise investing in an electric car if you are thinking of purchasing a new vehicle. In the long run, you will spend less on keeping the vehicle running due to not cashing out on petrol/diesel. As mentioned before, electric cars produce no harmful pollutants. Not only this, I would recommend investing in some solar panels which would reduce your electricity bills along with contributing to a cleaner environment.

Overall, there are many small things that we can all do to contribute to a greener planet. Starting with small steps such as recycling waste, to bigger steps such as investing in economical uses of energy.

By Amy Leary, Marketing Manager, eBOM.com

Britain was the birthplace of the industrial revolution, but the nation’s manufacturing future is often blighted by Brexit woes. Now, to secure the future of British manufacturing, the country must invest in technology to join the fourth industrial revolution.

According to a report by The Guardian, British factories suffered a sixth consecutive month of falling orders in October 2019. During the three-and-a-half-year ordeal so far, Brexit negotiations have inflicted long-lasting damage — complicating supplier relationships, reducing access to talent and causing some manufacturers to up sticks and leave. 

Deploying new technology is regularly hailed as a method to protect manufacturers during turbulent periods; improving productivity, cutting costs and increasing profit. That said, the current climate is more likely to cause manufacturers to hold onto their capital, as opposed to invest in new tech. However, to suggest manufacturers have only recently started to adopt technology would be misleading.

Industry has been using Programmable Logic Controllers (PLCs), Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) software, robotics and other automated hardware for more than three decades. The problem is that many manufacturers do not regularly upgrade these tools to ensure they are equipped with the latest technology. 

Coinciding with this use of technology, manufacturers have long used lean manufacturing methodologies to improve profitability. This practice usually focuses on minimising waste created during manufacturing — whether that is waste related to inventory, overproduction, human resource or energy. But current lean strategies might not be enough during these turbulent times.

The methods to implement this methodology are advancing exponentially. In fact, alongside quality management systems, lean manufacturing systems top the list of important technology investments in The Future of Manufacturing: 2020 and Beyond report by Industry Week.

The first step of lean implementation is to evaluate problems. This requires analysis of a huge number of variables. For example, a brewing facility would have separate processes for malting, fermentation, carbonating, bottling and labelling its beers —to name just a few. Manually collecting production data from these processes could be incredibly time consuming, which is why SCADA software is often used to collate this information automatically.

Data collection might be the first step, but manufacturers also need to evaluate this data. By consistently acquiring and automatically analysing data, there will be quick reporting of every incidence of waste in a factory: when deliveries have not arrived, carbonating equipment is wasting CO2 and if bottling machines are not hitting cycle times.

Without technology to analyse and report this data automatically, identifying the worst offenders in a production facility would be longwinded. Automating this process with intelligent software is a prime example of how investing in new technology can actually cut costs — as opposed to putting a dent into the company funds.

Uncertainty will cause manufacturers to become reluctant to invest. In these situations, the most important thing to consider is the advantage of investing in the right technology and the potential pitfalls of not investing at all. Before parting with their cash, manufacturers must identify how the investment will deliver benefit.

During manufacturing slumps, like Britain has experienced during 2019, it is natural for manufacturers to want to tighten their purse strings. However, should Britain want to compete for its place in the fourth industrial revolution, it is during these times that businesses must invest in technology to improve productivity and increase profits.

Over the last few months in the UK, Brexit has been the most talked about topic due to the uncertainty and frustration of what the future holds. The recent British vote resulted in Boris Johnson being elected as Prime Minister of the UK. With preliminary talks ongoing about Boris Johnson’s new Brexit proposals, the deal is ‘essentially impossible’ according to The Telegraph.

The Impact of Brexit on the Electronics Industry To Date

The result of the referendum vote caused the pound to drop dramatically. A weak pound is bad for the country since it makes imports more expensive; this applies to electronic components too. Within the electronics industry, a slowing down in shifting electronic components affected distributors, suppliers as well as manufacturers simply because less people were making purchases.

The Ways Brexit Could Impact the Electronics Industry in the Future?

It’s difficult to predict the future related to Brexit since there’s so much uncertainty around it. However, I believe that it will not only be more expensive to import/export electronics to and from the UK, but more time-consuming as well. For example, the electronics companies across Europe were able to shift products throughout the EU borders without the need for custom checks. This was due to the ‘Freedom of Movement Act’ in 1993. However, if the UK officially leaves the EU, which is most likely – there will be increased border checks which will impact the cost and the time frames.

Many large companies have also expressed concern about pursuing their operations in the UK. If these large companies were to transport their business/workplace elsewhere, this could lose jobs dramatically and affect the economy.

The electronics industry needs highly-skilled workers to ensure success and safety within the workforce. Many electronics workers come from overseas because of their skills. With future uncertainty in place, we are not sure whether this will affect workers sourced from the EU.

All in all, I believe that Brexit will have a negative impact on the electronics industry not only UK based, but globally.

I’d suggest purchasing electronic stock from UK-based manufactures to avoid costly import duties and shipping costs, which may rise depending on the result of Brexit.

Did You Stockpile Because Of Brexit?

According to the Guardian newspaper, UK manufacturers’ stockpiling for no-deal Brexit hit record levels. This is because there was a high concern that there would be border gridlock which would slow down the process of transportation of goods globally. The concern of border gridlock was caused by ‘no deal’ Brexit which led British manufacturers to increase their stockpiling efforts.

In my opinion, I think stockpiling prior to Brexit was a clever move as there was strong uncertainty of how the vote would affect the economy. Some of the products we’re accustomed to having all year round could be harder to come by or cost more to buy. So, it would have been a good idea to buy the items to be sure you have easy access to them and at a good price.

I also think that this could have affected companies negatively. I believe it because they may have stockpiled high quantities of products and then may not necessarily be able to shift them as quickly as first thought, resulting in excess stock.

Amy Leary, Marketing Manager, eBOM.com

First, for a sanity check on what follows, I would draw your attention to the FT article “Rocky road awaits any US attempt to weaken dollar” Eva Szalay, 17^th July 2019. Of course, a newspaper journalist who can move markets needs to be circumspect in what she says. I do not. 

Rickards analysis has so far held up. He is of the view that it shall be all over bar the bragging rights by 2020. Perhaps so. His analysis allows the rise of cryptocurrencies to be viewed in their proper perspective along with Brexit and the rise of President Trump. Post ”The Last Crisis” the first US Quantitive Easing project of flooding the world with money, began in December and was immediately followed in January with the publication of the original BlockChain Bitcoin paper. Interestingly Rickards missed this technological intervention in his 2011 analysis. He also missed the strategic ambition of the Paypal Mafia. A small oversight? Perhaps not for his focus was elsewhere. 

Rickards states regarding his first presentation to the DoD community at the Applied Physics Lab’s: “My presentation focused on the dark side of Sovereign Wealth Fund investment, how they could operate through what intelligence analysts call cutouts, or front companies, such as trusts, managed accounts, private Swiss banks and hedge funds. With these fronts in place, SWF’s could then be used to exercise malign influence over target companies in order to steal technology, sabotage new projects, stifle competition, engage in bid rigging, recruit agents or manipulate markets. I did not assert that such activities were common, let alone the norm, but rather that such activities were possible, and the US needed to develop a stronger watch function to protect its national security interests. Along with these specific threats, I suggested an even greater threat: a full-scale attack on Western capital markets to disable the engine of capitalist society. My presentation included metrics and system specifications to monitor sovereign wealth fun behavior, to look for behind-the-scenes malign acts and to identify financial choke points – the information age equivalent of the Suez Canal or the Strait of Hormuz – which could be monitored to prevent or fight off future financial attacks” (p8). Alas all these financial choke points run through The City of London.

Furthermore, Rickards states “The stock market can crash, yet the bond market might rally at the same time. The bond market may crash due to rising interest rates, yet other markets in commodities, including gold and oil, might hit new highs as a result. There is a way to make money in one market while another market is falling out of bed. However, stocks, bonds, commodities, derivatives and other investments are all priced in a nation’s currency. If you destroy the currency, you destroy all markets and the nation.This is why the currency itself is the ultimate target in any financial war. Unfortunately, these threats are not given sufficient attention inside the US national security community. Bill Gertz, reporting in the Washington Times, noted “US officials and outside analysts said the Pentigon, The Treasury, and US intelligence agencies are not agressively studying the threats to the US posed by economic warefare and financial terrorism. “Nobody wants to go there,” one official said. An overview of the forces of globalisation and state capitalism, a new version of seventeenth-century mercantilism in which corporations are extensions of state power, is a step toward understanding the grave dangers facing the world economy today. Financial warfare threats can be grasped only in the context of today’s financial world. This world is conditioned by the triumph of globalisation, the rise of state capitalism and the persistence of terror. Financial warfare is one form of unrestricted warfare, the preferred method of those with inferior weapons but greater cunning.” (p146).

That was then and now PM Johnson expects those who bet against Britain in the Currency War to lose their shirts? We shall see.

What led me to this insightful book was that it began with an account of the US DoD’s first Financial War Game and ends with the scenario I sent you from his chapter Endgame . Paper, Gold or Chaos? The key to understanding Rickards analysis and foresight is the application of the obscure International Emergency Powers Act of 1977, (IEEPA). He points out: “The use of IEEPA is subject to two preconditions. There must be a threat to the national security or the economy of the US, and the threat must originate from abroad.” (p251)

Alas, in a previous blog I also pointed out that President Trump was not elected as an independent but had the unconditional support of both wings of the Republican GOP. The important point to discern is: what issue would unite these Republican wings in an uncritical bond? The one answer appears to me to be the elimination of the US Fiscal Deficit. Achieved in a scenario not unlike the one Rickards proposes? This would require President Trump to clissify the threat as “Currency Manipulation”. In May the US Treasury began to lay the legal framework for this eventuality. Given that President Xi is not stupid, would you not agree with me that China would strike first? If so how and when? After the US democratic candidate is inplace and before the next G20? Or in the lead up to a G7 or G20 Financial Ministers Summit? Perhaps. Surely though before he is re-elected? 

In short, I believe President Trump was elected by both wings of the Republican Party to eliminate the Fiscal Deficit through application of IEEPA and to take the rap if things go wrong. The evidence for this view is now clearly emerging through his application of IEEPA as the US deficit racks up $22tn. Once you accept this prism of his zero-sum game to make America Great Again all begins to fall in place. 

The key to understanding China’s potential response is given by Rickards on page 11. “I knew that a real financial attack would not involve anything as obvious as dumping Treasury notes on the open market, because the president has near dictorial powers to freeze any accounts that try to disrupt the market in that way. An attack would almost certainly involve hard-to-identify cutouts and hard-to-track derivatives. Above all, a financial attack would almost certainly involve the dollar itself. Destroying confidence in the dollar would be far more effective than dumping any particular dollar-denominated instrument. If the dollar collapsed, all dollar-denominated markets would collapse with it and the president’s powers to freeze accounts would be moot.”

Libra is just that, an attempt to destroy confidence in the dollar from within and a direct attach on the Washington consensus which its origins in the PayPal Mafia who invested in both Facebook and now has an adviser in the White House. Playing both as the financial markets do sides?

In Rickards defensive measures assessment conclusions, he states ”As applied to capital and currency markets, the correct approach is to break up big banks and limit their activities to deposit taking, consumer and commercial loans, trade finance, payments, letters of credit and a few other useful services. Proprietary trading, underwriting and dealing should be banned from banking and confined to brokers and hedge funds. The idea that large banks are needed to do large deals is nonsense. Syndicates were invented for exactly this purpose and are excellent at spreading risk.

Derivatives should be banned except for standardized exchange traded futures with daily margin and well-capitalised clearinghouses. Derivatives do not spread risk; they multiply it a concentrate it in a few too-big-to-fail hands. Derivatives do not serve customers; they serve banks and dealers through high fees and poorly understood terms. The models used to manage derivatives risk do not work and never will work because of the focus on net risk rather than gross risk.”

None of these defensive measures have been enacted.

Alas, the FT, now owned by Japan, has begun its soothsayer analysis of the forthcoming Derivatives Crisis: with a projection in Q4 2020 from an author from Stanford. It shall be more brutal than anything which has preceded it.

But Facebook shall upend the apple cart with Libra by destroying faith in the dollar. A FT 4^th of July (coincidence?) article states: “Democrates urge Facebook to stop launch of digital coin” in which Maxine Waters wrote “it appears that these products may lend themselves to an entirely new global financial system that is based out of Switzerland and intended to rival US monitery policy and the dollor” Oh Dear. That is a correct assessment. If Facebook adopt the strategy outlined in Rickard’s analysis between p235 and p247 in respect of adopting a 40% flexible gold standard backing to their stable coin currency basket the day’s of the dollar’s dominance are over. And it in my opinion it spells annilation for Sterling. 

I won’t comment on their appearances before Congress last week as I have not yet had time to digest this material fully, but clearly FaceBook’s $5bn fine by the FTC, and their share rise of over 2%, over the Cambridge Analytica debacle is grounds to believe eventually Facebook shall get around to bringing a liquidating damages claim against UK parties for intefering in US elections and get their money back – timing here matters. Yes – this was UK interference in US elections. Clearly Zuckerberg holds the UK fully responsible. I would speculate here that the with the leak of UK diplomatic cables which are  a godsend for the eventual Democratic Candidate with compromising material on this point yet to be disclosed? 

So, what has this all to do with The City and Brexit? Far, far too many of Rickard’s financial choke points go throught it. So, I believe next year in Q2 – the first opportunity – post Brexit, a situation shall arise which will force the ejection of Sterling as an IMF Reserve Currency before the oncoming Derivatives Crisis. Consequences for your Magazine and the companies and readers you serve? 

Two further aspects. Further to the 31^st October Brexit extension the Internationa Currency Markets priced in a Sterling Drop from 1.2974 to 1.10. Post the Referendum’s unxpected result over twenty Hedge Funds, including the four owners cited in the FT, made a financial killing. This time, with Brexit, the markets are ready. Indeed, Richard Branson, one businessman who understands technology, pointed out that pre the referendum the value of the pound stood at 1.53 and could drop below parity with the dollar. Alas this is not about what value for money tourists in London and New York get, psychologically what would this do to English society?As Rickards points out, quoting Keynes, “There is no subtler, surer means of overturning the existing basis of society than to debauch the currency”. 

Yet PM Johnson believes he can save his people from the currency speculators. Bur what if the ECB floods the market with Euros first?

Secondly, regarding Macrons post G20 leaverage measure of a Tex Tax and the UK playing catch-up, I would draw your attention to the comment “countries are only relevant if they can tax companies” in the “The Fracturing of the global consensus”, by Raana Foroohar, FT 8^th July attached. I would be most interested to know which enlightened citizen of nowhere gave that quote. The consensus being of course the 75th anniversry of Bretton Woods this month.

So, Facebook shall succeed not by advancing the privacy argument but once they frame there Libra currency in Virtual Soverignty terms under Freedom of Association and let the US citizens buy-in. To understand where the Paypal Mafia and Facebook are going with all this it is necessary to understand the Nobel Financial Lie, the simultaneous claim of two different people (or organisations) on the same financial resources and the Ignoble Lie concerings the expectation of abundant rewards for sharing resources. On both these pretentions the banking system rests.

Johnston and England, I am sorry to say, has failed to appreciate that the 4^th Industrial Revolution is exactly that. A Revolution. Coming soon also to the financial and banking establishment which Adam Smith pointed out are playing “with other peoples money”. 

The brexiteers nonsense about taking back control I have already exposed, but their appreciation of people taking back control of their own money as Facebook intends would be anathema to them. Which is why Facebook intends to launch their new currency in the midst of the US election from Switzerland. An undeclared nation state Currency War has just become a declared Currency War. What now are the signs to look out for? Would you believe that I stumbled into all this as a consequence of looking out for the payment system for 5G SA – which as yet has failed to materialise? Alas the FT  correspondents have yet to get their collective heads around this aspect.  Or as Her Majesty would say “Why did no one see this coming?”

Best Regards

Barry McKeown

25 August 2019

Even worse for England, they are all supporters of The Spine of Europe, and I believe would accept England’s EU exit to achieve EU peace and prosperity with the Russian peoples but not Putin. I can well understand the English people’s reluctance to accept this point of view even if it was brought forthright to their attention.

Thus, I would not be surprised if President Macron were to veto any further extension at the Council of Ministers meeting in October or prior to this, even if he is unprovoked by the Johnson Government first. To complicate matters, the new Foreign High Representative, is a Spaniard who appears to want to seek to make EU inroads into Spanish Latin America. Shall he build a political wall here against President Trump? Importantly also Vestager shall become a Vice-President.

President Juncker set in place a regulatory framework for privacy, cybersecurity, copyright and telecoms. Though the Digital Single Market is still not mission accomplished, largely being “overshadowed” according to Lisa Fuhr of ETNO, as a result of Brexit. It also needs a banking union to accomplish this fully.

As for President Ursula von der Leyen herself she is a well-known quantity (at least to me), not just from a defence point of view but for the fact that she is a power broker trustee of the World Economic Forum. I would draw your attention to her biography on the WEF web site along with the list of the other trustees. I trust that you agree with me that Klaus Schwab has assembled a well-balanced team to guide the 4^th Industrial Revolution. I believe Ursula’s focus and legacy shall be mHealth and AI and she shall look for external guidance to the WEF. 

In ex-PM Theresa May terms Ursula, born in Brussels and being European, is a citizen of nowhere. I believe, as with Johnson, she shall be known in the UK on first name terms as Ursula not VDL.

President Ursula has stated that in her first 100 days she intends to put in place a coordinated European approach on the human and ethical implementations of AI, in short, she is taking up where Obama left off. Hence, I am attaching two recent WEF reports; one their view of the 10 emerging technologies and the second on building value on blockchain technology. The UK media has so far failed to grasp the significance of the this WEF network involvement. The question appears to me is: is Johnson not only taking on the EU but the WEF – the ultimate globalist powerbrokers as well? My advice for your magazine, understand the WEF agenda. 

On the rest of EU front, this month, legislative steps to classify Facial Recognition Technology as “Biometric Data” which falls under the “Sensitive Data” auspices of the GDPR, therefore it will require “explicit consent” to harvest. Simple move, profound consequences. 

This aspect plays into the recent S&T excoriation of the May government through “The Work of the Biometrics Commissioner” report, from 18^th July attached, and even strengthens the hand of the Information Commissioner Liz Denham. 

However, would you not agree it shall also put the kibosh on one of the UK government’s proposed technology solutions for the “frictionless” NI Border from the Irish/EU perspective? The Brexiteers won’t like this aspect being added to the EU arsenal for Soft Border Technology. 

Another unacknowledged under the radar technology aspect I would bring to your attention regards the historical debate in the US over the human implanted VeriChip, which is MRI incompatible, from Applied Digital (see HR 3200). I have no intention of wandering into the quagmire of the US Religious Right politics but sometime soon someone is going to shine a light here before it is imported into the UK. 

For a not-quite-conspiracy theory perspective, I am told the book to begin your evaluation with is “Spy chips: How major corporations and governments plan to track your every move with RFID” by Katherine Albrecht from the 3G era. I have not read it. Although even the Daily Mail appear to have got on to this page when it reported that 150 employees of Epicenter in Sweden were “microchipped” in 2017. 

Where else overseas is the UK government looking for soft border technology clues? This is not just about chipping cattle or sheep after all. I wonder who holds all the leverage cards here.

Of course, I have no intention of pointing out to Johnson that you need a cross border Spectrum Monitoring system to be in place for a soft border.

So, the issue here is how do the Brexiteers view this RFID technology for tracking criminals and immigrants? Essentially through the lens of modern-day slavery?

Incidentally it also openly emerged this month that one of the pieces of “leverage” the government believes the UK holds over the rest of the EU is that we host 40% of Europe’s Data Centres. Oh Dear!

As with Age Verification Checks, they clearly fail to understand just the true nature the Internet and who really owns and designs this physical infrastructure. This very important issue of Online Verification shall eventually descend into being a regulatory bun fight between the US, China and the EU with the EU holding all the best cards. Especially as President Ursula is well versed in Virtual Sovereignty to enable the EU to “face” them both down. 

So, actually I am quite optimistic about the future of the two applications I cited in the Staying Ahead of the Game Blog as the subsystems and sensor technology are nearly there. It is now simply a matter of the payment mechanisms between peer-to-peer vendors and system integrators that needs to be addressed for 5G Stand Alone technology. 

Johnson’s Bluff, Bluster and Bullying shall get nowhere with the EU who shall merely keep calm and carry on with the 4^th Industrial Revolution. In this respect the 4^th Industrial Revolution aspect, the penny has failed to drop that it is a real revolution that shall upturn the current geopolitical setup. 

This is where Currency Wars themes enters into the game, which I shall address next, really do matter.

This Currency War aspect plays to Johnson’s statement “The people who bet against Britain are going to lose their shirt”. 

I think not!

Best Regards

Barry McKeown

25^rd July 2019