The Dutch citizens are concerned about their privacy and want a referendum

2

October

2017

No ratings yet.

On the 1st of October, a large TV show called Zondag met Lubach dedicated 13 minutes of airtime to the so called ‘Sleepnetwet’, which roughly translates to ‘trawl law’. The focus of the epsiode is to let people sign up on sleepwet.nl, because there are 300.000 people needed to organize a referendum in The Netherlands. But what is this ‘Sleepnetwet’?

The Dutch parliament has approved an update on the law that lets the secret services collect data (Van Rossem, 2017). This update allows the secret services to use a digital trawl. When, for instance, a suspect is located this law allows the government to collect all the data in the street. Even the data of the innocent civilians. This law would mean that innocent civilians have a higher risk of being eavesdropped by the government (Sitanala, 2017).

When even a big organization like Amnesty International is supporting the referendum about the ‘Sleepnetwet’, you begin wondering how serious this matter is. In the TV show episode of Zondag met Lubach the host mentions the fact that this law would make it easier to track down terrorists. No citizen would be against the decreased chance of a terrorist attack. The downside that is mentioned states that already in the United States the President Trump is tracking down people that have liked an anti-Trump Facebook page. Whenever the data of the ‘Sleepnetwet’ gets in the hands of a Trump-like government that would impose huge risks for the Dutch citizens.
On the 28th of September, there were 100.000 signatures collected (Het Parool, 2017). On the 16th of October, all the 300.000 need to be collected to be able to set up a referendum. If you are a Dutch citizen and never heard about this new law, it is time to get yourself informed.

Het Parool (2017) Nog 200.000 handtekeningen nodig voor referendum sleepwet. Consulted on October 2nd via https://www.parool.nl/amsterdam/nog-200-000-handtekeningen-nodig-voor-referendum-sleepwet~a4518940/
Sitanala, S. (2017) Vijf vragen over de nieuwe sleepwet. Consulted on October 2nd https://www.metronieuws.nl/nieuws/binnenland/2017/10/vijf-vragen-over-de-nieuwe-sleepwet
Van Rossem (2017) Privacy Barometer: ‘De sleepwet is niet effectief, intimiderend en onrechtmatig’. Consulted on October 2nd https://www.geenstijl.nl/5138591/teken-dan/

Please rate this

Is the iPhone X not as disruptive as Apple claims?! 5 must-read reasons why..

24

September

2017

5/5 (5)

During the Keynote on September 12, 2017, Apple’s CEO Tim Cook presented the iPhone X as ‘The future of the smartphone’. This suggests that the iPhone X has futures that would disrupt the smartphone industry just like it did when the first iPhone was launched (Rogowsky, 2017). In this blogpost the new features will be compared to already existing phones.
In past week’s lecture, we discussed the topic of industry disruption. Although the smartphone is not a newly-vulnerable-market (read Granados, N., Kauffman, R.J., and King, B. 2008 for more info) anymore at this point, Apple tries to disrupt the industry again with the introduction of the iPhone X. Sulleyman (2017) disputes this statement by claiming that the iPhone X ‘isn’t quite as revolutionary as the company would have you believe’.
Sulleyman (2017 compares the iPhone X with is competitors on different points. First, the new “all-screen” feature for the iPhone X has already been featured by Samsung in the Galaxy S8, S8 Plus and Note 8. Second, the new OLED display that has been introduced is something that has been adopted by Samsung for a couple of years. Third, the new resolution and pixel density is way behind in comparison to Android phones. Fourth, the facial recognition technology is also used in the Samsung Note 8, S8 and S8 Plus and is thus not as revolutionary as Apple claims it to be. Fifth, Apple has proudly introduced the wireless charging feature, a feature that has been around for a couple of years for Android phones.
The whole point of this blog is to be critical towards claims that companies make about being disruptive. If we look at Uber and Airbnb, there will be more people supporting the statement that they are disrupting the industries right now. Alton (2017) explains that there is a difference between disruption and innovation. Disruption causes the industry to change because of something that did not exist before, but innovation only improves an already existing product.
Looking at the introduction of the iPhone X, shouldn’t we agree that it is merely an innovation and not a disruption?

Alton, L. (2017). How Purple, Uber and Airbnb Are Disrupting and Redefining Old Industries. Consulted on September 24, 2017 via https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/273650
Granados, N., Kauffman, R.J., and King, B. 2008. How Has Electronic Travel Distribution Been Transformed? A Test of the Theory of Newly Vulnerable Markets. Consulted on September 24, 2017 via http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.2753/MIS0742-1222250204
Rogowsky, M. (2017). A Decade Of iPhone: The Smartphone Disrupted Everything But Still Has Work To Do. Consulted at September 24, 2017 via https://www.forbes.com/sites/markrogowsky/2017/01/09/iphone-at-10-the-smartphone-disrupted-everything-but-still-some-has-jobs-to-be-done/#1457174a3ed5

Please rate this