When there were limited uses to which data could be put, it was easy to evaluate the harms that could result from providing consent. Things are much more complex today so data protection regulations have tried to improve the quality of consent. This has resulted in the transparency paradox. If we can adopt consent templates we can give users appropriate autonomy.

Every evolution of communications technology from the printing press to the telegraph to telephones and eventually the internet has placed new and different stresses on personal privacy. As much as we welcome these technologies when launched, in time we realise the effect that they can have on personal privacy. The whole point of communicating is to violate your privacy in a controlled way. But if we do not have information about all the ways in which a given communication can affect your privacy you cannot really exercise effective control over it.

The South African patent office has granted a patent to an artificial intelligence program for an invention it has made. India granted a copyright to an AI application along similar lines. It is not clear how an artificial intelligence can exercise the IP granted by prosecuting a breach or negotiating commercial arrangements for its license. All these actions will have to be taken by humans on behalf of the AI in which case what is the point in calling the algorithm an inventor.

Identity is a prerequisite for the provision of services and efficient identity systems are necessary to scale digital public infrastructure. We can build back trust in identity systems through encryption and tokenisation of identity information by using privacy preserving technologies like zero knowledge proofs so that we can still establish eligibility for a service without exposing identity information.

The reason why email is the most widely used messaging protocol is because it uses an open interoperable protocol that allows messages to be exchanged freely regardless of the underlying operating system. If we are to take advantage of the benefits of data we need to enable open interoperable protocols that will break down the silos of our digital infrastructure.

The cutting edge of innovation in NFTs is taking place in the gaming space. Most NFT based games use non-fungible tokens to attest the title of in-game digital assets. If we start to use the metaverse for more and more real world activities, we will need some way to assert title over digital assets. NFT’s could become the future of title in the metaverse.

In order to extract greater efficiency out of existing systems we sometimes need to break the atomic units of those systems down into even smaller pieces so that we can re-imagine how they can be put back together. This is the sort of unbundling that we need to do of the retail stack in order to be able to build a digital retail infrastructure that can empower our small traders. This is the only way we can enable hyperlocal commerce at national scale.

The courts in the US have upheld the App Store model arguing that it demonstrates pro-competitive features that outweigh concerns of monopolistic activity. All it does is prevent operators of these stores from putting in place measures that ensure that all in-app transactions be routed exclusively through the App Store so the fees can be deducted at source.

A number of countries have realised that they need to extend their data protection frameworks through new measures that will unlock data silos in order to make it easier for data to flow from one entity to another with the permission of the data subject. However, if these measures are adopted solely through legislation they will fail. Technology businesses must be regulated through a mixture of law and technology - strong principle based laws and protocol based technology guardrails to ensure compliance.

Policy-making requires an understanding of the reciprocal relationships inherent in regulation. Focusing on a policy outcome in a narrow area of specific intent will result in unintended consequences in reciprocally related areas. In these instances it is important to think about policy making as a dial. Tilting too much in one direction will cause harm elsewhere. It is about finding the right balance.