WhatsApp has announced it will begin showing adverts on its platform for the first time, with new features designed to monetise its Updates tab while keeping personal messages private.

Ads Appear Only in the Updates Tab

In a major shift for the Meta-owned app, WhatsApp will now allow businesses to promote content in two key areas of the Updates tab, i.e., Status and Channels. These features are separate from private chats and have been used by more than 1.5 billion people daily, according to Meta.

The new monetisation rollout includes three core features, which are:

1. Ads in Status – short-lived posts similar to Instagram Stories, where businesses can now place adverts that link directly to a chat.

2. Promoted Channels – businesses and creators will be able to pay to have their Channels suggested to users browsing the directory.

3. Channel Subscriptions – a new paid model allowing followers to access exclusive content for a monthly fee. WhatsApp will take a 10% commission.

“Today we’re introducing new features in WhatsApp’s Updates tab, which is home to both Channels and Status,” the company said. “We believe the Updates tab is the right place to introduce this, in a way that doesn’t interrupt personal chats.”

Targeting and Privacy

Meta says it has designed the new advertising features with “privacy as the core principle”. The company is keen to stress that end-to-end encryption still applies to all messages, calls and personal Status posts, meaning they cannot be accessed or used for ad targeting.

Instead, WhatsApp says it will use a limited set of data to decide which ads to show. This includes:

– The user’s country or city.

– App language settings.

– Channels followed.

– Interaction with other ads.

Those who have linked WhatsApp to Meta’s Accounts Centre (used to manage connected services like Facebook and Instagram) may also see more tailored ads, based on preferences or activity from across those platforms. But Meta insists phone numbers and private content will not be shared.

“We will never sell or share your phone number to advertisers,” WhatsApp stated. “Your personal messages, calls and groups you are in will not be used to determine the ads you may see.”

A Strategic Move Towards Business Monetisation

While this is WhatsApp’s first foray into advertising, the move aligns with Meta’s wider strategy to turn the messaging app into a multi-purpose business platform. With public social media engagement falling and users spending more time in private messages and small group updates, WhatsApp’s Status and Channels features represent prime digital real estate.

“We’ve been talking for years about how to build a business on WhatsApp in a way that doesn’t interrupt personal chats,” Meta said. “Now the Updates tab is going to be able to help Channel admins, organisations and businesses build and grow.”

WhatsApp’s Status feature is already used by millions of individuals and companies to post 24-hour content. Channels, meanwhile, offer a one-way broadcast model, popular with news outlets, influencers and service providers—that is now gaining commercial functionality.

By adding adverts and subscription models, Meta is following a monetisation blueprint more common in Asia, where super-apps like WeChat have long blurred the line between messaging, content, and e-commerce.

Businesses and Advertisers

For UK businesses using WhatsApp to communicate with customers, the change brings new opportunities to drive engagement and visibility directly within the app.

Ads in Status updates could, for example, allow a local retailer to post a promotion with a “click to chat” button that starts a WhatsApp conversation. Promoted Channels will enable brands to push their content to new audiences, while paid subscriptions may appeal to creators and media companies offering exclusive updates.

“By showing ads in Status, you can help your business get discovered by new customers and make it easy for them to start a conversation with you, all within WhatsApp,” the company explained.

Although detailed campaign tools are still limited compared to Facebook or Instagram, early reports suggest that WhatsApp will offer businesses insights into click-through rates and some performance data.

Meta says it will gradually roll out the new advertising features over the coming months, starting with select markets. It has not confirmed which countries will be first, but WhatsApp’s Updates tab is known to be more popular in Latin America, India, and Southeast Asia than in the UK or Europe, where adoption of Channels and Status has been slower.

A Careful Balancing Act for WhatsApp

While WhatsApp says personal chats will remain untouched, the introduction of adverts may be seen by some as a departure from the app’s original ethos. For example, WhatsApp was once strongly anti-ads, famously stating in a 2012 blog: “Advertising isn’t just the disruption of aesthetics… at every company that sells ads, the user becomes the product.”

That stance softened after Meta’s acquisition in 2014. With WhatsApp now home to billions of users but little direct revenue, monetisation has become a priority. For example, back in 2023, Meta introduced tools such as WhatsApp Business API, click-to-chat ads from Facebook, and shopping catalogues, but this is the first time that on-platform adverts will be shown within the app itself.

Optional

Meta has also confirmed that the new advertising and subscription options are optional for users. For example, if someone chooses not to follow Channels or browse Status updates, they won’t see any ads. “If you only use WhatsApp to chat with friends and loved ones, there is no change to your experience at all,” the company said.

Even so, some privacy experts have warned that the move could set a precedent. Marijus Briedis, CTO at NordVPN, has noted: “Ads in WhatsApp aren’t just a distraction—they’re a signal of what may come next. Meta’s so-called ‘optional’ data-sharing is rarely as optional as it sounds.”

Regulation

Regulators in the EU are also likely to take a close look at the rollout, especially in light of GDPR requirements and Meta’s ongoing legal challenges over data processing and consent.

More changes are expected as the advertising features evolve. For now, it seems that WhatsApp is just focusing on “ads in the right place”, limiting the impact on its core messaging service. “We also don’t want to have a service that has lots of settings… that’s complexity too,” the company said, confirming that core app tabs like Updates and Channels will remain fixed.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

It has to be said that this first step into advertising marks a real turning point for WhatsApp and the direction of Meta’s wider messaging strategy. By ringfencing adverts within the Updates tab, the company is attempting to walk a careful line between unlocking new revenue streams and preserving user trust. Whether that balance holds will depend on how the rollout is received across different markets, particularly in Europe, where expectations around privacy and digital intrusiveness remain high.

For UK businesses, the changes bring a new channel for visibility, especially for those already using WhatsApp to handle customer enquiries or share updates. The ability to promote Status content or gain traction through sponsored Channels could offer low-friction ways to reach engaged users, with a direct path into conversation. It may also help smaller firms compete more easily with larger brands in a messaging-first environment. However, uptake will likely depend on how seamlessly these features integrate with the current business tools and how effective the targeting proves in practice.

Advertisers and creators also now have a fresh route into an app with over a billion daily users, but one that has historically resisted the very concept of commercialisation. Meta’s challenge is to prove that these new ad formats deliver value without compromising the simplicity and privacy that have long defined WhatsApp’s appeal. Meanwhile, competitors like Signal and Telegram are likely to be watching very closely and may well seize on any missteps to reinforce their own positioning as ad-free alternatives.

For users, the WhatsApp experience remains largely unchanged for now, provided they steer clear of Channels and Status. However, questions about long-term data use, the permanence of ad features, and the possible expansion of monetisation elsewhere in the app are unlikely to fade. WhatsApp’s keen to promote the message that ads will stay away from personal chats. However, the test will be whether that promise still feels true a year from now.

A new set of documents known as The OpenAI Files claims to reveal troubling internal dynamics at OpenAI and could shape how the world approaches artificial general intelligence (AGI) governance in the years ahead.

An Urgent Moment for AI Oversight

The release comes at a critical juncture. For example, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman has stated publicly that AGI (AI systems capable of performing most human jobs) is likely to arrive within just a few years. In a February 2024 blog post, OpenAI said it was “quite plausible that AI systems will outpace human expert skill levels in most domains within the current decade.”

Such predictions have fuelled both investment and anxiety. This is because, while the potential productivity gains from AGI are vast, so too are the risks, ranging from misinformation and bias to large-scale unemployment or misuse by malicious actors. However, critics argue that the current leading AI companies, including OpenAI, are operating with too little external scrutiny.

That’s where The OpenAI Files come in. Curated by two US-based non-profit watchdog organisations, i.e. The Midas Project and the Tech Oversight Project, the archive aims to fill a growing accountability gap by exposing how OpenAI’s trajectory has diverged from its original non-profit mission.

Who’s Behind the Archive?

The Midas Project and the Tech Oversight Project describe themselves as independent technology watchdogs. Both are known for promoting stronger corporate accountability in Big Tech and for campaigning on issues such as data privacy, algorithmic bias, and monopoly power.

Their collaboration on The OpenAI Files resulted in a publicly accessible dossier of internal documents, board communications, statements, and media coverage. For example, this includes over 10,000 words of commentary and contextual analysis. The goal, according to the Midas Project, is to “shed light on the ethical and governance failures at OpenAI that have broader implications for AI safety and democracy.”

Has OpenAI’s Founding Principle Shifted?

The central claim of the archive is that OpenAI has quietly shifted from its founding principle, i.e. to build AI that benefits all of humanity, to what is essentially a commercial structure prioritising investor returns. For example, in 2015, OpenAI began as a non-profit with a mission to ensure AGI would be “used for the benefit of all.” However, after introducing a capped-profit model in 2019 to attract investment, and launching high-profile partnerships such as the one with Microsoft, critics say the company has become less transparent and more profit-driven.

The archive also revisits the dramatic 2023 ousting (and rapid reinstatement) of CEO Sam Altman by the OpenAI board. Internal tensions reportedly stemmed from disagreements over safety culture and the pace of development. The board’s lack of explanation at the time, followed by a shake-up that brought in pro-growth allies, raised concerns about whether safety was being sidelined.

One former board member, Helen Toner of Georgetown University’s Centre for Security and Emerging Technology, is quoted in the archive alleging that Altman “withheld information” and “gave inaccurate information” to the board—an assertion he denies.

A Playbook for Responsible AI

Despite the retrospective tone of the materials, rather than being like a post-mortem, The OpenAI Files could be seen as more of a call to action. The curators argue that this transparency can inform a better governance model for AGI, and one that includes:

– Independent oversight of frontier AI companies.

– Binding commitments to public benefit.

– Worker and user representation in decision-making.

– Global cooperation on safety research and risk standards.

The Tech Oversight Project notes: “We need robust regulatory guardrails, but we also need a cultural shift—companies building AGI must be accountable to the public, not just shareholders.”

AI Developers and the Public

If adopted, such reforms would significantly alter how OpenAI and its peers operate. For example, developers may face slower release cycles, stricter testing requirements, and mandatory transparency mechanisms. Companies would also need to re-centre their objectives around public interest, which is something OpenAI once championed.

For users and society, these shifts could bring reassurance that powerful AI tools won’t be developed behind closed doors or guided solely by profit. It could also mean better protection against misuse, clearer redress mechanisms, and fairer access to AI-generated benefits such as job creation, medical breakthroughs, or educational access.

As AGI becomes less hypothetical and more imminent, the stakes are getting higher. In its own 2023 governance update, OpenAI acknowledged: “We don’t expect everyone to trust us by default. We plan to earn that trust.” The watchdog groups may agree but also argue that trust must be backed by verifiable commitments, not just promises.

Other Safeguards and Challenges

The archive’s release adds to growing momentum for external safeguards. For example, in the past year, governments and international organisations have stepped up efforts to regulate frontier AI. The UK held the first global AI Safety Summit in 2023, while the EU has finalised its AI Act, a comprehensive legal framework for high-risk systems. In the US, the Biden administration introduced an AI executive order in late 2023 calling for more audits and red-teaming (testing of system vulnerabilities).

There are also proposals from academics and policy experts for third-party licensing bodies, global AI treaties, and mandatory ethics boards inside AI labs.

That said, change won’t be easy. Major tech firms have pushed back against regulation, warning that overreach could stifle innovation. Critics of The OpenAI Files also point out that the documents reflect selective curation, not an exhaustive or balanced record. OpenAI itself has defended its structure, saying the capped-profit model allows it to raise capital while still pursuing safety goals. “We believe strongly in alignment research and broad benefit,” the company wrote in a recent update, adding that it has made safety “a core focus of our technical agenda.”

Even so, the release has clearly struck a nerve, sparking fresh debate over who should shape the future of AI, and on what terms.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

The timing of The OpenAI Files places added pressure on AI leaders to re-examine not just their business models but their obligations to society. For OpenAI and others pushing towards AGI, transparency and public accountability are essential (not optional) to maintain legitimacy in the eyes of governments, users, and regulators alike. These archives offer a detailed and accessible case study on how corporate structure, leadership decisions, and investor influence can shift priorities away from public interest. Whether companies accept or resist the lessons outlined remains to be seen, but the conversation is clearly changing.

For UK businesses, the implications are wide-reaching. For example, as AI systems become more capable, more embedded, and potentially more autonomous, their influence on supply chains, labour, customer experience, and regulatory exposure will grow. Businesses may welcome AGI’s productivity gains, but only if they feel the technology is being developed responsibly and without hidden risks. Greater clarity on AI safety protocols, decision-making processes, and ethical frameworks could help smaller firms and public sector bodies feel more confident about adoption. It could also influence procurement choices, data handling policies, and the future of work more broadly.

Also, users, whether individuals or employees, may stand to gain or lose the most. For example, a governance framework focused on ethical leadership and shared benefit could help protect against exploitative uses of AI, ensure wider access to new capabilities, and support democratic oversight as systems grow in complexity and power. That would require sustained effort from policymakers, watchdogs, and AI firms alike, as well as a shift away from the current reliance on self-regulation. The OpenAI Files may not offer all the answers, but they appear to provide quite a detailed starting point for anyone serious about building a future where AGI development is guided by more than market momentum.

Scattered Spider, a teenage-led (mainly UK and US-based) hacking group has begun targeting insurance companies, sparking fresh warnings from cyber security experts.

Google’s Threat Intelligence Group (GTIG) confirmed multiple US insurance firms have recently suffered attacks matching the group’s methods. Known for breaching major retailers like M&S and Tiffany, the group uses tactics such as phishing, SIM-swapping, and MFA fatigue to bypass identity checks and helpdesk protocols.

Two incidents in early June, affecting Philadelphia Insurance and Erie Insurance, show the threat is real and growing. GTIG warned that the group tends to focus on one sector at a time, and insurance firms are now clearly in its sights. Experts believe UK providers could be next.

Unlike ransomware gangs, Scattered Spider relies on social engineering to move fast and exploit human error. “They don’t need advanced exploits,” said Jon Abbott, CEO of ThreatAware. “They get in by tricking people – not by breaking software.”

To stay safe, insurers and other businesses should strengthen helpdesk verification, use phishing-resistant MFA, and monitor for unusual login activity. Above all, building a culture of security awareness is essential to stop attackers in their tracks.

A small municipality in Finland is switching off fossil fuels and switching on a new era of green heating, thanks to an innovative sand-based energy storage system.

Pornainen Turns to Thermal Storage to Ditch Oil and Gas

The Finnish town of Pornainen, just over an hour from Helsinki, has become the first community to heat its buildings entirely using a sand battery, officially the world’s largest of its kind. Developed by clean-tech startup Polar Night Energy, the sand-filled system went live in early 2025 and now powers the district heating network serving the town’s 5,000 residents.

Heating Bills Slashed and Fossil Fuels Replaced

Crucially, the project slashes heating emissions by an estimated 70 per cent and replaces imported fossil fuels with stored renewable energy. According to Polar Night Energy’s COO, Liisa Naskali, “This project is a powerful example that effective solutions for mitigating climate change do exist. Combustion is not a sustainable option for the climate or the environment.”

How a Sand Battery Actually Works

At the heart of the system is a 13-metre-tall, 15-metre-wide insulated steel silo filled with 2,000 tonnes of crushed soapstone, an industrial by-product similar to sand. The sand battery stores thermal energy, not electricity. During periods of high renewable electricity availability e.g., such as windy or sunny days, clean power is routed to a resistive air heater, which warms air to around 600°C. That hot air is then circulated through pipes embedded in the sand, storing energy as heat.

How It Works

The silo’s insulation is key and once charged, Polar Night Energy says the sand can retain its high temperature for weeks, or even months, with only minor heat loss. When heating is needed, cooler air is pumped through the silo, absorbing heat from the sand and passing it through a heat exchanger. This warms water for the town’s district heating system, which supplies homes, businesses, and even public buildings such as swimming pools.

Charging the system from ambient temperature takes several days, but in reality, the battery is topped up continually from available surplus energy. This means it rarely cools fully, enabling more efficient long-term performance.

Heating for a Week (Or a Month) On One Charge

The Pornainen sand battery has a power output of around 1 MW and a total energy storage capacity of 100 MWh. Polar Night Energy estimates that’s enough to heat the entire town for a week during winter, or up to a month in summer when demand is lower. In a cold Nordic climate heavily reliant on heating, that’s a significant step.

This installation builds on an earlier, smaller 2022 pilot by the company in Kankaanpää. That earlier model had just one-tenth the capacity of the Pornainen system and served as a proof of concept. Now, Polar Night Energy is scaling up, with further deployments under discussion across Finland and other European nations.

Emissions and Efficiency Gains

According to the town’s heating provider, Loviisan Lämpö, the sand battery will reduce the use of oil by 100 per cent and cut consumption of wood chips (the previous main heat source) by 60 per cent. This is expected to save around 160 tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions per year, a major environmental gain for such a small town.

The battery also contributes to energy security by reducing reliance on imported fossil fuels and improving resilience during energy price spikes. With around 50 per cent of Europe’s final energy consumption still used for heating (most of it fossil-fuel-based), thermal energy storage could play a crucial role in decarbonisation strategies.

Thermal Efficiency Higher Than Chemical Batteries

Round-trip thermal efficiency of the sand battery is reported to be around 85–90 per cent, significantly higher than many chemical battery systems. While it cannot return energy to the grid as electricity (yet), a pilot project is underway to develop a Power-to-Heat-to-Power (P2H2P) version by 2026, which would allow stored heat to be converted back into power during peak demand periods.

Who It’s For?

The sand battery is primarily targeted at district heating providers, industrial users, and large buildings or campuses. Applications include heating water for municipal systems, generating hot air for industrial drying or manufacturing, and producing process steam for sectors such as chemicals, food production, or pharmaceuticals.

It’s also suitable for facilities aiming to participate in grid balancing or reserve energy markets. The system can adjust its charging rate to respond to energy price changes or availability, using AI-based optimisation, an approach developed with telecoms provider Elisa.

Sand Means It’s Scalable

Also, because sand is cheap, abundant, and not in demand for construction, the system is also highly scalable and cost-effective. “We aim to provide a viable alternative to fossil fuels without introducing new dependencies,” said co-founder Markku Ylönen.

Competitors and Comparisons

It’s worth noting here that Polar Night Energy isn’t the only company exploring thermal energy storage. For example, German firm Kraftblock uses a proprietary granulate material to store heat at temperatures of up to 1,300°C for industrial processes. Also, in the US, Antora Energy has developed carbon-block-based thermal storage to power industrial operations, while Siemens Gamesa has experimented with volcanic rock as a medium for grid-scale storage in Hamburg.

However, sand, or in this case, crushed soapstone, offers a unique combination of affordability, local availability, and self-insulating properties. It’s also inert, safe, and non-toxic, making it suitable for use near residential areas.

Compared to lithium-ion batteries, which degrade over time and require mining of critical materials, sand batteries have far lower lifecycle impacts and do not face the same safety concerns. That said, they are limited to heat-based applications and cannot directly power electrical appliances or vehicles.

Challenges and Criticisms

One of the main criticisms of thermal storage systems is that they don’t address all aspects of the energy transition, particularly where electricity, rather than heat, is the end use. Converting heat back into power is possible but involves efficiency losses and greater technical complexity.

There are also infrastructure constraints. Not all towns have district heating networks in place and retrofitting them can be costly and disruptive. In the UK, for example, the dominance of individual gas boilers and a lack of widespread district heating limits immediate applicability.

Another concern is scalability. While sand batteries are modular and cost-effective at medium scale, it remains to be seen whether they can fully replace existing heating systems in large urban areas or high-density cities.

That said, advocates argue that sand batteries are not a silver bullet but a strategic piece of the puzzle. “Of course, we alone cannot solve the whole problem of climate change,” said Liisa Naskali. “But we need different solutions, and our sand battery is one of them.”

What Does This Mean For Your Organisation?

For now, the technology remains most viable in towns or industrial zones with established district heating systems, but its potential reach is growing. As more renewable electricity becomes available and the need for long-duration storage intensifies, thermal solutions like sand batteries are likely to gain traction. What makes Pornainen’s example compelling is that it shows how even a small town can take meaningful climate action using infrastructure that is low-cost, low-maintenance, and relatively simple to integrate.

For UK businesses, particularly those involved in manufacturing, utilities, or large-scale building management, sand-based thermal storage could offer a new route to decarbonisation. While domestic adoption faces barriers due to the limited rollout of district heating, commercial and industrial users may find opportunities to cut fuel costs and emissions by incorporating heat storage alongside renewable generation. Energy-intensive sites with processes that rely on steam or hot air could benefit most immediately, especially where peak demand or volatile energy pricing creates operational risks.

There’s also a clear advantage in terms of supply chain resilience. For example, by using abundant, non-toxic materials and sidestepping the rare minerals used in conventional batteries, sand storage avoids many of the geopolitical and environmental concerns linked to lithium and cobalt. Also, for those designing future-ready infrastructure, the option to add electricity recovery later may future-proof investments made today.

While sand batteries won’t replace all forms of energy storage, they do challenge the assumption that high-tech solutions must always rely on complex chemistry or cutting-edge electronics. In an energy landscape that needs diversity and flexibility, simplicity might turn out to be one of the most powerful tools we have.

Gamma can be particularly helpful for PowerPoint users by offering a streamlined way to generate visually appealing slides and content, even from an existing PowerPoint presentation. It simplifies the design and formatting process, allowing users to focus on the content and message.

[Note – To Watch This Video without glitches/interruptions, It may be best to download it first]

Clipboard history makes copying and pasting quicker, but it can also store sensitive info you may not want to leave behind.

How to Enable:

– Press Windows + V, then select ‘Turn on’.

How to Clear History:

– Press Windows + V, click ‘Clear all’.
– Or go to Settings > System > Clipboard and click ‘Clear’.

What it’s for:

Makes copying multiple items easy while allowing you to erase any private or confidential items in seconds.

Pro‑Tip: Clipboard history clears automatically on restart (unless you’ve pinned items) but clearing manually adds extra peace of mind.

A major new study has revealed that 78 per cent of (US) public sector organisations are still operating with serious, unresolved software security flaws, some of which have persisted for over five years.

Report Uncovers Widespread “Security Debt”

The findings come from US-based application risk management firm Veracode’s Public Sector State of Software Security 2025 report, released on 11 June. Based on an analysis of over 1.3 million software applications and 126 million security findings, the research highlights the extent to which government organisations in the US are falling behind on basic software vulnerability management.

According to the report, a massive 78 per cent of (US) public sector bodies are running with unresolved flaws that have remained open for more than a year, a situation Veracode refers to as “security debt”. In more than half of these organisations, the report identifies critical vulnerabilities with high risk potential that have still not been addressed.

Fixing Flaws Takes Far Longer in Government

One of the clearest indicators of the public sector’s struggle appears to be the time it takes to resolve these software issues. For example, the report shows that government bodies take an average of 315 days to fix just half of their identified software vulnerabilities. This is far higher than the cross-industry average of 252 days, which is already considered too slow by many cybersecurity experts.

That 63-day gap may sound modest, but Veracode warns it opens up a significant attack window. This is because these flaws, often in applications delivering essential services, could be exploited by attackers for months at a time. In some cases, flaws are left unresolved for multiple years. As the report shows, around one-third of vulnerabilities in US government software remain unpatched even after two years, and 15 per cent are still unresolved after five.

Chris Wysopal, Chief Security Evangelist at Veracode, described the situation as a systemic failure to keep pace with risk, saying: “Many government organisations are facing growing challenges in keeping up with vulnerability remediation, potentially leaving critical systems and data that run essential government services exposed.”

Which Public Sector Organisations?

The report encompasses a wide range of public sector bodies, including US federal, regional, and local government departments, as well as agencies responsible for education, healthcare, law enforcement, and infrastructure. While the specific organisations are not named, the findings indicate a sector-wide problem that spans multiple tiers of government.

Public-facing applications and internal administrative systems are both affected, with legacy software and fragmented IT infrastructure frequently cited as contributing factors. The report also shows that larger and more complex organisations tend to perform worse, particularly where digital transformation has lagged.

Is the UK Public Sector Facing the Same Risks?

Although Veracode’s report focuses specifically on the US, many of the challenges it identifies appear to be mirrored in the UK.

For example, according to a recent National Audit Office (NAO) report, 58 critical UK government IT systems still have significant cyber-resilience gaps, with 228 legacy systems running without full knowledge of their vulnerabilities. The NAO also highlighted that one in three cybersecurity roles in government remains vacant or is filled by temporary staff, suggesting a widespread skills shortage similar to that seen in the US.

Also, recent cyber incidents have highlighted the risks. For example, back in May, a breach at the Legal Aid Agency exposed the personal data of over 2 million individuals. The British Library and parts of the NHS have also suffered serious service disruptions due to ransomware attacks, often linked to outdated infrastructure.

Unlike Veracode’s report, there is currently no published UK data showing the average time it takes public sector bodies to fix software vulnerabilities. However, the reliance on legacy systems, combined with under-resourced security teams and a reactive approach to patching, strongly suggests that vulnerability resolution timelines in the UK are also prolonged.

That said, the UK Government has begun taking steps to address the issue. For example, a new Cyber Security and Resilience Bill is set to tighten breach reporting requirements and enhance supply chain security. Also, the NCSC’s GovAssure programme is now auditing critical departments, and £1 billion has been pledged to improve cyber capacity across public services. However, progress has been slow, and experts have raised concerns about how effectively these initiatives are being implemented.

In the absence of specific figures, it remains difficult to compare the scale of UK security debt directly with the US, however the warning signs are there and the structural issues look strikingly familiar.

Open Source and Third-Party Code a Major Weak Point

While most flaws are found in first-party applications, it seems that the most dangerous and persistent problems come from open-source and third-party code. Interestingly, although these components make up less than 10 per cent of total public sector software, they account for 70 per cent of the critical security debt in government systems.

To make matters worse, flaws in third-party code take around 50 per cent longer to fix than those in software developed internally. As organisations increasingly rely on open-source libraries and packages, this gap presents a growing threat.

“This disproportionate risk highlights the importance of securing software supply chains and carefully vetting open-source dependencies,” said Wysopal. “Without extending visibility and remediation efforts beyond internal code, public sector entities risk leaving the most dangerous flaws unaddressed.”

Some Agencies Are Far Ahead of Others

The report appears to highlight a stark disparity between the best and worst performing organisations. In the top 25 per cent of public sector bodies, just one-third of applications contain flaws. These leading agencies resolve half of their issues within 3.3 months and manage to fix over 9 per cent of flaws per month. The report shows that by contrast, the worst 25 per cent have flaws in every application tested, with less than 0.1 per cent fixed each month and average remediation times exceeding 11 months.

Wysopal highlights how this gap raises serious questions about leadership, resource allocation, and operational culture across the public sector, saying: “The disparity between top and bottom-performing government organisations is striking and raises important questions about the factors that make a material difference to security posture.”

What’s Causing the Problem?

The report suggests a number of causes behind the growing backlog. These include underinvestment in software development security (AppSec) tools, overreliance on legacy systems, and a lack of skilled personnel to address vulnerabilities at scale.

Another issue is that vulnerability scanning is often performed late in the development lifecycle, when flaws are more costly and time-consuming to fix. Without ongoing analysis and integration into development workflows, issues tend to accumulate and are eventually deprioritised due to competing pressures.

Compounding this appears to be the rapid adoption of AI-generated code. While generative AI can speed up development, it can also introduce subtle but serious vulnerabilities if not properly reviewed. Veracode warns that comprehensive open-source analysis is more essential than ever to prevent hidden flaws from slipping through.

How Can Public Sector Bodies Respond?

Veracode is urging public sector organisations to modernise their approach by adopting risk-based remediation strategies and automating more of the security process. Key recommendations include:

– Implementing context-driven security posture management, which prioritises the most exploitable vulnerabilities using insights from multiple tools and data sources.

– Establishing continuous scanning, integrated into the full development lifecycle, so that flaws are caught earlier and fixed faster.

– Supporting developer enablement, giving teams the training and tools they need to identify and address issues proactively.

According to the report, the most effective and cost-efficient way to reduce security debt is to prevent it from accumulating in the first place.

Risks for the Public, Service Delivery, and Compliance

While the problem is technical in nature, the impact appears to extend far beyond IT departments. For example, vulnerabilities in public sector software can put sensitive public data at risk, disrupt essential services, and erode public trust. In sectors like healthcare and social services, the consequences of a breach could be devastating.

There are also compliance implications. For example, governments are increasingly subject to cybersecurity regulations requiring evidence of secure coding practices and risk mitigation. Persistent security debt may put some organisations in breach of data protection obligations or national security protocols.

A Complex Challenge, but Improvement Is Possible

Despite the bleak statistics, Veracode’s analysis makes clear that progress is achievable and that top-performing agencies prove that meaningful improvement can be made with the right strategy, investment, and organisational buy-in.

The challenge now appears to be for lagging organisations to assess their security maturity, identify the operational and cultural blockers to faster remediation, and make the structural changes needed to reduce their exposure to risk.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

For governments, the consequences of inaction are no longer theoretical. The exposure created by slow patching and ageing systems is already being exploited by cybercriminals. Also, for the public, the stakes are growing, whether through data loss, service disruption, or erosion of trust in digital government services. What Veracode’s report makes clear is that the organisations getting this right are not doing so through luck or scale, but through deliberate prioritisation and operational focus.

In the UK, many of the same systemic issues are clearly visible. Critical infrastructure is still running on unsupported legacy platforms, key security roles remain unfilled, and cyber incidents linked to outdated systems are becoming more frequent. Without hard data on vulnerability resolution times or the extent of open-source debt, public sector bodies are left guessing where their greatest risks lie and how they compare to their peers.

This gap also affects the wider network of software vendors and contractors. UK businesses that supply the public sector will need to meet rising expectations around security assurance and may face tighter scrutiny as new legislation and procurement rules come into force. At the same time, private sector organisations can use these findings as a benchmark, both to avoid the same mistakes and to identify opportunities to lead in secure development practices.

The core message here is that software risk is measurable, manageable, and no longer optional. Delays in addressing known flaws are not just a technical lapse but an operational liability, with real consequences for services, compliance, and reputation. Whether in the US or UK, the longer these gaps are left open, the harder and costlier they become to close.

In this Tech Insight, we look at how Apple used its annual WWDC event to unveil some major software updates, a striking new Liquid Glass design, and expanded AI tools for developers across its platforms.

Focus on New Website Features and Developer Tools

Held at Apple Park in Cupertino, California, WWDC 2025 brought developers and media together for the company’s yearly June event. As expected, the focus was on new software features and developer tools rather than hardware. The announcements spanned iOS, macOS, watchOS, visionOS, tvOS and iPadOS, alongside incremental upgrades to AirPods, CarPlay and Apple Wallet. However, while some Apple Intelligence features were expanded, Siri was notably absent, raising questions about Apple’s positioning in the increasingly competitive AI market.

Introducing ‘Liquid Glass’ Design and a New Naming Convention

One of the standout changes announced at WWDC 2025 was Apple’s complete visual overhaul of its operating systems. A new design language called Liquid Glass will replace the current aesthetic across iOS, iPadOS, macOS and visionOS.

The new interface uses semi-translucent, reflective elements that respond to lighting and context, creating what Apple describes as a more immersive and natural user experience. Context menus, alerts and backgrounds now blend with the device’s environment. Apple confirmed that this marks the most significant visual shift since iOS 7 back in 2013.

Alongside this, Apple also announced it would abandon sequential numbering for its OS versions. Instead, the 2025 releases will all carry the year in their names. This means users will see iOS 26, macOS 26 (also known as macOS Tahoe), watchOS 26, and so on.

Apple Intelligence Expands, but Siri Delays Raise Concerns

Apple made several announcements about its Apple Intelligence initiative (first introduced at WWDC 2024). This year, the company extended AI features to more apps and functions, positioning privacy-friendly on-device intelligence as a central part of the user experience.

Visual Intelligence Enhances Screen Awareness

A key update is Visual Intelligence, an AI tool that analyses screen content and lets users interact with what they’re viewing. For example, users can tap on a photo of a restaurant and get more details via Google, ChatGPT or supported apps. It can also detect events and suggest adding them to the calendar, automatically extracting date, time and location information.

Live Coaching, Translation and Smarter Shortcuts

It seems that Apple Watch users will be getting a new AI-powered workout coach called ‘Workout Buddy’. It uses personal fitness history and real-time performance data to deliver motivational voice feedback during exercise. Also, ‘Live Translation’ enables real-time, on-device translations across Messages, FaceTime and phone calls, displaying captions or speaking translations aloud depending on the context.

Apple’s Shortcuts app has also been upgraded. For example, users can now add intelligent actions, such as text summarisation or image generation, powered by Apple Intelligence. These can be run entirely on-device or use Apple’s Private Cloud Compute when needed, preserving user privacy.

Developers Gain Direct Access to On-Device Models

In what could be described as quite a significant shift, Apple announced the Foundation Models framework, giving developers access to its on-device large language model. For example, with native Swift support (developers using Apple’s language to build apps easily), apps can now integrate Apple Intelligence features like summarisation or natural language commands using as little as three lines of code.

As highlighted by Craig Federighi, Apple’s Senior Vice President of Software Engineering: “Now, the models that power Apple Intelligence are becoming more capable and efficient, and we’re integrating features in even more places across each of our operating systems.”

Siri Upgrades Still Missing in Action

Despite the expanded AI rollout, many attendees had been expecting a major upgrade to Siri. Instead, Apple confirmed delays to its next-generation voice assistant. Federighi admitted that the improvements had not reached the level of reliability Apple wanted, saying: “We weren’t able to achieve the reliability in the time we thought.”

This absence was widely noted and may add pressure to Apple’s position in the AI race. For example, while competitors like OpenAI, Google and Microsoft continue to push forward with conversational agents, it seems that Apple’s flagship assistant remains largely unchanged for now.

iOS 26 Brings Visual Overhaul and AI Features

iOS 26 was positioned as Apple’s flagship release, introducing Liquid Glass and a more adaptive Lock Screen and Home Screen experience. Key additions include contextual widgets, smarter Spotlight search with task-aware results, and updates to Messages such as AI-suggested polls and live translation. There are also enhanced privacy controls and accessibility tools.

A redesigned Control Centre and greater customisation options round out the update. Users can also activate features like Visual Intelligence directly from the Action button or screenshot shortcuts.

Also, Apple’s new child safety features will now require parental approval before children can communicate with new contacts, reflecting growing concern over online safety. Developers will also have access to a new ‘PermissionKit’ to implement similar controls within their apps.

macOS 26 ‘Tahoe’ and Spotlight Upgrades

The macOS 26 update, codenamed Tahoe, brings the Liquid Glass interface to Mac alongside new Spotlight functionality. Users can now trigger app actions directly from Spotlight, such as playing music, starting a workout or adding tasks to Notes.

The new theme options and improved menu navigation are designed to appeal to productivity users, while the expanded Shortcuts integration introduces AI-generated actions. macOS Tahoe will also be the last major version supported on Intel-based Macs, marking the end of an era as Apple completes its transition to Apple Silicon.

Multitasking Redefined on iPadOS 26

iPadOS 26 delivers a long-awaited overhaul to multitasking. For example, Apple says that users can now resize app windows more freely and reposition them anywhere on the screen, bringing the iPad experience closer to macOS. Developers will have to opt in to support the new features, but the system is reportedly intuitive and flexible.

Other changes include the arrival of the Journal app on iPad, new Apple Pencil features for image markup, and enhanced export options for creative users. Also, preview tools now allow users to inspect and annotate files more like on desktop platforms.

Vision Pro Gains New Accessories and Software Updates

visionOS 26, Apple’s latest operating system for its Vision Pro headset, brings new spatial widgets and easier profile switching to the headset. Apple also confirmed compatibility with the PlayStation VR2 Sense controller and a new Logitech Muse stylus. These accessories are intended to boost adoption of the device among gamers, designers and engineers.

Also, it seems that Persona avatars, previously criticised for their unnatural look, have been refined to look more realistic, while support for more third-party input devices reflects Apple’s efforts to expand the Vision Pro’s ecosystem.

watchOS 26 and tvOS 26: Subtle but Useful Enhancements

Apple also announced that as part of watchOS 26 (an update for Apple Watch), the Liquid Glass update introduces the Workout Buddy AI feature for real-time coaching. A new flick gesture enables users to interact with the watch without touching the screen, improving accessibility.

Also, tvOS 26 now focuses on usability, introducing faster profile switching, a sleeker interface and a karaoke feature. AirPods also now gain studio-quality audio recording and camera remote capabilities, making them more useful for content creators and on-the-go users.

New Apps and Smaller Updates

Apple also announced a new dedicated Games app for iOS and iPadOS. The app functions as a hub for tracking achievements, joining challenges and inviting friends to multiplayer sessions. Social features like “Play Together” aim to make gaming more collaborative on Apple platforms.

Apple Maps now uses on-device learning to suggest commute-based routes, while Apple Wallet will summarise delivery and tracking updates using AI. Podcast users can now listen at up to 3x playback speed, and News gains a new emoji-based trivia game.

Developer Tools and Global Expansion

A key announcement for developers was the expanded access to Apple’s foundation models. For example, developers can now build AI features directly into their apps using the on-device model, without relying on external APIs. The models support Swift and include built-in tools like tool calling and guided generation.

Apple also confirmed that Apple Intelligence will expand to eight more languages later this year, including Danish, Dutch and Turkish, with availability dependent on local laws and device compatibility.

A New Generation of Experiences?

After trailing behind rivals on AI, it seems that at this year’s WWDC, Apple doubled down on privacy-focused, on-device intelligence that integrates directly into apps and workflows. By opening up its core models to developers, it may be hoping to spark a new generation of experiences that differentiate its ecosystem.

For users, the changes are mostly evolutionary but important, particularly the design refresh, privacy-conscious AI tools, and new multitasking capabilities. However, the delay to Siri’s upgrade leaves a visible gap in Apple’s response to competitors like Google Gemini, OpenAI’s ChatGPT and Microsoft Copilot.

While Apple’s privacy model and integration strengths remain core advantages, some commentators have noted that many of the features shown at WWDC 2025, e.g. call screening, image generation and real-time translation, have been available on Android or third-party platforms for some time.

As Apple seeks to reassert itself in the AI space while maintaining its reputation for design and reliability, this year’s announcements appear to generally reflect both ambition and caution. It’s likely that the next 12 months will be critical in determining how far the company can evolve its AI strategy, and how willing users and developers are to embrace it.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

The real test for Apple will be whether these updates deliver meaningful, seamless experiences in day-to-day use. While the Liquid Glass redesign brings a striking new aesthetic, and the Apple Intelligence features promise more contextual support, much depends on how consistently and reliably they perform across devices. The fact that developers now have access to Apple’s on-device models is likely to accelerate the creation of tailored, private AI experiences. For UK businesses, this opens up potential for more secure, integrated tools across sectors such as retail, healthcare, and finance, especially for those already embedded in Apple’s ecosystem.

However, questions remain about how quickly these new capabilities can reach mass adoption. With many features still in beta and some dependent on specific hardware or language settings, rollout may be uneven. Apple’s slower progress on Siri is also a strategic concern. In a market where AI-powered voice interaction is fast becoming a standard expectation, its absence puts Apple at a disadvantage, particularly in the enterprise and productivity space where hands-free interaction can offer real operational value.

Apple’s emphasis on privacy and on-device processing is clearly intended to differentiate it from AI competitors who rely heavily on cloud-based models. This may appeal strongly to consumers and businesses alike, particularly those facing increasing regulatory pressure around data handling. Even so, Apple will need to keep pace on usability and innovation if it wants to remain a leader in AI-enhanced computing.

As other players race ahead with chatbots, copilots, and custom models, Apple has opted for a slower but arguably more sustainable approach. Whether this proves to be a strength or a missed opportunity will depend not just on technical progress, but on how well it can support developers, reassure users, and turn these tools into something people actually want to use every day.

Meta is taking legal action against a company accused of flooding its platforms with ads for non-consensual AI-generated nudity, while Disney and Universal have launched a separate lawsuit claiming one of the world’s most popular image-generating tools is built on stolen intellectual property.

Meta Targets CrushAI in Major Legal Push

Meta has filed a lawsuit in Hong Kong against Joy Timeline HK Limited, the company behind CrushAI, an app that uses generative AI to undress photos of clothed individuals without their consent. According to Meta, the service ran more than 87,000 ads across Facebook and Instagram, often using misleading images and evasion tactics to bypass platform rules.

Repeated Violations

Meta’s lawsuit alleges that CrushAI’s operators repeatedly violated Meta’s advertising policies and continued to create new accounts and domains to distribute ads even after multiple take-downs. Meta said the company operated under names like “Eraser Annyone’s Clothes” and used generic visuals in ads to sidestep detection systems. In one example cited in court filings, an ad featured a split image of a woman clothed on one side and digitally undressed on the other, with phrases like “BRA OFF” and “PANTS OFF” alongside captions such as “Upload a photo to strip for a minute.”

Meta’s lawsuit seeks to stop the defendants from using its platforms entirely. A company spokesperson stated, “This legal action underscores both the seriousness with which we take this abuse and our commitment to doing all we can to protect our community from it.”

Scale of Abuse Raises Platform Accountability Questions

Based on what Meta says, it appears that the volume of ads involved in the case is significant. For example, reports indicate over 135 Facebook pages and more than 170 business accounts were used to promote AI undressing services. Many of these targeted users in the US, UK, Canada, Australia and Germany. According to investigative journalist Alexios Mantzarlis (who first reported on CrushAI’s ad activity), around 90 percent of its website traffic came directly from Meta-owned platforms.

Not only is Meta suing, but it has also now responded by expanding its detection and enforcement methods. Reports indicate that new tools can now identify suspicious ads even when they contain no explicit content, using copy-detection and adversarial network analysis. Since the start of 2025, Meta says it has dismantled four separate networks of such advertisers and provided over 3,800 URLs linked to nudify services to other tech firms via the Tech Coalition’s Lantern programme.

Monetising Harmful Content Through Mainstream Platforms

This case essentially highlights how AI tools are being used not just to produce harmful content, but to monetise it through mainstream ad platforms. Meta’s decision to pursue litigation suggests a growing willingness to tackle abuse at the source rather than relying solely on content moderation. The company has also backed new US legislation like the TAKE IT DOWN Act, aimed at removing non-consensual intimate images from the internet more broadly.

Tech Industry Struggles With Deepfake Threat

It should be noted here that the CrushAI case is certainly not an isolated incident. Meta, TikTok and others have all faced rising pressure over how easily such tools can reach users, especially teenagers. Despite banning search terms like “undress” and “nudify,” demand for these apps has grown sharply in recent months. In 2024 alone, researchers found millions of ad impressions for similar services across YouTube, X, and Reddit.

The business model is simple but troubling, i.e., create synthetic nude images from innocent photos using AI, serve ads via loopholes in platform rules, and profit from traffic and paid services. Meta argues that only cross-industry cooperation and stronger regulation will stop the spread of such services. “Removing them from one platform alone isn’t enough,” the company wrote in a June 2025 update.

Should Have Acted Faster?

However, critics say Meta should have acted faster. Despite knowing about the problem since at least 2023, many CrushAI-linked domains remained live and active into this year. Privacy campaigners argue that platforms must improve human oversight of AI-driven ad systems, particularly when dealing with abusive content aimed at minors or vulnerable groups.

Disney and Universal Take Aim at Midjourney Over IP Use

While Meta fights AI abuse through its own platforms, another battle is unfolding in the entertainment world. Disney and Universal have recently filed a joint lawsuit in California against San Francisco-based Midjourney, accusing it of using copyrighted characters and imagery without permission.

The studios argue that Midjourney’s generative AI models have enabled users to create countless unauthorised depictions of characters like Yoda, Elsa, Darth Vader and the Minions. According to the complaint, the tool functions as an “AI-powered vending machine” that outputs copyrighted content on demand, without adequate transformation or permission.

Horacio Gutierrez, Disney’s chief legal officer, said: “Piracy is piracy, and the fact that it’s done by an AI company does not make it any less infringing.”

Midjourney is reported to have generated around $300 million in revenue in 2024. It is also developing a video generation service, which the plaintiffs warn could extend the infringement into moving images. While Midjourney has not responded publicly to the lawsuit, its website describes the team as a “small self-funded research lab” with fewer than a dozen full-time staff.

Fair Use, Transformation and Legal Uncertainty

The Midjourney case cuts to the heart of one of the thorniest questions in current copyright law, i.e., how much transformation is enough to qualify as fair use? Syracuse University professor Shubha Ghosh noted, “A lot of the images that Midjourney produces just seem to be copies of copyright characters that might be in new locations or with a new background.”

The studios argue this isn’t transformative in a meaningful sense. However, Midjourney’s defenders claim its models are trained on vast quantities of publicly available images and that user-generated content can vary widely in form and purpose. The outcome may hinge on whether courts see Midjourney’s tools as akin to remixing or as unauthorised reproduction.

It’s been reported that IP lawyer Randy McCarthy has warned that this case is far from clear-cut, saying: “No litigation is ever a slam dunk, and that is true for Disney and Universal in this case.” He points to Midjourney’s terms of service and the complexity of fair use law in the context of AI-generated content.

A Growing Legal Reckoning for AI

Both lawsuits essentially reflect a broader shift in how tech companies, regulators and rights holders are responding to the explosive growth of generative AI. While the technology is transforming fields from entertainment to education, it is also forcing courts to confront unprecedented questions about privacy, consent, and intellectual property at scale.

For example, while Meta is investing in machine learning to better detect nudify ads, legal pressure may ultimately do more to stop app makers from operating in the first place. Similarly, Hollywood’s case against Midjourney may define future boundaries for AI training, commercialisation and user outputs.

These cases also raise operational questions for AI developers and platforms alike. For example, businesses using AI models in customer-facing products will need to monitor legal risks more closely, especially where training data or outputs involve real people or proprietary content. The financial, reputational and regulatory costs of getting this wrong are starting to come into sharper focus.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

The outcomes of these lawsuits could set influential precedents in how AI content is policed, monetised and legally challenged across both the tech and entertainment industries. In Meta’s case, the scale of abuse has forced the company to shift from reactive moderation to proactive disruption and litigation. The company’s legal and technical responses also highlight the degree to which AI-generated content has outpaced existing enforcement systems, raising critical questions about how other platforms will handle similar threats. While Meta’s use of machine learning and industry-wide collaboration may help close the gap, regulators and watchdogs will be watching closely to see whether these measures are sufficient, or merely reactive damage control.

For UK businesses, these developments highlight the need to approach AI integration with greater care, especially when it involves third-party content, image generation or user data. Any business using or developing generative tools must understand not just the technical capabilities, but also the legal and ethical frameworks now forming around them. Whether it’s a platform hosting user-generated images or a marketing agency using AI to create branded visuals, the risks associated with misuse, infringement or reputational harm are now more tangible than ever. Ensuring that AI systems are responsibly sourced, monitored and legally compliant is really now essential.

The legal action from Disney and Universal shows that large rights holders are prepared to challenge even the most technically complex cases of copyright use. Although Midjourney is not accused of creating content directly, it stands accused of enabling users to infringe at scale by offering tools trained on protected IP. This line of legal argument may soon be tested further if other AI firms follow similar models. For other stakeholders in the creative sector, from publishers to games studios, the message is that commercialising AI without clear safeguards can bring substantial legal exposure.

It seems the more AI tools intersect with real people’s identities and other people’s intellectual property, the more likely it is that platforms, developers and even users will be drawn into litigation. The next few months are likely to shape not just individual company policies, but broader norms around how AI is trained, deployed and held accountable across multiple sectors.

A growing number of major tech companies are turning away from the London Stock Exchange in favour of listings in the US, citing better valuations, deeper capital markets, and greater investor appetite for growth.

Wise and Others Moving Away

Last week, UK fintech firm Wise announced plans to shift its primary listing from London to New York. The move follows similar decisions by chip designer Arm, which chose Nasdaq in 2023, and Just Eat Takeaway, which exited London for Amsterdam. Wise’s CEO Kristo Käärmann said the shift would provide access to “the world’s deepest and most liquid capital market” and the largest potential customer base for its services.

Klarna, Spotify and other European tech players have already listed in the US or confirmed plans to do so. Revolut’s founder recently summed up the sentiment, describing a London listing as “not rational” under current conditions.

Bigger Capital Pools and Bolder Investors

It seems that this trend is being driven primarily (and not surprisingly) by financial factors. For example, the US offers much larger pools of capital, higher valuations, and a more supportive investor culture. The New York Stock Exchange has a market capitalisation of about $27 trillion, compared to £2.8 trillion for the LSE. It’s this sheer scale that’s creating more liquidity and attracts more institutional investment.

For example, UK semiconductor and chip design company Arm achieved a far higher valuation on Nasdaq than analysts expected it could reach in London. Wise is hoping for the same, believing US investors are more likely to back its revenue-first, long-term model.

US markets also tend to favour growth over immediate profit, and this appears to align more closely with the business models of many tech firms. In the UK, by contrast, investors often demand revenue visibility early on and, for high-growth companies, that kind of risk aversion can be limiting.

A Shrinking Share of Global Markets

The decline of the LSE is visible in the numbers. For example, in 2024, 88 companies delisted or moved their primary listing away, which is the highest annual outflow in over a decade. At the turn of the millennium, UK-listed companies made up 11 per cent of the MSCI World Index. Today, that share has dropped to just 4 per cent.

For the wider UK economy, this shift poses long-term risks. For example, as more firms list overseas, the UK loses influence over its most dynamic sectors. There is also a risk of a talent drain, as companies with international ambitions may choose to relocate senior teams and operations.

Deliveroo’s underwhelming 2021 IPO on the LSE is often cited as a turning point. The company’s falling share price and lukewarm investor reception cast doubt over London’s ability to support innovative tech listings. That failure has made other firms wary of following the same route.

Government Reforms Are on the Table

That said, UK policymakers now appear to be trying to respond. For example, the Edinburgh Reforms aimed to improve access to public markets for scale-ups, and Labour’s Chancellor Rachel Reeves has proposed further deregulation. Changes include relaxing rules on sovereign fund investment, reducing tax friction for traders, and streamlining disclosure obligations.

Dual-class share structures, which allow founders to retain control, are also under discussion. Raspberry Pi recently adopted such a structure in its successful LSE debut, suggesting the market can support innovative tech companies when the conditions are right.

AIM’s Decline and the Call for Radical Change

The UK’s Alternative Investment Market (AIM), originally designed to support fast-growing smaller companies, has lost nearly 400 listings in the past nine years. Critics argue it has become too weak to serve its intended purpose, with concerns over liquidity and transparency deterring new listings.

Benedict Macon-Cooney from the Tony Blair Institute has called for a far more radical overhaul. He argues that the UK needs to stop “nibbling” at the problem and instead make high-growth sectors a national economic priority. That means rethinking regulation, investment, skills, and infrastructure to support innovation from the ground up.

New York Isn’t the Only Winner

While US exchanges are drawing the lion’s share of attention, other global markets are also benefiting. Amsterdam, in particular, has positioned itself as a hub for digital and fintech firms. For example, Just Eat Takeaway moved its primary listing there in search of a more aligned investor base.

Some believe the UK could build partnerships with emerging markets such as India, Nigeria, or the Middle East to attract listings from new tech sectors. ReachX CEO Rafael S. Lajeunesse argues that offering structured dual-listing pathways could help London gain exposure to future tech powerhouses outside of the US.

Making the LSE Fit for Growth Companies

Several experts believe the LSE could still thrive if it focused more on attracting £500m to £1bn market cap tech companies, i.e. the kinds that might struggle to gain attention on Nasdaq but are too big for venture capital alone.

For example, Raspberry Pi succeeded in part because its leadership team understood the IPO process and prepared well for the demands of public investors. More tech founders could follow suit with the right education, support, and guidance.

There are also structural changes that could help. Reducing the cost of listing, increasing analyst coverage for growth firms, allowing dual-share structures, and introducing faster listing routes are all on the table.

What Does This Mean For Your Business?

What’s now becoming clear is that the London Stock Exchange is no longer the default destination for ambitious UK tech companies. For many founders, the capital, scale and investor mindset offered by the US are proving too attractive to ignore. This is not simply a matter of prestige or visibility. The decision to list in New York or Amsterdam is often about achieving a better valuation and securing the kind of long-term backing needed to grow globally. If London cannot compete on those fundamentals, it risks being left behind.

The concern is not just for the stock exchange itself but for the broader ecosystem around it. When companies go elsewhere to list, there is a knock-on effect across the UK’s professional services, capital markets, and innovation economy. It becomes harder for growth-stage UK investors to plan domestic exits. It also sends the wrong signal to the next generation of entrepreneurs who may begin building with one eye already on an overseas IPO. For UK businesses more broadly, this erosion of the local tech sector could weaken supply chains, reduce local collaboration opportunities, and limit talent retention in key innovation areas.

That said, there is still time to turn things around, but it will require more than minor regulatory tweaks. The UK will need to create a genuinely competitive listing environment that reflects how tech businesses operate and grow. That means improving access to capital, updating market rules to support dual-share structures, and better educating investors on modern business models. It also means giving smaller tech firms a credible path to public funding that isn’t crowded out by legacy sectors.

Recent success stories like Raspberry Pi show what’s possible when those conditions are met. If the LSE can build on that momentum, focus on realistic growth sectors, and reframe its pitch to scale-up companies, it may yet reclaim its place as a serious option for the UK’s most promising tech businesses.
Until then, more of them will continue to look west.