Category: Uncategorized

Chancellor Jeremy Hunt has predicted that he could be within 1,500 votes of losing his seat in the upcoming election.
While campaigning in Chiddingfold, part of the newly formed Godalming & Ash constituency, Hunt emphasised the competitive nature of the race, noting that the seat could be won or lost by a narrow margin.
“This seat is probably going to be won or lost by the Conservatives by 1,500 votes or fewer,” Hunt told Bloomberg. The new constituency includes parts of the South West Surrey seat, which Hunt has represented since 2005. This area is now a key target for the Liberal Democrats.
In 2015, Hunt secured a substantial majority of 30,000 votes, making the current race a significant shift. A Liberal Democrat victory would make Hunt the first sitting chancellor to be ousted in an election. Other prominent Tory ministers, including Penny Mordaunt and Johnny Mercer, are also facing tough battles in their respective constituencies.
Hunt, (pictured with supporters) dismissed the notion of contemplating a loss, attributing it to bad “feng shui.” Nonetheless, the race for the Godalming & Ash seat remains a focal point as election night approaches.
Read more:
Jeremy Hunt Faces Tight Battle for Seat in Election Race

Elon Musk has unexpectedly requested the dismissal of his lawsuit against OpenAI and its CEO Sam Altman, which alleged that the AI company had abandoned its original mission to develop artificial intelligence for the benefit of humanity.
The filing, submitted by Musk’s legal team, did not provide any reasons for the withdrawal.
The move came just a day before a scheduled court hearing where OpenAI was set to argue for the case’s dismissal. The filing asked for the case to be dismissed “without prejudice,” meaning Musk retains the option to reactivate the lawsuit in the future.
Musk initially filed the lawsuit at the end of February, claiming that OpenAI, which he co-founded in 2015, had shifted its focus from altruistic goals to profit-making. OpenAI responded by stating that Musk had previously supported the idea of a for-profit structure and had even suggested a merger with Tesla, his electric car company.
The dispute escalated earlier this week when Apple announced a partnership with OpenAI to enhance its Siri voice assistant and operating systems using OpenAI’s ChatGPT technology. Following the announcement, Musk took to his social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter, to criticise the collaboration. In one post, he wrote, “Apple has no clue what’s actually going on once they hand your data over to OpenAI. They’re selling you down the river.”
Despite Musk’s criticisms, investors reacted positively to the news, boosting Apple’s market value to a record high above $3 trillion.
In July 2023, Musk founded his own AI company, xAI, with the aim of “understanding reality.” By November, xAI had launched Grok, a chatbot designed to compete with ChatGPT, notable for incorporating a touch of humour.
The dismissal of the lawsuit leaves questions unanswered about Musk’s future intentions regarding OpenAI and his broader AI ambitions.
Read more:
Elon Musk Drops Lawsuit Against OpenAI

Gener8 – a free-to-use app empowering people to control and be rewarded from their data – has announced a £2m funding round, valuing the company at £39m.
A consortium of investors participated in the round and joined past investors including musician Tinie Tempah, legendary football manager, Harry Redknapp, and Dragons’ Den stars, Peter Jones, Touker Suleyman, Tej Lalvani, among others.
Gener8 is creating a movement to highlight the importance of protecting our online data and the diverse nature of backers shows that this issue affects many from all walks of life. It turns your online data into real-world rewards: from gift cards and gadgets to exclusive offers and charity donations. It’s like frequent flyer miles for the internet.
Gener8 founder, Sam Jones, (pictured) said: “The world’s most valuable resource is no longer oil but data, and as a result of this everything that happens online is being tracked. The majority of websites we visit and apps we use place trackers on us to follow our movements and understand our behaviour. These trackers enable tens, and sometimes thousands, of companies to collect our information and they consequently exploit or sell it to make money from our data.
“But this is our information and at Gener8 we believe people should have a choice to stop this or, even better, to earn from it themselves.”
Gener8 also reveals what information other apps hold on you. It visualises this in an easy to understand manner and then empowers users to exchange their anonymised data from these companies for Gener8 rewards – should they choose to. No data leaves a person’s device or passes through any of Gener8’s systems without their explicit consent. All insights are generated on a user’s device and data is only shared if they choose to. All data is anonymised, so personal information is never shared with anyone.
In academia and government there has been a concept called PIMS (personal information management systems). This is essentially the idea that in the future there will be systems that are created that enable people to centralise their data into one location. Gener8 is now doing that today.
Sam continues: “Think about it. Isn’t it crazy that we don’t even know which companies buy and sell our data?”
“In fact, we don’t even know what data company’s hold on us. What do Facebook and Google know about you? Why do spam emails keep landing in your inbox? Well, with the Gener8 app you can connect to different apps and we’ll show the data that these apps hold on you.
“So, if for example you connect to Google, we can show you all the data that Google holds on you – every search you’ve ever made, every YouTube video you’ve watched, every ad that you’ve clicked on. It’s mind boggling. We can then enable you to delete this data from Google. Or should you choose you can anonymise your data and can earn from it. When we launched the app in 2023 we were the first company in the world to enable people to centralise their data into one location and earn from it.”
Headquartered in London, Gener8 products have more than one million downloads, with the app being downloaded every 90 seconds. The company has grown to 26 employees and is on track to be another UK tech unicorn this decade.
Sam adds: “With consumers and regulators all around the world wising up to the extent of online surveillance, personal data management has the potential to be a multi-billion-pound, winner-takes-most global market. As it stands, Gener8 is well-positioned to win this race, and to bring more digital success to the UK.”
Referred to as having given ‘the best pitch ever’ on Dragons Den, Gener8’s founder Sam Jones and has attracted investment from a range of high-profile individuals.
Read more:
Gener8 Closes £2m Funding Round, Valuing Company at £39m

Customer data needs to be firewalled and if protected properly can still be used for valuable analytics
In 2006, British mathematician Clive Humby declared that data is the new oil—and so could be the fuel source for a new, data-driven Industrial Revolution.
Given that he and his wife helped Tesco make £90m from its first attempt at a Clubcard, he should know. And it looks like the “derricks” out there are actually pumping that informational black gold up to the surface: the global big data analytics market is predicted to be more than $745bn by 2030—and while it may not be the most dependable metric, Big Tech is throwing billions at AI at a rate described as “some of the largest infusions of cash in a specific technology in Silicon Valley history”.
That’s what we’re being told is happening. But is it really? Are organisations genuinely and consistently monetising all the data they have—and so using it for competitive advantage and innovation?
More worryingly, are the safeguards we have put in place, like GDPR and other global data privacy restrictions, being deployed in ways that make them needlessly restrictive to the full flood of AI-driven innovation?
We were keen to understand where organisations really are with that exploitation, and if data monetisation and a defined, repeatable workflow really is in place.
Specifically, we wanted to check if organisations really are leveraging their data’s full potential and are operating with the appropriate levels of protection for that data, and if that data is accessible in a time frame useful for the business.
Therefore, we commissioned research and spoke to 600 CIOs, CTOs, CISOs, heads of data and data managers in organisations in everything from the airline sector to retail and telecommunications.
And it was interesting to hear firsthand what they told us about the true state of data handling out there.
Innovation through data, yes. But enough of it? No
What these practitioners told us is that while they absolutely see the potential for innovation and profit opportunity in their data, they are struggling to capitalise on this cost-effectively.
For example, 56% of all respondents said they have already achieved significant improvements in both CX and EX (customer and employee experience); 44% confirmed data access has directly led to a profit advantage of 6 to 10%—a very impressive 20% put that figure at more like 11 to 20%. In 2023, over half (57%) of the organisations we spoke to had introduced new products and services based on insights they’d got directly from mining their data.
But 32% admitted it can take 3-6 months to access the data they need to power apps to do that. 37% said that process could take between one to two full months, and only a tiny percentage, a mere 2%, said that they could access data in “less than a week” or instantly.
To clarify what we mean by “data”: we’re not talking transactional data such as EPOS data—we mean the potentially good data, about customers and their behaviours and attitudes.
When we say that, CISOs and Data Protection Officers will immediately slap the label “sensitive and classified data” over this—which leads to this data being put into purdah and many doors locked around it.
Which is as it should be—I don’t mind others knowing what kind of sandwich I bought at the petrol station for example but I do mind if you connect that purchase to my NI number.
If the data protection wall is being set at too high a level, does that mean a miss of millions in potential profit through data exploitation (and potentially billions for UK plc) in lost opportunity?
Is putting all your effort into cyber potentially a big mistake?
Yes and no. We do need to protect our data—these laws exist because of shockingly bad behaviour by some technology vendors.
But there’s a troubling confusion about what we are really protecting here. IT has somehow become obsessed with cyber security but hasn’t yet really got its head around data security.
Thus, we have $180 billion annually spent on cybersecurity, while data security strategies are so much less robustly understood and resourced. At the end of the day all that cybersecurity exists to protect your networks, your infrastructure and endpoint… but 99 times out of 100, the bad agents don’t care about any of that—they are after one thing, your data.
What is happening, then, is that CIOs are putting all their attention into cybersecurity and GDPR and other data privacy laws, thinking that solves the data problem. But if you lock down your data in ways that make it essentially ‘dark’ to the kind of AI analysis you want to run over it, then you’re sitting on your oil, not pipelining it. The good news is there is a solution that will satisfy all the stakeholders in the custody and use of customer data.
Use the right technology to protect all that sensitive information
The way out of this is to understand that there are tried and trusted ways to let your data scientists and machine learning platforms get into the data in ways that 100% preserve my NI number from that visit to the petrol station, but still allow you to do something with the transaction (or sell it to third parties).
Step forward Privacy-Enhancing Technologies (PETs) like encryption and anonymisation, which can be used to protect sensitive information in ways that seal off anything that could worry the CIO, as that “sensitive and classified” personal data is replaced with a value that prevents individual consumer data from being directly identified.
What CIOs in this survey tell us is that most organisations are heavily invested in PET through encryption, with pseudonymisation and tokenisation less utilised or understood.
Personally, we think that’s a mistake—as pseudonymisation in particular is a highly efficient way of making your customer and partner data safe in privacy terms but open to rapid analysis.
Nonetheless, we were very encouraged by how our analysis showed the need to look again at data security, with almost all (96%) of all respondents saying they plan to invest a portion of their IT budget on the issue this year—with 49% thinking that needs to be between 11-15% of their entire IT budget.
Summing up, these numbers show that business owners know data is their biggest asset—but they are also crying out for a safe way to use it so they can analyse it all for advantage in ways that don’t expose anybody in the company or their supply chain.
Not long after that famous comparison between data and oil, Australian economist Michael Palmer pointed out that while oil in its raw state is valuable, “if unrefined it cannot really be used”. Could thinking more about data than infrastructure security be the refining step we’ve been missing?
By Paul Mountford, CEO at Protegrity
Read more:
Is over-focusing on privacy hampering the push to take full advantage of AI? 

Shopping habits are changing; consumers are increasingly opting to buy or rent used items rather than purchasing brand new.
Digital marketplaces are making this easier and easier, with 80% of refurbished goods now purchased online.
The trend is only set to grow, with 44% of people stating they’re buying more second-hand items and Barclaycard Payments estimating that recommerce already contributes £7bn to the UK economy annually. It’s driven in particular by younger generations, with over two-thirds of Gen-Z preferring to buy second-hand. Meanwhile, Selfridges is aiming for almost half of its interactions with customers to be based on resale, repair, rental or refills by 2030.
Economic and environmental drivers
So, why is this happening?
Well, with increases in the cost of living, it’s no surprise that customers are paying closer attention to the price of products. Finding preloved items that would otherwise be financially inaccessible is an attractive prospect when budgets are tight.
But it’s not just about price; environmental impact is a key factor too. Two-thirds of consumers now look at the environmental credentials of a brand when purchasing an item. Almost three quarters of those evaluate not only the products, but also factors such as deliveries and returns. Sustainability is a key influence on the upsurge of re-commerce.
Boosting the refurbished tech sector
The rapid rise of re-commerce has highlighted a growing trend in consumers choosing refurbished electronics. Refurbished tech is a big business, and it’s growing quickly.
Almost two-thirds (64%) of UK consumers have previously bought a refurbished or repaired electrical item.  Despite the popularity of pre-loved clothes, twice as many people would buy a used washing machine or fridge over second-hand clothing items.
Customers are drawn by the cost savings, with many items that are as good as new selling for up to 50% off RRP. The environmental benefits are another big draw, with refurbished electronics standing out for their attractive circular economy appeal.
This points to an exciting new opportunity for retailers to increase revenue streams while also boosting their environmental credentials, but there’s much more that can be done to help this market reach its potential. Which is something we’re looking at here at fulfilmentcrowd.
The refurbishment roundabout
For example, there are some fundamental challenges in the traditional refurbishment process. Sending products for repair and then for resale creates logistical and ecological burdens.
In the existing model, when consumers encounter issues with their purchases, the items are sent back to the local fulfilment centre responsible for the initial logistics. These products are then transported back to their original manufacturing locations to diagnose and fix the problem. These locations are often thousands of miles away, such as in China.
Following repair, these refurbished items are then shipped all the way back to their original destination market for resale – significantly increasing the item’s carbon footprint.
With a typical return rate of more than 10% for consumer tech in the UK – and around a quarter of those due to faults – each retailer is potentially having to navigate thousands of products taking this inefficient and environmentally detrimental round-trip.
Challenging the status quo with a localised approach
To tackle these challenges, we’ve created a new service that enables issues to be resolved, and items to be returned to the market as refurbs, all without ever leaving the intended destination of sale.
To do this, we’re establishing a network of regional returns centres, initially in the US, UK, and EU (Germany), where returned items are thoroughly assessed, tested, and refurbished by locally employed experts.
It’s a complete end-to-end process, from the logistics of returns to diagnostics and repair (which is managed by our skilled team using detailed guidelines provided by the manufacturers), through to the re-introduction of refurbished items on the resale market.
This ensures a more sustainable and efficient resolution for returned products, benefitting our customers, their customers, and the environment.
Conclusion
Retail is a sector continuously in a state of evolution. In an age where there are growing ethical and environmental concerns around the business models of the likes of Temu and Shein, the more we can do to support more sustainable purchasing habits, the better, particularly if it also helps retailers to increase efficiency and diversify their offerings to meet a range of budgets.
Our approach offers a blueprint for the future, showcasing how businesses can thrive by integrating circular economy principles into their operations.
Read more:
Can the rise in re-commerce help create a more sustainable retail sector?

In many parts of the world, wealth is celebrated and admired. This is especially true in Asia, Africa, and the United States, where the “American Dream” ethos fosters the belief that hard work and ingenuity can lead to fortune.
This aspiration has driven the US to become the world’s most dynamic economy. Yet, in the UK and much of Europe, particularly in northern countries like Norway and Sweden, there’s a growing suspicion and hostility towards the wealthy.
Misconceptions About the Wealthy
The super-rich are often depicted as societal villains responsible for inequality, tax evasion, and even undermining democracy. This portrayal is prevalent in media and films, where billionaires are frequently cast as greedy, morally dubious characters who exploit legal loopholes to avoid paying taxes. As a tax lawyer with over 25 years of experience advising the wealthy, I can offer a different perspective on these popular myths.
Myth 1: The Wealthy Pay Lower Taxes
One common myth is that millionaires pay a lower effective tax rate than their cleaners. This misconception stems from misunderstandings about how the tax system works. In the UK, general income, such as earnings and interest, is taxed at higher rates than dividends. While dividends face a top rate of 39.35%, they are taxed twice – first at the corporate level and then again when received by shareholders. This can result in an effective tax rate of up to 54.85%, compared to the 45% rate for general income.
Capital gains, another significant part of wealthy individuals’ income, are taxed at rates between 10% and 24% for all taxpayers, with no special lower rates for the rich. For example, a person with £1 million of income, split between earnings, dividends, and capital gains, would pay an effective tax rate of 38.1%. In contrast, someone with £50,000 of income would pay an effective rate of 10.3%. The wealthier you are, the more tax you pay, both in quantity and effective rate, reflecting the progressive nature of our tax system.
Myth 2: Tax Evasion is Rampant Among the Rich
Another myth is that paying tax is voluntary for the rich, thanks to their access to top tax lawyers who exploit loopholes. However, genuine loopholes are rare, and any that exist are countered by HMRC’s “General Anti-Abuse Rule.” Aggressive tax avoidance schemes are not only unethical but also largely ineffective under current regulations.
Myth 3: Non-Doms Exploit Tax Loopholes
The idea that non-domiciled individuals (non-doms) exploit tax loopholes is also misleading. The non-dom regime has been part of the UK’s tax system since 1799 and is not an unintended gap in legislation. Non-doms contribute significantly to the UK economy, paying an average of £123,000 in tax annually. In total, non-doms contribute nearly £8.5 billion in UK taxes, not including additional business-related taxes. While the UK phases out this system, countries like Italy and Greece are introducing their own non-dom regimes to attract wealthy foreigners.
The Contributions of the Wealthy
Overall, the top 1% of taxpayers in the UK pay nearly 29% of all income tax, while the top 10% pay 60%. These contributions fund essential public services, including healthcare. Without these taxpayers, the financial burden on the rest of society would be significantly higher.
Changing the Narrative
It’s time to shift the narrative around wealth. Instead of vilifying the wealthy with terms like “filthy rich,” we should celebrate their success and contributions. Recognising the positive impact of the wealthy on our economy and society could foster a more supportive environment that encourages prosperity and innovation.
Read more:
Britain Should Celebrate the Wealthy – Not Tax Them Out of the Country

Labour has reversed its plan to reintroduce the pension lifetime allowance, sparking claims from the Tories of a significant financial “black hole” in Labour’s budget.
The U-turn, valued at £800 million, sees Rachel Reeves, the shadow chancellor, abandoning the pledge to reinstate the lifetime cap on tax-free pension savings.
Labour asserts that this policy reversal will not impact its spending plans, as the expected revenue was not included in their budget calculations. However, the Conservatives estimate that this decision will add billions to what they claim is a £40 billion deficit in Labour’s financial plans.
The lifetime allowance, which was £1.073 million, was abolished by Chancellor Jeremy Hunt in 2023 to retain experienced NHS staff who were retiring to avoid hefty tax bills. Initially, Reeves promised to reverse this, labelling it a “tax cut for the wealthiest.” Despite assurances to protect doctors, the policy prompted concerns of an NHS staff exodus.
The Office for Budget Responsibility noted that abolishing the cap amounted to an annual tax cut of £800 million. However, Labour has now scrapped its plan to reintroduce the cap to avoid further confusion over what they describe as the Conservatives’ “botched” policy, which has left many investors uncertain due to legislative errors.
A Labour source told the Financial Times: “The Conservatives have botched their policy of abolishing the lifetime allowance, with thousands of people approaching retirement being left in limbo because of errors in legislation.” They added that Reeves would “sort out the mess” and prioritise bringing stability and certainty to the economy.
Laura Trott, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, argued that this reversal would add another £3.2 billion to Labour’s financial deficit. She accused Labour of planning a “raid” on pensions by not adopting the Conservatives’ “triple lock plus” policy, which protects the state pension from tax.
Trott stated, “Despite this U-turn, which adds another £3.2 billion to their £38.5 billion black hole, Labour have failed to rule out a swathe of pensions taxes and their retirement tax will mean the state pension being subject to income tax for the first time ever.” She further claimed that Labour’s approach would make retirements less secure.
Labour’s decision appears to be an attempt to counter accusations of planning a tax increase, with Sir Keir Starmer having already ruled out rises in income tax, National Insurance, or VAT. The Tories have centred their election campaign on tax policies, claiming Labour plans to increase the financial burden on families by £2,000 to cover their spending plans.
Sir Keir Starmer has dismissed these claims as “deliberate” lies, insisting that all Labour policies are “fully-costed and fully funded.” Confirming the decision not to reinstate the cap, Bridget Phillipson, the shadow education secretary, emphasised the need for stability, stating on Sky News, “It wouldn’t have been our priority to make that change but the Government have created an awful lot of uncertainty for people who are looking towards retirement so no, we wouldn’t be bringing that back and that is about making sure we have got stability and security for people going into this election.”
Read more:
Labour Abandons Pension Lifetime Cap Reinstatement in £800m U-turn

iPhone users are gearing up for a significant update to Apple’s Siri digital assistant, which will soon enable sending and deleting emails using voice commands.
This update is part of a broader rollout of new artificial intelligence (AI) features for Apple’s iOS smartphone operating system, as the company aims to compete with Google’s advanced AI tools.
Apple is reportedly set to announce a collaboration with OpenAI to enhance Siri’s intelligence and functionality. The voice assistant, which debuted over a decade ago, will soon control more app features, including sending and deleting emails and generating AI-driven “smart replies”, according to AppleInsider.
In addition to email enhancements, Apple plans to introduce new AI tools in its Photos app, including a “Clean Up” tool that uses AI to remove unwanted objects or blemishes from photos. The Notes app is also expected to get a revamp with features that enable voice transcriptions and summaries.
Apple is branding its new AI offerings as “Apple Intelligence”, according to Bloomberg. Among other updates, the tech giant plans to introduce AI-generated emojis.
Since Siri’s launch as a “humble personal assistant” in 2011, it has not achieved the widespread popularity Apple had hoped for. Currently, users predominantly rely on Siri for simple tasks such as dictating text messages or checking the weather, rather than as a comprehensive digital assistant.
In contrast, over the past two years, rivals like Microsoft and Google have advanced their digital assistants significantly, especially with the integration of chatbots like ChatGPT. These AI-driven tools are increasingly being integrated into smartphones with voice and video capabilities.
Apple’s anticipated deal with OpenAI, the developer behind ChatGPT, aims to make Siri more conversational and capable. The company hopes that these enhancements will boost smartphone sales, which have recently experienced their sharpest decline in three years.
The new updates to Apple’s iOS software will be disclosed at the company’s annual Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC) in California at 6pm. These advancements are expected to mark a significant step forward in Apple’s AI capabilities, offering users more sophisticated and intuitive digital assistant features.
Read more:
Major Update for iPhone Users: Siri to Gain Advanced Email and AI Features

Nigel Farage, leader of Reform UK, has expressed strong opposition to the idea of Shein, the Chinese-founded fast-fashion retailer, listing on the London Stock Exchange.
Farage criticised efforts by ministers, including Chancellor Jeremy Hunt, to attract the company to London, arguing that it would not help revive the market.
Farage emphasised that Shein’s potential £50 billion listing would not enhance London’s financial stature. The retailer has faced accusations of forced labour in its supply chain, which it denies. “Encouraging Shein to choose London would be a mistake,” Farage said, adding that it “won’t change the IPO crisis” in the City.
He continued, “They see an IPO for Shein and say, ‘Oh isn’t that marvellous because London needs it’. No, it doesn’t. It doesn’t at all. Saying no to Shein is not cutting off our nose to spite our face. It’s saying we think this is a very bad idea.”
Farage, the parliamentary candidate for Clacton, attributed the London Stock Exchange’s struggles to “excess regulation” and called for a “radical rethink of the financial market rules.” He argued that “We have not deregulated from EU rules at all.”
Shein has been preparing for a London listing after earlier plans to float in New York were thwarted by political opposition. Although founded in China, Shein is now headquartered in Singapore and is working on paperwork for a potential blockbuster listing, though this does not guarantee it will choose the UK market.
Both Conservative and Labour parties have indicated support for Shein listing in London. Labour MPs recently met with the retailer, affirming that “raising investment, productivity, and growth is one of Labour’s missions for government.” Jeremy Hunt also held talks with Shein’s executive chairman Donald Tang in January, in an effort to persuade the retailer to choose London.
Shein has rapidly grown to become one of the world’s largest fashion retailers, known for its ability to launch new products swiftly. However, concerns have been raised about how it can afford to charge such low prices, with some items selling for as little as £4. US Senator Marco Rubio stated in April that there was a “high probability these companies have facilitated the importation of goods made with forced labour.”
These concerns focus on Shein’s Chinese supplier base, particularly as much of China’s cotton comes from Xinjiang, where there are allegations of forced labour involving Uyghurs. Last week, Peter Hugh Smith, chief executive of CCLA Investment Management, warned that allowing Shein to list in London would risk the City becoming a “listing venue of last resort” for companies with questionable human rights records.
Smith added that government support for a Shein float “sends the signal that the UK is willing to overlook significant human rights concerns.”
A spokesperson for Shein responded, “Shein has a zero-tolerance policy for forced labour and we are committed to respecting human rights. We take visibility across our entire supply chain seriously and require our contract manufacturers to only source cotton from approved regions.”
Read more:
Nigel Farage: Shein’s London Listing is a ‘Very Bad Idea’