2024 only started and we already get some hot news on American multinational technology company – Amazon!
According to a recent article in the Financial Times, Amazon’s recent crackdown on its marketplace has resulted in some small businesses having their accounts suspended. Millions of accounts on the leading e-commerce platform have been prevented from making sales due to alleged violations of Amazon’s wide range of policies and other bad behaviour. And it is safe to say that in this case, even temporary suspensions can be a critical blow to small business owners who rely on online sales.
It has led to merchants turning to the lawyers to try to regain access to their accounts and money, amid growing scrutiny of the retailer’s treatment of independents. About a dozen sellers said they had become concerned about Amazon’s power to suspend their accounts or product listings, as it was not always clear what had triggered the suspension and Amazon’s seller support services did not always help to resolve the issue.
So, let’s look closer at this topic and decide who was right!
What people(sellers) are saying right now
While Amazon’s efforts to crack down on issues such as fake product reviews come as US and European regulators have stepped up their scrutiny of online harms faced by shoppers, critics argue that the existence of a growing army of lawyers and consultants to deal with the fallout from Amazon’s actions points to a problem with the way the retailer treats its sellers.
“If you’re a seller and you need help to navigate the system, that’s a real vulnerability for the marketplace. If you’re operating a business where the people you’re deriving revenue from feel that they’re being treated in an arbitrary way without due process, that is a problem,” – said Marianne Rowden, chief executive of the E-Merchants Trade Council.
“The fact that there are entire law firms dedicated to dealing with Amazon says a lot,” said one seller, who like many who spoke to the FT asked to remain anonymous for fear of reprisals.
Figuring out what caused a suspension and how to reverse it can be difficult. “We had a listing shut down during Prime Big Deals Days with no warning, no cause, no explanation,” said one kitchenware seller who has been selling on Amazon.com since 2014. “That’s pretty common.”
Such confusion drives some sellers towards lawyers and consultants who advise on underlying problems, such as intellectual property disputes.
What Amazon said
Amazon’s lawyers said the company was working to “eliminate errors and ‘false positive’ enforcement” and had an appeals process in place for sellers. They also admitted that some sellers had been wrongly accused by the company’s automated systems that identify breaches of rules and policies. But they added that others had broken Amazon’s rules.
The retailer has become “more draconian” in the enforcement of its policies in recent years, said attorney Jeff Schick.
“Clients will say Amazon is unfair,” he said, but added that if the company did not strictly enforce its rules “then the platform becomes the next Craigslist”.
Conclusion (&personal opinion)
In my opinion, Amazon’s crackdown on fraudulent sellers is a positive step towards ensuring a fair and transparent marketplace for all. As Forbes reports, Amazon’s recent suspension of multiple high-profile sellers for using banned techniques to get reviews is a win for everyone. The fewer fake reviews that infiltrate Amazon, the better the customer experience will be. Amazon’s muscle-flexing against fraudulent brands is also a big win for those brands that play by the rules
However, it is important to note that Amazon’s account suspension process can be a critical blow to small business owners who rely on online sales. It is also true that Amazon’s broad range of policies and other bad behavior can lead to account suspensions that are not always justified.
In conclusion, while Amazon’s crackdown on fraudulent sellers is a positive step towards ensuring a fair and transparent marketplace, it is important to ensure that the process is fair and transparent for all sellers. We should support Amazon’s efforts to eliminate fraudulent sellers, but also ensure that small business owners are not unfairly impacted by the process
The internet is woven into the fabric of daily life, and at the heart of it lies the ever-crucial function of search. Google, with its eponymous search engine, has been a dominant player in this space for decades. Its prevalence is undisputed, but this dominance has also brought increased scrutiny from regulators worldwide. As Google faces an antitrust trial, the outcome could significantly alter the landscape of internet search. This article explores the potential implications of the trial and how it may reshape the digital experience for users and competitors alike and my personal opinion on this topic.
– But what is antitrust law ?
To start with, for better understanding of what we are going to talk about in this artical, I think I should give you a definition of what antitrust law is.
Antitrust laws – are regulations that encourage competition by limiting the market power of any particular firm.
The Background of the Antitrust Trial
In January, the Department of Justice filed a lawsuit against Google, claiming that the company acted in violation of the Sherman Act, an antitrust law that outlawed monopolistic practices. The act helps ensure that no single company or firm has control of a particular market.
According to the case filing, Google has paid billions to cellular device manufacturers and browser developers to ensure that it is the default general search engine for laptops, computers, and cellphones. Google’s contract with Apple, for instance, costs the big tech company an estimated $15 to $20 billion annually. That money also ensures that those companies do not work with Google’s competitors. The contract has helped Google account for nearly 95% of all search queries on mobile devices, according to the court filing. Google is worth around $1.7 trillion and has control for some 90% of the American search engine market.
The Justice Department argues that these sort of practices prevent other search engine companies from having a real chance to compete in the industry. “Google is so dominant that ‘Google’ is not only a noun to identify the company and the Google search engine but also a verb that means to search the internet,” the filing complaint says. Google also was accused of overcharging consumers through unlawful restrictions on the distribution of apps on Android devices and unnecessary fees for in-app transactions. Regulators argue that these actions harm consumer choice and innovation. In contrast, Google maintains that its services are designed to benefit users and that competition. Google alleged that it did not monopolize the ad industry, instead arguing that it is just “getting the benefit of a bargain”.
At the end after antitrust settlement with consumers and US states Google agreed to pay $700m and to allow for greater competition in its Play app store.
How this could impact the future of search
David Olson, a professor at Boston College Law School, told NBC News that the remedy could cause an increase in the cost of devices to make up for loss of contracts with Google. He adds that Google could still have an advantage over competitors if users still choose to use it. And it could also bring many implications.
Potential Implications of the Trial
Opening Doors for Competitors
Should the trial conclude against Google, one of the most immediate effects could be the opening up of the search engine market to more competition. Google may be required to change its practices, giving smaller search engines a fairer chance to compete. This could lead to a more diverse range of search tools, each catering to different user preferences and needs.
Changing Business Models
The trial could also force Google to alter its business model. Currently, Google’s search engine is free to use because it makes money from advertising. If changes are mandated to how Google can display or prioritize ads, the company might have to explore alternative revenue streams, potentially even charging for services that are currently free.
Impact on User Experience
Google’s easy integration of services such as Maps, Shopping, and Images directly into its search platform is convenient for users. However, should the trial require Google to decouple or offer more visibility to competitor services, users might experience a less seamless interaction out these features or deal with a more fragmented online experience.
The final result of the Trial
Potential Advantages of the Trial
Wilson White, Google vice-president for government affairs and public policy said the settlement “builds on Android’s choice and flexibility, maintains strong security protections, and retains Google’s ability to compete with other [operating system] makers, and invest in the Android ecosystem for users and developers”.
The company said it was expanding the ability of app and game developers to provide consumers an alternative billing option for in-app purchases next to Play’s billing system. Plus as part of the settlement, Google said it would simplify users’ ability to download apps directly from developers.
Conclusion: My Personal Opinion
As the trial ended I can certainly said that I thought of much worse outcomes for Google (like limiting their abilities, allowing a risk that too much intervention could stifle the efficiency and utility that users have come to expect from Google and etc.), but everything ended pretty good for Google. Of course they los a lot of money and maybe it will has a greater influence on Google that we see right now, including simplifying users’ ability to download apps directly from developers, will not affect Google so much as to leading to a global changes in the search field, which is really good both for the company and for us users. As of the who was right, I think it is true that Google dominant position is undeniable, however I am not sure that I one hundred percent agree with the accusation that Google was overcharging consumers.
I think the insight we all should take from this is that – As the digital ecosystem evolves, we must be vigilant in ensuring that it remains both open and accessible, while also rich and innovative.
Have you herd about this lawsuit? Who in your opinion is right?
Artificial intelligence is rapidly transforming the consulting industry, and the Big Four firms – Deloitte, EY, KPMG, and PwC – are at the forefront of this change. These firms are investing heavily in AI to develop new services, improve the efficiency of their operations, and gain a competitive edge.
AI’s Journey to Big Four Consulting Firms
I think it is important to firstly give you a little introduction of how AI was used before by the Big Four. AI’s journey to the Big Four consulting firms has been a gradual one, marked by both skepticism and cautious adoption. The initial hesitation stemmed from concerns about the potential for AI to replace human consultants, the lack of proven applications in the consulting industry, and the ethical implications of using AI to make decisions.
However, as AI technology matured and its benefits became more apparent, the Big Four firms began to embrace its potential. In 2016, PwC launched its first AI innovation center, and the other Big Four firms soon followed suit. Since then, AI has become an integral part of the Big Four’s operations, with applications ranging from data analysis and automation to client relationship management and risk assessment.
EY’s Pioneering Use of AI for Audit Fraud Detection
EY has been at the forefront of using AI for audit fraud detection recently.
When Big Four accounting firm EY tried out an artificial intelligence system Helix GLAD, it was able to detect fraudulent journal entries in a dataset of real-world financial data. According to Kath Barrow, EY’s UK and Ireland assurance managing partner, the new system detected suspicious activity at two of the first 10 companies checked. The clients subsequently confirmed that both cases had been frauds.
This early success illustrates why some in the industry believe AI has great potential to improve audit quality and reduce workloads. The ability of AI powered systems to ingest and analyse vast quantities of data could, they hope, provide a powerful new tool for alerting auditors to signs of wrongdoing and other problems.
Yet many auditors disagree sharply about how far they can rely on a technology that has not yet been widely tested and is often poorly understood. Some audit firms are sceptical that AI systems can be fed enough high quality information to detect the multiple different potential forms of fraud reliably. There are also some concerns about data privacy, if auditors are using confidential client information to develop AI.
“Frauds are . . . unique and each is perpetrated in a slightly different way,” Stephens said. “By nature they are designed to circumvent safeguards through novel uses of technology or exploiting new weaknesses, and AI doesn’t play well there right now.” – Simon Stephens, AI lead for audit and assurance at the UK business of Deloitte, another of the Big Four audit firms, pointed out that frauds were relatively rare and tended to differ from each other. That would mean there were not necessarily tell-tale patterns for AI systems to pick up.
KPMG UK, another Big Four auditor, echoed the concerns of Stephens at Deloitte. “Fraud by its nature is unpredictable and therefore using known fraud cases to train machine learning models is challenging,” KPMG said.
“AI can automate some of the more mundane, repeatable tasks and allows our auditors to focus on the areas of greatest risk,” – Stephens acknowledged that the technology had its uses in auditing. But he saw a far more limited role for it. As Deloitte currently restricts use of AI to less complex tasks, providing clear instructions on what kinds of anomalies to look for in company accounts.
So Why Only EY Uses AI for Finding Audit Frauds
There are a few reasons why EY is the only Big Four firm that has publicly announced its use of AI for audit fraud detection. First, EY is a leader in the audit and assurance space, and it has a strong track record of innovation. This gives EY the credibility and expertise to develop and implement AI-powered audit tools.
Second, EY has made a significant investment in AI, both in terms of financial resources and human capital. This investment has allowed EY to develop Helix GLAD and other AI-powered audit tools that are at the forefront of the industry.
Third, EY has a strong culture of innovation, and it is willing to take risks on new technologies. This culture has fostered an environment where EY’s auditors are comfortable using AI to detect fraud.
As AI technology continues to mature, it is likely that other Big Four firms will adopt AI-powered audit tools. However, EY is currently the leader in this area, and it is well-positioned to maintain its lead in the years to come.
What is to expect (my opinion)
AI is transforming the whole world right now, and of course the consulting industry will not be an exception, and the Big Four firms will be at the forefront of this change. Even though now almost all consulting firms (except for EY) are very sceptical about the AI usage, I think AI implementation in consulting industry will be for the better, as it will automize work, for sure, and also find some problems/issues that we as people are not able to indicate, as we all can make mistakes.
Of course as were said below there many negative points too, but looking at the consulting industry, what is the one of the most important things after the result itself? – Right, audit fraud detection and this is exactly what AI can help us with. What I am trying to say is that even though there some risks that should be considered, when AI can help so much we should not avoid it, but improve and implement it, which is exactly what EY did. I think EY made the first step, and all the other consulting companies will soon follow
Since the Apollo era, the moon has remained a symbol of untapped potential and a gateway to new frontiers. Recent developments in space exploration, driven by both governmental and private initiatives, a combination of scientific curiosity, and the pursuit of potential economic opportunities, have reignited the passion for lunar missions once again. The prospect of returning to the moon, not as a mere visit but as a sustainable economic endeavor, has sparked a wave of innovative ideas and bold aspirations leading to a so-called Moon rush. So let’s look deeper into the topic.
Evolution of the Lunar Economy Since the Apollo Era
“Right now, the Moon is the target of more missions than at any time since the Apollo era – over the next 10 years, 400 missions are projected,” said Jim Free, the associate administrator for the Exploration Systems Development Mission Directorate at NASA Headquarters in Washington, D.C.
The Apollo missions of the late 1960s and early 1970s represented the first and only time that humans have set foot on the lunar surface. However, as the result of the Apollo program, the focus of space exploration was shifted to low Earth orbit and beyond.
The concept of a lunar economy, centered around the utilization of lunar resources for scientific, commercial, and exploratory purposes, began to gain traction only in the early 21st century. This shift in focus was driven by a growing recognition of the Moon’s potential as a platform for supporting future space missions, including those aimed at Mars and beyond. Additionally, advancements in robotics, additive manufacturing, and in-situ resource utilization (ISRU) technologies have bolstered the prospects of establishing a sustained human presence on the Moon.
NASA’s Plans and Involvement in the Lunar Economy
“Building the foundations of a lunar economy for returning to the Moon are really rooted in what NASA has always done,” said Jim Free in his interview with FT.
As a key player in space exploration and scientific research, NASA plays a pivotal role in shaping the future of the lunar economy. In recent years, NASA has outlined ambitious plans for returning humans to the Moon under the Artemis program, which aims to establish a sustainable human presence on the lunar surface by the end of the decade. Central to NASA’s vision for the Artemis program is the Lunar Gateway, a space station that will orbit the Moon and serve as a staging point for lunar missions, as well as a hub for scientific research and international collaboration.
However NASA’s involvement in the lunar economy extends beyond the Artemis program, encompassing a broad range of initiatives aimed at unlocking the potential of lunar resources and advancing the frontiers of space exploration, as they said that they see the Moon adaptation as a training ground for living and working on Mars.
Additionally, NASA is turning to the private sector to help cut the cost of its mission. Instead of concentrating on building a rocket, it wants to buy a ride from companies such as SpaceX and Blue Origin. This is one of the fundamental differences from the Apollo era. It means that others could use those services, too. Therefore, NASA’s collaboration with international partners, commercial entities, and academic institutions underscores the agency’s commitment to fostering a vibrant lunar economy that transcends national boundaries and harnesses the collective expertise and resources of the global space community.
Viability of the Lunar Economy and Potential Challenges
The prospect of establishing a sustainable lunar economy holds immense promise for advancing the frontiers of space exploration and resource utilization. However, it is essential to critically examine its viability and consider the potential challenges that may impede its realization.
Several factors contribute to the potential success of the lunar economy, including the abundance of lunar resources, the strategic significance of the Moon as a platform for deep space exploration, and the advancements in technology that enable the utilization of lunar resources for scientific, commercial, and exploratory purposes. Additionally, a significant role in the lunar economy’s viability plays the presence of water ice and other volatiles in permanently shadowed regions of the Moon, which can be extracted and utilized for supporting human missions, generating propellant, and sustaining life on the lunar surface. The availability of these resources holds significant implications for reducing the cost and complexity of deep space missions, as well as enabling the establishment of a sustained human presence on the Moon.
While the prospects of the lunar economy are promising, several challenges must be addressed to realize its full potential. These challenges include the technical, logistical, and economic complexities inherent in establishing and maintaining a robust lunar infrastructure, as well as the imperative of addressing environmental and ethical considerations associated with lunar resource utilization.
Conclusion: personal opinion, the Promise of a Sustainable Lunar Economy
As we stand on the threshold of a new era in space exploration, the promise of a sustainable lunar economy beckons with boundless potential and transformative opportunities. The resurgence of interest in lunar missions, fueled by the vision of returning to the moon not as a mere destination but as a sustainable platform for scientific discovery, resource utilization, and human habitation, heralds a paradigm shift in our relationship with the cosmos.
The viability of the lunar economy, while accompanied by formidable challenges, in my opinion, still holds a great chance of success, as all of those challenges could be solved, and the factors of success definitely outweigh them. However I hold a sceptical opinion on the idea of whether it will really happen in the near future, as we always heard about companies’ ambitious goals connected with the space and lunar exploration and most often it were just the words only; So whether it will really come into action is still under a question. Thus, the pursuit of a sustainable lunar economy is not merely a scientific or economic endeavor; it is a testament to our enduring spirit of exploration, our capacity for ingenuity, and our responsibility to chart a course toward a future that extends beyond the boundaries of our capabilities. So, let’s wait and see what the new Moon rush will bring to us.
What is your opinion on the new lunar economy? Do you think it may really come to life?
In today’s rapidly evolving world, where technological advancements seem to know no bounds, it is always remarkable to witness how innovations can still surprise us. Microsoft, a renowned tech giant, has once again piqued our interest with the unveiling of their latest AI tool.
As Windows 11 is set to launch on November 1st, the spotlight is on the new features and innovations that Microsoft promises to bring to the table. Among the most anticipated additions to the operating system is the Capilot AI Assistant. Capilot has been in the spotlight ever since its earlier pre-version release on September 26. In this article, we will delve deeper into the potential impact of Capilot and find out whether it can help Microsoft surpass Apple.
Capilot AI Assistant: A Game-Changer or a Liability?
Capilot is Microsoft’s answer to the growing demand for AI-powered virtual assistants. With the success of Apple’s Siri, Amazon’s Alexa, and Google Assistant, Microsoft has been striving to create a better multi-functional AI assistant that can cater to the needs of Windows users.
Reviews and Early Impressions
To assess the potential of Capilot, it is crucial that we examine the early reviews from users who had been using the Capilot pre-version.
“Of course, many Windows users will want to stick with the old way of doing things. But they’ll be missing out on many opportunities. In less than three days with Copilot, I find myself frequently turning to it for answers. The feature will be a boon to students and anyone who needs to compose text or create images, both of which it excels at. Copilot has plenty of room for improvement, though, particularly when it comes to changing settings, opening apps, and opening web pages.” – said Michael Muchmore in PC Magazine.
We see that the author has mostly found Copilot to be highly useful in a short span of time, indicating its practical value and leaving a quite positive review, though mentioning some inconveniences. But we should also take into consideration that he was using only the pre-version, so the full extent of Copilot’s capabilities may yet to be fully realized.
Potential for Success
Enhanced Integration with Windows Ecosystem
Capilot’s ability to seamlessly integrate with Windows 11 is a key strength. Users can expect it to excel in performing OS-related tasks and navigating the Windows environment effectively. This deep integration sets it apart from standalone AI assistants.
Continuous Improvement
Microsoft’s track record of refining its products over time suggests that Capilot could evolve into a formidable competitor. Regular updates and refinements can help address initial limitations and enhance the user experience.
Potential for a Fall
Competition
The AI assistant market is crowded, with established players like Apple and Google. To gain an edge, Capilot needs to not only match but surpass the capabilities of its competitors. Its success depends on Microsoft’s ability to close the gap effectively.
Privacy Concerns
As with all AI assistants, privacy and data security are paramount. Any mishandling of user data or security breaches could severely damage Capilot’s reputation.
My opinion about whether Capilot can help Microsoft beat Apple?
The question of whether Capilot can help Microsoft surpass Apple is a complex one. Apple’s Siri has a strong foothold in the mobile and smart home ecosystem, which may be challenging for Microsoft to match. However, the integration of Capilot with Windows 11 and the potential for cross-device functionality could prove enticing to users deeply embedded in the Microsoft ecosystem.
Of course people will not abandon Apple easily, as I myself would definitely not, but if it will really made a difference and make AI usage easier and more comfortable then ever before maybe then all people gradually will start switching to the Microsoft. In the end, I think Capilot’s success will largely depend on how effectively Microsoft addresses Capilot’s limitations and leverages its strengths. At the beginning, it may not necessarily need to surpass Apple but carve out its niche within the Windows ecosystem, continue to evolve and meet user expectations. If it will happen, then Capilot will have the potential to change the way we interact with not only Windows devices but all devices overall and, of course this way beat Apple. But it probably will not happen in the near future.
In the coming months, as Windows 11 is officially released, users will have a clearer picture of Capilot’s capabilities and its impact on Microsoft’s future. Whether it’s a game-changer or a liability remains to be seen, but one thing is certain: Capilot will play a pivotal role in shaping Microsoft’s trajectory in the AI assistant market.
But what do you think about the upcoming launch of Capilot? Will it be successful?
