Category: Tech

NorthSky Films/Shutterstock

When you learn about how Apple CarPlay actually works, you might be overwhelmed by just how many ways it can change your commute. While this hands-free interface offers a ton of features, like easy navigation and Siri integrations, controlling your favorite music and audio apps while on the go is one of the best ways to use it. With so many apps to choose from on Apple’s App Store, finding the best ones for CarPlay can be challenging.

There are a few ways to make a decision. You’ll likely need a go-to music player for streaming albums and playlists, and we’ll offer a couple of selections depending on your active subscriptions. Then, you’ll need a radio app, and we’ve got one of the best options for that as well. We’ll even recommend an app that lets you set up your own streaming audio server and access it via CarPlay. So buckle up, and let’s head out.

Spotify

A. Aleksandravicius/Shutterstock

When choosing the best music app for CarPlay, you will probably give extra points to the service you’re already using. After all, CarPlay is mostly an extension of your phone, as it uses profiles and the processing power of your iPhone. And even though we don’t think Spotify is a flawless music service, there’s no denying that it owns the most market share of any music streaming service. So, there’s a pretty good chance that you already have an account.

In fact, Spotify commands almost one-third of the streaming music market. That’s because Spotify made its name in 2008 with an on-demand streaming offering that was legal and free to play, with ads and subscription models supporting it. Today, it offers over 100 million tracks with one of the best libraries available in this type of product.

It comes to life beautifully on CarPlay with a dedicated “Now Playing” screen that makes it easy to skip tracks and play or pause with a simple tap. For browsing, it opts to offer a “Recently Played” list in the center, but you can go into a Siri-powered search menu to find other options. There are a few drawbacks, as it can be a little clunky to scroll longer lists of recent songs — particularly a problem if you have varied listening tastes. You also need a Premium subscription to get the best listening resolutions, though some users point out you can adjust phone settings for a better experience. At the end of the day, Spotify is the market leader and a great all-around choice for your main streaming app.

Apple Music

Harry Howitt/Shutterstock

If Spotify is the all-around choice for most people, the Apple stalwarts will want to turn their attention to the CarPlay functionality of Apple Music for seamless integration with the Apple ecosystem. Apple Music via CarPlay can offer a similar experience to Spotify, pulling in your favorites, playlists, and recent songs to easily play and navigate using the car screen. Apple’s also got a real eye toward building its own offering, as we covered in our interview with Apple Music’s Oliver Schusser.

It’s when you start to open up more Apple functionality that this option really shows its value. Many users prefer the user interface of Apple Music in CarPlay, which makes sense because it lines up well with other stock Apple apps. Apple Music generally streams at a higher resolution than the base Spotify subscription. What’s really cool is you can even use SharePlay integration on Apple Music via CarPlay, which opens up functionality for more social listening. Of course, this all assumes that you have an Apple Music subscription, and podcasts are not integrated into this app as they are on Spotify.

TuneIn

Mehaniq/Shutterstock

The two apps discussed so far are focused on on-demand listening, but what if you want the more traditional radio experience in your car? One of the best apps for listening to both traditional and internet radio stations is TuneIn. Launched in 2002 as a means of bringing radio broadcasting online, TuneIn now offers a wide network of stations from around the country. That means you can listen to a slew of dedicated online radio stations or turn to your favorite station from your hometown — all through your iPhone and CarPlay.

It’s more than just music, as TuneIn also offers sports broadcasts through partnerships with top leagues as well as talk radio and specialty partner stations. The interface is solid on CarPlay, but its Premium offering is a little underwhelming. TuneIn also offers dedicated programs right on certain car infotainment centers (such as Tesla and Lucid vehicles), and that interface is better, faster, and smoother than the CarPlay offering. But if you’re looking for far-reaching radio options on CarPlay, TuneIn is one of the best.

Tidal

Sidney van den Boogaard/Shutterstock

If your focus for music is on audio fidelity, then you’ve probably considered Tidal. When this music service was launched by some of music’s biggest stars in 2014, its fanfare was pinned on offering a service that both provided musicians with a bigger slice of royalties and listeners with better quality audio. Tidal’s key claim is that it offers resolutions of up to 24-bit, 192-kilohertz FLAC songs, which is more than Spotify’s max of 320 kilobit-per-second AAC. This means that, theoretically, your music could sound better using Tidal.

Then there’s the editorial and playlist component of Tidal. While Spotify’s Discover playlists and algorithmic recommendations are well-covered, Tidal has a few of its own curation options, including its similarly named My Daily Discovery playlist, which doesn’t have quite as much reach as Spotify. Tidal’s controls still work well via CarPlay, and the integration with Apple “Now Playing” is the same as you might expect with other services. So, the key here is to consider whether the promise of higher resolution is your top priority.

Plexamp

Reyanaska/Shutterstock

While there are subtle differences between the various music services above, we wanted to include something a little more off-center for those who don’t want to put all their eggs into one music service subscription. Plexamp is an offshoot of video server provider Plex. It provides a way for you to categorize, explore, and listen to any music stored on your Plex server via other devices. If you’ve never used Plex, it’s an app with a user-friendly media interface that allows you to access a self-hosted server storing your audio and video.

In this case, Plexamp unlocks multi-device support to access any of your local files for streaming anywhere, including your car. While you can store a music library on your phone and play that in the car, Plexamp allows those files to be accessed on many devices. You can then fire it up via CarPlay and make your own private streaming music library. While Plexamp is free, it requires a subscription to stream your songs at their original quality. But this may be a worthy price if you want to keep your music library local to you (and your data and subscription fee out of the Spotify universe).

How we chose these music apps

DenPhotos/Shutterstock

There’s truly no shortage of music apps for iPhone, and many of them offer full-featured CarPlay integrations. So, when we set out to choose the best apps to pair with this service, our focus factored in a few variables. First, the apps had to be well-reviewed, both on the App Store and in anecdotal forum threads. Additionally, the apps had to be popular, with wide compatibility and a track record of reliability.

The other main factor was how these apps come to life on CarPlay. Sure, it could be solid on a phone or directly on another Apple device, but what are its key features for CarPlay? Making sure the user interface is seamless while driving and that the app developer actively supports reliability for the CarPlay extensions was paramount. Every app on this list clears a threshold in these areas, and we’re confident they’ll all soundtrack your drives easily.

Source

Dorota Szymczyk/Shutterstock

We may receive a commission on purchases made from links.

With the introduction of USB-C, a primary benefit of the new standard is the ease of usability. It’s meant to be universal, thanks to a symmetrical, reversible 24-pin connector. But there are many different types of USB-C offerings out there — cables and connectors alike. Not all of them support fast-charging, meaning some chargers or cables won’t work as intended when plugged into various devices. The Steam Deck is an excellent example of this; according to Valve, the Steam Deck is equipped with a 45-watt USB-C PD 3.0 charger. 

PD is the key there, which stands for Power Delivery. The USB-C Power Delivery standard is a protocol that allows up to 240 watts of power, as explained by USB-IF, which is necessary for higher power delivery and fast-charging situations, like what the Steam Deck uses. The question is whether all USB-C chargers are compatible with the Steam Deck, including phone and laptop chargers.

The answer is yes and no. You can use them, but it doesn’t mean you should. There are also some factors to keep in mind, like whether the third-party charger supports PD and what power output it supports. If it doesn’t provide enough watts (45 to be exact), the Steam Deck likely won’t charge fast enough and may even experience battery drain while plugged in, especially if you’re playing games on it. Then, there’s also the matter of safety. Most OEM phone and laptop chargers are made to high standards, but cheap offerings should be avoided, as they can damage your devices.

Is it safe to use a phone or laptop charger with your Steam Deck

Fcafotodigital/Getty Images

Whether a charger is safe to use with the Steam Deck is going to depend entirely on the charger itself. To be on the safe side, you should avoid using third-party chargers unless you know for a fact they support the necessary requirements. There is a good chance that if you plug in a charger that’s not supported, Steam Deck will warn you via a notification, as Reddit users have pointed out.

One of the most common issues people have with their Steam Deck stems from the device not charging properly when plugged in. The best way to tell a charger’s specifications is to look at the label on the adapter, if there is one, or refer to the user manual for the original device, whether it’s for a laptop or a phone. On the label or printed somewhere on the adapter, you should see an “Output” line that lists Volts x Amps. For instance, the original Steam Deck charger lists four outputs: 5V==3A, 9V==3A, 15V==3A, and 20V==2.25A. 

You can take the largest number and multiply volts by amps to see the max wattage, in this case, 20 by 2.25, which equals 45 — 45 watts. We already know the Steam Deck charger supports 45 watts, but we also now know how to check other chargers. That still doesn’t address the quality of the charger in question. Chargers could be made with poorly-supplied materials or may not incorporate modern safety standards like overvoltage or overcharge protection. 

These concerns are also applicable to other power sources. When looking for Steam Deck accessories on Amazon, like a portable charger, you’ll want to look for 45 watts, fast charging, and PD support.

The Steam Deck needs USB-C PD capable chargers

tinhkhuong/Shutterstock

The official Steam Deck charger supplies 45 watts, but it also supports the USB-C PD 3.0 protocol. Ideally, you need a charger rated for 45 watts or higher, with the PD 3.0 protocol. That significantly narrows down the third-party chargers you can use, including phone and laptop chargers. It’s also important to note that using the Steam Deck at the same time it’s charging is going to consume a lot of power. The power draw will be higher with demanding games. The 45-watt and PD support are non-negotiable in that case. Anything less and the charger will not be able to supply enough power to maintain the battery, let alone charge it. That’s also how you can squeeze more battery out of your Steam Deck – by effectively reducing the power it’s using through software tweaks.

If, for some reason, you don’t have the official charger that came with your Steam Deck, you can order a new one from iFixit. Some alternatives you can use are the Anker Nano series as long as they’re 45-watts or above, UGreen Nexode, and JSAUX Steam Deck charger, the latter of which is also compatible with Mac, iPhone and various mobile devices. 

Another great feature to look for is GAN support, which stands for Gallium Nitride, a material that can handle higher voltages, fast-charging and is better at conductivity. Typically, GAN chargers, power adapters, and hubs can power multiple devices at once with ample power, like charging your Steam Deck and a mobile device simultaneously.

Source

Two former directors of nChain UK, the London blockchain company associated with a computer scientist who falsely claimed to be bitcoin inventor Satoshi Nakamoto, are bringing legal proceedings against their former employer.

Group finance officer Andrew Moody and general counsel David Brookes claim that they were dismissed in retaliation for blowing the whistle on an alleged attempt by an investor to acquire the company’s intellectual property without the knowledge of nChain’s directors.

The firm, together with three company officials, dispute the claims, which were made yesterday at a London employment tribunal. They argue that the directors had not made protected disclosures and were properly dismissed for gross misconduct.

The company was closely associated with Craig Wright, an Australian computer scientist, who falsely claimed to be Satoshi Nakamoto, the inventor of bitcoin. A high court judge found that Wright fabricated documents and repeatedly lied to justify his claims in a 2024 court case.

Brookes and Moody claimed in a written opening note that they made protected disclosures to their group CEO after learning of the existence of documents that had been created by others “behind the backs” of nChain’s directors which were not in the interests of the company.

The two directors claim that the documents, which consisted of three agreements with an investment company, contained a mechanism that could have stripped nChain of its entire portfolio of intellectual property and were an “existential threat” to the nChain group.

They claim they were led to believe that the documents were drawn up at the insistence of an investor in nChain to “hedge their bets” if litigation brought against Wright to overturn his claims of being Sakatoshi Nakamoto were successful.

Biggest fake ever

At a mock trial in September 2023, an attempt to “cajole” Wright to produce bitcoin keys to unequivocally demonstrate he was Nakamoto failed. Instead, he produced a memory stick purporting to prove his identity that turned out to be an “obvious forgery”.

The incident prompted the group CEO, Christen Ager-Hanssen, to send a WhatsApp message describing Wright as “the biggest fake ever”, the two directors claim.

Ager-Hanssen called a meeting of group executives on 26 September 2023, where he presented a report, setting out the disclosures previously made by Brooks and Moody about the alleged conspiracy to obtain nChain’s intellectual property for less than its value.

Their plan to gather further evidence by instructing the IT department to obtain emails of everyone involved in creating the “July documents” floundered, when the head of IT, who had been instructed to keep the matter confidential, alerted the company’s chair, who vetoed the plan.

Whistleblowing report

Ager-Hanssen emailed his report, dubbed the Fairway brief, under the headline, Whistleblowing report from the management of HEH holding AG/nCHain Group, along with minutes of the meeting to company executives the following day.

Brookes and Moody claim that an independent report subsequently commissioned to look into the allegations in the Fairway brief were a “whitewash”.

They also allege that one of the companies hired to investigate the claims had previously been engaged to produce “evidence” to support Wright’s claim to be Satoshi Nakamoto. One of the ideas considered was to publish a book that could be used as evidence in court, it was claimed.

Following a disciplinary procedure, the directors were suspended and later received letters informing them that they had lost their jobs because of “gross misconduct”.

They claim there is no contemporary evidence to show why they had been suspended and that the real reason for action was their involvement in the protected disclosures in the Fairway brief.

Brookes and Moody accused of ‘piggybacking’

Along with three other respondents in the case, nChain UK Limited contests the claims. They said in an opening note that if there were any whistleblowing disclosures, they were made by Ager-Hanssen, not the two directors. Brookes and Moody were seeking to “piggyback” on protected disclosures made by somebody else in a way that was legally flawed.

According to the respondents, the July documents had been examined by well-qualified lawyers in the UK, Liechtenstein and Switzerland, who found legitimate and lawful commercial agreements. They found no breaches of duty and concluded that none of the allegations in the Fairway brief were legally founded.

On any sensible reading of the July agreements, Wright’s loss in court “afforded no right of bail out/asset stripping”, and the claimants cannot credibly suggest that it did, they said in their opening note.

The respondents argue that the directors’ dismissals were not triggered by their disclosures, but a series of “extraordinary events” and improper conduct that took place in the office on 27 September 2023. 

They claim that CCTV footage shows Ager-Hanssen engaged in allegedly “unhinged” conduct when he angrily asked one of the respondents to leave the office, used multiple expletives and claimed there was an illegal conspiracy to steal intellectual property from the company.

He is quoted as saying: “You don’t understand corporate governance, you don’t work here … Get out of this office, otherwise, I’m getting security to do it. I am a board member, and you  are not. You don’t even work here.”

Moody and Brookes’ conduct on 27 September was also described “extraordinary and alarming”.

The respondents said in their opening note that numerous employees that were not involved in the Fairway brief were also suspended from work following the events of 27 September.

Ager-Hanssen previously brought an employment tribunal which was struck out on 18 October 2024, on the basis that it had not actively been pursued, according to the respondents written submissions. In separate legal proceedings, between nChain Holding, Ager-Hanssen was sentenced to 10 months imprisonment for contempt of court.

The case, which has backing from WhistleblowersUK, continues. 

Source

We are experiencing a deliberate, and often quiet, roll back of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives within UK businesses which will have long-term damaging effects for the tech sector and wider economy. The implications of these roll backs are, put simply, a reversal in progress and a reinforcement of deep systemic inequality.

With pressure to reduce costs and stay afloat in challenging economic times many businesses cite the cost of DEI initiatives and policies as being prohibitive to doing business. This is short sighted. A 2020 study by McKinsey which gathered data from 1,000 organisations revealed that  gender-diverse businesses are 25% more likely to have higher profits, with that number increasing to 36% for ethnically and culturally diverse businesses.

The risk of turning away

So, what are the actual implications of the roll back in DEI initiatives? If you are experiencing a change in DEI activities within your organisation it’s useful to consider whether this is because DEI is being de-prioritised or whether the organisation is re-framing what DEI means within the context of its organisational strategy. If efforts are being de-prioritised then potential implications include:

1. A shift in workplace culture

When DEI is no longer a priority the risk is that some employees become more vulnerable to discrimination, micro-aggressions and systemic disadvantages. They may lack the structures and mechanisms to ensure their voices and perspectives are heard, in the worst-case scenario they may be actively silenced.

Practically, you might see this in meetings where the same people contribute regularly, and the same people struggle to contribute their ideas and perspectives. Over time you may notice your teams becoming more homogenous. There is an active disadvantage in having a team where all members come from a similar background, have a similar thinking style, are of the same gender, race or education background. You create an echo-chamber which inhibits creativity and innovation. This can erode the deep cultural fabric of an organisation.

2. Loss of Innovation and Competitiveness

A BCG study suggests that increasing the diversity of leadership teams leads to more and better innovation and improved financial performance. In today’s economic climate, coupled with the opportunities and risks artificial intelligence (AI) brings to the way we do business, businesses need to stand out and continue to truly innovate to remain competitive. This requires resilience and a commitment to building and nurturing loyal talent within organisations.

3. Damage to Employer Brand and Talent Retention

As Gen Z, and eventually Gen Alpha, enter the workforce businesses will need to consider the expectations of a younger workforce. Gen Z is the first generation to grow up in a fully digital world with ready access to a wealth of information to shape their perspectives. Emerging research shows that their expectations are to find employment which is financially secure, supports overall well-being, and aligns to their values. For many individuals who represent Gen Z within the workforce DEI is not optional, it is a necessity. To remain relevant businesses need to consider how they will meet the expectations of the younger generations and their future leaders.

4. Widening Societal Gaps

Businesses influence our society, employers can promote and sustain upward mobility, economic empowerment and equitable opportunities. Stalling or stopping DEI initiatives will entrench existing inequalities particularly with regards to race, gender, disability, sexuality, and socioeconomic background. This is harmful to our societal values and norms and will have a ripple effect to our social services and societal structure.

Protecting the progress so far

Whilst it’s key to maintain and protect progress which has been made in business as a result of successful and thoughtful DEI initiatives it might be time for a reframe. Creativity, innovation and diverse perspectives are key to a business being resilient and adaptable in today’s world. Responsible businesses will not only prioritise DEI they will also consider their approach to the climate emergency and their ethical values in the way they do business. As a result there’s an opportunity for businesses who want to remain relevant to reshape how DEI initiatives are funded and delivered.

Here’s what can be done:

1. Integrate DEI into the overall strategy

DEI should not sit within one department, rather it should be embedded across all functions of the organisations from recruitment, marketing, leadership and service and/or product design. In this way DEI approaches should influence the day-to-day practices within an organisation, shaping culture and behaviour without requiring high investment.

2. Transparent leadership

If it matters, it should be measured. Leadership teams and company boards should be measuring their progress on inclusion alongside their bottom line. The numbers will start to speak for themselves. Leaders who prioritise transparent and open communication, including public reporting on workforce diversity and the gender pay gap are more likely to develop loyalty both internally and with their clients.

3. Build a network of strong allies

Organisational behaviours and practices that lack inclusivity are often inherently discriminatory and can contribute to a toxic and unproductive workplace culture. Build alliances and find allies. It’s extremely challenging for one individual to speak out however building a constructive case as a group could contribute to significant change and impact within your organisation. DEI initiatives are inherently hard because they challenge the status quo, therefore it makes sense to co-create solutions and share the load.

What might the future hold?

In uncertain times it’s easy to lose heart and lose sight of the bigger picture. The seismic shift we saw in 2020 of businesses pivoting resources and focus to support DEI came at a significant moment during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic alongside the Black Lives Matter movement. Five years on we can see that the journey for successful DEI initiatives is not linear, it’s often experimental, fraught with tension (at least at the start) and take time to mature.

A key enabling factor is the current approach of the UK Government. The Mission Led Government framework deeply embeds diversity, equity and inclusion by calling for a fairer and more equal society.  The cross cutting nature of DEI across the five national mission areas identified in the framework signals that DEI is foundational to societal progress. Businesses should take a lead from this.

This is not the moment to roll back from DEI, doing so is short-sighted and damaging to long-term business resilience, innovation and ethical responsibility. Now is a moment to galvanise progress to date and evolve how we understand DEI and how we deliver it. This is a critical moment, a crossroad for businesses tempted to retreat from previous DEI commitments. Whilst the economic pressures are real the answer is not drawing back from an approach which ultimately impacts the bottom line. The research is clear, organisations that prioritise diversity are more creative, more adaptable, and more profitable. Beyond the numbers, inclusive companies foster greater loyalty, collaboration, and innovation all essential qualities in an uncertain economy and a fast-evolving tech sector.

DEI is an essential component of a business strategy, now is the time for organisations to embed it deeply and strategically. The focus should shift from performative gestures to meaningful, measurable, and systemic change. This means aligning DEI with business goals, integrating inclusive practices across functions, and embedding accountability at every level of leadership.

There is also an opportunity to reframe DEI within a broader commitment to ethical and sustainable business practices. Gen Z and Gen Alpha are entering the workforce with high expectations for fairness, transparency, and impact. If businesses wish to attract and retain top talent, they must be able to practically demonstrate how they are building inclusive cultures and equitable opportunities.

Whilst UK business is inevitably influenced by governments and policies overseas there is a risk that our very values, the values which make UK businesses unique and attractive to investors and employees, are being slowly eroded. To stand out and take a stand is to hold true to the positive values which take time and focus to cultivate. Ditching a focus on DEI is a disappointing outcome, but all is not lost. The real opportunity lies in reaffirming our commitment to fairness, innovation, and integrity—even when it’s difficult. UK businesses can lead not by following reactive trends, but by setting a clear, values-driven example of what responsible, future-ready leadership truly looks like.

In closing, it’s always important to remember the words of Robert Reich, former U.S Secretary of Labour: “Change threatens those who benefit most from the status quo.”

 

Source

AI in cyber is everywhere this year, and if you’re a CISO you’re feeling the push from all sides. Boards want a plan, and vendors are promising AI‑powered outcomes. Your own teams can list a dozen places to apply it from speeding SOC triage, tightening identity hygiene, helping business users complete assessments, strengthening audit evidence, to improving OT readiness. The opportunity is real, but the noise is exhausting. The easiest way to cut through it is to decide, up front, what you’re buying and what you’re building. That means thinking in terms of SaaS AI accelerators and enterprise AI capability.

SaaS AI accelerators are hosted add‑ons that plug into tools you already use. Their job is practical, to  shave time off repetitive work and make outputs more consistent. If something sits on your telemetry, and drafts useful queries, assembles incident narratives, and proposes actions you can approve and roll back, with sensible logs, it will help in days, not months. The same goes for identity and email where accelerators can suggest safer access policies, flag risky sessions, nudge least‑privilege clean‑ups, or run adaptive phishing training. These tend to deliver quick, measurable gains without needing to re‑architect your programme.

Enterprise AI is the right choice when you need trusted outputs and verifiable sources that can be produced entirely inside your network if required. It’s also the right fit for operational technology, where teams should rehearse attacks in a safe testbed and track tangible improvements (faster detection, quicker recovery) rather than just running tabletop discussions. Use enterprise AI when the work spans multiple teams, touches sensitive data, or your policies need it to run the same way every time.

One more clarification is helpful when marketing blurs the terms. AI covers traditional models that detect, score, and cluster andgenerative AI creates text, images, or code. In security you’ll often pair them and the detection models will surface signals while the generative models will help people explain, draft, and decide. Treat generative outputs as high‑quality drafts to review, log, and tie important statements back to trusted sources, especially for audit or regulatory use.

So which use cases are worth a look?

In the SOC, seconds matter; accelerators that cut triage minutes and improve incident narratives without moving data out of bounds earn their keep. Identity hygiene and phishing resilience are similar.  Reversible changes and privacy‑aware telemetry keep improvements safe and relevant to humans. Enterprise AI can prepopulate assessment answers from known data, surface control evidence, and hand everything to reviewers for clean sign‑off, and replace fatigue with flow. Don’t overlook the value of assessment completion to help business users who have to slog through privacy, security, and vendor questionnaires. AI can suggest answers, highlight gaps, pull relevant policy extracts, and set out the route for approval. When done inside your governance framework, it increases speed and quality while keeping control within your privacy or security office requirements.

When dealing with the hype, you should be realistic. A fully autonomous SOC is still a future headline, not an achievable outcome in 2026. Keep humans in the loop, insist on explainability for suggested actions, and separate “what the system proposed” from “what the analyst did.” Unsupervised auto‑remediation across production environments is similarly risky. It’s important to start narrow, review anything that changes live systems, and make roll‑back easy. Also be wary of perfect detection claims, false positives, false negatives, and drift are facts of life and of instant compliance. If you can’t export and justify evidence for audit, you don’t own it. Ungoverned generative outputs are not a source of truth; they are powerful assistants that still need sources.

Then there’s a need to keep governance light but real. Maintain a living AI inventory that sets out what each system or agent does, where its data comes from, who owns it, and how it’s logged. Pair that with practical safety checks with human approval of impactful actions, apply reversible changes, log prompts and output, and run periodic drift tests. That should mean innovation stays on the right side of expectations without slowing the team.

Finally, make decisions easy with two questions. Will this plug into your existing stack and deliver value in weeks without breaching data boundaries? If the answer is yes, it’s a SaaS AI accelerator that needs to be judged on fit, speed, guardrails, and auditability. Does it need to live inside governance, touch sensitive evidence, or run locally or offline? If yes, it’s an enterprise AI capability where you need to build or extend it so you own the controls, lifecycle, and audit trail. Consider those questions and you’ll be able to secure clear, defensible wins from the wave of AI tools. You’ll have accelerators for tasks where seconds count, capability where governance carries the load, and provide genuine help for the people doing the work including filling in those questionnaires that never seem to end.

Richard Watson-Bruhn is a cyber security expert at PA Consulting.

Source

Marking what the fleet technology provider says is its most ambitious leap in artificial intelligence (AI) safety to date, Motive has launched a class of intelligence hardware for commercial vehicles using driving analytics to enable drivers and their operators to stay safe on the road, in real time.

AI Dashcam Plus is said to have fast AI capabilities and hands-free communication that allow for proactive collision prevention. Explaining the need for such technology, Motive quoted the UK Department of Transport, stating that in 2024 alone, more than 128,000 roadway casualties occurred in the country, with almost 30,000 serious or fatal accidents. The company added that reactive safety systems with limited visibility, delayed alerts and unreliable technology were failing organisations at crucial moments.

“Collision rates and related costs remain unacceptably high around the world,” said Shoaib Makani, co-founder and CEO of Motive. “Organisations need AI-powered driver safety solutions that can perceive and respond in real time. We’ve added three times more compute, created the first AI dash cam with stereo vision, and added hands-free communication, all in one system, so organisations can detect more risks and act faster. This isn’t just a new product; it reflects a shift toward proactive, AI-driven road safety.” 

Powered by the Qualcomm Dragonwing QCS6490 processor, AI Dashcam Plus can run more than 30 AI models simultaneously, and is designed to detect and respond to risk, instantly enabling broader detection with fewer false alerts. These updates are designed to enable AI Dashcam Plus to detect more unsafe behaviours in real time with higher accuracy and less latency.

AI Dashcam Plus’s Android-based architecture is claimed to provide a secure framework for voice, audio, connectivity and AI services. It enables rapid feature delivery such as two-way calling, voice control and over-the-air AI model updates, without frequent hardware refreshes. The Android-based architecture also enables the device to optimise AI workloads across Qualcomm’s central processing unit, graphics processing unit and Hexagon DSP to improve performance and reduce latency on every update.

The device is also said to be the first AI dash cam with dual forward-facing stereo vision to improve visibility, combining live, hands-free, two-way calling and other AI capabilities into a unifying hardware designed to improve reliability and reduce installation time.

AI Dashcam Plus’s stereo vision uses two synchronised road-facing lenses to create human-like depth perception, and allows the AI to judge distance and closing speed with far greater accuracy. This stereo vision feature aims to improve Forward Collision Warning, Lane Swerving and Close Following alerts to help prevent more collisions. 

AI Dashcam Plus also integrates video, audio, telematics, GPS and dual motion sensor data to detect more complex events, such as a break-in from the sound of glass shattering, or a low-severity collision from subtle vibration patterns – events that other competing dash cams miss entirely.

It also boasts AI Dashcam Plus, with a 1440p zoom lens with a narrow field of view, enabling automatic number-plate recognition even in motion, from long distances or in bad weather. This could provide critical evidence in hit-and-runs, theft and other incidents, helping to speed up investigations and exonerate drivers.

Hands-free communication helps drivers instantly connect with managers using voice-activated control, while managers can reach drivers directly from the Motive Dashboard or Fleet App. Automated alerts can help organisations improve safety and reduce costs by prompting drivers to address time-sensitive issues such as critical fault codes and excessive idling.

Beatriz Minamy, principal analyst at S&P Global Market Intelligence, said: “Improving driver and vehicle safety is among the top three priorities for truckload carriers globally when adopting new technologies … AI-powered solutions that enable real-time coaching, automated in-cab alerts for unsafe behaviours and proactive risk detection are becoming central to how fleets strengthen safety and accountability.”

Source

At ING, artificial intelligence (AI) is not a new phenomenon. The wholesale and retail European bank has been using AI for a decade and has centralised its AI development efforts to scale product development across multiple countries while maintaining strong connections with business divisions.

As Computer Weekly has previously reported, ING is focused on the use of AI in five key areas of the business: know your customer (KYC), call centres, wholesale banking to improve customer due diligence, retail for the hyper-personalisation of offerings, and inside tech for engineering.

Discussing the centralised approach, Marco Li Mandri, who used to work at Vodafone and is now ING’s head of advanced analytics strategy, says: “A clear consequence of how we are organised is that, from the beginning, we invested in having one platform. This is the platform that we use to build most of our AI, all of our GenAI [generative AI], and that we are positioning for agentic AI.”

According to Li Mandri, ING’s centralised approach to AI development has resulted in a high success rate for pilot projects, with 90% moving to production compared with the industry average of 30%.

The bank has standardised on cloud-hosted AI models from preferred partners, which are then made available globally, allowing ING to scale. He says the platform is centrally managed with risk controls, guardrails and real-time monitoring.

Regarding ING’s approach to digital sovereignty, Li Mandri says: “You can design for this with many of the cloud platforms. They have EU-based servers where the data does not leave the EU, but there are still some dependencies to provide continuity of the service.”

The AI tools ING has deployed are being actively used and, according to Li Mandri, employees interact with these tools 30 to 50 times per week in some markets. For instance, ING is rolling out AI productivity tools, such as copilots for software engineers and Microsoft 365 Copilot, to enhance efficiency across teams. In addition, it has trained 5,000 employees on data fluency and GenAI to ensure they can effectively use and challenge AI systems.

ING has deployed generative AI-powered customer-facing chatbots in multiple countries, automating 75% of customer queries. The bank is focusing on high-value problems, such as mortgage processing and anti-money laundering, where AI is being used to augment human capabilities rather than to replace workers.

When asked about how the bank rolled out GenAI-powered chatbots to its customers, Li Mandri says customers can request to speak to a real person at any point during the online chat conversation, providing a human in the loop. ING has also implemented a data-driven quality assurance framework to avoid AI hallucinations and malicious manipulation of prompts.

“From the beginning, we invested in having one platform. This is the platform that we use to build most of our AI, all of our GenAI, and that we are positioning for agentic AI”

Marco Li Mandri, ING

Given that ING is one of the biggest mortgage lenders in Europe, there is an opportunity to use agentic AI to handle parts of mortgage application processing, as Li Mandri explains: “We are using an agentic AI system in mortgage processing to help back-office employees conduct all the checks they need to do.”  

The agentic AI system handles the task of extracting information from the various documents involved in a mortgage application and can perform checks on these. “It will not replace the human,” says Li Mandri, “but it’s like the human will have a mini team and, if we are able to do that, it will have quite some impact on the time it takes to approve mortgage applications.”

Like many organisations using AI to improve workflows, ING is ensuring there is always a human in the loop. Article 1 of the EU AI Act covers human oversight in high-risk AI systems – from a financial services perspective, this covers AI systems that are intended to be used to evaluate the creditworthiness of or establish the credit score of applicants.

Discussing compliance with the act, Li Mandri says the bank already had a robust compliance framework: “When we did the analysis of the EU AI Act, we realised a lot of it was already embedded in the bank. But new technologies like generative AI introduce new risks, so we have 140 different risks that we specifically vet when we deploy GenAI systems.”

Evolution of customer-facing chatbots

During his time at Vodafone, Li Mandri built a chatbot for the telecoms provider, saying: “When I started with AI, eight to 10 years ago, I built a chatbot, which became the number one in Europe by volume because it was installed on the phone and the web page, all based on one brain.” 

When we did the analysis of the EU AI Act, we realised a lot of it was already embedded in the bank. But new technologies like generative AI introduce new risks, so we have 140 different risks that we specifically vet when we deploy GenAI systems Marco Li Mandri, ING

Looking to the future and thinking about the present, using natural language speech interaction is the direction of travel as voicebots replace chatbot technology in call centres, thanks to advances in AI models.

ING is exploring speech-to-speech models to improve the naturalness of voicebot interactions. It is testing the technology in Spain and Germany. Devices such as smart speakers generally convert human speech input to text, which is then processed, and the response requires a conversion from text back to speech.

As Li Mandri notes: “This chain will make a conversation with a voicebot very unnatural. But there are now models providing speech-to-speech, which enable you to have a conversation with a voice bot more naturally.”

Source

A group of German anarchists have claimed responsibility for an arson attack on critical energy infrastructure in Berlin, citing the “insatiable” energy demands of artificial intelligence (AI) and other digital technologies.

On 3 January 2026, members of the Vulkangruppe (Volcano Group) used homemade incendiary devices to destroy cables connected to the Lichterfelde power station in south-west Berlin, leaving around 45,000 households and 2,200 businesses in the city without electricity, according to grid operator Stromnetz Berlin.

While some key buildings like hospitals and schools were able to continue operating via emergency power generators, most households and businesses were left without electricity until 7 January, although roughly 10,000 households and 300 businesses were reconnected within 24 hours.

The five-day blackout caused by the arson attack is reportedly the longest blackout experienced by the German capital since the Second World War.

In a statement published online, the Volcano Group said its targets were “the fossil fuel economy” and “energy-guzzling” digital technologies such as AI that are contributing to the planet’s rapid environmental destitution.

“In the greed for energy, the Earth is being drained, sucked dry, burned, ravaged, razed, raped and destroyed,” they said. “Entire regions are rendered uninhabitable … With our militant action, we reject the offers of participation in a world ravaged by destruction.”

The group further argued that AI-driven digital infrastructure expansions – in Berlin but also globally – will only promote further environmental degradation while enabling more authoritarian political solutions via the transformation of urban environments into ‘smart city’ metropolises. “Switch off the greed for energy, switch off the digital management of life, switch off the progress of destruction,” they said.

Mayor comment

Berlin mayor Kai Wegner told reporters: “It is unacceptable that left-wing extremists are once again openly attacking our electricity grid and thereby endangering human lives.” 

He later added: “This is not just arson or sabotage – this is terrorism.”

Berlin’s energy and economy senator, Franziska Giffey, called the attack a “serious blow to critical infrastructure”, and said the perpetrators had likely used publicly available data to select their location.

“You can find a lot of information on the internet,” she said, adding that policymakers would need to prioritise security over transparency going forward. The group claimed in its statement, however, that the sabotaged cables were “not publicly documented”.

On 6 January, German federal prosecutors confirmed they had launched a terrorism investigation into the arson attack by Volcano Group, which is considered “a left-wing extremist organisation” by the German government.

Active since 2011 – when it sabotaged railway infrastructure in Berlin on the basis that it helped the German state project military force and transport nuclear technology – members of the Volcano Group have claimed responsibility for a number of acts of technological sabotage since then.

This includes attacks on high-voltage power lines, transformers, radio stations and the power supplies of Tesla production sites.

A 2024 annual security report by Germany’s domestic intelligence agency highlighted that the group is a major concern for the German state due to the “enormous impact and high amounts of damage” caused by their attacks, which participants view as “a potentially promising way of influencing” the country’s climate policy.

To date, German police have failed to identify or arrest specific individuals that have participated in the Volcano Group or any of its attacks. While the group’s membership and organisational structure remain largely opaque, German authorities believe it operates in a decentralised manner.

Volcano Group motivations

In the statement published online in the wake of its attack, the Volcano Group apologised to “less affluent and vulnerable” Berlin residents impacted by the power cuts, claiming they were not the “intended targets” of the action.

“Our sympathy for the owners of the many villas, the real estate companies, the embassies and other elite wealthy individuals in the area is limited. The rich and their self-centred, antisocial lifestyle are currently destroying the planet,” they said, claiming the attack deliberately targeted the wealthier districts of the city.

In a follow-up statement published on 8 January, the group expressed regret at the impact on ordinary Berliners, adding that knowing the full consequences now, they would have planned the attack for a warmer time of the year.

In its initial statement published online, however, the Volcano Group said its targets were “the fossil fuel economy” and “energy-guzzling” digital technologies.

Noting that ordinary people “have no say in the direction of energy policy decisions or the city’s development”, the Volcano Group members argued that the “modernisation” of Berlin’s digital infrastructure is about increasing control and making it an attractive investment location, rather than improving the lives of all of its residents.

“These economically liberal destroyers of a liveable future think of the city in terms of numbers, sums of money, growth rates and competition with other cities. People don’t count, or only as categories of low-income or high-income earners,” they said, noting that while the latter will receive a “smart and beautiful” city, the former will face increasingly repressive measures that curtail their movement and opportunities.

“The ‘energy transition’ is a smokescreen that obscures the fact that it’s about energy without any transition, without ifs, ands or buts,” they added. “The main thing is energy, sustainable or not.”

Highlighting how the digital technologies being produced by resource-intensive production processes are contributing to people’s social dislocation while bolstering the military and surveillance capacities of states around the globe, Volcano Group members claimed that its “public-spirited action is socially beneficial.”

They added that although the attack will not prevent Volcano Group members’ own complicity “in an imperial lifestyle” built at the expense of billions in the Global South, it will send a signal.

“We are trying to interrupt the exploitation of the Earth, prevent CO2-related deaths, and halt the diseases linked to the climate catastrophe,” they said. “We are also trying to put an end to species extinction and make the world a more liveable place for everyone. Those who call us ‘eco-terrorists’ are themselves the real eco-terrorists, using this term to serve their own selfish interests and power calculations.”

Everyday digitisation

Volcano Group members also criticised the increasing digitisation of everyday life, claiming that algorithmically mediated communication via smartphones and social media means people are “operating their own surveillance”, while also feeding their “loneliness and alienation”.

At the same time, they argued that digitisation also means people are “increasingly excluded” from society if they do not use certain technologies.

“We are prisoners in a digital system that increasingly deprives us of our right to exist if we don’t submit to its rules and relocate our lives to social media, chat rooms and artificial realities,” they said.

“We receive no money, can’t book or buy anything with cash. Without access to the digital world, we are increasingly excluded, losing touch with what seems normal. We are afraid of what will happen to us and bury ourselves even deeper in our screens instead of switching off our devices and taking away the power over us of those who track, monitor, observe and manipulate us.”

Highlighting how rich countries and billionaires are doubling down in the face of looming environmental catastrophe – using growing resource scarcity to promote authoritarian political solutions while continuing their destabilising resource extraction at pace – the Volcano Group members called for “an international movement that rejects progress based solely on destruction, murder and plunder.”

“Desperate, angry and determined, we call out, joining the calls of others: Sabotage the fossil fuel infrastructure, the power grids, the exploitation of the Earth, the datacentres, the chip industry and its suppliers; destroy the foundations of the automotive and arms industries, of air travel, villas, yachts, spaceships and golf courses,” they said.

“Destroy the police headquarters that guarantee patriarchal property relations, for the Earth belongs to itself and to all living beings, not to humans, or rather, to men alone, and not to the richest among them.”

Contending views

Since the sabotage, a third statement has appeared online from people who claim to be members of the original 2011 Volcano Group that attacked the cable duct at Ostkreuz train station.

Distancing themselves from the action at Lichterfelde power station, the members said it contradicts what the group originally stood for and why they acted.

“Our point of reference was clear and limited,” they said. “Our targets were Bundeswehr deployments, German participation in wars, and arms exports.

“Infrastructure was not an end in itself or a playing field for us, but rather a symbol and vehicle for external military force. Our interventions were directed against war policies, not against basic social services, not against people in their everyday lives.”

Noting that “our past actions are being used to legitimise, explain or politically justify current attacks”, the group added that they have now distanced themselves from this and other recent Volcano Group attacks because they do not “want to be part of a dynamic in which criticism of militarism coincides with the actual weakening of societies”.

However, just as the identities of those who made the initial statements after the Lichterfelde attack cannot be definitively identified, there is no way of concretely verifying the identities of the third letter’s authors.

Source

Veni Vidi…shoot/Getty Images

As the reality of 2026 settles in, an analysis of Nvidia graphics card trends gives users, especially PC gaming enthusiasts, plenty of reasons to worry. Building a desktop with a focus on offering the best gaming experience was never easy, as you need to consider multiple components when shopping for hardware. However, these kinds of problems may get worse. Nvidia, one of the big manufacturers of gaming GPUs, changed its strategy to become a supplier to the primary architecture of AI infrastructure, leading to higher graphics card prices for regular consumers.

This means the company is no longer targeting gamers, making GPUs an even harder component to find and plan around when building a desktop. With AI attracting more attention from investors, it’s easy to focus on data centers and enterprise buyers, since they can absorb costs that gaming clients can’t and buy products in bulk quantities with high margins to sustain their large-scale AI operations.

That’s why this year feels like a turning point in the wrong direction for everyday buyers. Even as technology improves, it’s become harder to access these kinds of products. With fewer Nvidia GPUs offering good value for their price, building a PC that offers stable gaming frame rates has become even harder.

AI data centers will inflate flagship GPU prices

Evolf/Shutterstock

The graphics card is always one of the most expensive and important parts of building a PC, since, combined with a CPU, it is what defines how well a game can run. This cost can be even higher if you’re considering adding a flagship model to your desktop, as these cards come equipped with more memory and higher clock speeds, making GPUs like RTX 5090 also a good choice for AI development.

For small AI teams, buying gaming GPUs instead of accelerators designed specifically for AI, such as the H100 or H200 series, is a more affordable alternative. Considering these teams can purchase several units at once, and the market lacks supply, the average gamer who wants to buy a single GPU can’t compete for the stock. Then, GPU prices increase because demand remains stable as the supply decreases.

However, this kind of price increase doesn’t only affect the flagship models of Nvidia graphics cards like the RTX 5090, as older versions also see a spike in value as demand rises. Nvidia’s manufacturer’s suggested retail price rarely reflects what buyers actually pay, pushing the PC gaming segment out of reach for many players.

Manufacturing shortages will force a return to the RTX 3060

While high-end GPUs are being swept from the market by AI data centers, Nvidia is also exploring the possibility of bringing back old models to fill the gaming demand gap. According to rumors, the return of RTX 3060 is very likely to happen in 2026 (via VideoCardz), since this model is a cost-effective graphics card that runs most modern games at 60 frames per second on High or Ultra settings. However, its performance is 15% lower than the RTX 5050according to benchmarks.

The decision to bring back RTX 3060 is also a direct consequence of the struggle for manufacturing resources. Since Nvidia’s Series 50 uses the Blackwell architecture, which relies heavily on the GDDR7 memory standard, Nvidia also faces significant hurdles in mass-producing enough low-end RTX 50 cards to meet global demand without impacting its AI business. This means that reverting to the RTX 3060, which utilizes GDDR6, makes it possible to keep stock available without losing out on the other demand.

Beyond the memory shortage that many manufacturers are facing, some market data also helps explain why Nvidia is considering bringing this GPU back. Despite being more than five years old, RTX 3060 remains the most popular graphics card in desktops according to Steam data. Even if buying an old GPU in 2026 feels counterintuitive, its performance is still good enough when gamers have fewer GPU options for their desktop.

RTX 50 Series Super will be delayed

The Super series was another popular Nvidia graphics card trend on older models, but it may not happen with the RTX 50 Series. Originally, it served as a mid-generation refresh between major GPU launches. With this kind of update, it was possible to purchase a new version of a GPU with new features, such as more cores, higher clock speeds, or even additional VRAM, often at a better price than the launch model.

One of the main reasons for discontinuing Super models is the current state of competition. AMD, Nvidia’s biggest rival, is no longer focusing on high-end graphics cards and has instead shifted its strategy toward more budget-friendly options for players. This lack of competition at the top end reduces the need for Nvidia to refresh the RTX 50 Series with upgraded Super variants, since these updates existed mainly to keep the lineup competitive.

The shortage of GDDR7 also plays a major role in Nvidia delaying its plans to release the RTX 50-series Super edition, since the launch of these enhanced variations typically demands a higher supply of memory chips. With GDDR7 production still under pressure and heavily prioritized for AI accelerators and enterprise-grade hardware, allocating additional memory to refreshed gaming GPUs becomes increasingly difficult, making it a risk that Nvidia won’t take. Since Nvidia didn’t announce RTX 50 Series Super GPUs at CES 2026, such a delay is more likely than ever.

New DLSS updates will create bottlenecks on older hardware

Annastills/Getty Images

While the return of the RTX 3060 is likely being planned by Nvidia, it also highlights a different issue that can worry gamers following the most recent trends among Nvidia graphics cards: how DLSS technology works. With the arrival of the 4.5 update, benchmarks in games like “Cyberpunk 2077” show that some presets can deliver lower FPS than DLSS 4.

This happens because, as Nvidia says, DLSS 4.5 needs five times more compute power to run well and is also dependent on FP8 acceleration to reduce the performance impact in-game, a feature found only in the RTX 40 Series and RTX 50 Series. Tensor cores in the RTX 20 Series and 30 Series are built on a different architecture, which can lead to worse performance with newer DLSS versions and create a hardware bottleneck.

That way, while Nvidia launches new DLSS technology for its graphics cards, stable performance may be restricted to the latest hardware, so older cards like the RTX 3060 won’t support it. This means that buying a mid-range card now can mean being locked out of most updates that the manufacturer will release only for the latest GPUs.

Source

The Police Digital Service (PDS) is set to be the subject of at least two employment tribunals this year, with former staffers making claims of harassment, sexual discrimination and unfair constructive dismissal against the organisation, Computer Weekly has learned.

Three PDS senior executives, including a director, are also understood to have been dismissed in recent weeks, according to sources with a close working knowledge of the Home Office-funded organisation, which is responsible for overseeing the development and delivery of the National Police Digital Strategy.

PDS has previously been described to Computer Weekly as being a “really unhappy place to work”, with sources within the organisation reporting low staff morale, amid a promise from the organisation’s senior leaders that the workplace would undergo a “cultural reset”.

This vow is understood to have been made to staff following the completion of a “through review” of PDS, following the arrests of two employees in July 2024 for suspected bribery, fraud and misconduct in public office.

This event led to the resignation of then PDS chief executive Ian Bell, and a subsequent restructure and streamlining of the rest of the company’s senior leadership team over the past year, which is now almost exclusively staffed by interim hires.

It has now been brought to Computer Weekly’s attention that at least two employment tribunals against PDS are getting underway this month, with PDS facing claims of harassment and victimisation by one former staff member.

Second case hearing

The preliminary hearing for the second case, brought by another ex-PDS staffer, took place during the week commencing 5 January 2026, as confirmed to Computer Weekly by the local tribunal office overseeing it.

That case is understood to feature accusations of sexual discrimination and whistleblowing detriment, with the individual involved putting in a claim for unfair constructive dismissal against PDS.

Sources told Computer Weekly that there are several other employment tribunals concerning the company’s treatment of former staff members either underway or in the pipeline.

Computer Weekly contacted PDS for a comment and clarification on the forthcoming employment tribunals, as well as the more recent wave of senior departures from the organisation, and received the following statement in response:

“We do not provide comment on any internal personnel matter which is confidential to both the organisation and any individual involved. In relation to employment tribunal claims, like any organisation, we occasionally face claims brought against us and are unable to comment on individual cases.”

Culture and engagement

PDS has repeatedly acknowledged that “improving the culture and engagement with employees at all levels” is a priority for the organisation, with this phrase appearing in every PDS financial report filed with Companies House since 2020.

The organisation’s most recent set of accounts covers the 12 months to 31 March 2025, and were filed with Companies House on 12 December 2025, confirming the organisation received a Home Office grant valued at £22.3m to progress its work during this period.

The accounts also confirm that PDS made a profit before tax of £2.22m during the year, which is an improvement on 2024, when it made a loss of £1.2m.

“The profit for the year includes the release of £3.63m of deferred income related to prior years following a review of remaining liabilities … without this there would have been a loss of £1.4m,” the accounts clarified.

Commitment to company culture changes continues

The report reiterates the company’s commitment to improving workplace culture, and said this “continued to be an important workstream throughout 2024/2025” and will remain one through to 2026 “and beyond”.

To this point, the company said it wants to “develop and embed a culture where our people feel they matter and understand how their role contributes to the success of the business”, and that this “programme of work” has been “updated to reflect emerging priorities and is progressing well”.

The report added: “Career development objectives, which include investing in our people through both specialist and behavioural training, continue to be important foundations for the way we shall operate in 2025/26 and beyond.”

On the topic of staff retention, the PDS annual report acknowledged that there has been a “steady increase” in staff turnover over the “rolling 12-month period” covered by its December 2025 accounts, although “month-by-month” turnover is described in it as having “stabilised” over the course of the 2024/25 financial year.

“At the end of 2024/25, our turnover was 15.5%,” the report stated. “Within the DDaT [digital, data and technology] industry, a turnover at or under 15%, with a retention figure of over 85%, is considered good.

“During 2024/25, 34% of our workforce were women,” it added. “This was a stable position during the financial year … In 2024, 54.5% of the civil service were women.”

As reported by Computer Weekly, sources at PDS have previously pointed to the uncertainty surrounding the organisation’s future as a source of low staff morale, in light of the Home Office’s much-talked-about plans to reform the policing sector.

In November 2024, the Home Office said the reforms will include the creation of a National Centre of Policing (NCoP) that will have the provision of national IT capabilities in its purview. As reported by Computer Weekly at the time, this has led to questions about whether PDS will still exist once NCoP is created because it appears the two entities will be duplicating responsibilities.

In June 2025, Diana Johnson, the former minister of state for policing and crime prevention, published a letter that strongly suggested PDS’s work and responsibilities will be taken over by NCoP. It stated that establishing NCoP will require primary legislation to be passed, and preparatory work undertaken to “facilitate a smooth transition of relevant capabilities” into this new organisation, while “maintaining effective service delivery” and ensuring minimal disruption to staff.

“Examples of such functions [that require transition] include the commercial work currently being delivered by BlueLight Commercial Limited, and the IT functions currently delivered by the Police Digital Service,” Johnson’s letter confirmed.

Further detail on NCoP is expected to emerge in the coming months, with the publication of the Police reform whitepaper, which was due to drop before the end of 2025, but has now been delayed until early 2026, Computer Weekly understands.

Source