Health trackers are very popular gadgets. They come in at different price ranges and have different functionalities, but they clearly serve a purpose: people wish to track aspects of their activity and health, and the knowledge obtained can help stimulate making changes for the better.

Apple is especially active in this area with the Apple Watch. Initially, the positioning of the Apple Watch was all over the place, but very quickly Apple narrowed in on the Health functionalities of the watch. Every year, Apple expands on the information it can gather about our health through different sensors, as well analyse it in new and useful ways:

• Sleep
• Heart health notifications
• Blood oxygen
• Exercise and activity tracking
• Ambient noise levels
• Tracking menstrual cycle
• Fall detection and gate analysis

Changes observed in my running through my watch

Personally, I have been using a smartwatch for many years now and have tracked my activity and other health aspects for that time. Admittedly, I have done so on different platforms (Withings, Google Fit, Samsung Health, Huawei Health, …) and don’t have years of information in one centralised place, but I continue using it actively.

Since last year, I am fully into the Samsung ecosystem and I have a Samsung Galaxy Watch Active 2. Samsung’s health app has very nice stats for running, which I happen to do. In part, in fact, that is the reason I wanted to go with this watch.

I wish to share a very illustrative example of what this type of technology enables and which I think is pretty powerful. When running, it tracks of course your route, heart rate, steps, distance, speed and many more things. However, it also does an analysis of your running “technique”: assymetry, contact time, flight time, regularity, vertical, stiffness.

Now, generally speaking, I score Good on 4 of these aspects and Great on 2 of them. I am far from a great runner, so no surprise here.

Since reading the book Born to Run, I have always had an interest in the idea of letting the foot do the work it was designed to do rather sticking it in a shoe that limits its movement. As a results, in the summer, I like to run in a pair of Luna running sandals. The idea is that your body is much more atuned to the ground and its feedback and that you change - without active effort on your part - your running style: smaller stride, higher cadence, landing more on the midfoot to front foot, … Which is supposed to be beneficial.

In any case, to my surprise when I checked these advanced running metrics after running several times on my sandals this year, I could actually see that it registers a difference, where all of a sudden I pass to Great for contact time (which means it is reduced) as well as stiffness.

There is still so much potential and areas for growth

Of course, this is just anecdotal evidence, but I think this is the transformative power of these tools: allowing you to see the positive impact of changes you make in your life.

Now, tracking consistently and continuously information like sleep, weight, body composition, activity level, heart rate, blood pressure, oxygen level, blood sugar levels, movement data (for fall detection and gate analysis) is a powerful tool for preventative health care, I am sure.

New sensors are being developed, existing ones get better and cheaper and the processing of the raw data is something that is under continuous development for better diagnostics. All of this will make this more and more useful.

Looking at the future and the role this can play, as a user:

• I want one central place where all information is stored, from all of my health devices.
• Ideally speaking, existing devices such as the watch, earbuds, or even glasses, will add new sensors that allow recording more information.
• But more than just information, the health solution should take the next step to giving diagnostics based on Big Data analytics.
• And, crucially, all this information should be safely stored under the sole control of the user, where he/she can share it with their health professional safely as interpreting results and making sense of it often still requires the help of professionals.

So, is this the sort of tech you are enthousiastic about? Have you made any changes in your life based on the information measured? Hit my up on Twitter or Mastodon if you want to chat about this.

Signal has just designed a pretty brilliant marketing campaign for themselves, showing why people should potentially care about the privacy message that Signal so strongly pivots their product around and probably having the foresight that the campaign could lead to free PR.

If you don’t know Signal, it is a messenger app/service that prioritises privacy and wants none of your data (link to their web site).

Signal designed a marketing campaign on Instagram, where they created individualised ads incorporating some of the information that Facebook (Instagram’s parent company) has about the specific individual.

Facebook, though, didn’t like the campaign and quickly disabled the ad account that Signal has, stopping a campaign they were apparently uncomfortable with.

Well, this already smart ad campaign, will now benefit from some interesting free PR. Very smart, all together. In the source link, you will find the Signal blog post with some additional info.

Just for your interest, a few other examples of the ads:

Source (Signal blog): The Instagram ads Facebook won’t show you

Amy Webb is a Quantitative Futurist that started the Future Today Institute. I have listened to her many times on the TWIT network’s podcasts where she discusses future trends and have read her book The Big Nine, which I reviewed here.

Every year she (and her team) come out with a Trends Report that makes for very interesting reading. Make sure to check it out if you want to know what’s up with AI, Blockchain, Biotech, Tech regulation, Data Privacy and so much more. Here is the link to the landing page for The Future Today Institute’s 14th Annual Tech Trends Report.

In my push to leave behind me as much of the data-tracking-web as possible, I have been using DuckDuckGo as my search engine rather than Google for the last 6 months. I can honestly say that, based on search results alone, I feel no need to go back. That being said, I wasn’t always very happy with the speed of the site. Sometimes it was fine, but other days, it was really slow.

So, I went looking for an alternative search engine and came across 2 that struck a cord with me: Qwant and Ecosia. For the last week and a half I have been using the latter, Ecosia, and I have to say I am satisfied. I haven’t seen it load results slowly yet and results have been good - and I am planting trees when using it :-). The only thing is that it doesn’t integrate on my mobile phone browsers very well (I think), so there I continue to use DuckDuckGo.

Don’t get me wrong, I am not saying it is better than Google, but I do encourage you to look beyond the go-to search engine if you are at all concerned with data tracking.

I have not been much of a Facebook fan for data privacy reasons. A couple of years ago I deleted my Instagram and Facebook accounts, in fact, and am now only connected to them via WhatsApp. However, living in Europe, it is a lot more difficult to get rid of that, so I have been very hesitant.

WhatsApp was supposed to stay independent and separate when it was purchased by Facebook in 2014, but users will have noticed lately that they need to accept a new privacy policy where data from Whatsapp will be shared with Facebook. Chats are, supposedly, still end-to-end encrypted, but it is a new step towards integration.

This new Privacy Policy together with people seeming to sign up for Telegram lately (I get notifications about that as I have the app installed), has made me review my intention to delete WhatsApp once again. However, although there are certainly technical alternatives that are basically just as good as WhatsApp, there is a real issue with the user base, making the services practically useless.

In my particular situation, for instance, I have 220 contacts on WhatsApp including all 14 of my adult close family members. Naturally, also all of my friends are on WhatsApp. So what about alternative solutions?

• When looking at Telegram, I do see that 73 of my contacts are on the chat service which is not a bad stat at all, however, only 2 of my adult family members are amongst them, indicating that my crucial contacts don’t actually use it.
• Signal, probably one of the most secure and private messaging services , only covers 12 of my contacts, including 2 adult family members.
• And lastly, RCS is activated on 37 of my contacts' phones, including again 2 adult family members.

As you can see, Telegram is certainly best positioned for me to become the alternative chat service in my life, but I do need to convince first many family members and friends to jump over and we all know how difficult that is. At least, it appears in my circle that Telegram has a little bit of momentum, so I am keeping my fingers crossed.

RCS gives me some hope for a couple of reasons. Firstly, people don’t actually have to install a new service and sign up for it. We “just” need to wait for their operator and phone manufacturer to support it (which unfortunately Apple probably never will). And, secondly, it always has regular text messages as the back up.

My personal preference would be to use Signal, but at this point I just don’t see how that can become a mainstream solution given that it has been available already for many years and is a feature rich solution, but to little avail.

So, come February, I am afraid that I will have to accept the conditions in order to continue using WhatsApp as I just don’t see how I can reasonably leave it behind at this point.

To be continued…

Lately I have read a couple of books about privacy and artificial intelligence. These subjects are quite related, as massive amounts of data are required to make artificial intelligence work and that directly leads to privacy considerations.

We all benefit one way or another in our daily lives from sharing our data, e.g. by accessing free tools (such as Facebook and Google) or by using tools that already start to benefit from AI (such as Google Assistant or Google Maps). However, there are lots of things to be worried about. Both books take a closer look at this and I just thought I’d share them here as I found both of them to a worthy read.

The Age of Surveillance capitalism by [Shoshana Zuboff] (https://twitter.com/shoshanazuboff?s=09)

A lot of the ideas in this [book] (https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/26195941-the-age-of-surveillance-capitalism) are quite interesting. Few people will argue that we are losing our privacy to tech companies. However, not everyone is equally worried about the implications of this and how these companies go about gathering the information. The book is a good eye-opener for the latter and gives food-for-thought regarding the former.

Zuboff brings to life the consequences as surveillance capitalism advances from Silicon Valley into every economic sector. According to the book, vast wealth and power are accumulated in ominous new “behavioral futures markets,” where predictions about our behavior are bought and sold, and the production of goods and services is subordinated to a new “means of behavioral modification.”

The threat has shifted from a totalitarian Big Brother state to a ubiquitous digital architecture: a “Big Other” operating in the interests of surveillance capital. Here is the crucible of an unprecedented form of power marked by extreme concentrations of knowledge and free from democratic oversight.

Should you be interested in the book - and I do recommend it if you are into this subject matter - then I suggest looking at an abridged version (the author is a bit wordy).

Summary of the book to be found [here] (https://goodbooksummary.com/the-age-of-surveillance-capitalism-by-shoshana-zuboff-book-summary-review/).

The Big Nine by [Amy Webb] (https://twitter.com/amywebb?s=09)

In this [book] (https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/41717507-the-big-nine), Amy Webb reveals the pervasive, invisible ways in which the foundations of AI – the people working on the system, their motivations, the technology itself – is broken. According to Webb, within our lifetimes, AI will, by design, begin to behave unpredictably, thinking and acting in ways which defy human logic. The big nine corporations (6 US companies and 3 Chinese companies) may be inadvertently building and enabling vast arrays of intelligent systems that don’t share our motivations, desires, or hopes for the future of humanity.

Above all, she argues for us to think very well about what we want and what role we want AI to play, as we can still make decisions to ensure that AI ends up benefiting humanity, but in order to do so the status quo needs to be broken. Specifically, in the latter part of the book she describes the near future for optimistic, realistic and pesimistic scenarios depending on how we deal with AI. They are certainly worth a read.

Summary of the book to be found [here] (https://lifeclub.org/books/the-big-nine-amy-webb-review-summary).

After reading both books, it is difficult not to be “worried” about AI. AI offers clearly many possibilities for humanity, but it is very easy for it to get out of our collective control. Reading these books has made me more aware of the issues, but The Big Nine has also made it clear that we are still in time to manage this “properly” - although that will not be easy. All in all, I think I’d recommend The Big Nine above The Age of Surveillance Capitalism. Both have interesting ideas, but The Big Nine feels like a more practical and less theoretical book and comes to the point quicker.

We’ve known about the Surface Duo for quite some time, but Microsoft has finally made it “official”. However, rather than an actual product launch, it feels much more like a beta programme.

That is necessary to a large extend, as the foldable phone category is very young. We’ve seen many companies try different ways and we clearly haven’t settled yet on THE foldable form factor.

In the case of the Surface Duo, we are looking at two independent screens rather than a foldable screen as we’ve seen in the Galaxy Fold phones. Microsoft has some good ideas, that it has showcased, of how this is better for the user, but we’re clearly not there yet.

I don’t want to take anything away from the product, though, because it looks really well designed and thought through, and I for one am really excited, but clearly this is a .5 version. Rather than just refining it in the labs, Microsoft will allow consumers to play with it and shape the future development, I can only imagine.

Firstly, there is the hardware. It is beautifully designed with what appears to be a great working hinge, which will be important to make this work well. However, it has last year’s processor, doesn’t ship with 5G, it has incredibly large bezels, and it has a small battery. These are big “flaws” for a device that comes in at 1.400 USD and are really a result of having been in development for a long time (apparently, the hardware has been ready for some time).

Then there is the software. Microsoft is launching this with an adapted version of Android. The two-screen UI allows for apps to take up both screens, but divide the app in panes. Microsoft will have its apps ready, but developers will need to time to play with this new paradigm (if they will actually adapt their app to take advantage of the capability). Launching it early and letting people and developers play with it, is of course a great thing for the development of this new product category.

Lastly, it is only launching this phone in the US, which again indicates they want the roll-out to be small for now, so they can gather feedback. It’s not yet about market share or revenue.

As a researcher that helps companies in product development, I can only imagine what a luxurious situation this is for the product team. Microsoft does well financially and can afford to do this. They will learn a lot and it will help them building the next version. I am very excited to see this.

Source (The Verge): [Microsoft’s Surface Duo arrives on September 10th for $1.399] (https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/12/21364633/microsoft-surface-duo-release-date-pricing-features-specs)

Yesterday the European Commission (EC) announced that it will open an in-depth investigation into the proposed acquisition of Fitbit by Google. Google agreed to purchase Fitbit in November 2019, but the purchase has not yet been formalised as it is being looked at by Authorities.

Specifically, the EC’s main reason for opening this investigation is:

The data collected via wrist-worn wearable devices appears, at this stage of the Commission’s review of the transaction, to be an important advantage in the online advertising markets.

I think the advertisement angle is interesting and I suggest you read the source article linked below, but there is an additional implication of course, which has to do with how this impacts Wear OS.

Google launched Android Wear - its wearable OS - many years ago, but has frankly not been able to get real traction. Apple Watch is clearly a success and I think we can safely say that the Galaxy Watches are also doing quite well, but Wear OS (as it is called now) has never been a great success despite Android’s clear success.

There are hardware issues that need to be resolved, certainly, but there is also a software and services part. A big part of a wearable is the health tracking and Wear OS with Google Fit just does not have a great solution in place. Buying, and integrating, Fitbit is a possible solution, but that will now have to wait. The question is, how much longer can Google wait before it is just too late for Wear OS?

Source (European Commission): [Mergers: Commission opens in-depth investigation into the proposed acquisition of Fitbit by Google] (https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_20_1446)

In 2014, Google purchased Nest. After many years of product and brand strategy changes, it seems that Nest is finally within Alphabet the brand for all home tech (home assistants, thermostat, security cameras and even wireless home networking).

Yesterday, Google made an important next step for the Nest brand by investing 450 million USD in ADT, an alarm system company. This should give ADT access to smarter cameras and Google to a new sales channel. It’ll be interesting to see how far the integration between Nest cameras and ADT’s alarm system will go (pretty sure that is a subtantial technical challenge).

Personally, I have my doubts about whether Google should have done this. It seems like quite a lot of money for just accessing a new sales channel. ADT is a human resource intensive business, whereas Google with its Nest cameras focuses more on high tech cameras, good software and good solutions, but all very scaleable.

I realise that without a monitored alarm system, some would argue that Nest cameras give a false sense of security, but I wonder whether an emphasis on convenience and control could be enough to strongly position Nest. It’ll be interesting to see how this plays out and whether Google starts coming to similar agreements with other alarm companies in other countries.

Source (TechCruch): [Google to invest $450M in smart home security solutions provider ADT] (https://techcrunch.com/2020/08/03/google-to-invest-450m-in-smart-home-security-solutions-provider-adt/?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly90ZWNobWVtZS5jb20v&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAIMJGwnOnYdyKWdtwhvychwfXnfzVgSVPcKDrpuS-v9qmJzvN2RPda98OJy9YFiLNI2F_r-1JlugDB3Cj5X7iD58PeMyH3_I-3lMvBPMvlzUn-cwe6WzugAn6tEdRSzZGjiS0sJPtYwOU5fIzZ9IyNyjEfKaE_wDTNumj2pJqnse)

It is so nice to see competition heating up in this segment. After the iPhone SE, OnePlus Nord, now Google has announced the Pixel 4A. Pixel’s selling point is its still camera.

Pixel 4A review: Google’s smartphone camera for $349 - The Verge