Tag: Regulation

  • Google\’s Sameer Samat on ecosystems, regulation and competition

    Android was, predictably, everywhere at Mobile World Congress. At a show where Apple has no public-facing presence, Google’s mobile operating system is almost entirely ubiquitous. As in past years, the company also set up a sprawling outdoor booth between halls. This time, the focus was on interoperability and ecosystem.

    You’d be hard-pressed to find a better person to speak on the subject than Sameer Samat; the former president of Jawbone now heads Android’s product and design team, as well as design and engineering for Google Play and Wear OS. We sat down with the executive on the third day of MWC to discuss Google’s consumer software plays.

    \"Google\'s

    Google’s Android booth at MWC 2023 in Barcelona. Image Credits: Brian Heater

    Samat: People don’t just buy a phone anymore, they buy into an ecosystem.

    TechCrunch: That’s been the case for some time.

    Samat: It has, but on the Android side, having that full portfolio of devices is important.

    You’re talking specifically about Google devices?

    No. It’s not been the case that every major manufacturer has offered a full portfolio. I think that’s super important. It’s really important that those devices work well together. We’ve had this effort that we call “Better Together” for a while, and we’re working on a number of things that help these devices interoperate.

    iOS is your main competition. That’s something Apple has done well for a long time. It’s a big part of why people buy their products. Do you look at what they’re doing when building out features?

    From a consumer standpoint, it’s very clear that people have more devices in their life. The average U.S. household has 20-plus connected devices in their home. We hear feedback from consumers, and individual manufacturers have implemented these things. Usually on these things, some Android manufacturer has gone and done it first. The reverse happens a lot of times. Apple sees something they think is cool and copies it that way — always-on displays. The difference is: Can you do it widely across the ecosystem? Can you do it where you can cross pair between different devices from different manufacturers, and can you do it at scale.

    People ask me for earbud recommendations. Nine times out of 10, I ask them who makes their phone. Manufacturers’ devices tend to work better with their own product.

    There’s always opportunity for manufacturers to differentiate. I think that’s good and should remain. But I also think there are basics that need to be standardized, because it provides a level of choice to consumers that they appreciate and they expect in our ecosystem.

    Wear OS/Android Wear seemed stagnant for a long time. There does seem to be a renewed effort around the Pixel Watch, however.

    We were very early to the watch space. We helped pioneer a lot of things that went into smartwatches. At the beginning, the use cases weren’t very clear. There were a lot things that people wanted their watches to do. There was a view that maybe it was like a phone on your wrist. Over time what’s develop is a set of key pillars — use cases that the device is awesome at, and that will grow over time.

    Health came in and completely dominated the conversation.

    Health is important. The watch is one of the only electronics that you wear on your body, 24/7. With your permission, it has access to your vitals and these days, health is a big concern for all of us. Technology assisting us with that is very in line with our overall mission, and a lot of what our partners want to do for consumers. As we’ve honed that, there’s been an opportunity to refocus the platform. It started with our partnership with Samsung around this. For a while, they had done something different with their watches [Tizen OS]. We got back together and made an effort to restart that.

    With Samsung, Wear OS suddenly has a lot more market share overnight.

    Yeah. I think when you find the right market fit with those core use cases and you do it with the right hardware and a great partner like Samsung, it gives you an opportunity to get out there and show consumers what’s possible.

    This is one category where Apple was extremely dominate in market share. After the recent updates, if you push Samsung to the side for a moment, are you seeing a lot more adoptions?

    Yeah. There are a lot more people buying Wear OS devices, and there will be a lot more devices coming from other partners this year.

    Smartphone sales were declining before the pandemic, and that trend has accelerated in the last few years. Will the decline continue to grow?

    The market is definitely changing and reaching a new phase. I don’t know that year over year sales is quite the right way to look at this […] There will always be sales of new phones. But I think you’re now reaching the point where this is, for many people, it is their primary computing device. So, there are different and more interesting ways of looking at the market. I think in terms of what are you able to do with these devices? What does engagement look like? What are the services that you’re utilizing? And how is it integrated with other parts of your life? We talked about tablets and we talked about watches, but why are you getting a tablet or watch? It might be all about productivity for you or entertainment. That could be replacing the time you spent watching a big screen television or it could be that you’re using the watch for fitness. In some ways, the watch becomes like the new pair of running shoes. It’s like that promise to yourself that you’re gonna get in shape.

    It’s aspirational.

    So the real question is not as much for me how many phones are sold? But what is this technology meaning for people across the different aspects of their life? Sure. We need to look at the attachment of different devices. The second part is that devices are lasting longer.

    Manufacturers painted themselves into a corner. If you spend $1,000 on a device, it’s probably going to last five years, and not the two or three that were set up by the carrier system.

    I think it’s really important that these devices last a long time. We’ve done a few things on our side to support that kind of that. A lot of the top Android phone manufacturers are now offering their four years or five years of security and OS updates. And on top of that, we’ve retooled a lot of the platform and innovated around providing more frequent updates in between those OS updates.

    Apple’s not selling many devices. I think they saw that coming and shifted their focus toward monetizing services. The Android revenue model is very different for every company that isn’t Google. They rely on your apps and services. What does the shift in monetization look like for them, now that they’re not selling as many devices?

    It’s something a lot of them saw coming. I don’t think it was just Apple. We’ve been in the services business —

    For much longer than you’ve been in the phone business…

    Hardware is newer for us than services. We have a business model around people using our services. We partner with manufacturers. It’s not a secret that we share in that success. I think there’s going to be more of a movement toward models where devices themselves are sold more as a service. I think there’s a lot of innovative work going on in the carrier side to figure out how you buy a device for less up front, you use it and return it after a period of time and you get another device as part of your overall subscription.

    Is Google still committed to Android Go?

    Absolutely. The purpose of Android Go is to make sure that entry-level devices have a really high-quality experience. We built Android Go because we saw an opportunity to make sure that when you buy the device, even though it might be less expensive than other devices, that doesn’t mean the experience should be poor.

    How bullish is Google on AR and VR?

    I think we’re excited about the possibilities of AR and VR. We’re not strangers to the space. We’ve been pioneers there for a long time, and we’re seeing the next generation of the technology now. We’ll be right there with the industry participating in that.

    Is there a role for Google to play in the metaverse?

    The team that I run at Google is a platform provider. The great thing about the ecosystem is that there are a number of companies that have a vision of what they’d like to see happen. We have developers who like to participate. Where the platform can be relevant is in making sure that there is a way that developers can leverage their interest across different providers and ensure that the experience scales for them. I think the most important thing about AR and VR right now is just like watch. It’s making sure, as an industry, we come to the use cases that truly resonate as a consumer.

    There are always regulator concerns around anti-competitive activities. Look at what’s going on in India right now. How much of a challenge are these sorts of laws and regulations for your team.

    As a platform provider making technology that is important in people’s live, I think that governments around the world representing their citizens should be involved in looking at that technology carefully. We have a responsibility to make sure that we’re integrating that technology well into society. Different countries have different opinions on how that should work. I think it’s a constructive dialogue for the most part around the world where governments want to engage in that kind of discussion — what role should society play? We welcome that, and we should be engaged in that conversation responsibly. It takes time and is a new component of what we do today. Fifteen years or so ago, it wasn’t a big part of what we do. But it comes with the territory of playing an important role in what people do.

    Will Google continue to aggressively push back against some of those decisions?

    The important thing Google will do is continue to make products that we hope consumers will love. Of course, where we think that there are elements of policy where we can help educate, we will engage to do that in the right way.

    The EU has been at the forefront of much of this digital legislations, whether it’s GDPR, USB-C or the right to repair. What has the climate been like when it comes to dealing with the European Union?

    For tech in general across the world, whether it be the EU or any other country where tech is playing a big role in society, there are appropriate questions being asked about how that should happen. On the surface, one might try to say that’s a challenging environment. I prefer to think about it as what happens when technology in a particular area goes mainstream and becomes such an important part of life.

    Democracies then look at it as how do we want this technology to interact with our citizenry, and what should that relationship be like. That’s a responsibility that we have to engage in that way. We have a very productive dialogue set of conversations with the European Commission and the EU on a number of things. We have a very productive dialogue with the equivalent organizations in Japan and Korea and a number of places. There are certain instances where we’re helping to educate on policy. There are certain instances where we may disagree, and we need to explain our position. There are certain places where there are laws, and we have to be compliant with those laws.

    \"\"

    Google’s Android booth at MWC 2023 in Barcelona. Image Credits: Brian Heater

    U.S. trade embargoes have kneecapped Huawei. How do those sorts of things impact you and your team?

    We work with a lot of partners around the world, so it’s not a new thing to us that there are certain geopolitical events that occur that cause one or more of our partners to have a challenge. You mentioned U.S. government action, but take the pandemic, the supply chain challenges and how demand and supply become imbalanced. It’s a global world, and all of these things are interconnected. […] We want to support a healthy ecosystem. The good news is there are partners in lots of different geographies, and we work with all of them to try to make sure that they can build and be successful in the ecosystem. Obviously, we have some limits in how we can participate in China, and that’s fine. We have found ways to work with partners so that they can be successful.

    Have you played with [Huawei’s] HarmonyOS?

    I haven’t played with HarmonyOS and am not in the best place to give it a review.

    It seems like they’ve made a lot of progress.

    I think they probably have very smart folks working on that. We have a lot of respect for companies that can do that. That’s innovative. There’s a lot of competition. It’s always felt like a pretty vibrant ecosystem, whether it’s manufacturers building their own operating system or taking open source Android and building their own variant, which many companies have done. There’s a ton of competition.

    You say there’s a ton of competition. There are some smaller players like Sailfish, but in terms of market share, no one can touch [Android and iOS].

    I think there are plenty other competitive solutions, whether it be Fire OS from Amazon or the original Geophone that launched in India and has hundreds of millions of subscribers and didn’t run Android. You mentioned Harmony. In China, there are a number of variants of open source Android. There’s a lot going on, and I think for our part, it’s something we always have to make sure we’re delivering from a platform standpoint is useful and good. Android is open source. If someone wants to build their own version of it, they’re free to do that. So if someone wants to go and build their own versions of it, they’re free to do that. So we have to have compelling reasons technically, and in terms of consumer experience, why you should use the Android platform.

    \"Read



    >Source link>

    >>Join our Facebook page From top right corner. <<

  • Google\’s Sameer Samat on ecosystems, regulation and competition

    Android was, predictably, everywhere at Mobile World Congress. At a show where Apple has no public-facing presence, Google’s mobile operating system is almost entirely ubiquitous. As in past years, the company also set up a sprawling outdoor booth between halls. This time, the focus was on interoperability and ecosystem.

    You’d be hard-pressed to find a better person to speak on the subject than Sameer Samat; the former president of Jawbone now heads Android’s product and design team, as well as design and engineering for Google Play and Wear OS. We sat down with the executive on the third day of MWC to discuss Google’s consumer software plays.

    \"Google\'s

    Google’s Android booth at MWC 2023 in Barcelona. Image Credits: Brian Heater

    Samat: People don’t just buy a phone anymore, they buy into an ecosystem.

    TechCrunch: That’s been the case for some time.

    Samat: It has, but on the Android side, having that full portfolio of devices is important.

    You’re talking specifically about Google devices?

    No. It’s not been the case that every major manufacturer has offered a full portfolio. I think that’s super important. It’s really important that those devices work well together. We’ve had this effort that we call “Better Together” for a while, and we’re working on a number of things that help these devices interoperate.

    iOS is your main competition. That’s something Apple has done well for a long time. It’s a big part of why people buy their products. Do you look at what they’re doing when building out features?

    From a consumer standpoint, it’s very clear that people have more devices in their life. The average U.S. household has 20-plus connected devices in their home. We hear feedback from consumers, and individual manufacturers have implemented these things. Usually on these things, some Android manufacturer has gone and done it first. The reverse happens a lot of times. Apple sees something they think is cool and copies it that way — always-on displays. The difference is: Can you do it widely across the ecosystem? Can you do it where you can cross pair between different devices from different manufacturers, and can you do it at scale.

    People ask me for earbud recommendations. Nine times out of 10, I ask them who makes their phone. Manufacturers’ devices tend to work better with their own product.

    There’s always opportunity for manufacturers to differentiate. I think that’s good and should remain. But I also think there are basics that need to be standardized, because it provides a level of choice to consumers that they appreciate and they expect in our ecosystem.

    Wear OS/Android Wear seemed stagnant for a long time. There does seem to be a renewed effort around the Pixel Watch, however.

    We were very early to the watch space. We helped pioneer a lot of things that went into smartwatches. At the beginning, the use cases weren’t very clear. There were a lot things that people wanted their watches to do. There was a view that maybe it was like a phone on your wrist. Over time what’s develop is a set of key pillars — use cases that the device is awesome at, and that will grow over time.

    Health came in and completely dominated the conversation.

    Health is important. The watch is one of the only electronics that you wear on your body, 24/7. With your permission, it has access to your vitals and these days, health is a big concern for all of us. Technology assisting us with that is very in line with our overall mission, and a lot of what our partners want to do for consumers. As we’ve honed that, there’s been an opportunity to refocus the platform. It started with our partnership with Samsung around this. For a while, they had done something different with their watches [Tizen OS]. We got back together and made an effort to restart that.

    With Samsung, Wear OS suddenly has a lot more market share overnight.

    Yeah. I think when you find the right market fit with those core use cases and you do it with the right hardware and a great partner like Samsung, it gives you an opportunity to get out there and show consumers what’s possible.

    This is one category where Apple was extremely dominate in market share. After the recent updates, if you push Samsung to the side for a moment, are you seeing a lot more adoptions?

    Yeah. There are a lot more people buying Wear OS devices, and there will be a lot more devices coming from other partners this year.

    Smartphone sales were declining before the pandemic, and that trend has accelerated in the last few years. Will the decline continue to grow?

    The market is definitely changing and reaching a new phase. I don’t know that year over year sales is quite the right way to look at this […] There will always be sales of new phones. But I think you’re now reaching the point where this is, for many people, it is their primary computing device. So, there are different and more interesting ways of looking at the market. I think in terms of what are you able to do with these devices? What does engagement look like? What are the services that you’re utilizing? And how is it integrated with other parts of your life? We talked about tablets and we talked about watches, but why are you getting a tablet or watch? It might be all about productivity for you or entertainment. That could be replacing the time you spent watching a big screen television or it could be that you’re using the watch for fitness. In some ways, the watch becomes like the new pair of running shoes. It’s like that promise to yourself that you’re gonna get in shape.

    It’s aspirational.

    So the real question is not as much for me how many phones are sold? But what is this technology meaning for people across the different aspects of their life? Sure. We need to look at the attachment of different devices. The second part is that devices are lasting longer.

    Manufacturers painted themselves into a corner. If you spend $1,000 on a device, it’s probably going to last five years, and not the two or three that were set up by the carrier system.

    I think it’s really important that these devices last a long time. We’ve done a few things on our side to support that kind of that. A lot of the top Android phone manufacturers are now offering their four years or five years of security and OS updates. And on top of that, we’ve retooled a lot of the platform and innovated around providing more frequent updates in between those OS updates.

    Apple’s not selling many devices. I think they saw that coming and shifted their focus toward monetizing services. The Android revenue model is very different for every company that isn’t Google. They rely on your apps and services. What does the shift in monetization look like for them, now that they’re not selling as many devices?

    It’s something a lot of them saw coming. I don’t think it was just Apple. We’ve been in the services business —

    For much longer than you’ve been in the phone business…

    Hardware is newer for us than services. We have a business model around people using our services. We partner with manufacturers. It’s not a secret that we share in that success. I think there’s going to be more of a movement toward models where devices themselves are sold more as a service. I think there’s a lot of innovative work going on in the carrier side to figure out how you buy a device for less up front, you use it and return it after a period of time and you get another device as part of your overall subscription.

    Is Google still committed to Android Go?

    Absolutely. The purpose of Android Go is to make sure that entry-level devices have a really high-quality experience. We built Android Go because we saw an opportunity to make sure that when you buy the device, even though it might be less expensive than other devices, that doesn’t mean the experience should be poor.

    How bullish is Google on AR and VR?

    I think we’re excited about the possibilities of AR and VR. We’re not strangers to the space. We’ve been pioneers there for a long time, and we’re seeing the next generation of the technology now. We’ll be right there with the industry participating in that.

    Is there a role for Google to play in the metaverse?

    The team that I run at Google is a platform provider. The great thing about the ecosystem is that there are a number of companies that have a vision of what they’d like to see happen. We have developers who like to participate. Where the platform can be relevant is in making sure that there is a way that developers can leverage their interest across different providers and ensure that the experience scales for them. I think the most important thing about AR and VR right now is just like watch. It’s making sure, as an industry, we come to the use cases that truly resonate as a consumer.

    There are always regulator concerns around anti-competitive activities. Look at what’s going on in India right now. How much of a challenge are these sorts of laws and regulations for your team.

    As a platform provider making technology that is important in people’s live, I think that governments around the world representing their citizens should be involved in looking at that technology carefully. We have a responsibility to make sure that we’re integrating that technology well into society. Different countries have different opinions on how that should work. I think it’s a constructive dialogue for the most part around the world where governments want to engage in that kind of discussion — what role should society play? We welcome that, and we should be engaged in that conversation responsibly. It takes time and is a new component of what we do today. Fifteen years or so ago, it wasn’t a big part of what we do. But it comes with the territory of playing an important role in what people do.

    Will Google continue to aggressively push back against some of those decisions?

    The important thing Google will do is continue to make products that we hope consumers will love. Of course, where we think that there are elements of policy where we can help educate, we will engage to do that in the right way.

    The EU has been at the forefront of much of this digital legislations, whether it’s GDPR, USB-C or the right to repair. What has the climate been like when it comes to dealing with the European Union?

    For tech in general across the world, whether it be the EU or any other country where tech is playing a big role in society, there are appropriate questions being asked about how that should happen. On the surface, one might try to say that’s a challenging environment. I prefer to think about it as what happens when technology in a particular area goes mainstream and becomes such an important part of life.

    Democracies then look at it as how do we want this technology to interact with our citizenry, and what should that relationship be like. That’s a responsibility that we have to engage in that way. We have a very productive dialogue set of conversations with the European Commission and the EU on a number of things. We have a very productive dialogue with the equivalent organizations in Japan and Korea and a number of places. There are certain instances where we’re helping to educate on policy. There are certain instances where we may disagree, and we need to explain our position. There are certain places where there are laws, and we have to be compliant with those laws.

    \"\"

    Google’s Android booth at MWC 2023 in Barcelona. Image Credits: Brian Heater

    U.S. trade embargoes have kneecapped Huawei. How do those sorts of things impact you and your team?

    We work with a lot of partners around the world, so it’s not a new thing to us that there are certain geopolitical events that occur that cause one or more of our partners to have a challenge. You mentioned U.S. government action, but take the pandemic, the supply chain challenges and how demand and supply become imbalanced. It’s a global world, and all of these things are interconnected. […] We want to support a healthy ecosystem. The good news is there are partners in lots of different geographies, and we work with all of them to try to make sure that they can build and be successful in the ecosystem. Obviously, we have some limits in how we can participate in China, and that’s fine. We have found ways to work with partners so that they can be successful.

    Have you played with [Huawei’s] HarmonyOS?

    I haven’t played with HarmonyOS and am not in the best place to give it a review.

    It seems like they’ve made a lot of progress.

    I think they probably have very smart folks working on that. We have a lot of respect for companies that can do that. That’s innovative. There’s a lot of competition. It’s always felt like a pretty vibrant ecosystem, whether it’s manufacturers building their own operating system or taking open source Android and building their own variant, which many companies have done. There’s a ton of competition.

    You say there’s a ton of competition. There are some smaller players like Sailfish, but in terms of market share, no one can touch [Android and iOS].

    I think there are plenty other competitive solutions, whether it be Fire OS from Amazon or the original Geophone that launched in India and has hundreds of millions of subscribers and didn’t run Android. You mentioned Harmony. In China, there are a number of variants of open source Android. There’s a lot going on, and I think for our part, it’s something we always have to make sure we’re delivering from a platform standpoint is useful and good. Android is open source. If someone wants to build their own version of it, they’re free to do that. So if someone wants to go and build their own versions of it, they’re free to do that. So we have to have compelling reasons technically, and in terms of consumer experience, why you should use the Android platform.

    \"Read



    >Source link>

    >>Join our Facebook page From top right corner. <<

  • Google\’s Sameer Samat on ecosystems, regulation and competition

    Android was, predictably, everywhere at Mobile World Congress. At a show where Apple has no public-facing presence, Google’s mobile operating system is almost entirely ubiquitous. As in past years, the company also set up a sprawling outdoor booth between halls. This time, the focus was on interoperability and ecosystem.

    You’d be hard-pressed to find a better person to speak on the subject than Sameer Samat; the former president of Jawbone now heads Android’s product and design team, as well as design and engineering for Google Play and Wear OS. We sat down with the executive on the third day of MWC to discuss Google’s consumer software plays.

    \"Google\'s

    Google’s Android booth at MWC 2023 in Barcelona. Image Credits: Brian Heater

    Samat: People don’t just buy a phone anymore, they buy into an ecosystem.

    TechCrunch: That’s been the case for some time.

    Samat: It has, but on the Android side, having that full portfolio of devices is important.

    You’re talking specifically about Google devices?

    No. It’s not been the case that every major manufacturer has offered a full portfolio. I think that’s super important. It’s really important that those devices work well together. We’ve had this effort that we call “Better Together” for a while, and we’re working on a number of things that help these devices interoperate.

    iOS is your main competition. That’s something Apple has done well for a long time. It’s a big part of why people buy their products. Do you look at what they’re doing when building out features?

    From a consumer standpoint, it’s very clear that people have more devices in their life. The average U.S. household has 20-plus connected devices in their home. We hear feedback from consumers, and individual manufacturers have implemented these things. Usually on these things, some Android manufacturer has gone and done it first. The reverse happens a lot of times. Apple sees something they think is cool and copies it that way — always-on displays. The difference is: Can you do it widely across the ecosystem? Can you do it where you can cross pair between different devices from different manufacturers, and can you do it at scale.

    People ask me for earbud recommendations. Nine times out of 10, I ask them who makes their phone. Manufacturers’ devices tend to work better with their own product.

    There’s always opportunity for manufacturers to differentiate. I think that’s good and should remain. But I also think there are basics that need to be standardized, because it provides a level of choice to consumers that they appreciate and they expect in our ecosystem.

    Wear OS/Android Wear seemed stagnant for a long time. There does seem to be a renewed effort around the Pixel Watch, however.

    We were very early to the watch space. We helped pioneer a lot of things that went into smartwatches. At the beginning, the use cases weren’t very clear. There were a lot things that people wanted their watches to do. There was a view that maybe it was like a phone on your wrist. Over time what’s develop is a set of key pillars — use cases that the device is awesome at, and that will grow over time.

    Health came in and completely dominated the conversation.

    Health is important. The watch is one of the only electronics that you wear on your body, 24/7. With your permission, it has access to your vitals and these days, health is a big concern for all of us. Technology assisting us with that is very in line with our overall mission, and a lot of what our partners want to do for consumers. As we’ve honed that, there’s been an opportunity to refocus the platform. It started with our partnership with Samsung around this. For a while, they had done something different with their watches [Tizen OS]. We got back together and made an effort to restart that.

    With Samsung, Wear OS suddenly has a lot more market share overnight.

    Yeah. I think when you find the right market fit with those core use cases and you do it with the right hardware and a great partner like Samsung, it gives you an opportunity to get out there and show consumers what’s possible.

    This is one category where Apple was extremely dominate in market share. After the recent updates, if you push Samsung to the side for a moment, are you seeing a lot more adoptions?

    Yeah. There are a lot more people buying Wear OS devices, and there will be a lot more devices coming from other partners this year.

    Smartphone sales were declining before the pandemic, and that trend has accelerated in the last few years. Will the decline continue to grow?

    The market is definitely changing and reaching a new phase. I don’t know that year over year sales is quite the right way to look at this […] There will always be sales of new phones. But I think you’re now reaching the point where this is, for many people, it is their primary computing device. So, there are different and more interesting ways of looking at the market. I think in terms of what are you able to do with these devices? What does engagement look like? What are the services that you’re utilizing? And how is it integrated with other parts of your life? We talked about tablets and we talked about watches, but why are you getting a tablet or watch? It might be all about productivity for you or entertainment. That could be replacing the time you spent watching a big screen television or it could be that you’re using the watch for fitness. In some ways, the watch becomes like the new pair of running shoes. It’s like that promise to yourself that you’re gonna get in shape.

    It’s aspirational.

    So the real question is not as much for me how many phones are sold? But what is this technology meaning for people across the different aspects of their life? Sure. We need to look at the attachment of different devices. The second part is that devices are lasting longer.

    Manufacturers painted themselves into a corner. If you spend $1,000 on a device, it’s probably going to last five years, and not the two or three that were set up by the carrier system.

    I think it’s really important that these devices last a long time. We’ve done a few things on our side to support that kind of that. A lot of the top Android phone manufacturers are now offering their four years or five years of security and OS updates. And on top of that, we’ve retooled a lot of the platform and innovated around providing more frequent updates in between those OS updates.

    Apple’s not selling many devices. I think they saw that coming and shifted their focus toward monetizing services. The Android revenue model is very different for every company that isn’t Google. They rely on your apps and services. What does the shift in monetization look like for them, now that they’re not selling as many devices?

    It’s something a lot of them saw coming. I don’t think it was just Apple. We’ve been in the services business —

    For much longer than you’ve been in the phone business…

    Hardware is newer for us than services. We have a business model around people using our services. We partner with manufacturers. It’s not a secret that we share in that success. I think there’s going to be more of a movement toward models where devices themselves are sold more as a service. I think there’s a lot of innovative work going on in the carrier side to figure out how you buy a device for less up front, you use it and return it after a period of time and you get another device as part of your overall subscription.

    Is Google still committed to Android Go?

    Absolutely. The purpose of Android Go is to make sure that entry-level devices have a really high-quality experience. We built Android Go because we saw an opportunity to make sure that when you buy the device, even though it might be less expensive than other devices, that doesn’t mean the experience should be poor.

    How bullish is Google on AR and VR?

    I think we’re excited about the possibilities of AR and VR. We’re not strangers to the space. We’ve been pioneers there for a long time, and we’re seeing the next generation of the technology now. We’ll be right there with the industry participating in that.

    Is there a role for Google to play in the metaverse?

    The team that I run at Google is a platform provider. The great thing about the ecosystem is that there are a number of companies that have a vision of what they’d like to see happen. We have developers who like to participate. Where the platform can be relevant is in making sure that there is a way that developers can leverage their interest across different providers and ensure that the experience scales for them. I think the most important thing about AR and VR right now is just like watch. It’s making sure, as an industry, we come to the use cases that truly resonate as a consumer.

    There are always regulator concerns around anti-competitive activities. Look at what’s going on in India right now. How much of a challenge are these sorts of laws and regulations for your team.

    As a platform provider making technology that is important in people’s live, I think that governments around the world representing their citizens should be involved in looking at that technology carefully. We have a responsibility to make sure that we’re integrating that technology well into society. Different countries have different opinions on how that should work. I think it’s a constructive dialogue for the most part around the world where governments want to engage in that kind of discussion — what role should society play? We welcome that, and we should be engaged in that conversation responsibly. It takes time and is a new component of what we do today. Fifteen years or so ago, it wasn’t a big part of what we do. But it comes with the territory of playing an important role in what people do.

    Will Google continue to aggressively push back against some of those decisions?

    The important thing Google will do is continue to make products that we hope consumers will love. Of course, where we think that there are elements of policy where we can help educate, we will engage to do that in the right way.

    The EU has been at the forefront of much of this digital legislations, whether it’s GDPR, USB-C or the right to repair. What has the climate been like when it comes to dealing with the European Union?

    For tech in general across the world, whether it be the EU or any other country where tech is playing a big role in society, there are appropriate questions being asked about how that should happen. On the surface, one might try to say that’s a challenging environment. I prefer to think about it as what happens when technology in a particular area goes mainstream and becomes such an important part of life.

    Democracies then look at it as how do we want this technology to interact with our citizenry, and what should that relationship be like. That’s a responsibility that we have to engage in that way. We have a very productive dialogue set of conversations with the European Commission and the EU on a number of things. We have a very productive dialogue with the equivalent organizations in Japan and Korea and a number of places. There are certain instances where we’re helping to educate on policy. There are certain instances where we may disagree, and we need to explain our position. There are certain places where there are laws, and we have to be compliant with those laws.

    \"\"

    Google’s Android booth at MWC 2023 in Barcelona. Image Credits: Brian Heater

    U.S. trade embargoes have kneecapped Huawei. How do those sorts of things impact you and your team?

    We work with a lot of partners around the world, so it’s not a new thing to us that there are certain geopolitical events that occur that cause one or more of our partners to have a challenge. You mentioned U.S. government action, but take the pandemic, the supply chain challenges and how demand and supply become imbalanced. It’s a global world, and all of these things are interconnected. […] We want to support a healthy ecosystem. The good news is there are partners in lots of different geographies, and we work with all of them to try to make sure that they can build and be successful in the ecosystem. Obviously, we have some limits in how we can participate in China, and that’s fine. We have found ways to work with partners so that they can be successful.

    Have you played with [Huawei’s] HarmonyOS?

    I haven’t played with HarmonyOS and am not in the best place to give it a review.

    It seems like they’ve made a lot of progress.

    I think they probably have very smart folks working on that. We have a lot of respect for companies that can do that. That’s innovative. There’s a lot of competition. It’s always felt like a pretty vibrant ecosystem, whether it’s manufacturers building their own operating system or taking open source Android and building their own variant, which many companies have done. There’s a ton of competition.

    You say there’s a ton of competition. There are some smaller players like Sailfish, but in terms of market share, no one can touch [Android and iOS].

    I think there are plenty other competitive solutions, whether it be Fire OS from Amazon or the original Geophone that launched in India and has hundreds of millions of subscribers and didn’t run Android. You mentioned Harmony. In China, there are a number of variants of open source Android. There’s a lot going on, and I think for our part, it’s something we always have to make sure we’re delivering from a platform standpoint is useful and good. Android is open source. If someone wants to build their own version of it, they’re free to do that. So if someone wants to go and build their own versions of it, they’re free to do that. So we have to have compelling reasons technically, and in terms of consumer experience, why you should use the Android platform.

    \"Read



    >Source link>

    >>Join our Facebook page From top right corner. <<

  • Hong Kong shows desire to be crypto hub with new regulation

    جیسا کہ امریکی حکومت قواعد و ضوابط کی ایک لہر کے ساتھ کرپٹو انڈسٹری پر لگام لگا رہی ہے، دوسری جگہیں ورچوئل اثاثہ کی صنعت کے لیے نئے مرکز کے طور پر ابھر رہی ہیں۔ پیر کو ہانگ کانگ نے تجویز پیش کی۔ قواعد اس سے خوردہ سرمایہ کاروں کو لائسنس یافتہ ایکسچینجز پر مخصوص \”لارج کیپ ٹوکن\” کی تجارت کرنے کی اجازت ملے گی، جو اس کی سرحد کے پار سرزمین چین کے بالکل برعکس ہے۔ کرپٹو سے متعلقہ لین دین پر مکمل پابندی ہے۔.

    شہر کے سیکیورٹیز اینڈ فیوچر کمیشن نے یہ واضح نہیں کیا کہ کون سے بڑے ٹوکنز کی اجازت دی جائے گی، حالانکہ ریگولیٹری باڈی کے ایک ترجمان نے کہا کہ یہ ممکنہ طور پر بٹ کوائن اور ایتھر ہوں گے، جو مارکیٹ ویلیو کے لحاظ سے دو سب سے بڑے ڈیجیٹل اثاثے ہیں۔

    کرپٹو ٹریڈنگ کے خلاف چین کے کریک ڈاؤن کے بعد سے، ملک کے ویب 3 اسٹارٹ اپس کے پاس ہے۔ بڑی حد تک اپنی گھریلو مارکیٹ کو چھوڑ دیا اور توجہ بیرون ملک منتقل کر دی۔. کچھ زیادہ وسائل رکھنے والوں نے دوستانہ مقامات جیسے سنگاپور اور دبئی میں نئے اڈے قائم کرنے کا انتخاب کیا ہے، حالانکہ وہ عام طور پر ملک کے سستی ٹیک ٹیلنٹ کے بڑے تالاب کو استعمال کرنے کے لیے ڈویلپرز کو چین میں رکھنا جاری رکھتے ہیں۔

    کریپٹو کرنسیوں کے لیے ہانگ کانگ کی جانب سے زیادہ آرام دہ ریگولیٹری ماحول متعارف کروانے کے ساتھ، ان میں سے کچھ چینی کی قائم کردہ ویب 3 کمپنیاں جلاوطنی میں واپس آ سکتی ہیں اور گھر کے قریب ہو سکتی ہیں۔

    انفرادی سرمایہ کاروں کو قیاس آرائی پر مبنی سرگرمیوں سے بچانے کے لیے کرپٹو ٹریڈنگ پر چین کی پابندی اب درست معلوم ہوتی ہے، دیوالیہ پن اور برطرفیوں کی وجہ سے جس نے عالمی کرپٹو انڈسٹری کو ہلا کر رکھ دیا ہے۔ لیکن پیسہ اور ہنر web3 میں ڈالنا جاری رکھیں کرپٹو بلبلے کے پھٹنے کے باوجود۔ یہ تصور کرنا مشکل ہے کہ بیجنگ خاموش بیٹھا ہے جب کہ باقی دنیا عمارت کے بلاکس پر کام کرتی ہے۔ بحث جدت کی ایک نئی لہر کو جنم دے گا جتنا کہ موجودہ انٹرنیٹ خود۔

    ہانگ کانگ، جو تاریخی طور پر ایک مالیاتی مرکز ہے، ممکنہ طور پر چین کے پالیسی سازوں کے لیے ایک تجربہ گاہ ہو سکتا ہے تاکہ ملک کے ایک بلین نیٹیزنز کے لیے کچھ بفر کے ساتھ بلاک چین کی صلاحیت کو جانچ سکے۔

    ہانگ کانگ کی طرف سے پیش کردہ تجویز میں کہا گیا ہے کہ شہر میں کام کرنے والے تمام مرکزی ورچوئل کرنسی ایکسچینجز یا علاقے کے سرمایہ کاروں کے لیے مارکیٹنگ کی خدمات کو سیکیورٹیز اور فیوچر اتھارٹی سے لائسنس حاصل کرنا چاہیے۔ تقاضے \”اثاثوں کی محفوظ تحویل، اپنے کلائنٹ کو جاننا، مفادات کے تصادم، سائبر سیکیورٹی، اکاؤنٹنگ اور آڈیٹنگ، رسک مینجمنٹ، انسداد منی لانڈرنگ/دہشت گردی کی انسداد فنانسنگ اور مارکیٹ میں بدانتظامی کی روک تھام جیسے اہم شعبوں کا احاطہ کرتے ہیں۔\” اعلان پڑھتا ہے.

    \”آن بورڈنگ کلائنٹس اور ٹوکن داخلہ میں مناسبیت کو یقینی بنانے کے علاوہ، دیگر اہم تجاویز ٹوکن ڈیو ڈیلیجنس، گورننس اور انکشافات سے متعلق ہیں۔\”

    دوسرے لفظوں میں، سنٹرلائزڈ کرپٹو ایکسچینجز کو ہانگ کانگ کے آئی پی ایڈریسز پر اس وقت تک پابندی لگانی ہوگی جب تک کہ وہ وہاں کام کرنے کے لیے متعلقہ اجازت نامہ حاصل نہ کر لیں۔

    ریگولیٹری تقاضے 31 مارچ تک مشاورت کے لیے کھلے ہیں اور لائسنسنگ کا نیا نظام یکم جون سے نافذ العمل ہوگا۔



    Source link

  • PayPal tells Australia it supports buy-now-pay-later regulation

    سڈنی: ادائیگیوں کی بڑی کمپنی PayPal Holdings Inc صارفین کے تحفظ کے قانون کے تحت خریدے جانے والے قرضے (BNPL) چاہتی ہے، اس نے آسٹریلوی حکومت کو جمع کرائے گئے ایک بیان میں کہا، اس شعبے کے اندر سے ایک طاقتور آواز کو شامل کیا گیا جس میں ریگولیشن کا مطالبہ کیا گیا۔

    امریکی فرم، جو اپنی مرکزی رقم کی منتقلی کی خدمت کے ساتھ ساتھ BNPL قرض فراہم کرتی ہے، نے کہا کہ خریداروں کو بہت زیادہ قرض لینے سے بچانے کے لیے اس کے اپنے تحفظات ہیں لیکن صنعت کو \”صارفین اور صنعت کی یقین دہانی اور مسابقتی غیر جانبداری\” کو یقینی بنانے کے لیے کچھ ضابطوں کا سامنا کرنا چاہیے۔

    جمع کرانے، جسے حکومت نے جمعرات کو بی این پی ایل ریگولیشن کی تحقیقات کے ایک حصے کے طور پر شائع کیا، پے پال کی اس پوزیشن کا اب تک کا مکمل حساب دیتا ہے کہ ریاست کی طرف سے اس شعبے کی کتنی نگرانی کی جانی چاہیے۔ بہت سی دوسری کمپنیاں جو بی این پی ایل کے قرضے فروخت کرتی ہیں انہوں نے گذارشات میں کہا کہ انہوں نے کم سے کم یا خود ضابطے کی حمایت کی۔

    88 بلین ڈالر کی کمپنی نے \”نیشنل کنزیومر کریڈٹ پروٹیکشن ایکٹ کے ذریعے بی این پی ایل سیکٹر کے لیے ایک موزوں، متناسب اور سوچے سمجھے ریگولیٹری فریم ورک کی حمایت کی تاکہ صارفین کو زیادہ سے زیادہ تحفظ فراہم کرنے کے لیے حکومت کے مقصد کو حاصل کیا جا سکے\”، پے پال نے اپنے آسٹریلیا کے جنرل منیجر اینڈریو کی طرف سے دستخط کیے گئے جمع کرائے گئے بیان میں کہا۔ ٹون

    BNPL کمپنیاں خریداروں کو بلا سود لے کر اپنی طرف متوجہ کرتی ہیں اور خوردہ فروش کی فیس سے پیسے کماتی ہیں۔

    سود کے چارجز کی عدم موجودگی نے انہیں صارفین کے کریڈٹ قانون سے مستثنیٰ قرار دے دیا ہے، اور اس شعبے کا کاروبار ایک آن لائن خریداری کے جنون میں پھٹ گیا جو COVID-19 محرک ادائیگیوں اور انتہائی کم بینک سود کی شرحوں سے ہوا تھا۔

    پے پال کی جمع آوری میں کہا گیا ہے کہ اس نے بی این پی ایل فراہم کرنے والوں کے لیے لازمی کریڈٹ لائسنسوں کی حمایت کی ہے اور ان قوانین کی حمایت کی ہے جن کے تحت کمپنیوں کو \”مناسب حد\” سے اوپر کے قرض کے لیے صارف کی مناسبیت کی جانچ پڑتال کی ضرورت ہے۔

    ادائیگیوں کی فرم پے پال اخراجات میں کمی کے لیے اپنی 7 فیصد افرادی قوت کو فارغ کرے گی۔

    کمپنی نے مکمل طور پر \”کریڈٹ رپورٹنگ کے نظام میں مشغول ہونے کے ساتھ منسلک اخراجات\” کے بغیر \”بیسپوک بی این پی ایل کریڈٹ رپورٹنگ فریم ورک کی ترقی پر مزید غور کرنے میں میرٹ\” کو دیکھا۔

    آسٹریلیا کی سب سے بڑی بی این پی ایل کمپنی آفٹر پے، جسے 2022 میں ٹویٹر کے بانی جیک ڈورسی کے بلاک انکارپوریشن نے خریدا تھا، نے اپنی عرضی میں کہا کہ بی این پی ایل کمپنیوں کو صنعت سے چلنے والے ضابطہ اخلاق پر عمل کرنا چاہیے اور \”اسٹیٹس کو نے صارفین کے نقصان کو روکنے کی اپنی صلاحیت کا مظاہرہ کیا ہے\”۔

    آسٹریلوی سیکیورٹیز اینڈ انویسٹمنٹ کمیشن نے اپنی عرضی میں، بی این پی ایل سیکٹر کو صارفین کے تحفظ کے قانون کی زد میں آنے کا مطالبہ کیا کیونکہ \”ایک جیسی خصوصیات اور ایک ہی مقصد اور کام کے ساتھ کریڈٹ پروڈکٹس کے ساتھ ایک جیسا سلوک کیا جانا چاہیے\”۔

    حکومت نے کہا ہے کہ وہ 2023 میں BNPL ریگولیشن کو نافذ کرنا چاہتی ہے۔

    اسسٹنٹ خزانچی اسٹیفن جونز نے کہا کہ آسٹریلیا میں 7 ملین فعال BNPL اکاؤنٹس ہیں – ہر چار افراد کے لیے ایک – اور حکومت \”مقابلہ، اختراع اور صارفین کے تحفظ میں صحیح توازن حاصل کرنے\” کے لیے پرعزم ہے۔



    Source link

  • Banistan: Ignorant leaders, absurd regulation

    بہت زیادہ انا، ذاتی مفادات اور میڈیم کی مکمل تفہیم کی کمی کو قربان کیا جا رہا ہے۔

    اس مہینے کے پہلے دن، ویکیپیڈیا کی خدمات کو تنزلی کا نشانہ بنایا گیا۔ پاکستان ٹیلی کمیونیکیشن اتھارٹی (PTA) کی طرف سے، پلیٹ فارم پر پابندی لگا دی گئی بڑے پیمانے پر مذمت ہوئی، پابندی عالمی سرخیوں میں آگئی، قومی کمیشن برائے انسانی حقوق نے پی ٹی اے کو خط لکھا، سول سوسائٹی اور بزنس کمیونٹی ایڈوکیسی گروپس مشترکہ بیان جاری کیا دی وزیراعظم آفس نے پی ٹی اے کو ہدایات جاری کر دیں۔ پابندی ہٹانے کے لیے اور بالآخر، ویکیپیڈیا ایک بار پھر پاکستان میں قابل رسائی ہو گیا۔ یہ سب کچھ ایک ہفتے کے اندر اندر ہوا۔

    اس سب کے درمیان، اس اقدام کے پیچھے اصل وجہ کبھی بھی ظاہر نہیں کی گئی، پی ٹی اے نے صرف یہ کہا کہ پلیٹ فارم پر \”مقدس مواد کو مسدود/ہٹانے\” کی وجہ سے پابندی عائد کی گئی تھی۔ یہ مواد کیا تھا کسی کا اندازہ ہے۔

    ابھی حال ہی میں، وزیر اعظم کی طرف سے ایک وزارتی کمیٹی تشکیل دی گئی ہے اور اس کی سربراہی وزیر آئی ٹی کر رہے ہیں، پی ٹی اے کو ویب سائٹس بلاک کرنے سے روک دیا۔ پہلے وزارت سے مشورہ کیے بغیر۔

    لیکن کس اختیار سے؟ یہ مسلم لیگ ن کی حکومت تھی جس نے متعارف کرایا الیکٹرانک جرائم کی روک تھام ایکٹ (پیکا) 2016 میں کافی مزاحمت کے باوجود، اور PTA کو مبہم الفاظ والے سیکشن 37 کے ذریعے پلیٹ فارمز کو بلاک کرنے کا اختیار دیا۔

    اسلام آباد ہائی کورٹ (IHC) کے سامنے اختیارات کو مسدود کرنے کے استعمال کے دو چیلنجوں میں، عدالت نے اپنے فیصلوں میں نوٹ کیا۔ کہ سیکشن 37 کی اسکیم کے تحت، چونکہ قانون PTA کو اختیارات دیتا ہے، اس لیے صرف اتھارٹی ہی ان کاموں کو انجام دے سکتی ہے، لیکن یہ کہ اس طرح کے اختیارات کو سیکشن 37(2) کے مطابق قواعد کے ذریعے ریگولیٹ کیا جانا چاہیے۔ اس کا مقصد ذمہ داری کا تعین کرنا اور یہ بھی یقینی بنانا تھا کہ ریگولیٹر بیرونی ہیرا پھیری اور سیاسی اثر و رسوخ سے آزاد ہو کر قانونی اور آزادانہ طور پر اپنی ذمہ داریاں ادا کرے۔

    متعارف کرائے گئے قوانین کے برعکس، قانون پی ٹی اے کے اختیارات کی نگرانی اور ریگولیٹ کرنے کے لیے ایسے قوانین کا تصور کرتا ہے، نہ کہ اسے آزاد ہاتھ دینے کے لیے ایک آلہ کے طور پر کام کرتا ہے۔

    سیکشن 37 میں \”انفارمیشن سسٹم کے ذریعے معلومات تک رسائی کو روکنے\” کے اختیارات کا ذکر کیا گیا ہے۔ اس میں کہیں بھی پلیٹ فارمز کو مکمل طور پر بلاک کرنے کی طاقت کا ذکر نہیں ہے – یہ بعد میں موجودہ آئی ٹی وزارت کے متعارف کرائے گئے قواعد میں لکھا گیا تھا۔

    اگرچہ وکی پیڈیا پر سازگار موقف اختیار کرنے کے لیے ایگزیکٹو کا قدم قابل تعریف معلوم ہو سکتا ہے، لیکن سیاسی مواد کو بلاک کرنے کے لیے – جیسا کہ ماضی میں ہوتا رہا ہے، کل اس کے بالکل برعکس ہو سکتا ہے۔

    ریگولیٹری طاقت پر ایگزیکٹو اثر و رسوخ منانے کی چیز نہیں ہے اور نہ ہی اس مثال میں یہ قانونی طور پر جائز ہے۔ ہدایات جاری کرنے اور قانونی اختیار سے عاری کمیٹیاں قائم کرنے کے بجائے – جیسا کہ ماضی میں بین وزارتی کمیٹی برائے ایویلیوایشن آف ویب سائٹس (IMCEW) کے ساتھ کیا گیا تھا – کیوں حکومت قواعد کو ختم نہیں کرتی اور دفعہ کو منسوخ کرنے کے لیے بل پیش نہیں کرتی؟ 37، اصل مسئلہ اور اس کا جائز قانونی مینڈیٹ کہاں ہے؟

    ہر چیز پر پابندی لگائیں۔

    جب تک ریگولیٹرز کھیل کے میدان کے غنڈوں کی طرح برتاؤ کرتے ہیں اور پوری قوم کو اپنی انا کا یرغمال نہیں بناتے، پاکستان معاشی، سماجی یا کسی بھی شعبے میں ترقی نہیں کر سکتا۔ اس انا پاور ٹرپ کا تازہ ترین واقعہ اس لیے پیش آیا کہ ایک ہدایت کی تعمیل نہیں کی گئی، جس کے جواب میں طاقتیں جو قبائلی انداز میں ایک کو سبق سکھانے کے لیے اجتماعی سزائیں دیتی ہیں۔

    ہم پبلک سیکٹر میں جہاں تکنیکی خدمات اور پلیٹ فارمز کا تعلق ہے، میں بے خبر فیصلہ سازی کا یرغمال بنائے ہوئے ہیں۔ اپنی صلاحیتوں کے لیے ٹیکنالوجی کو بروئے کار لانے کے بجائے، خاص طور پر ایسے وقت میں جب پاکستان کو سخت معاشی صورتحال کا سامنا ہے، دنیا کو یہ پیغام بھیجا جا رہا ہے کہ ہم اب بھی ایک قدیم دور میں رہ رہے ہیں جہاں 2023 میں کمبل پابندیاں لگائی گئی ہیں۔

    ایک ایسے دائرہ اختیار میں جہاں ریگولیٹری غیر یقینی صورتحال غالب ہے اور قانونی اور ماورائے قانونی دونوں اقدامات شہریوں اور کاروباروں کو مجبور کرنے کے لیے استعمال کیے جاتے ہیں، پاکستان کو قطعی طور پر قانون کے اصول کے مطابق یا سرمایہ کاری کو راغب کرنے کے لیے منافع بخش جگہ کے طور پر مارکیٹ نہیں کیا جا رہا ہے — مالیاتی یا انسانی وسائل۔

    گویا سب سے مضحکہ خیز ریگولیٹر اسپاٹ کے لیے مقابلہ کر رہے ہیں، پاکستان الیکٹرانک میڈیا ریگولیٹری اتھارٹی (پیمرا) نے ایک نوٹیفکیشن جاری کیا، جس میں F9 ریپ کے واقعے کی نشریات پر پابندی لگائی گئی۔

    متاثرہ کی شناخت کے تحفظ کی حد تک نفاذ قابل فہم ہے۔ پیمرا کوڈ آف کنڈکٹ کی شق 8.6 لائسنس دہندگان کو شکار کی شناخت ظاہر کرنے سے منع کرتا ہے۔

    تاہم، ایک ہدایت جاری کرتے ہوئے کہ \”F-9 پارک اسلام آباد واقعے کے حوالے سے خبروں/رپورٹوں کی نشریات/دوبارہ نشریات ممنوع ہیں، فوری اثر کے ساتھ\” ایک مکمل ممانعت کے طور پر آتا ہے۔ مبہم ریگولیٹری ہدایات جو ریگولیٹری کارروائی کے خطرات کو منسلک کرتی ہیں، چاہے سروس کی تنزلی، پابندی، لائسنس کی معطلی یا جرمانے، پھر حد سے زیادہ ریگولیشن کا باعث بنتے ہیں، حتیٰ کہ محفوظ تقریر کو بھی سنسر کرتے ہیں اور مفاد عامہ کے مسائل پر بحث ہوتی ہے۔

    آزادی اظہار کو مجرم بنانا

    اگر ریگولیٹری رولر کوسٹر کافی نہیں تھا، تازہ ترین خبروں کا انکشاف فوجداری قوانین ترمیمی بل 2023 وفاقی کابینہ کے سامنے زیر غور ہے۔ وزارت داخلہ کی طرف سے پیش کیا گیا یہ بل مسلح افواج اور عدلیہ کی \”بدنامی\” کو جرم قرار دینے کی کوشش کرتا ہے۔

    یہ اپنی نوعیت کی پہلی تجویز نہیں ہے۔

    2021 میں، ایک پی ٹی آئی کے ایم این اے نے پرائیویٹ ممبرز بل پیش کیا تھا۔ اسی اثر کے لئے. 2022 میں، پی ٹی آئی حکومت نے ایک آرڈیننس جاری کیا، جس میں الیکٹرانک جرائم کی روک تھام کے ایکٹ (پیکا) 2016 کے سیکشن 20 میں ترمیم کی گئی تھی، جس میں اسے شامل کیا گیا تھا، جسے اسلام آباد ہائی کورٹ نے مسترد کر دیا تھا۔

    اب مسلم لیگ ن کے ماتحت وزارت داخلہ نے یہ بل پیش کیا ہے۔ گویا پی پی سی اور پیکا کے مختلف سیکشنز پہلے ہی اس اثر کے لیے استعمال نہیں ہو رہے ہیں، بغیر اس طرح کی ترامیم کے۔ اندرونی طور پر مخالفت کے بعد اے کمیٹی تشکیل دی گئی۔ اس معاملے پر مزید غور کرنے کے لیے۔

    مزید پڑھ: پروجیکٹ پیکا I – کسی قوم کو کیسے خاموش کیا جائے۔

    کمیٹیاں متنازعہ قانون سازی کو پش بیک کے درمیان موخر کرنے کا سب سے آسان طریقہ ہے، پھر \”ہم نے مشاورت کی\” دلیل کو آگے بڑھاتے ہوئے، جو چیز پہلے قابل اعتراض تھی اسے بحال کریں۔

    کہیں اور، مشاورت سالوں پر محیط ہے۔ ان میں عوامی طور پر دستیاب مسودے، وائٹ پیپرز، اور جمع کرائے گئے ان پٹ کے جوابات شامل ہیں۔ یہاں، قوانین اور ضوابط سب سے پہلے رازداری کے ساتھ تیار کیے جاتے ہیں، پھر عجلت کا حوالہ دیا جاتا ہے، وہ ایجنڈے پر پائے جاتے ہیں اور ووٹ ڈالے جاتے ہیں۔ عوامی غم و غصے کا باعث بنتا ہے، بعض صورتوں میں قانونی چیلنجز کے بعد، پھر کمیٹیاں تشکیل دی جاتی ہیں، \”مشاورتیں\” مختصر وقت میں منعقد کی جاتی ہیں، جس میں آپٹکس کے لیے باکس چیک کرنے کے لیے کوئی مناسب شرائط نہیں ہوتی ہیں۔ یہ بات بھی درست تھی کہ سوشل میڈیا کے قوانین کیسے بنائے گئے تھے۔

    اسلام آباد ہائی کورٹ کے بعد۔۔۔ پارلیمنٹ سوشل میڈیا قوانین پر نظرثانی کی ہدایت اس کے بعد سے ان کے بارے میں کچھ نہیں سنا گیا ہے۔ فی الحال، وہ نظر آتے ہیں قانون و انصاف کمیٹی کے سامنے زیر غور، لیکن کیا جائزہ لیا جا رہا ہے، کس سے مشورہ کیا گیا ہے اور کیا یہ عمل واقعی زیادہ شفاف اور بامعنی انداز میں مشاورتی ہو گا، یہ واضح نہیں ہے۔

    عمل بھی الٹا ہے۔ یہ قواعد پہلی بار 2020 میں دریافت ہوئے تھے جب ایک لیک شدہ کاپی گردش میں پائی گئی تھی، جسے پہلے ہی مطلع کر دیا گیا تھا۔ قواعد و ضوابط پر مشاورت اس سے پہلے کہ انہیں منظوری، ووٹ یا مطلع کیا جائے۔

    ناقص قوانین

    پاکستان میں آج تک پرائیویسی سے متعلق کوئی قانون سازی یا ڈیٹا کے تحفظ کا کوئی قانون نہیں ہے۔ اگرچہ ورژن 2005 سے چل رہے ہیں، واضح طور پر ترجیح صرف شہریوں کی حفاظت یا کاروبار یا پبلک سیکٹر کے ڈیٹا کو محفوظ کرنا نہیں ہے۔

    کبھی کبھار، ایک بل ظاہر ہوتا ہے، ان پٹ کی کچھ سطح کی تلاش کی جاتی ہے اور پھر یہ دوبارہ غائب ہوجاتا ہے۔ یہی وجہ ہے کہ کارپوریٹ سیکٹر اہم پالیسی ایشوز پر بیک ڈور چینلنگ کا استعمال کرتا ہے اور حقوق گروپ عوامی وکالت پر انحصار کرتے ہیں۔

    لیکن جس چیز کی بھی ضرورت ہے وہ ایک ایسی میز کے گرد عوامی ان پٹ، سنجیدہ اور پائیدار گفتگو کی ہے جہاں متنوع نقطہ نظر کی نمائندگی کے ساتھ ساتھ نجی اور سرکاری دونوں حلقوں سے، اور عوامی شعبے کے اندر، فیصلہ سازی کے مختلف حلقوں سے موجود ہوں۔

    پارلیمانی کمیٹیاں عوامی سماعتیں بلا سکتی ہیں، جوڈیشل اکیڈمیاں نصاب میں کورسز کو یک طرفہ تربیت کے بجائے ضم کر سکتی ہیں، ایگزیکٹو سال بھر مشاورتی عمل جاری رکھ سکتا ہے۔

    لیکن اس کے لیے کوشش اور حقیقی ارادے کی ضرورت ہوتی ہے تاکہ شفاف اور حقیقی معنی خیز گفتگو کی جائے تاکہ بعض حلقوں کی خواہشات کے آگے جھکنے کی بجائے گہری اور زیادہ باریک بینی کو فروغ دیا جا سکے۔

    بہت زیادہ انا، ذاتی مفادات اور میڈیم کی مکمل تفہیم کی کمی کو قربان کیا جا رہا ہے۔ اگر کسی بھی شعبے کی طرح اس شعبے میں بھی ایڈہاک، غیر اطلاعی فیصلہ سازی غالب رہی، تو ہم صرف نیچے کی طرف ہی رہیں گے، جو کہ واقعی ایک عوام دشمن اور پاکستان مخالف ایجنڈا ہے۔


    ہیڈر کی تصویر: شٹر اسٹاک





    Source link

  • New EU Regulation Could Hurt Small Palm Oil Producers: Watchdog

    پیسیفک منی | معیشت | جنوب مشرقی ایشیا

    پائیدار پام آئل (RSPO) پر گول میز کے سربراہ جوزف ڈی کروز کا خیال ہے کہ برسلز کے نئے قوانین کی \”انسانی، سماجی اور ترقیاتی لاگت\” ہو سکتی ہے۔

    \"EU

    شمالی سماٹرا، انڈونیشیا میں پام آئل کا ایک باغ۔

    کریڈٹ: جمع فوٹو

    اس ہفتے، خبر رساں ادارے رائٹرز ایک انٹرویو کیا پائیدار پام آئل (RSPO) پر گول میز کے سربراہ جوزف ڈی کروز کے ساتھ، نئے یورپی ضوابط کے بارے میں جو بلاک کی پام آئل کی درآمدات کو سختی سے روک سکتے ہیں۔

    آر ایس پی او کے چیف ایگزیکٹیو آفیسر ڈی کروز نے کہا کہ اے یورپی یونین کا نیا ضابطہدسمبر میں منظور کیا گیا، جس کے لیے کمپنیوں کو یہ ثابت کرنے کی ضرورت ہے کہ ان کی سپلائی چینز جنگلات کی کٹائی میں حصہ نہیں لے رہی ہیں، چھوٹے کسانوں کو ایک طرف کر سکتی ہیں، اور اس کے نتیجے میں، عالمی پام آئل کی صنعت کو مزید مستحکم کرنے کا باعث بن سکتی ہے۔

    ڈی کروز نے انٹرویو میں کہا کہ پام آئل پروڈیوسرز جو پہلے ہی RSPO سے تصدیق شدہ ہیں انہیں یورپی یونین کے تقاضوں کی تعمیل کرنا مشکل نہیں ہو گا، اس لیے کہ اس کا سرٹیفیکیشن کا عمل کافی سخت ہے اور پہلے ہی جنگلات کی کٹائی اور بنیادی جنگلات کو باغات میں تبدیل کرنے سے منع کرتا ہے۔ . تاہم، انہوں نے متنبہ کیا کہ ایشیا، افریقہ اور لاطینی امریکہ میں چھوٹے پروڈیوسر – یہاں تک کہ وہ جو پام آئل کی پائیدار پیداوار کرتے ہیں – کو یہ ظاہر کرنا مشکل ہوگا کہ سپلائی چین جس کا وہ حصہ ہیں وہ جنگلات کی کٹائی میں حصہ نہیں ڈالتے۔

    ڈی کروز نے کہا، \”وہاں ایک انسانی، سماجی، اور ترقیاتی لاگت ہے، جسے چھوٹے، معمولی پروڈیوسروں کو EU کے جنگلات کی کٹائی کے ضابطے کے نفاذ کے لیے برداشت کرنے پر مجبور کیا جا سکتا ہے جس طرح سے اسے ابھی ترتیب دیا جا رہا ہے۔\”

    کئی دہائیوں سے عالمی پام آئل کی صنعت منسلک کیا گیا ہے مزدوروں کے حقوق کی خلاف ورزیوں کی ایک لمبی فہرست کے علاوہ جنوب مشرقی ایشیا میں \”بڑے پیمانے پر بارشی جنگلات کی تباہی اور جنگلی حیات کا نقصان\”۔ آر ایس پی او ایک غیر منافع بخش تنظیم ہے جو تبدیل کرنے کا مقصد ہے سیکٹر \”مصدقہ پائیدار پام آئل کی پیداوار اور سورسنگ کے لیے عالمی معیارات کو تیار کرنے اور لاگو کرنے کے لیے سپلائی چین کے اسٹیک ہولڈرز کو اکٹھا کر کے۔\”

    اس مضمون سے لطف اندوز ہو رہے ہیں؟ مکمل رسائی کے لیے سبسکرائب کرنے کے لیے یہاں کلک کریں۔ صرف $5 ایک مہینہ۔

    جنگلات کی کٹائی سے اس کے سخت ربط کو دیکھتے ہوئے، پام آئل کے نئے یورپی ضابطے کی خاص جانچ پڑتال کے تحت آنے کا امکان ہے، جو \”یقینی بنائے گا کہ یورپی یونین کی مارکیٹ میں رکھی گئی اہم اشیا کا ایک سیٹ اب یورپی یونین میں جنگلات کی کٹائی اور جنگلات کے انحطاط میں کوئی کردار ادا نہیں کرے گا اور دنیا میں کہیں اور، \”یورپی کمیشن نے کہا بیان اس کے گزرنے کے بعد. پام آئل کے علاوہ، یہ قانون مویشیوں، سویا، کافی، کوکو، لکڑی اور ربڑ کے ساتھ ساتھ ان سے حاصل کی جانے والی دیگر مصنوعات پر بھی لاگو ہوگا۔

    آر ایس پی او کے اعداد و شمار کے مطابق، دنیا بھر میں سات ملین سے زیادہ چھوٹے ہولڈرز روزی روٹی کے لیے پام آئل کاشت کرتے ہیں۔ رائٹرز کے ذریعہ حوالہ دیا گیا۔. انڈونیشیا اور ملائیشیا میں، پام آئل کے دو سرفہرست پروڈیوسر، چھوٹے ہولڈرز پام آئل کے باغات کے لیے مختص کل رقبہ کا تقریباً 40 فیصد ہیں۔

    قانون کا ممکنہ منفی دوبارہ تقسیم کرنے والا اثر EU کی اقدار پر مبنی اقتصادی پالیسی کے غیر ارادی نتائج کی ایک اور مثال ہے، جو بیرونی ممالک میں ترقی پسند تبدیلی کی ترغیب دینے کے لیے بلاک کے بہت بڑے اقتصادی وزن کا فائدہ اٹھانا چاہتی ہے۔ یورپی یونین کا مجوزہ قانون، اور عام طور پر پام آئل کے بارے میں اس کی پالیسی نے پہلے ہی انڈونیشیا اور ملائیشیا کے ساتھ برسلز کے تعلقات کو خراب کر دیا ہے، بالکل ایسے وقت جب یورپی یونین جنوب مشرقی ایشیائی ممالک کی ایسوسی ایشن (ASEAN) کے ساتھ اپنی \”اسٹریٹیجک مصروفیت\” کو تقویت دینے کی کوشش کر رہی ہے۔ )۔

    دونوں ممالک یورپی یونین کے نئے اصول پر اس قدر فکر مند تھے کہ وہ لابی کے لیے افواج میں شامل ہو گئے۔ اس کے خلاف. اس کے گزرنے کے بعد، ملائیشیا کے ایک سینئر تجارتی اہلکار نے مشورہ دیا کہ ان کا ملک کر سکتا ہے۔ پام آئل کی برآمدات بند کریں۔ یورپی یونین کو مکمل طور پر. یورپی یونین کا معاشی وزن بلا شبہ اسے عالمی سطح پر کافی طاقت دیتا ہے – لیکن یہ وزن واضح طور پر تبدیلی لانے کا ایک دو ٹوک آلہ ہے۔



    Source link