Video Age International October 2015

56 etc. They all have complete software ecosystems that are not compatible on the interactive television screens. And governments won’t push them to standardize. One of the fundamental problems of the digital economy is that [companies will continue to] see business value in controlling their business. Will a combination of more pipes and better compression make broadband sufficient for the growing Internet traffic? Theoretically it could, however the demand for video is growing exponentially. The fundamental problem is that [today, providers] who own the networks don’t have mature business models for making money on the networks. So, they don’t have the financial incentive to build new connectivities. I don’t see business enterprises responding with sufficient investment to satisfy our population’s insatiable demand for video and other high-bandwidth like entertainment. And it is not necessarily the governments’ responsibility to solve this problem. Google could solve it. Google has the largest network in the world and can offer broadband and video service at a much lower cost than its competitors in the telecommunications system because their cost of operation is subsidized by enormous income from other businesses. Google has the business models that allows them to build communication infrastructures. In some cases, governments will build the [broadband] infrastructures. Certainly in South Korea, Singapore, China, Europe and places like that there are government incentives for building advance broadband networks, but it will vary from nation to nation. Will broadband (and thus the Internet) still be based on a subscription model? Many cities in the U.S. wanted to put up free Wi-Fi, but telephone companies stopped that because it would have hurt their profits. In some cases, companies or governments may subsidize it so it could be free. People may demand it at some point, but there will always be a fee for access. Will the Internet be protected from nuclear electromagnetic pulses? No. There’s vulnerability. Everything electric will be impacted, but it’s a remote possibility. I don’t see any effort to solve the problem [because] anything that has low probability has low investment going into it. A question and answer interview with Michael Liebhold , senior researcher at the Institute for the Future, a Palo Alto, California-based non-profit research group. The 70-year-old Liebhold worked at Intel Labs, was a scientist for Apple Computers and is a former VP of technology at Times Mirrow. Liebhold discussed his predictions over the phone, in an interview that VideoAge editors recorded, transcribed and edited for space below. The focus was Internet security, which is the backbone of the modern and future entertainment business, and the outcome is not very encouraging. Will technology solve Internet security problems? The answer is no. Even secure systems will be breached. Technology will make it extremely difficult and expensive, [but] governments and criminals have almost unlimited resources to develop the capabilities to hack into just about anything. The edges of the Internet networks will always be insecure. We’ll need multi-factor biometric, social and policy solutions to solve the problem. In the future, you may have to give a retina print, a fingerprint, a voiceprint or even a heartbeat to replace passwords. Multi-faceted security is key because it is possible to fool with a fingerprint. There needs to be a second factor. Howwill piracy of intellectual property evolve in 2030? Will it be controlled or will it be more uncontrollable? Will there be any defense in order to reduce it? The futures of piracy and protection of intellectual property are deeply entangled in the future of encryption. Without deep encryption, intellectual property will become increasingly vulnerable. With pervasive encryption (advocatedbyApple, Googleandothers), IPwould continue to enjoy some technical protections. Unfortunately, government agencies in the U.S., China and elsewhere are deeply concerned that criminals would be protected from surveillance by pervasive deep encryption. This conflict is currently in negotiation at all levels, but it is unlikely that it will be resolved in our lifetime. Is it possible that ICANN (the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) will get involved and create Internet zones that are not automatically interconnected? ICANN is responsible for two things: the administration of domain names and IP addresses. ICANN doesn’t administer policy over the use of addresses, so ICANN probably won’t be the venue for your suggestion about a fragmented Internet in Russia and China. The U.S. could block e-mail or information coming from Russia, but it wouldn’t be done through ICANN. China is developing its own network. You cannot access the global Internet inChinawithout permission. China, Saudi Arabia, Russia and Iran are all trying to assert nation-state control over their local Internet, while the rest of the world sees the Internet as a global resource that cannot be regulated by nation-states. In theWest, the Internet is designed for personal privacy and liberty; the extreme case of liberty is anarchy. In China, the Internet is engineered for social harmony, and the extreme case of social harmony is totalitarianism. The middle ground between these two philosophies is a diplomatic problem. Will there be a secure way to prevent online wars? Governments are now attacking the problem. Online wars could paralyze countries. The problem is so large and complex, it’s hard to know how close we are to making the system secure [against online wars]. Right now the Internet infrastructure is very vulnerable. There are so many problems with the software stacks, starting at the bottom with the electrical layer, going up to the service layers, the application layers and the user layers. The entire stack of technology is vulnerable. They’re finding 30-year-old flaws in the network encryption systems that we’ve used since the beginning of the Internet. The Internet is not engineered for security and privacy. If we make everything secure and private, then criminals will be protected too. It’s a defining question of our time. Will the Internet become standardized and compatible? Backwards compatibility will always be an issue. Making old TV compatible with modern TV was a huge global effort. Theproblemin the technologyworld is there are geopolitical interests. In the software ecosystem, there are conflicts, for example, between Samsung, LG, Microsoft, Nintendo, Apple, October 2015 V I D E O A G E Ten Steps to 2030 Futurist and Scientist Talks About Internet Vulnerabilities Michael Leibhold