The Restart Project Podcast

In this week's episode, Janet, Ugo and Dave Lukes discuss our personal data being collected and held elsewhere, focusing on the new EU regulation on data protection and its effect on consumer rights. We focus on 'connected devices', where increasing amounts of our personal data are collected and stored by companies. There are potentially wider, positive implications of the new rules in relation to the lifecycle of these devices. But first, May 1st is International Workers' Day in many countries. We celebrated it by discussing news of the Global Day of Action Against Samsung. A network of organisations called for the protection of their electronics factory workers, who have been and may continue to be exposed to dangerous chemicals. They are asking Samsung to stop attempting to suppress information on chemicals used, to use safer ones, and to ensure workers' right to organise independently. Also on Samsung, a US class action lawsuit alleges that the company has teamed up with two other major DRAM memory manufacturers (who have a total marketshare of 96%) to raise the price of their products. Next we discuss the GDPR, or General Data Protection Regulation (acronym botched by Janet!), which will be enforced on 25th May by the EU. GDPR has to do with the current emails you may be getting from companies or organisations asking you to remain on their email lists. Dave explains the regulation has a strong focus on protecting our personal data, that is: any information that could be used to identify someone. We talk about one of its main principles: about consent. According to GDPR, we all need to be fully and explicitly informed about how our personal data is being used. Then, we talk about the importance of GDPR in the context of 'connected devices'. First we have a laugh about inscrutable terms and conditions of products, such as those of Amazon Kindle: it took an actor 8h 59 mins to read them all! Clearly, in the age of GDPR, user-centred terms and conditions will become the rule for these connected devices and appliances, which may soon include household appliances. We use Samsung "smart" TVs as an example, revealing that already there is a divergence between Samsung privacy policies for European (UK) consumers and the rest of the world. Finally, we reflect on how mandatory, increased attention to the lifecycle of personal data can influence the lifecycle of our devices. With companies accountable for protecting our information, they may have to ensure that our gadgets remain safe of data breaches or hacks, and we hope this implies extending security updates over longer periods of time.

In this week's episode, Janet, Ugo and Dave Lukes discuss our personal data being collected and held elsewhere, focusing on the new EU regulation on data protection and its effect on consumer rights. We focus on 'connected devices', where increasing amounts of our personal data are collected and stored by companies. There are potentially wider, positive implications of the new rules in relation to the lifecycle of these devices. But first, May 1st is International Workers' Day in many countries. We celebrated it by discussing news of the Global Day of Action Against Samsung. A network of organisations called for the protection of their electronics factory workers, who have been and may continue to be exposed to dangerous chemicals. They are asking Samsung to stop attempting to suppress information on chemicals used, to use safer ones, and to ensure workers' right to organise independently. Also on Samsung, a US class action lawsuit alleges that the company has teamed up with two other major DRAM memory manufacturers (who have a total marketshare of 96%) to raise the price of their products. Next we discuss the GDPR, or General Data Protection Regulation (acronym botched by Janet!), which will be enforced on 25th May by the EU. GDPR has to do with the current emails you may be getting from companies or organisations asking you to remain on their email lists. Dave explains the regulation has a strong focus on protecting our personal data, that is: any information that could be used to identify someone. We talk about one of its main principles: about consent. According to GDPR, we all need to be fully and explicitly informed about how our personal data is being used. Then, we talk about the importance of GDPR in the context of 'connected devices'. First we have a laugh about inscrutable terms and conditions of products, such as those of Amazon Kindle: it took an actor 8h 59 mins to read them all! Clearly, in the age of GDPR, user-centred terms and conditions will become the rule for these connected devices and appliances, which may soon include household appliances. We use Samsung "smart" TVs as an example, revealing that already there is a divergence between Samsung privacy policies for European (UK) consumers and the rest of the world. Finally, we reflect on how mandatory, increased attention to the lifecycle of personal data can influence the lifecycle of our devices. With companies accountable for protecting our information, they may have to ensure that our gadgets remain safe of data breaches or hacks, and we hope this implies extending security updates over longer periods of time.

In this month's Radio “takeover”, Restart volunteers Ben Skidmore, Dave Lukes and Steve Cook proclaim "It's MY Device!": they talk about our right to repair and mantain our gadgets, and about exciting fixing stories at repair events held in London for Earth Day. First, Dave introduces recent tech news, such as Lenovo preventing users from performing software updates on a recent smartphone, the acquisition of photo-sharing service Flickr by SmugMug and the release of an extensive sound effects library by the BBC. Next, they ask: how much do we own our devices? They talk about our right as consumers to repair our stuff. They discuss the restrictions to repair certain gadgets, which might not only be technical but also legal. There are initiatives pushing against this scenario, such as the US initiative of "Right to Repair". They also discuss the case of John Deere's repair monopoly over tractors, which has led farmers to demand access to repair their own vehicles. They also comment on the recent lawsuit which Apple lost in Norway against an independent repair shop, accused of violating their trademark by using aftermarket iPhone parts. So, do we really own our devices if we are not allowed to fix them? Ben, Dave and Steve volunteer at our regular Restart Parties in London. They discuss recent events and comment on their favourite repairs. Dave's pick was quite a particular one: a cat water fountain, which he helped fix in a Hackney Fixers event. "Presumably her cat is happy now", he adds. Ben tells us about his experience with fixing a printer, and they all discuss their approach to repairing these often hostile devices. Steve and Ben talk about the recent repair event at Crystal Palace, where they dealt for the first time with fixing a lawn mower. They also discuss the importance of improvisation when attempting a repair, and the use of commonplace objects such as paper clips or credit cards to tinker with gadgets.

In this month's Radio “takeover”, Restart volunteers Ben Skidmore, Dave Lukes and Steve Cook proclaim "It's MY Device!": they talk about our right to repair and mantain our gadgets, and about exciting fixing stories at repair events held in London for Earth Day. First, Dave introduces recent tech news, such as Lenovo preventing users from performing software updates on a recent smartphone, the acquisition of photo-sharing service Flickr by SmugMug and the release of an extensive sound effects library by the BBC. Next, they ask: how much do we own our devices? They talk about our right as consumers to repair our stuff. They discuss the restrictions to repair certain gadgets, which might not only be technical but also legal. There are initiatives pushing against this scenario, such as the US initiative of "Right to Repair". They also discuss the case of John Deere's repair monopoly over tractors, which has led farmers to demand access to repair their own vehicles. They also comment on the recent lawsuit which Apple lost in Norway against an independent repair shop, accused of violating their trademark by using aftermarket iPhone parts. So, do we really own our devices if we are not allowed to fix them? Ben, Dave and Steve volunteer at our regular Restart Parties in London. They discuss recent events and comment on their favourite repairs. Dave's pick was quite a particular one: a cat water fountain, which he helped fix in a Hackney Fixers event. "Presumably her cat is happy now", he adds. Ben tells us about his experience with fixing a printer, and they all discuss their approach to repairing these often hostile devices. Steve and Ben talk about the recent repair event at Crystal Palace, where they dealt for the first time with fixing a lawn mower. They also discuss the importance of improvisation when attempting a repair, and the use of commonplace objects such as paper clips or credit cards to tinker with gadgets.

Dave and Ugo interview Professor Ross Anderson, an expert on Security Engineering at Cambridge University, on the topic of software obsolescence. First, we discuss how devices connected to the Internet need to be constantly updated to remain secure. Anderson tells us about the approach of vendors to software: it is costly to maintain it and hence they only provide updates for the latest devices, expecting us to get new devices regularly if we want to be safe. Then, we talk about the frustration that many users experience around repair. Dave tells us about his experience at Restart Parties, where many people feel helpless or uninformed when it comes to software updates and issues of memory or functioning after doing such upgrades. "I feel like every time I do an update something will go wrong", says Savita at a Restart Party. We also point out the environmental implications of software updates. We discuss their effects on the durability of the products we buy. Also, we debate over consumers' awareness of software obsolescence, and how "the software problem" should be noticed when we make purchases: how will having software on our fridge affect its durability? Anderson suggests that appliances that do not need a connection to the internet be sold with a "dumb switch" to maintain their core functionality when connection to the network fails. Finally, we discuss who should take responsibility for software obsolescence. Ugo asks about the role of the European Union in the matter, and then they all emphasise the importance of citizen action. Anderson talks about the many levels of action for everyone: from a more conscious purchasing, to actually influencing policymaking. He ends up calling companies to action: "What you got to do is you got to keep shipping patches for Android, not for 3 years, not for 5 years but for 10 years. Then we’ll believe, Mr. Google, that you actually do care about sustainability."

Dave and Ugo interview Professor Ross Anderson, an expert on Security Engineering at Cambridge University, on the topic of software obsolescence. First, we discuss how devices connected to the Internet need to be constantly updated to remain secure. Anderson tells us about the approach of vendors to software: it is costly to maintain it and hence they only provide updates for the latest devices, expecting us to get new devices regularly if we want to be safe. Then, we talk about the frustration that many users experience around repair. Dave tells us about his experience at Restart Parties, where many people feel helpless or uninformed when it comes to software updates and issues of memory or functioning after doing such upgrades. "I feel like every time I do an update something will go wrong", says Savita at a Restart Party. We also point out the environmental implications of software updates. We discuss their effects on the durability of the products we buy. Also, we debate over consumers' awareness of software obsolescence, and how "the software problem" should be noticed when we make purchases: how will having software on our fridge affect its durability? Anderson suggests that appliances that do not need a connection to the internet be sold with a "dumb switch" to maintain their core functionality when connection to the network fails. Finally, we discuss who should take responsibility for software obsolescence. Ugo asks about the role of the European Union in the matter, and then they all emphasise the importance of citizen action. Anderson talks about the many levels of action for everyone: from a more conscious purchasing, to actually influencing policymaking. He ends up calling companies to action: "What you got to do is you got to keep shipping patches for Android, not for 3 years, not for 5 years but for 10 years. Then we’ll believe, Mr. Google, that you actually do care about sustainability."

Ugo interviews Alasdair Davies, who has been working as a conservation technologist for over 10 years. Alasdair introduces us to his work on bringing affordable, customisable and repairable open hardware technology to people working on conservation projects. When he started working in the field, Alasdair noticed it was hard to get access to devices. The options were: either spent a lot of money on out-of-the-box, proprietary equipment or take a chance with DIY options made in makerspaces. In response, after being involved with the maker movement and working for the London Zoo, he decided to launch his own project - the Arribada Initiative - which aims to deliver "open conservation technology for all". So how can technology help in conservation? First, Alasdair tells us about his project with sea turtles, where he used GPS transmitters to tag and track the turtles' routine - where they feed, where they nest, and hence where to protect them. These tags used to be extremely expensive to buy and repair, making it too costly to track populations. However, he has worked to reduce this problem, with each tag now costing a third of the original price. Also, Alasdair tells us about how they used cameras and Raspberry Pi technology on the tags to explore the bottom of the oceans. Next, we talk about the potential of technology for communities to influence local policymaking. For instance, people in marine communities can analyse the type of plastic they find impacting on sea life and where it might have come from. And they can prove how and where to take action for the conservation of species thanks to the more inexpensive tags. Then, given our interest in repair, we talk about responsible design. When out in the field, there are many issues around repairing the devices used in conservation projects. For this reason, Alasdair has worked on devices which can be fixed easily and locally, making use of traditional tools that communities feel confident with. Also, we discuss the potential to reuse these devices through sharing tools with other conservation teams. Finally, Alasdair tells us about other projects such as his work with king penguins in Antarctica for "Penguin Watch", and with AudioMoth, an open source audio recorder used in the field. Arribada's approach in supporting the team working on the AudioMoth is promising, as it acknowledges the importance of ensuring that open hardware projects get long-term software updates and maintenance.

Ugo interviews Alasdair Davies, who has been working as a conservation technologist for over 10 years. Alasdair introduces us to his work on bringing affordable, customisable and repairable open hardware technology to people working on conservation projects. When he started working in the field, Alasdair noticed it was hard to get access to devices. The options were: either spent a lot of money on out-of-the-box, proprietary equipment or take a chance with DIY options made in makerspaces. In response, after being involved with the maker movement and working for the London Zoo, he decided to launch his own project - the Arribada Initiative - which aims to deliver "open conservation technology for all". So how can technology help in conservation? First, Alasdair tells us about his project with sea turtles, where he used GPS transmitters to tag and track the turtles' routine - where they feed, where they nest, and hence where to protect them. These tags used to be extremely expensive to buy and repair, making it too costly to track populations. However, he has worked to reduce this problem, with each tag now costing a third of the original price. Also, Alasdair tells us about how they used cameras and Raspberry Pi technology on the tags to explore the bottom of the oceans. Next, we talk about the potential of technology for communities to influence local policymaking. For instance, people in marine communities can analyse the type of plastic they find impacting on sea life and where it might have come from. And they can prove how and where to take action for the conservation of species thanks to the more inexpensive tags. Then, given our interest in repair, we talk about responsible design. When out in the field, there are many issues around repairing the devices used in conservation projects. For this reason, Alasdair has worked on devices which can be fixed easily and locally, making use of traditional tools that communities feel confident with. Also, we discuss the potential to reuse these devices through sharing tools with other conservation teams. Finally, Alasdair tells us about other projects such as his work with king penguins in Antarctica for "Penguin Watch", and with AudioMoth, an open source audio recorder used in the field. Arribada's approach in supporting the team working on the AudioMoth is promising, as it acknowledges the importance of ensuring that open hardware projects get long-term software updates and maintenance.

In this episode, Janet and Isabel interview Suw Charman-Anderson, founder of the Ada Lovelace Day (ALD), which annually supports and increases the visibility of women in Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths (STEM) careers. First, we discuss how ALD started and how it came to be such a huge initiative, with international events happening each year. We then ask Suw why she chose Ada Lovelace as a symbol for this project. She tells us the story of Ada, a 19th-century mathematician who worked with polymath Charles Babbage on the design of the 'Analytical Engine', a vision of the first mechanical computer. Ada has been considered the first ever computer programmer, with a computing language now named after her. Then, we talk about the importance of role models for girls and women to go into science. Girls and women are still underrepresented in STEM, specially in fields such as physics or computing. Also, the historical contributions of women to science and tech have commonly been overlooked. At Restart, we are interested in engaging people with technology from a young age - we chat with Suw about the need to engage girls from a very young age to actually change the gender disparity in STEM. Not only to motivate girls to go into these fields of education, but also to actually continue their careers after their training. Suw walks us through her own career in science, having graduated from Geology and struggling to find her professional path. She went into publishing and journalism, and reminds people that it is fine to have a less conventional career path. Before ALD, Suw co-founded the Open Rights Group in the UK, which campaigns for digital rights. We relate their early work on intellectual property law to the US Right to Repair initiative, discussing whether we actually own our devices when our access to repair is denied. And of course, whether Lovelace would've been a repairer and user of open-source software. Don't forget to save the date of the tenth Ada Lovelace Day, 9th October. And in the meantime you can join us at a Rosie skillshare, for/by women and non-binary people.

In this episode, Janet and Isabel interview Suw Charman-Anderson, founder of the Ada Lovelace Day (ALD), which annually supports and increases the visibility of women in Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths (STEM) careers. First, we discuss how ALD started and how it came to be such a huge initiative, with international events happening each year. We then ask Suw why she chose Ada Lovelace as a symbol for this project. She tells us the story of Ada, a 19th-century mathematician who worked with polymath Charles Babbage on the design of the 'Analytical Engine', a vision of the first mechanical computer. Ada has been considered the first ever computer programmer, with a computing language now named after her. Then, we talk about the importance of role models for girls and women to go into science. Girls and women are still underrepresented in STEM, specially in fields such as physics or computing. Also, the historical contributions of women to science and tech have commonly been overlooked. At Restart, we are interested in engaging people with technology from a young age - we chat with Suw about the need to engage girls from a very young age to actually change the gender disparity in STEM. Not only to motivate girls to go into these fields of education, but also to actually continue their careers after their training. Suw walks us through her own career in science, having graduated from Geology and struggling to find her professional path. She went into publishing and journalism, and reminds people that it is fine to have a less conventional career path. Before ALD, Suw co-founded the Open Rights Group in the UK, which campaigns for digital rights. We relate their early work on intellectual property law to the US Right to Repair initiative, discussing whether we actually own our devices when our access to repair is denied. And of course, whether Lovelace would've been a repairer and user of open-source software. Don't forget to save the date of the tenth Ada Lovelace Day, 9th October. And in the meantime you can join us at a Rosie skillshare, for/by women and non-binary people.

In our monthly Radio "takeover", Restart volunteers own the show. This time, we have Ben Skidmore, Panda and Steve Cook discussing our relationship with phones. What makes us replace them and how can they last for longer? To start, they chat about the new Samsung Galaxy S9 release, which has some minor improvements - like a better camera - but no increase in relevant features: battery life, for instance, has not improved. Do we need to buy new phone models when only small features change? Next, they discuss reasons why we change our devices, thinking about issues of repairability and software support. At Restart, we are interested in understanding the repairability of our gadgets. This is something Steve is actively involved in, as he is volunteering for us as a data analyst, looking at the information gathered through our Fixometer application. Our volunteers discuss the importance of batteries as key components to the functioning of our phones and how, still, these parts are often hard to repair - for instance, when they are glued into the phone. In terms of software, it is common for companies to stop updating software for their old phones, leaving these users unsupported or unprotected. They also mention the vulnerability of 2G phone users, who can be left behind as companies stop supporting this network. In terms of repairability, they talk about the importance of being informed when buying new products - not only about durability but about the availability of spare parts. They refer to modular phones, such as Fairphone 2, which offer replacements for repair. We also learn that in France, companies are obliged by the law to inform of the period of availability of spare parts when selling products.

In our monthly Radio "takeover", Restart volunteers own the show. This time, we have Ben Skidmore, Panda and Steve Cook discussing our relationship with phones. What makes us replace them and how can they last for longer? To start, they chat about the new Samsung Galaxy S9 release, which has some minor improvements - like a better camera - but no increase in relevant features: battery life, for instance, has not improved. Do we need to buy new phone models when only small features change? Next, they discuss reasons why we change our devices, thinking about issues of repairability and software support. At Restart, we are interested in understanding the repairability of our gadgets. This is something Steve is actively involved in, as he is volunteering for us as a data analyst, looking at the information gathered through our Fixometer application. Our volunteers discuss the importance of batteries as key components to the functioning of our phones and how, still, these parts are often hard to repair - for instance, when they are glued into the phone. In terms of software, it is common for companies to stop updating software for their old phones, leaving these users unsupported or unprotected. They also mention the vulnerability of 2G phone users, who can be left behind as companies stop supporting this network. In terms of repairability, they talk about the importance of being informed when buying new products - not only about durability but about the availability of spare parts. They refer to modular phones, such as Fairphone 2, which offer replacements for repair. We also learn that in France, companies are obliged by the law to inform of the period of availability of spare parts when selling products.

Janet and Dave interview Florence Okoye and Debs Durojaiye, two of the organisers of the Afrotech Fest, an exciting event which took place in London at the end of January. We talk about representation of black people of Caribbean and African heritage in tech and we discuss the meanings of Afrofuturism. First, we discuss their motivation to put on Afrotech Fest: the realisation that black people in Britain tend to be underrepresented in tech conferences here, but more fundamentally to challenge the very institution of the tech conference itself. They felt there was a need to involve black voices - everyone, not just self-defined technical people - in debates about technology. The Youth Programme was a great example of this, and of the importance of engaging kids with technology. Children were protagonists at the event, developing hard skills like coding but also enhancing their creativity, for example thinking of design and storyboarding in videogames. Debs tells us about their STEAM approach (A for art) instead of thinking of science and technology in the traditional way of STEM. Beyond having fun with the hands-on workshop, the aim was also to gave kids agency, to make them think critically about how technology works, what we should demand of our products and how innovation can be representative and responsible to benefit all citizens. Afrotech's main goal has been to empower participants to rethink their relationship with technology. We talk about the difference between "collaboration and not charity", as Debs puts it. We discuss how the lack of real consideration of the black community results in low number of black people accessing and staying in science and technology jobs. And we arrive at the consequences: how this produces "shoddy" tech, as best illustrated by Google's facial recognition tool which fails a large part of the population. Lastly, we discuss Afrotech and Afrofuturism, referring to the recent and much debated film Black Panther. Along with the Afrotech Fest, we see that projects such as Black Panther have allowed for a deeper debate about black people representation, culture and history. We then talk about the different meanings of Afrofuturism, from the combination of sci-fi and black aesthetics, to its environmental perspectives, and the shift to considering innovation as an opportunity to use local resources and respond to local problems creating, as Florence says "an intersectional and liberatory future".

Janet and Dave interview Florence Okoye and Debs Durojaiye, two of the organisers of the Afrotech Fest, an exciting event which took place in London at the end of January. We talk about representation of black people of Caribbean and African heritage in tech and we discuss the meanings of Afrofuturism. First, we discuss their motivation to put on Afrotech Fest: the realisation that black people in Britain tend to be underrepresented in tech conferences here, but more fundamentally to challenge the very institution of the tech conference itself. They felt there was a need to involve black voices - everyone, not just self-defined technical people - in debates about technology. The Youth Programme was a great example of this, and of the importance of engaging kids with technology. Children were protagonists at the event, developing hard skills like coding but also enhancing their creativity, for example thinking of design and storyboarding in videogames. Debs tells us about their STEAM approach (A for art) instead of thinking of science and technology in the traditional way of STEM. Beyond having fun with the hands-on workshop, the aim was also to gave kids agency, to make them think critically about how technology works, what we should demand of our products and how innovation can be representative and responsible to benefit all citizens. Afrotech's main goal has been to empower participants to rethink their relationship with technology. We talk about the difference between "collaboration and not charity", as Debs puts it. We discuss how the lack of real consideration of the black community results in low number of black people accessing and staying in science and technology jobs. And we arrive at the consequences: how this produces "shoddy" tech, as best illustrated by Google's facial recognition tool which fails a large part of the population. Lastly, we discuss Afrotech and Afrofuturism, referring to the recent and much debated film Black Panther. Along with the Afrotech Fest, we see that projects such as Black Panther have allowed for a deeper debate about black people representation, culture and history. We then talk about the different meanings of Afrofuturism, from the combination of sci-fi and black aesthetics, to its environmental perspectives, and the shift to considering innovation as an opportunity to use local resources and respond to local problems creating, as Florence says "an intersectional and liberatory future".

Janet and Ugo talk with Estefania Suquilanda, who is introducing repair into a school in New York City. We then discuss Apple's recent claims on being zero waste and the Right to Repair movement in California. We are very interested in spreading the culture of repair from an early age, so it was great to hear about Estef's work. She is the current Tech Support Specialist at The Hewitt School, a girls' school in New York City, where she is inspiring secondary school students to gain hard skills fixing devices. Meeting once a week after school hours, her Restart students seem to be learning very rapidly. Just the other day, they impressively fixed an iPhone 7+ screen in about 45 minutes! Estef also tells us about her background, which is actually in professional electronics repair. She shares some thoughts on her experience as a female technician and about the small shop where she used to fix Apple products. We then stick to Apple to discuss their recent advert, where they state that their iPhone is assembled in facilities that send "zero waste to landfills". Going through their 2018 report on Supplier Responsibility, we find that this claim is based on their "Zero Waste to Landfill" certification by global company UL, but it is strictly limited to waste produced in its assembly facilities - that is, where all the product components get fitted together. Now, how much waste is being produced before assembly? Apple may be leading the way into a more sustainable manufacturing compared to the other big companies, however if they want to claim absolute zero waste products, they should be transparent about their whole supply chain, for instance about the manufacturing process of components, processing of raw materials and mining. Lastly, we comment on Apple's attack on DIY repairs, and whether this is incompatible with a claim of "zero waste". The US ‘Right to Repair’ campaign, which after successfully getting legislation introduced in other states now arrives in California, is pretty much at the doorstep of the big companies like Apple or Google. The Right to Repair bill is lobbying for making repair information and tools accessible to consumers. Companies may well be interested in providing repair services, however this initiative is speaking for people to have their right to repair their devices themselves.