The day I forgot my wallet – and it didn’t matter

Posted on By Mark Wilson

Yesterday I left the house without my wallet.

Once upon a time that would have been a disaster – but it didn’t matter in the slightest. I had my iPhone. My Apple Wallet held my train tickets and my virtual payment cards, and everything just worked.

At some point, I realised I’ve quietly crossed the line into a world where my phone is my wallet. It doesn’t just hold my payment cards – it replaces the cards I’d need to withdraw cash too. Which raises a question: if physical cards disappear, will we need NFC-enabled ATMs to keep access to cash alive?

The cashless tipping point

According to UK Finance’s UK Payment Markets 2025 report, cards now account for around two-thirds of all payments in the UK. Cash, once king, has slipped below 10% – fewer than one in ten transactions. Over half of UK adults now contactless payments, including both plastic cards and mobile wallets such as Apple Pay or Google Pay.

The Bank of England says cash won’t die out any time soon, but it’s hard to ignore the direction of travel. Every tap of a card or phone accelerates the shift.

Why cash still matters

And yet, we’re not a cashless society – at least, not officially.

The Financial Services and Markets Act 2023 gave the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) powers to make sure people can still withdraw and deposit notes and coins. Its new Access to Cash Regime came into force last September.

So even as digital payments dominate, the UK is deliberately keeping cash alive – not for nostalgia, but for resilience and inclusion.

Because while most of us can pay with a tap, around 5% of adults still have no internet access, and many more are what Ofcom calls “digitally disadvantaged” – they’re online, but lack confidence or skills.

Cash also serves as a fallback when the technology fails. Power cut, network outage, or card terminal on the blink – the humble £10 note still works.

Emotional value

Then there’s the emotional side.

The Bank of England points out that many people prefer cash for budgeting – physically seeing money leave your hand is more tangible than a number on a screen.

There’s also the matter of privacy. Every card transaction leaves a digital trail; cash doesn’t. For some, that’s reason enough.

The cost question

One argument that keeps popping up is the cost of card payments. Some businesses still cite high processing fees, especially for low-value sales. Others quietly admit that banking and securing cash costs money too.

And it’s rare to find a truly “cash-only” business these days. In a 2020-21 survey by HMRC, only 1% of small businesses described themselves as cash-only.

The “cash only” question

That 1% does make me raise an eyebrow though.

Whenever I see a “cash only” sign, I can’t help wondering whether every pound is being reported to His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs. It’s probably unfair – there are genuine reasons for preferring cash – but the association is hard to shake.

HMRC’s own research shows some tradespeople see “cash jobs” as unlikely to be caught. Maybe that says more about culture than crime, but it lingers in the background.

Should we mourn the loss of cash?

Personally, I don’t think so.

I like the convenience of digital payments, the security of not carrying notes, and the way my wallet has quietly become redundant. The only time I use cash regularly now is at the local market, where some of the traders are cash-only and others just prefer it. Ironically, I still have some euros in my wallet, but rarely any pounds!

But I do think we need to protect choice. A fully digital economy can’t leave behind those who aren’t ready, able or willing to join it.

The regulators seem to agree. Access to cash is now a legal right, even if accepting it isn’t.

Reflection

Forgetting my wallet was a small thing, but it made me stop and think about how quickly we’ve moved from contactless cards to contactless lives. And as much as I enjoy the convenience of paying with a phone, maybe we should all keep a few notes for emergencies.

OpenAI Atlas and the blurred line between search and synthesis

Posted on By Mark Wilson

OpenAI’s new Atlas browser has certainly got people talking.

Some are excited — calling it a “Google killer” and a glimpse of how we’ll all navigate the web in future. Others are alarmed — pointing to privacy concerns, data collection prompts, and the idea of handing over browsing history and passwords to an AI company.

Jason Grant described his experience as “a giant dark pattern.” Matthew Dunn was more balanced — impressed by the features, but quick to warn businesses off using it. He’s right: if you wouldn’t paste confidential data into ChatGPT, you probably shouldn’t browse the company intranet through Atlas either.

Search vs. synthesis

When people say Atlas will replace Google, they’re missing the point. It’s not search in the traditional sense.

A search engine indexes existing content and returns links that might answer your question. Atlas — and systems like it — go a step further. They synthesise an answer, combining what’s on the web with what’s in your conversation and what they’ve “seen” before.

As Data Science Dojo explains, search engines are designed to find information that already exists, while synthesis engines are designed to create new information.

Or, as Vincent Hunt neatly puts it: “Search gives you links. Synthesis gives you insight.”

That shift sounds subtle, but it changes everything: how we ask questions, how we evaluate truth, and how much we trust the output.

As I said in my recent talk on AI Transformation at the Bletchley AI User Group, “Generative AI is not a search engine. It doesn’t retrieve facts. It generates language based on probabilities.” Google doesn’t know the truth either — it just gives you the most common answer to your question — but AI goes a step further. It merges, rewrites and repackages information. That can be powerful, but it’s also risky. It’s why I believe the AI-generated results that many search engines now return as default are inferior to traditional results, based on actual information sources.

Without strong governance, AI may be repurposing outdated content or drawing on biased data. Transparency matters — because trust is the real currency of AI adoption.

Why Atlas matters

In OpenAI’s announcement, Atlas is described as “bringing ChatGPT anywhere across the web — helping you in the window right where you are.”

It’s not just a search bar. It can summarise pages, compare options, fill out forms, or even complete tasks within websites. That’s a very different paradigm — one where the browser becomes a workspace, and the assistant becomes a collaborator.

A step towards agentic AI?

So, is Atlas really agentic? In part, yes.

Agentic AI describes systems that can act rather than just answer. They plan, execute and adapt — working on your behalf, not just waiting for your next prompt.

OpenAI’s own notes mention an agent mode that can “help you book reservations or edit documents you’re working on,” as reported by The Verge.

Others, like Practical Ecommerce, describe Atlas as “a push into agentic browsing — where the browser is now an AI agent too.”

It’s not full autonomy yet — more like assisted agency — but it’s a clear step in that direction.

Why it still needs caution

As exciting as it sounds, Atlas isn’t designed for enterprise use. It raises valid concerns about data privacy, security, and trust. You wouldn’t give a work browser access to sensitive credentials, and the same logic applies here.

As Matthew Dunn notes, ChatGPT “produces better output than Copilot, but with less security and privacy.” That’s a fair trade-off for some users, but not for organisations handling confidential information.

So, by all means, explore it — but do so with your eyes open.

And yes, I’ll still give it a try I decided not to install it after all

For all the justified concerns about privacy and data handling, I’ll still give Atlas a try. Even though I have Copilot at work, I pay for ChatGPT Pro for activities that are not directly related to my confidential work.

Atlas might extend that usefulness into how I browse, not just how I prompt. The key, as ever, is knowing what data you’re sharing — and making that a conscious choice, not an accidental one.

[Updated 24/10/2025: After writing and publishing this post, I decided not to install Atlas. There are a lot of security concerns about the way the browser stores local data, which may easily be exploited. Nevertheless, both OpenAI Atlas and Perplexity Comet are interesting developments, and the narrative about the differences between an AI search (synthesis) and a traditional search is still valid.]

Featured image: created by ChatGPT.

Tonight’s talk at the Bletchley AI User Group, and a new AI Resources page

Posted on By Mark Wilson

Tonight, I’ll be giving a talk on AI Transformation at the Bletchley AI User Group.

Slides

I gave up on bit.ly QR codes/links to OneDrive* and hosted the slides on my own website. They are also embedded below:

20251021_Mark_Wilson_Bletchley_AI_UG_AI_Transformation

Alternatively, you can save my bandwidth by picking them up from my OneDrive instead!

Feedback

If you were at the talk, some feedback would be much appreciated, please. There’s a Microsoft Form for that!

Resources

I also reached a point where I was seeing more and more new AI content every day and I just… had… to… stop… adding… more… into… the… presentation. A few minutes vibe coding with ChatGPT gave me a static single page website with a search capability and a JSON-based data source. And ChatGPT even did the analysis, classification and tagging for me…

Anyway, my new AI Resources page is here and will be updated as and when I come across new artefacts.

*What was wrong with bit.ly?

Recent changes at bit.ly that mean they:

  • No longer support custom domain names on a free account (bye-bye mwil.it); and
  • Require a paid account to redirect short links after creation

The challenge I had was that I wanted to include a QR code for people to scan when I present the content, but that created a circular issue: I upload the slides, create a QR code, add the QR to the slides, upload the slides, the link changes… etc., etc.

(I wouldn’t mind paying for bit.ly, except that their plans are a bit expensive. This is a free website that creates a handful of short links each month and subscription fatigue is real…)

When software meets steel: agentic computing in the real world

Posted on By Mark Wilson

I flew to Dublin last week as part of the team representing Node4 at a Microsoft Sales and Partner summit. But the event itself is not really relevant here — what struck me was the amount of robot tech I interacted with on the trip.

At Heathrow Terminal 5, I took one of the self-driving pods that connect the business car park with the terminal. Inside, Mitie’s robot cleaning machines were gliding quietly between travellers. And in Dublin Airport, our restaurant meal was brought out by a robot waitress called Bella.

It was only later that I realised these weren’t isolated novelties. They’re part of a pattern: we’re used to talking about agentic computing in a software sense but it also presents itself through hardware in the physical world.

The journey begins: autonomous pods at Heathrow

The Heathrow pods have been around for over a decade, but they still feel futuristic. You call one on demand, climb in, and it glides directly to your stop. There’s no driver, no timetable, and almost no wait. The system uses far less energy than a bus or car, and the whole thing is orchestrated by software that dispatches pods, avoids collisions and monitors usage.

It’s a neat demonstration of automation in motion: you make a request, and a machine physically carries it out.

Quiet efficiency: Mitie’s cleaning “cobots”

Inside the terminal, Mitie’s autonomous cleaning robots were at work. These cobots use sensors and cameras to map the concourse, clean for hours, then return to charge before resuming their shifts. They handle repetitive tasks while human staff focus on the harder jobs.

You could easily miss them — and that’s the point. They’re designed to blend in. The building, in a sense, is starting to help maintain itself.

Meet Bella: the robot waitress

In Dublin, things got more personal. The restaurant’s “BellaBot” rolled over with trays of food, blinking her animated eyes and purring polite phrases. The QR code was hard to scan (black text on a brass plate lacks contrast) and the ordering app didn’t work so human staff had to step in — but the experience was still surreal.

Bella’s design deliberately humanises the machine, using expressions and voice to make diners comfortable. For me, it was a bit too much. The technology was interesting; the personality, less so. I prefer my service robots less anthropomorphised.

This tension — between automation and human comfort — is one of the trickiest design challenges of our time.

A pattern emerges

Taken together, the pods, cleaning cobots and BellaBot reveal different layers of the same trend:

  • Mobility agents like the Heathrow pods move people and goods.
  • Maintenance agents like Mitie’s cobots quietly maintain infrastructure.
  • Service agents like BellaBot interact directly with us.

Each one extends software intelligence into the physical world. We’re no longer just automating data; we’re automating action.

And none of them works completely alone. The pods are overseen by a control centre. The cobots have human supervisors. Bella needs a human backup when the tech fails. This is automation with a safety net — hybrid systems that rely on graceful human fallback.

From airports to high streets

You don’t have to go through Heathrow or Dublin to see the same shift happening.

Closer to home, in Milton Keynes and Northampton (as well as in other towns and cities across the UK and more widely), small white Starship robots deliver groceries and takeaway food along pavements. They trundle quietly across zebra crossings, avoiding pedestrians and pets, using cameras and sensors to navigate. A smartphone app summons them; another unlocks the lid when your order arrives.

Like the airport pods, they make autonomy feel normal. Children wave to them. People barely notice them anymore. The line between software, service and physical action is blurring fast.

The thin end of the wedge

These examples show how automation is creeping into daily life — not replacing humans outright, but augmenting us.

The challenge now isn’t capability; it’s reliability. Systems like Bella’s ordering app work brilliantly until they don’t. What matters most is how smoothly they fail and how easily humans can step back in.

For now, that balance still needs work. But it’s clear where things are heading. The real frontier of AI isn’t in chatbots or copilots — it’s in physical agents that move, clean, deliver and serve. It’s software made tangible.

And while Bella’s blinking eyes may have been a step too far for me, it’s hard not to admire the direction of travel. The future isn’t just digital. It’s autonomous, electric, slightly quirky – and already waiting for you in the car park.

Featured image: created by ChatGPT.

Delayed by the signs that are supposed to keep us moving

Posted on By Mark Wilson

After a late flight back into Heathrow last night, I just wanted to get home. It should have taken about an hour. Instead, it took almost two and a half — a slow-motion crawl through the Home Counties, lit by flashing amber lights, unclear diversions and matrix signs that seemed to know nothing about what was actually happening on the ground.

After I had negotiated the first closure on the M25 (J18-20), National Highways had used the variable signs to warn of closures on the A1 — miles away and irrelevant to traffic heading north and about to turn onto the M1. What they didn’t mention was the full closure of the M1 (J9-11) which was just a few junctions ahead (I joined at 6A and saw nothing until after the J7/8 exit). When I finally reached the cones and flashing arrows, it was too late to do anything but follow the long, meandering diversion through half of Bedfordshire.

The irony is that the technology is all there. We have live traffic feeds, sensors, cameras, and signs capable of displaying accurate, timely information. But it only works if the people behind the systems use it well. Otherwise, the signs are just expensive noise.

And once you start seeing inconsistent or irrelevant messages, you stop trusting them. We’ve all driven under a gantry showing a sudden 40 mph limit for no apparent reason. Or a “Fog” warning on a perfectly clear morning. (I was once told by a former highways engineer that’s often down to spiders nesting in the sensor housing — which makes sense, but doesn’t exactly inspire confidence.)

The result is predictable. When technology over-warns, people tune it out. It’s the same problem you see in many digital systems — from workplace dashboards to AI assistants. Data without context or accuracy doesn’t help anyone. Trust is built on relevance, timeliness and credibility. Without those, the message just becomes background noise.

I’m not against the tech — quite the opposite. These systems can make our roads safer and our journeys smoother. But they only do that when they’re properly configured, maintained and used by people who understand what the data means. Otherwise, we end up ignoring the very systems designed to help us — and taking the scenic route home when all we really want is our own bed.

Featured image: created by ChatGPT.

Transformation theatre: when digital isn’t enough

Posted on By Mark Wilson

I’m not a frequent flyer. Indeed, I avoid flying if there’s an alternative (like high speed rail) but I’ve had a British Airways account for years – probably over twenty. But, when I tried to log in ahead of today’s flight to Dublin, it seemed to have vanished. My PIN didn’t work, the password reset email never arrived, and WhatsApp customer support confirmed the bad news: my account had been closed.

No problem, I thought – just reopen it. Except I couldn’t. The advisor explained that although the account didn’t exist anymore, my email address was still in their system. To open a new account, I’d need to use a different email address.

I told them that I only have one address. Because, frankly, I shouldn’t need to create another just to fit around their IT quirks.

Eventually, the advisor said they’d request my email be deleted so I could open a new account “after a few days”.

In the meantime, I can still manage my booking using just my surname and booking reference – which always feels worryingly insecure. (Fun fact: behind almost every flight is the SABRE system that dates back to 1964).

When transformation is skin-deep

This is a classic example of where “digital transformation” falls short. The airline has done the visible stuff – shiny mobile apps, chatbots, WhatsApp support – but the underlying customer processes are unchanged.

I can interact through modern digital channels, but I’m still dealing with the same rigid, legacy back-end that can’t handle a simple scenario like reopening a dormant account. The transformation has been cosmetic, not structural.

It’s a reminder that customer experience isn’t about channels; it’s about outcomes. If a customer can’t achieve their goal, no amount of digital polish will make it a good experience.

Joined-up journeys, not disconnected systems

On theme that stood out at DTX London earlier this month was the importance of mapping and managing the customer journey – understanding what customers are trying to do, where friction exists, and how internal processes support (or hinder) that experience.

It’s not enough to build another interface. True digital transformation requires breaking down silos, re-thinking workflows, and aligning systems around real customer needs. If the back-end can’t flex, the front-end experience will always be compromised.

The lesson

In the end, I’m sure my problem will sort itself out – BA will eventually delete my old email record, and I’ll open a new account. But the irony is clear: digital transformation done badly just creates new frustrations through modern channels.

Transformation isn’t about adding apps and chatbots. It’s about re-engineering the processes that sit beneath them so customers don’t end up stuck in digital limbo.

Featured image: created by ChatGPT.

A couple of Garmin Fenix tips and tricks

Posted on By Mark Wilson

I’ve had my Garmin Fenix 6 Pro smartwatch for a few years now. I left my Apple Watch for the Garmin and have never looked back. I find that it works far better for me, as a pure sports watch rather than trying to be everything.

Sure, Garmin Pay wasn’t supported in the UK (it may be now, I haven’t checked). But I always have my phone with me for Apple Pay. I’ve got the apps I need on the watch (like my Parkrun barcode) and the sports tracking is much better than Apple’s – both in accuracy and variety. I’m sure Apple has improved, but my Garmin has been bomb-proof for years. And the battery life is amazing – nearly two weeks, though I rarely let it go that long.

But, a couple of nights ago it decided not to track my sleep. That was odd, and then I noticed it wasn’t recording my heart rate either. So I rebooted the watch. It’s the first rule of IT support – have you tried turning it off and on again?

I don’t think I’ve ever had to do that in all the years I’ve owned it. Something like four years of uptime. Not bad!

One thing that does annoy me is the charge cable. It’s not a standard USB-C (or USB-anything). Instead, it uses a proprietary four-pin connector on one end, and USB-A on the other. Over time, the connector becomes loose and won’t stay attached to the watch.

The trick here is to gently give it a pinch with some needle-nosed pliers, halfway along the long sides. Close the metal back in and the connector holds firm again. Reliable charging resumes.

Do you have a Garmin smartwatch? Got any tips or tricks to share?

Featured image: created by ChatGPT.

TIL: About custom emojis in Microsoft Teams

Posted on By Mark Wilson

I was in a Teams meeting recently, where someone added a version of our company logo as a reaction to a message. I’d never seen that before, and I was intrigued.

A little Googling later, and the AI Overview gave me my answer:

“To create custom emoji teams in Microsoft Teams, you need to upload images or GIFs as custom emojis, which can then be used by all members of your organization. This involves selecting the “Emoji, GIFs and Stickers” option in the message box, navigating to “Your org’s emoji,” and then choosing “Add emoji” to upload your custom content.”

This is what it looks like (though the screen grab has removed my cursor!)

And then…

You can read more about managing custom emoji in Teams, in the Microsoft support article on Use Custom Emoji in Microsoft Teams.

Same word, different world: cloud in context

Posted on By Mark Wilson

Almost 15 years ago, the US National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) published its definition of cloud computing. It outlined the essential characteristics of cloud, the service models (Infrastructure as a Service, Platform as a Service, and Software as a Service), and the deployment models – public, private, and hybrid. For a while, it felt like the industry had a common understanding of what cloud meant.

Cloud, in this context, is a concept – a way of thinking about how IT services are delivered. We might implement it in different ways, but we’re broadly talking about on-demand computing resources, elastic scalability, and usage-based metering. At least, that was the theory.

Same trend, different lens

Lately, I’ve seen conversations where different groups of technology experts view cloud through very different lenses. One group talks about organisations repatriating workloads from the cloud, while another highlights how they’re helping businesses modernise to the cloud. Both are right – they’re just looking at the same thing from opposite ends.

One sees rising cloud costs and workload suitability questions. The other sees the opportunity to modernise legacy applications and deliver value faster. Neither is wrong. But without that shared context, the conversation quickly becomes disjointed.

It’s perfectly possible – and entirely logical – for a majority of organisations to be moving one or more workloads away from the cloud (e.g. IaaS workloads that are poorly suited, or were not transformed), while at the same time many others are embracing SaaS to modernise their business applications.

Security still matters – even in SaaS

In another recent discussion, a speaker gave a solid presentation on cloud security challenges – configuration management, data protection, identity controls, and the like. Then came a question from the audience: “But what about us in the world of SaaS?”

It was a fair point. But again, it revealed the disconnect. Security considerations don’t go away with SaaS – they just shift. You might not patch servers anymore, but you still need to manage identities, access, and data sharing.

Microsoft explained the shared responsibility model back in 2018. They made it clear that while your provider handles infrastructure and platform security, you’re still on the hook for things like information protection and user behaviour.

Stop the tribalism

This is where it all starts to fall apart. “Cloud” has become such a broad umbrella that it hides the diversity underneath. Infrastructure-, platform-, software as a service – they’re all cloud, but they’re not the same. It’s almost as though we need to begin every meeting with a clarification: which cloud are we talking about?

We need to move past this tribalism. It’s unhelpful, and often gets in the way of progress. When we default to our own perspective – infrastructure vs. applications, on-prem vs. SaaS – we risk talking past each other.

Speak the same language

As technologists, we have a responsibility to be clear. If we’re talking about cloud, let’s define the scope. If we’re making assumptions, let’s surface them. Whether your focus is on platforms, apps, infrastructure or security, the goal is the same: to deliver value through technology.

So next time someone starts a sentence with “cloud is…”, pause. Ask them which bit they mean. It might just save everyone a lot of confusion.

Featured image: created by ChatGPT

Is this really progress? The downsides of the app economy

Posted on By Mark Wilson

A simple plan goes sideways

I should have just phoned the local taxi company.

But no. I listened to my son — who, to be fair, meant well — and took a modern, app-based approach. “Use Bolt,” he said. “It’s just like Uber. I use it all the time.” And that, it turns out, was the problem.

We’re on holiday in Andalucía, trying to get to a nearby village for dinner. I booked the ride through Bolt, selecting a pickup slot between 17:00 and 17:10. The app stressed the importance of punctuality: we had to be outside on time, or the driver might only wait five minutes before cancelling. Fair enough. So at 16:57 we were all standing by the road, ready to go.

By 17:10, nothing had happened.

Then the app admitted defeat. “No drivers available.” Ride cancelled. “WTF? I booked that hours ago”, thought I.

Platform to nowhere

OK, so Bolt has no drivers and our evening plans are in disarray. So I tried Uber. First, it quotes a price. Then it suggests paying extra to “increase the chance of getting a ride”. You know, because surge pricing and nudging people into premium options is apparently what counts as innovation now. Unsurprisingly, that didn’t work either. After taking my money and several minutes of repeatedly trying to get a driver to take the ride, feasting on my iPhone battery and drinking my mobile data allowance, it finally gave up on the cutesey “sorry about the wait” and admitted that there we no drivers available.

So here we are. No car. No ride. No confidence that we’d even get back if we somehow found our own way there.

I did everything right. I booked in advance. I turned up early. I trusted the system.

And the system is broken.

The slow death of a good idea

This is the very definition of enshittification — the gradual degradation of a service as it prioritises growth, then revenue, then cost-cutting. What starts out as a great user experience slowly turns to dust as the platform corners the market and lets quality slide. First they undercut local businesses, drawing customers in. Then they ration supply, push up prices, and shrug when things go wrong.

Talking with my son about his experience back home, and it seems the traditional minicab firms are fewer and fussier — because they’ve been undercut too. Just like high street shops were when Amazon trained us to expect fast, cheap delivery with no human interaction. And what happens when the competition’s gone? Well, you can guess what happens to the prices and service levels.

App-based everything

It’s not just transport or retail. It’s food delivery, hotel bookings, eBooks, music, even how we consume the news. Everything’s an app. Everything’s global. Everything’s slick — until it isn’t.

And I’m clearly not alone in thinking this. I recently reshared a post on LinkedIn that echoed a lot of my frustrations. From self-checkouts to smart homes, booking travel to banking queries, we’ve been sold the idea that technology makes everything easier. But the pattern seems to be this: companies use technology to reduce their own costs — while shifting the work onto us.

We scan our own groceries. We manage our own bookings. We dig through online portals to find PDFs that digitise our paper records. We chat to bots that often can’t help, and fill in digital forms just to get the most basic of services.

Grumpy Old Man

So yes, I may joke about my Grumpy Old Man Syndrome, but the underlying point stands: just because we can do something digitally, doesn’t mean we should. Especially when the “innovation” really just amounts to taking humans out of the loop and putting consumers to work.

Of course, some people prefer the new ways. Not everyone wants to chat with a travel agent or ring up a cab office. For many, the ability to access data and services 24/7 is empowering.

Progress means keeping options open

But what matters most — and what so often gets forgotten — is that there should still be a choice. Because if everything goes digital with no fallback, we risk excluding those who can’t (or don’t want to) play the app economy game.

Maybe I am just an old man yelling at the cloud (service). But the app-based, gig-driven, digitally transformed economy isn’t always a step forwards. The frictionless experience often hides a lot of pain behind the scenes — for drivers, small businesses, and occasionally, for frustrated tourists standing by a road in southern Europe, hoping the app will work this time.

The world is increasingly run by tech bros in California. And we’re all a little poorer — culturally and economically — for it.

Featured image: created by ChatGPT

Post Script

[14/7/25] Yesterday morning, I walked to the local tourist office. I know, really old school! There, I spoke to a really helpful lady, who advised me on local buses and taxis. We called a central number for taxis in the town — no advanced bookings can be made but the first off the rank came to collect us. And we had our evening in the next village. It was lovely.