I was sitting with a founder in Singapore last month who had just rolled out a generative AI assistant into their fintech product. They were proud of their “Responsible AI” page, complete with a model card, an explainability statement, and a glossy diagram about bias mitigation. But then they said something that caught me off guard:

“Users still don’t trust it. They open it, play for 10 seconds, and switch it off.”

And there it was — the core tension. We think we can explain our way into trust. But in practice, no amount of words will save a user who feels powerless.

This is where I take a contrarian stance: Trust is not a document. Trust is a design choice that gives users the ability to change outcomes.

Let’s unpack this through a story arc — from tension, to examples, to lessons learned, and finally to a guiding principle.

Act one: The illusion of transparency

In Southeast Asia, AI adoption is booming — from ride-hailing to e-commerce to digital banking. Companies are racing to launch AI-enabled features, but the trust playbook still looks like 2018: privacy policies, explainers, and “we take your data seriously” banners.

Take a look at major platforms’ trust dashboards: they are informative, yes, but fundamentally static. They tell users what has been done, not what can be undone.

And users are savvy. They’re less impressed by paragraphs of compliance language and more interested in the one question that matters:

“What happens when the AI gets it wrong — and what can I do about it?”

This is the gap few startups address — and where the opportunity lies.

Act two: A marketplace learns the hard way

Consider Southeast Asia’s bustling peer-to-peer marketplaces. Platforms like Carousell have invested heavily in scam detection, behavioral analysis, and community education campaigns. In 2024, they even published a regional scam trends report and multi-layered security updates to show transparency.

Yet long-time users still push for stronger verification, escrow payments, and platform-level guarantees.

The lesson? Disclosure is not enough. People don’t just want to know there’s a risk; they want to shift that risk away from themselves.

The contrarian move is to treat risk-shifting as a product feature. Build escrow into the workflow — like Carousell Protection’s rollout — show transaction risk scores, and set a clear “platform eats the loss if…” rule. Suddenly, trust becomes something users can spend.

Also Read: Southeast Asia’s trade future: Powered by tech, trust, and regional unity

Act three: Regulation as a product spec

Startups often view regulation as a hurdle. In reality, in Southeast Asia it can be your design brief.

Singapore’s Model AI Governance Framework and its new Generative AI consultation draft are explicit: operationalise accountability, test for safety, be explainable. Indonesia’s PDP Law, Thailand’s PDPA, and Malaysia’s 2024 amendments all tighten cross-border data requirements.

Instead of treating these as compliance checklists, turn them into architectural features:

• Data locality tiers: keep “must-stay” data in-region with edge inference, while allowing “can-mirror” data to sync globally.
• Consent receipts: issue machine-readable receipts for every transfer, so users can see and revoke.
• Cross-border off-switch: design for a one-week pivot to local storage if adequacy rules change.

This is not hypothetical. ASEAN regulators are moving from principles to testable standards, such as Singapore’s AI Verify framework — a world-first testing toolkit. Designing for “provability” is how you future-proof trust.

Act four: Limits, ladders, and graceful failure

Telling users “the model may be wrong” is a disclaimer. Giving them a ladder out of a bad decision is trust.

Think of three concrete product choices:

• Graceful degradation: If your model confidence is low, switch to human review or rules-based logic — and show that fallback state.
• Appeal & reversal SLA: Make appealing a wrong decision a two-tap process, and commit to a resolution time. If you’re wrong, compensate automatically.
• Evidence kits: Pre-pack the screenshots and logs a user needs to challenge a decision — don’t make them guess.

These are not just good UX; they are the new trust currency.

Act five: The hidden risk — consent debt

Here’s a concept that doesn’t get enough airtime: consent debt.

Just like tech debt, you accrue consent debt when you quietly expand data usage without granular, revocable permissions. Training on support chats, using personal data for look-alike models, or merging datasets across business units — all build silent liability.

In SEA, where trust in digital platforms can flip quickly and policy moves fast, consent debt is not just a PR risk — it’s existential. The antidote is a Consent Ledger per user:

• Show what data you hold, what model it trains, and what purpose it serves.
• Allow purpose-scoped revocation (“Use my data for personalisation, but not training”).
• Publish a quarterly data use changelog users can actually read.

Do this before regulators force you to — and you turn trust into a competitive moat.

Act six: What makes SEA unique

Unlike the US or EU, Southeast Asia is a patchwork of regulatory environments and cultural norms:

• Policy heterogeneity: You need switchable privacy modes, not one global setting.
• Messaging-first commerce: Trust is often mediated through WhatsApp, LINE, or Telegram, so verification and decision-summaries must travel across chat apps.
• Localised moderation norms: Global one-size policies fail; you need language- and culture-specific model adapters to avoid political or cultural backlash.

Startups that build with these factors in mind will not only comply but resonate with users in a region where trust is as much about face as it is about function.

Also Read: Building trust in the age of AI: Lessons for Southeast Asia’s startups

Act seven: The guiding principle

After dozens of conversations with founders, regulators, and users, I keep coming back to one principle:

Trust must be actionable.

If a reasonable user cannot change the outcome of an AI decision, you haven’t built a trust feature — you’ve built a brochure.

The metric that matters is not “number of users who viewed our policy page.” It’s median time from user appeal to resolution with restitution.

When startups measure and optimise that, they do more than comply — they set the tone for what trustworthy AI feels like. And in a region as dynamic as Southeast Asia, that could be the edge that keeps your product in play when the next wave of AI regulation — or public backlash — hits.

Your turn

If you launched your AI feature tomorrow, would your users have the power to undo, appeal, or reverse a decision — or would they just be left reading a policy page?

—

Editor’s note: e27 aims to foster thought leadership by publishing views from the community. Share your opinion by submitting an article, video, podcast, or infographic.

Enjoyed this read? Don’t miss out on the next insight. Join our WhatsApp channel for real-time drops.

Image courtesy: Canva Pro

The post Trust isn’t a FAQ — it’s a lever: How startups can engineer user power into AI appeared first on e27.

Supply chain cyberattacks remain a significant challenge in 2025. The 2024 BCI Supply Chain Resilience Report revealed that nearly 80 per cent of organisations experienced disruptions in their supply chains, while 34 per cent of respondents reported a cyberattack as a cause of the disruption. Threat actors increasingly target suppliers and third-party vendors to breach larger organisations, with financial service providers at the top of the target list.

Recently, more than 11,000 customer information from DBS and the Bank of China were compromised by a cybersecurity attack on their printing vendor. These attacks exploit vulnerabilities in interconnected systems, creating a ripple effect that broadly disrupts operations. Financial losses, reputational harm, and potential legal repercussions are just some of the outcomes. 

The growing complexity of supply chains only amplifies the risks, making proactive measures more critical than ever. Suppliers, especially smaller businesses, often lack the resources and expertise to implement strong cybersecurity measures, making them prime targets for attackers seeking to infiltrate larger, well-protected organisations.

Understanding the most common supply chain threats and adopting strategies to mitigate them is essential for safeguarding business operations and data integrity. 

Why are supply chains so vulnerable? 

The primary reason supply chains are exploited for cyberattacks is the disparity in cybersecurity levels between large enterprises and their suppliers. Smaller suppliers often operate with limited resources, focusing on operational performance metrics like rapid delivery times or cost efficiencies, unintentionally sidelining cybersecurity considerations.  

This is a problem, as while businesses keep increasingly relying on third-party software solutions and digital services, vulnerabilities in digital supply chains have emerged as a critical risk factor. Like their physical counterparts, software supply chains consist of multiple tiers of suppliers, often involving complex interdependencies, including open-source software libraries, cloud infrastructure, SaaS applications, authentication services, and security tools. Vulnerabilities can emerge at any tier, whether through unpatched code, misconfigured cloud storage, or compromised third-party IT services, creating significant security risks. 

Also Read: How tech startups can transform the supply chain in Southeast Asia 

This complexity is a key challenge, as mapping the components beyond first-tier suppliers is difficult, yet vulnerabilities often originate from lower-tier ones. Hence why attackers exploit these blind spots, leveraging security weaknesses in lower-tier modules to gain access to broader systems. Vulnerabilities like Log4j  show how a single weak link can expose entire ecosystems, making supply chain security a critical priority. 

One of the most notable global supply chain cyberattacks occurred in 2020 with the SolarWinds incident. SolarWinds, a provider of IT infrastructure management tools, became the target of state-sponsored cybercriminals who compromised its widely used Orion software. The attackers inserted malicious code into a routine software update, which was then deployed by unsuspecting customers.

SolarWinds reported that in all, this breach impacted approximately 18,000 organisations worldwide. The list of affected organisations includes U.S. federal agencies, state and local governments, and major corporations, exposing sensitive data and systems to unauthorised access. 

Supply chain risks 

Supply chain cyber risks come in many forms. Whether it’s ransomware, data theft, or fraud, attackers exploit vulnerabilities in suppliers, partners, and even open-source code to breach networks. Examples like SolarWinds or the breach of 3CX illustrate how widespread and damaging these attacks can be.

Additionally, sophisticated methods such as business email compromise (BEC) and credential theft demonstrate the lengths threat actors will go to infiltrate supply chains. Even trusted partners like managed service providers (MSPs) are not immune, as cybercriminals recognise that compromising a single MSP can open the door to numerous downstream targets. 

Other risks include: 

• Software vulnerabilities 

Digital risks such as zero-day exploits, or other software vulnerabilities create potential entry points for cybercriminals, leading to threats such as ransomware attacks, malware infections, data breaches, process disruptions or intellectual property theft, among others. 

• Supplier fraud 

Supplier fraud, or vendor fraud, is another rising threat. For instance, business email compromise (BEC) attacks often involve fraudsters impersonating suppliers to trick clients into transferring funds. Attackers typically hijack email accounts and send fake invoices with altered payment details, exploiting trust within supply chain relationships.

Fraudsters also increasingly employ sophisticated social engineering techniques, including AI-generated voicemails, and deepfake videos, making these attacks challenging to detect.  

• Data security 

Data protection remains a critical concern within supply chain security. Ensuring data integrity requires robust encryption practices and access restrictions, particularly for third-party integrations.

Since third-party vendors often have access to sensitive data to some extent, such encryption safeguards are essential to prevent cybercriminals from exploiting these connections. This can go a long way toward preventing large-scale incidents such as data breaches.  

Also Read: Why it is imperative to invest in digitalising the supply chain

How to mitigate supply chain risks? 

To address these threats, businesses of all sizes must make supply chain security a cornerstone of their cybersecurity strategies.  

Effective software security begins with a clear understanding of an organisation’s digital assets and rigorous due diligence when onboarding new suppliers. Maintaining an up-to-date inventory of all open-source and proprietary tools in use is essential for ensuring visibility across the software ecosystem. By employing tools like software composition analysis (SCA) and ensuring timely patching of vulnerabilities, businesses can guard against the hidden dangers within widely used components.

Organisations should remain vigilant for known vulnerabilities and apply patches promptly, recognising that concerns about malicious updates should not delay critical software maintenance. Moreover, breaches affecting third-party software vendors require careful attention, as they can ripple through and impact operations. 

Systems should also be regularly audited to identify and eliminate redundant or outdated services, protocols, or tools that could pose security risks. When partnering with software suppliers, it is crucial to assess their risk profiles by examining their security practices. Organisations should also establish clear security requirements for vendors, including regular code audits, robust change control procedures, and stringent security checks for code components. 

Additional measures include requesting penetration tests to uncover vulnerabilities in critical software, strengthening safeguards by enforcing strict access controls, and implementing multi-factor authentication (MFA) to secure development processes and build pipelines. Finally, deploying multi-layered security software is recommended to ensure comprehensive protection across the organisation’s infrastructure. 

These measures, coupled with clearly defined policies and regular communication with suppliers, lay the groundwork for a resilient supply chain. 

Emerging best practices 

As the threat landscape evolves, so too must supply chain security practices. Government agencies and industry organisations have introduced frameworks to guide businesses in managing supply chain cybersecurity. For example, the National Institute of Standards and Technology’s (NIST’s) Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management framework offers a systematic approach to assessing and mitigating risks. 

Also Read: The digital revolution in supply chain management: Efficiency, visibility, and resilience

Beyond technical tools, a cultural shift is required. Supply chain managers must integrate cybersecurity into their supplier selection processes and foster continuous development of suppliers’ security capabilities. This approach ensures that cybersecurity becomes an integral part of supply chain management, much like quality control or sustainability efforts. 

The path forward 

Supply chain cyberattacks are not going away. In fact, they are expected to increase as attackers exploit the growing complexity and interconnectivity of modern supply chains. With more than 70 per cent of Singapore organisations negatively impacted by a cybersecurity breach within their supply chain, there is no time to wait in implementing cybersecurity solutions.

By adopting a prevention-first approach that combines technological tools, rigorous supplier management, and a commitment to continuous improvement, organisations can significantly reduce their exposure to these threats. In an era where the weakest link can compromise an entire ecosystem, supply chain security must be a priority for every business leader. 

—

Editor’s note: e27 aims to foster thought leadership by publishing views from the community. Share your opinion by submitting an article, video, podcast, or infographic.

Enjoyed this read? Don’t miss out on the next insight. Join our WhatsApp channel for real-time drops.

Image courtesy: Canva

The post The most common supply chain threats and how to mitigate them appeared first on e27.

In this, part two of a four-part series, we’ll explore how SEA’s SME sector is primed for ETA to take place. Over US$1 trillion in family business assets will transfer in the coming years, yet the second generation increasingly chooses other careers over inheriting traditional enterprises.

These deals are also typically too small for private equity players and banks to support. Search funds uniquely solve both problems at once, providing transition capital to the region’s most vital yet overlooked economic engine, right as the first post-independence generation reaches retirement.

If you missed part 1, please find it here. 

The SME powerhouse: The engine of ASEAN economies

The economic landscape of Southeast Asia is overwhelmingly defined by the scale and significance of its SMEs. SMEs are not merely a part of the region’s economy; they are its primary engine. There are 70 million SMEs across SEA, compared to approximately 14 thousand funded startups.

SMEs constitute over 97 per cent of all business establishments, hire 85 per cent of the workforce, and contribute to over 40 per cent of SEA’s GDP, highlighting their foundational role in the economic structure of every SEA state. In a mature hub like Singapore, SMEs employ over 70 per cent of the workforce, underscoring their critical importance even in the most developed economies.

This economic backbone is dynamic and evolving. Spurred by the COVID-19 pandemic, SMEs across the region have accelerated their adoption of digital technologies, embracing e-commerce, productivity and fintech solutions at an unprecedented rate. This digital transformation is supported by increasingly sophisticated government policies aimed at enhancing SME competitiveness through improved access to finance, technology, and entrepreneurial education.

This confluence of factors creates a fertile ground for the ETA model: a vast landscape of fundamentally important businesses that are simultaneously becoming more resilient, more digitally savvy, and more open to the strategic and operational improvements that a new generation of leadership can provide.

A looming crisis, a golden opportunity: The great generational handover

However, beneath the surface of SEA’s vibrant SME sector, a profound demographic and cultural shift is creating both a looming succession crisis and a golden opportunity for the ETA model. The region is on the cusp of one of the largest intergenerational wealth transfers in its history, with estimates suggesting that over US$1 trillion in family business assets will transition to the next generation in Asia in the coming years.

Also Read: The new succession: Charting the rise of Entrepreneurship Through Acquisition (ETA) in SEA – Part 1

However, this transition is far from guaranteed. Historically, the odds of a successful handover are long; studies show that only 30 per cent of family businesses survive to the second generation, with a mere 12 per cent making it to the third. In SEA, this statistical challenge is compounded by a widening cultural and aspirational gap between generations.

Many of the region’s SMEs were built by first-generation founders who are now nearing retirement age. These entrepreneurs often came from humble beginnings often lacking better alternatives and forged their businesses through immense hardship, instilling a set of values and expectations that may not resonate with their successors.

The next generation, often raised in relative affluence and educated at reputable universities at home or abroad, frequently want different career aspirations. They may be drawn to exciting careers in technology, finance, or consulting, or they may wish to start their own ventures rather than take over a traditional family business.

Some also wish to pursue alternative careers in music or academia. This generational disconnect creates a growing pool of “orphan businesses”: profitable, stable, and respected companies but no clear successor to carry them forward, following the path of other aging societies like Japan and Hong Kong. 

Not just only a succession: Challenges faced by SMEs in SEA

The challenges facing SMEs in this region extend far beyond succession planning. Through extensive research with various stakeholders conducted by GenCap, we’ve identified several critical issues threatening the viability of these businesses.

• Lagging digitalisation: While COVID-19 accelerated technology adoption globally, SMEs in this region continue to lag significantly behind. Limited digital literacy, constrained financial resources, and inadequate infrastructure have left them at a considerable disadvantage, not only against larger, more technologically sophisticated corporations, but also compared to their Western counterparts.
• Rising operating costs: Unlike larger players who can leverage economies of scale or negotiate favorable supplier terms, SMEs face an impossible dilemma. They must either pass cost increases to customers and risk losing competitiveness, or absorb the losses and jeopardise their survival.
• Talent acquisition challenges: SMEs are fighting a losing battle for talent against multinational corporations and well-funded startups that offer superior compensation, comprehensive benefits, and clear career trajectories. This challenge is often compounded by the companies’ reluctance to invest adequately in employee development and competitive compensation packages.
• Limited international expansion: Complex export procedures, insufficient market knowledge, and difficulty meeting international standards restrict SMEs’ ability to compete globally. The absence of established networks and strategic partnerships further constrains their access to more lucrative international opportunities.

Also Read: Asia’s climate-health crisis deepens amid massive funding gaps

The real challenge isn’t simply succession; it’s about transforming these businesses through renewed leadership, professionalised management teams, stronger governance frameworks, and strategic technology adoption that can help offset rising operational costs and unlock sustainable growth.

Taking on new challenges: How search funds fill the market gap

These challenges are made more acute by a persistent gap in the region’s capital markets. While private capital investment in SEA has seen a significant boom, with deal value reaching a high of US$34 billion in 2022, this flood of capital rarely reaches the SME sector.

Private equity with their larger overheads are typically structured to pursue larger transactions while venture capital invests in high-growth, often pre-profitability, technology startups, leaving the vast majority of established, profitable SMEs outside their investment mandate. In almost all the LOIs that GenCap has issued, we are practically the only party issuing these LOIs. 

Simultaneously, traditional financing routes remain constrained as banks tend to lend to larger corporate clients which are more profitable. Bank lending growth has been insufficient to meet the needs of the SME sector, with a remarkable 70 per cent of SMEs in Southeast Asia reporting that they rely on personal savings or financial support from family and friends to fund their businesses.

As such, there are hundreds of thousands of healthy, cash-flow-positive businesses that are too small for institutional private equity but too large and complex for most individuals to acquire on their own. Search funds are uniquely and perfectly positioned to fill this capital chasm.

By targeting companies in this underserved segment, typically with enterprise values between US$5 million and US$30 million, search funds bring both professional management talent and structured, patient capital to a vital part of the economy that is critically overlooked by other investors. Most importantly, search funds come with a new CEO with a fresh vision that can unlock their next phase of growth.

The case for ETA in Southeast Asia is compelling in theory. But who’s actually doing it? And more importantly, what does success look like? In Part three, we’ll move from “why” to “how”, examining the early movers who are proving the model works in Southeast Asia, with the different search fund operators already on the ground, the investors backing them, and the specific types of deals they’re pursuing.

—

Editor’s note: e27 aims to foster thought leadership by publishing views from the community. Share your opinion by submitting an article, video, podcast, or infographic.

Enjoyed this read? Don’t miss out on the next insight. Join our WhatsApp channel for real-time drops.

Image courtesy: Canva

The post The new succession: Charting the rise of Entrepreneurship Through Acquisition (ETA) in SEA – Part 2 appeared first on e27.

In the current macroeconomic landscape of October 2025, the world finds itself in a precarious balancing act between fading momentum in major economies and the uncertain ripple effects of fiscal and monetary policy shifts. With the United States in the midst of a federal government shutdown that began on October 1, the usual flow of official economic data has been disrupted, leaving market participants increasingly reliant on private-sector indicators.

Among these, the flash Purchasing Managers’ Index (PMI) readings for October have assumed outsized importance. Scheduled for release during the week of October 20 across all major developed economies, these preliminary surveys offer the earliest glimpse into whether the modest growth seen in September can be sustained or whether deeper structural weaknesses are emerging.

The United States, long the standout performer among advanced economies, now faces growing scrutiny over the durability of its expansion. Although the Federal Open Market Committee delivered its first interest rate cut of the year in September, hopes that this would catalyse a renewed upswing are tempered by underlying vulnerabilities. The boost from tariff front-running appears to be waning, and growth remains disproportionately concentrated in financial services and technology sectors.

Compounding the uncertainty is the delayed release of official inflation data. The September Consumer Price Index (CPI), originally due earlier in October, is now expected on October 24, with forecasts pointing to a rise from 2.9 per cent to 3.1 per cent. However, recent PMI data have shown some easing in tariff-related cost pressures, suggesting that if this trend continues into October, it could presage a moderation in headline inflation in the months ahead.

Meanwhile, Europe presents a mixed picture. The eurozone recorded its fastest pace of business activity growth in 16 months in September, a promising signal that the bloc may be regaining some traction. Yet this momentum must be weighed against significant political headwinds, most notably the ongoing crisis in France, which risks undermining consumer and business confidence. In Germany, there is cautious optimism that fiscal measures could stimulate domestic demand, but the net effect on regional growth remains to be seen. The UK, for its part, is navigating a fragile recovery.

September’s PMI data indicated that the economic upturn had nearly stalled, accompanied by substantial job losses. On the inflation front, there is a glimmer of hope. Survey-based measures of price growth have moderated compared to the first half of the year, which should translate into softer official CPI figures in the coming months. Nevertheless, the August CPI reading stood at 3.8 per cent, with core inflation at 3.6 per cent, both well above the Bank of England’s two per cent target, leaving policymakers in a difficult position.

Also Read: AI still missing in action: Global firms lag in using tech for M&A and compliance

In Asia, mainland China’s economic slowdown has become more pronounced. According to a Reuters consensus, third-quarter GDP growth is expected to have decelerated to 4.8 per cent year-over-year, down from 5.2 per cent in the second quarter. This marks the weakest pace of expansion in a year, driven by a persistent property sector slump, ongoing trade tensions, and tepid domestic demand. The data underscores the challenges Beijing faces in meeting its full-year growth target of “around five per cent” and intensifies calls for more aggressive stimulus measures.

Against this complex macro backdrop, the cryptocurrency market has exhibited a characteristic blend of volatility and forward-looking speculation. Over the past 24 hours, the market has risen by 2.82 per cent, a rebound that appears to be fuelled more by anticipation than by concrete developments.

A key driver of this optimism is the positioning ahead of the delayed US CPI release. Traders are betting on a softer-than-expected inflation print, which could bolster the case for further Federal Reserve rate cuts and create a more favourable environment for risk assets. This sentiment is reflected in Bitcoin’s rising correlation with gold, which has climbed to +0.35, signalling a shared role as a safe-haven asset amidst geopolitical uncertainty.

A significant structural catalyst has also emerged from Japan. The country’s Financial Services Agency has proposed a landmark regulatory shift that would allow banks to hold and trade cryptocurrencies. This move, which follows initiatives like Mitsubishi UFJ’s stablecoin project, represents a major step toward mainstream institutional adoption.

Given Japan’s banking sector manages assets worth approximately US$5 trillion, this regulatory pivot could unlock a vast new pool of capital for the crypto ecosystem. This potential is further amplified by the yen’s persistent weakness, having depreciated by nine per cent against the US dollar year-to-date, which incentivises Japanese investors to seek alternative stores of value.

However, the market’s fragility is laid bare by the dynamics of leveraged trading. CoinGlass data reveals that over US$510 million in Bitcoin short positions are clustered above the US$112,000 price level, creating the potential for a powerful short squeeze if the price can sustain a breakout.

Also Read: Risk-off ripples: Trade fears, rate cuts, and a crypto sell-off collide

While funding rates have turned slightly positive, indicating renewed interest from leveraged longs, this optimism is counterbalanced by a stark reality. Spot Bitcoin ETFs in the United States experienced a staggering $1.23 billion in net outflows during the week ending October 17, the second-largest weekly outflow in history. This persistent capital flight from the most regulated and institutional-facing segment of the market suggests a deep-seated caution among traditional investors.

Sentiment indicators further validate this caution. The Crypto Fear & Greed Index currently sits at 30, firmly in the “Fear” territory. This level of anxiety, combined with the massive ETF outflows, acts as a powerful counterweight to the bullish narratives. The market is at a critical juncture.

A successful hold above US$110,000, followed by a break above the US$112,000 liquidation cluster, could trigger a powerful short squeeze and reignite a broader rally. Conversely, a failure to maintain this level could quickly reverse the recent gains and re-ignite the month-to-date downtrend, which currently stands at -7.1 per cent.

In conclusion, the current market environment is defined by a tension between hopeful macro speculation and sobering on-chain and fund flow realities. The flash PMI data will be a crucial barometer for the health of the real economy, while the delayed US CPI will be the immediate trigger for market direction.

Japan’s regulatory overture offers a long-term structural tailwind, but in the short term, the crypto market’s fate appears to hinge on the interplay between Fed policy expectations and the willingness of institutional capital to return to the space. Until the fear dissipates and ETF outflows reverse, any rally is likely to remain fragile and vulnerable to sharp corrections.

—

Editor’s note: e27 aims to foster thought leadership by publishing views from the community. Share your opinion by submitting an article, video, podcast, or infographic.

The post From PMIs to CPI: The data that could make or break crypto’s rally appeared first on e27.

On a humid evening in Jakarta, a warung owner hands over a plate of fried rice. Instead of fishing for small bills, the customer pulls out a phone, scans a black-and-white QR code taped to the stall, and within seconds, the payment is complete. No coins. No delays.

Scenes like this play out millions of times every day across Southeast Asia. For street vendors, small shopkeepers, and ride-hailing drivers, QR payments have transformed the way money moves. What started as a novelty has become the backbone of the region’s digital payment ecosystem.

Yet for all the convenience, a question lingers: is QR the future of money in Southeast Asia, or just a bridge technology on the way to something faster, safer, and more sophisticated?

Why QR became Southeast Asia’s favourite

Unlike Europe or the US, where credit cards and terminals are everywhere, Southeast Asia skipped straight from cash to mobile. QR codes offered a perfect shortcut.

• Low cost: Any merchant could print a QR code and start accepting payments without buying card readers.
• Smartphone boom: By 2025, smartphone penetration across the region is expected to surpass 80 per cent, meaning most consumers carry a QR scanner in their pocket.
• Government support: Indonesia’s QRIS, Thailand’s PromptPay, and Singapore’s PayNow weren’t just optional tools—they became national standards that banks and wallets had to adopt.

This made QR not just convenient but also inclusive. Suddenly, small businesses that were locked out of the digital economy could accept cashless payments just as easily as big retailers.

Also Read: Why is open banking the future of fintech?

A regional push for interoperability

What makes Southeast Asia’s QR story even more ambitious is the cross-border vision. Regulators want a tourist from Bangkok to pay in Bali, or a shopper from Singapore to settle bills in Kuala Lumpur, all by scanning a local QR code.

That vision is slowly becoming reality:

• Thailand and Singapore already link PromptPay and PayNow.
• Indonesia and Malaysia have connected QRIS and DuitNow.
• Other ASEAN nations are in talks to join a wider regional network.

For travellers, this means paying in their own currency abroad. For small merchants, it opens the door to foreign customers without expensive card networks. If the project succeeds, it could chip away at the dominance of Visa and Mastercard in the region.

But rollout is uneven. Not all countries are moving at the same pace, and differences in regulation, settlement systems, and fraud monitoring still hold back a seamless network.

The dark side of convenience: Security and trust

For every innovation, there’s a risk. QR codes, because they are so simple, can be easily tampered with. In Thailand, regulators warned consumers about fraudsters swapping merchants’ QR codes with fake ones, redirecting payments to scam accounts. Similar warnings have surfaced in Indonesia and Vietnam.

Trust is also a broader issue. Every scan generates data. Who owns that data—the wallet provider, the bank, or the regulator? And how is it being used? With high-profile data breaches in Asia in recent years, many consumers remain wary.

The irony is that QR was meant to make payments feel frictionless. But when consumers start questioning whether their money or data is safe, friction returns in a different form: hesitation.

Also Read: Uplifting the underserved and women in fintech: Retail technology on the frontier of equality

More than coffee? The perception barrier

QR is everywhere for small purchases—coffee, groceries, bus rides. But when it comes to bigger transactions—cars, jewellry, property—it hits a wall.

Part of this is regulatory. Many countries set transaction caps to minimise fraud exposure. Part of it is cultural: people still trust bank transfers or cards for large sums.

This creates a perception problem. If QR is seen only as the “cheap and cheerful” way to pay for snacks, can it ever grow into a universal standard? Or will it always sit at the bottom of the payment hierarchy?

Looking beyond the code

QR has done the heavy lifting of financial inclusion. But as the ecosystem matures, new contenders are emerging:

• NFC (Near-Field Communication): Tap-to-pay systems, already popular in Singapore, offer speed and stronger authentication, though they need more advanced terminals.
• Super apps: Grab, Gojek, ShopeePay, and others are embedding QR into larger ecosystems where payments become almost invisible.
• CBDCs (Central Bank Digital Currencies): Pilots in China, Singapore, and Indonesia hint at a future where cross-border settlement could bypass QR altogether.

This doesn’t mean QR is obsolete. It may remain the entry point for millions of new digital users while coexisting with more advanced systems. But it does suggest QR might be remembered as a stepping stone, not the final destination.

Also Read: Fintech rebound: Singapore bags US$1.04B, outpaces global peers

Case studies: Three markets, three lessons

• Indonesia (QRIS): Over 30 million merchants onboarded since 2019, making it one of the largest QR networks globally. Its strength is scale, but outages and transaction limits raise questions about resilience.
• Thailand (PromptPay): Hugely successful domestically and pioneering in cross-border payments, PromptPay shows what’s possible when regulators push hard for adoption.
• Singapore (PayNow): Highly efficient and trusted for P2P transfers, but QR here faces strong competition from tap-to-pay cards and NFC wallets.

These examples show QR’s dual role: essential in some markets, optional in others—a reminder that Southeast Asia is far from uniform.

Conclusion: A lifeline with limits

QR payments have transformed daily life in Southeast Asia. They have given millions their first experience of digital finance, enabled tiny businesses to go cashless, and spurred regional cooperation that could reshape how money flows.

But QR is not without its limits. Trust issues, fraud risks, and its image as a “small transaction tool” may prevent it from becoming the ultimate solution. As new technologies emerge, QR might fade into the background—a bridge that connected Southeast Asia to the digital economy, before handing over to faster, smarter, and safer systems.

For now, though, every time someone scans a QR code at a roadside stall, it’s more than just a payment. It’s a small act in a much bigger story: the remaking of money in one of the world’s most dynamic regions.

—

Editor’s note: e27 aims to foster thought leadership by publishing views from the community. Share your opinion by submitting an article, video, podcast, or infographic.

Enjoyed this read? Don’t miss out on the next insight. Join our WhatsApp channel for real-time drops.

Image courtesy: Canva

The post QR payments: Southeast Asia’s digital lifeline or just a stepping stone? appeared first on e27.

Tim Draper, the founder of Draper Associates and an early investor in Tesla, Facebook, and Skype, has led a US$3.2 million seed funding round of Singapore-based consumer crypto hardware wallet startup Ryder.

Solana founder Anatoly Yakovenko and Asymmetric’s Joe McCann, as well as Borderless Capital, Semantic, Smape, and VeryEarly, also joined.

Also Read: Blockchain boom: The Philippines’s rise in Southeast Asia’s crypto scene

Ryder was built by Filipino entrepreneur Louise Ivan Valencia Payawal (CEO),  Marvin Janssen (CTO), and Julien Nerée (CPO). Its consumer crypto hardware wallet Ryder One is designed to prioritise ease of use and security. The wallet promises users crypto security in 60 seconds or less. The product features TapSafe recovery, a proprietary tap-based experience that eliminates the “single point of failure” previously inherent in traditional seed phrases.

“What the crypto industry needs more than anything right now is solutions that don’t require in-depth technical knowledge while maintaining high security standards. This is exactly what I saw in Ryder’s hardware wallet with its minute-or-under setup and offline design that keeps users’ holdings safe,” Draper claimed.

Ryder will use the newly acquired funds to strategically deploy to ramp production, scale the marketing and engineering teams, and further develop the wallet. The capital is also earmarked to enable the next large-scale marketing push and raise brand awareness globally.

Co-founder and CTO Marvin Janssen shared, “With Ryder One, we set out to make crypto feel natural and human and as easy as tapping your phone. By simplifying the overall experience and rethinking recovery, we’re opening the door for anyone, anywhere to truly and confidently own and use crypto.”

According to Payawal, Ryder aims to make crypto ownership more accessible, especially for his fellow countrymen. He previously accumulated experience at tech firms across Europe and the US, including a key role at Stacks, a prominent innovative contract platform built on Bitcoin, where he helped evolve the network to over 100,000 community members across more than 30 countries.

Also Read: US$2.36 trillion: Asia Pacific becomes crypto’s growth engine

His entrepreneurial track record also includes being the 2015 champion of Startup Weekend ASEAN.

The annual Chainalysis Global Crypto Adoption Index for 2025 shows that Southeast Asia features prominently in the grassroots cryptocurrency activity. Within the top 20 countries for grassroots adoption, Vietnam ranks fourth globally, followed by Indonesia (7th), the Philippines (9th), and Thailand (17th). This strong showing is attributed to robust engagement from their populations across both centralised and decentralised crypto services.

As per the “Philippine Blockchain Report 2025″, the country is rapidly positioning itself as a significant player in the ASEAN blockchain landscape, propelled by a tech-savvy population, robust cryptocurrency adoption, and strong governmental support for emerging technologies.

The post Tim Draper leads US$3.2M bet on Singapore-based crypto wallet startup Ryder appeared first on e27.

Investing in the climate x health nexus presents a unique challenge: solutions often fall between traditional VC, infrastructure, and impact investing frameworks.

Conventional diligence methods are often insufficient because they fail to account for external factors like regulatory momentum, public sector readiness, and blended capital requirements.

Investors bet on algorithms and insurance to tame Asia’s climate-health crisis

To address this fragmentation, the ‘Unlocking Capital For Climate x Health: The Investment Landscape in Asia’ report introduces a fit-for-purpose climate x health investment toolkit, designed to balance analytical rigour with market flexibility.

The 5-step investment decision framework

The toolkit rests on a structured, five-step assessment process:

Step 1 & 2: Calculating the venture score (VS): This involves a rigorous, four-quadrant assessment framework, scored out of 5, which focuses on internal venture quality:

1. Solution (30 per cent weight): Assesses problem fit, traction, and scalability. Key cue: look for “land-and-expand” potential, starting with one acute problem.
2. Team (25 per cent weight): Focuses on execution capability and founder-market fit. Key cue: early-stage success is 80 per cent the team; bet on adaptability and clarity.
3. Ecosystem (15 per cent weight): Evaluates external enablers like policy alignment, institutional demand, and de-risking architecture.
4. Market Model (30 per cent weight): Determines the path to returns, capital efficiency, and exit potential. Key cue: look for non-linear liquidity paths such as B2G contracts or DFI buyouts.

Step 3: Setting the risk-adjusted baseline (MVS): The minimum viable score (MVS) establishes the required baseline score for a venture to be considered investment-ready. This score varies significantly by solution category to reflect inherent execution risk.

For example:

• Digital health infrastructure (low risk) requires a base MVS of 3.2.
• Parametric health insurance (moderate to high risk) requires a base MVS of 3.7-3.8.
• AI surveillance (high risk) requires a base MVS of 3.9-4 due to long development cycles and high reliance on government integration.

Step 4: Adjustment for macro risks: External market realities are applied using four coefficients to refine the scores:

Also Read: Asia’s climate x health startups struggle in the ‘missing middle’ funding void

1. Sector beta modifier (SBM): Adjusts the MVS upwards for sectors with high operational complexity and regulatory hurdles (e.g., deeptech).
2. Tailwind coefficient (TWC): Reflects market momentum based on policy environment, capital flows, and consumer demand. Strong tailwinds allow for a more generous evaluation.
3. Investor risk appetite coefficient (IRAC): Personalises the MVS based on the fund’s strategy (e.g., bold, balanced, or cautious), ensuring the threshold matches the investor’s risk tolerance.
4. Exit market health coefficient (EMHC): Applied as a multiplier to the final venture score to reflect liquidity and return outlook, such as M&A or IPO activity.

Step 5: Investment Decision: The final decision compares the adjusted venture score (VS × EMHC) against the risk-adjusted MVS (RA-MVS). This systematic approach ensures that capital is deployed where ambition and realism are aligned, moving beyond mere product quality to factor in ecosystem maturity and policy fit.

The post Unlocking climate x health capital: A data-driven blueprint for smarter impact investing appeared first on e27.

e27 has been nurturing a supportive ecosystem for entrepreneurs since its inception. Our Contributor Programme offers a platform for sharing unique insights. As part of our ‘Contributor Spotlight’ series, we shine a spotlight on an outstanding contributor and dive into the vastness of their knowledge and expertise.

In this episode, we feature Jatin Detwani, the Founder of Growwth Partners and RyzUp.ai, where he has helped over 500 startups and SMEs scale with innovative finance and data-led strategies. An INSEAD MBA and Chartered Accountant, he is recognised for his thought leadership at the intersection of finance, technology, and AI. Detwani also mentors at INSEAD and NYU, sharing his expertise to help founders build sustainable, tech-enabled businesses.

In the sections below, he reflects on his journey, the lessons he’s learned, and what keeps him going.

How I got here

The turning point came when I left a secure finance leadership role to build something of my own. Starting Growwth Partners shifted my focus from managing numbers to helping founders make sense of them to grow their business. Later, launching RyzUp.ai deepened that mission  combining finance, AI and technology to empower smarter decisions for finance teams to improve productivity by up to 50 per cent. 

If I had to explain my work to a kid

I’ve built a smart helper that makes numbers and reports work on their own. Imagine if your school notebook could instantly show you where all your notes are, highlight what is important, and remind you what to focus on. That is what RyzUp does for businesses. It shows them where their money is going, what is working, and what is not, without hours of spreadsheets. It is like having a tiny robot accountant who never sleeps.

Also Read: Singapore mandates AI literacy for public servants: A blueprint for the future of governance

Lessons learned along the way

I used to think success meant doing everything myself, learning every skill and handling every task. Now I realise it is about building a strong team and delegating. With the right people, tools, and systems, you can go ten times further than by just working harder.

What more people should notice

I think too many startups are chasing new ideas while not enough are fixing old inefficiencies. The real opportunity lies in making things faster, cleaner, or easier through AI, automation, new business or pricing models, or simply being more operationally efficient. There is a quiet revolution happening in areas like finance operations, marketing workflows, and compliance. These may not look glamorous, but they build lasting value.

One example is the billions of dollars worth of time finance teams globally spend on reconciling, checking, processing, and reporting financial data. With the right technology, all of this can be done much faster. It is a billion-dollar opportunity to build a global business. It may not sound sexy, but it is still a huge opportunity.

Why I write

Writing helps me think more clearly, and e27 felt like the right place to share those thoughts with other founders and businesses facing similar challenges. Most of my ideas begin as voice notes or questions from clients, and when something keeps coming up, I know it is worth unpacking in an article.

My advice for aspiring thought leaders

My advice to writers is to simplify the complex. Do not write to impress, write to be understood. If someone outside your industry can read your post and grasp it instantly, you have done your job. Keep it simple, stay consistent, and share from experience rather than theory. Readers connect with honesty more than perfection.

Also Read: Building trust in the age of AI: Lessons for Southeast Asia’s startups

What drives my curiosity

Outside of work, I make it a point to consciously build routines that keep me curious and balanced. Reading has been a big part of that lately; books like The Almanack of Naval Ravikant, Mental Models, and Deep Work are recent favourites. I also find energy in meditating, working out, playing tennis, and spending time with family.

Influences that shaped me

Books like The Almanack of Naval Ravikant and The Psychology of Money have definitely shaped how I think. I have also learned a great deal from conversations with founders and mentors who focus on building patiently rather than just quickly. Much of my writing voice comes from listening to how people talk about real problems before attempting to offer a solution.

Take a look at Detwani’s articles here for more insights and perspectives on his expertise.

—

Are you ready to join a vibrant community of entrepreneurs and industry experts? Do you have insights, experiences, and knowledge to share?

Join the e27 Contributor Programme and become a valuable voice in our ecosystem.

The post Jatin Detwani’s playbook: Simplifying finance for faster, smarter growth appeared first on e27.

There is a fundamental dissonance in today’s market narrative, one that pits the cautious choreography of global diplomacy against the raw, unfiltered mechanics of financial panic.

On the surface, officials like US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent project calm, insisting that Washington has no desire to escalate trade tensions with Beijing even as President Donald Trump prepares for a high-stakes meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping in South Korea.

Beneath this veneer of control, markets are reacting not to words but to the tangible consequences of prolonged uncertainty: a fifteen-day US government shutdown that has frozen critical economic data releases, including the weekly jobless claims report, and a palpable retreat from risk across asset classes. This backdrop sets the stage for a market caught between macro fragility and microstructural stress, where even a modest dip in equities or a shift in Treasury yields can trigger outsized reactions.

The mixed performance of US equities on Wednesday, Dow down 0.04 per cent, S&P 500 up 0.40 per cent, Nasdaq up 0.66 per cent, reflects this indecision. Investors are neither fully embracing risk nor fleeing to safety in a coordinated manner. Instead, they are parsing every signal with heightened sensitivity.

Treasury yields ticked higher, with the 10-year yield climbing one basis point to 4.03 per cent and the two-year yield jumping three basis points to 3.50 per cent, suggesting that despite the shutdown and trade anxieties, the bond market is not yet pricing in a sharp economic contraction.

Simultaneously, the US Dollar Index slipped 0.26 per cent to 98.79, indicating a modest loss of confidence in the greenback as a safe haven. In stark contrast, gold surged 1.3 per cent to US$4,193.39 per ounce, having breached the US$4,200 mark for the first time ever on Wednesday.

This milestone is not incidental. Gold’s ascent to these unprecedented levels aligns with data showing it reached US$4,179.48 on October 14, 2025, before climbing further. By October 16, it had hit US$4,215.64, underscoring a relentless flight to safety driven by inflation fears, geopolitical strain, and institutional distrust in fiat stability.

Also Read: AI still missing in action: Global firms lag in using tech for M&A and compliance

Meanwhile, Asian markets offered a flicker of optimism, led by Korea’s KOSPI Index, which jumped 2.7 per cent. This regional rebound may reflect anticipation of the Trump-Xi meeting or simply a technical bounce after recent weakness. Such gains remain fragile, tethered to developments in Washington and Beijing that are inherently unpredictable. The oil market tells a more pessimistic story.

Brent crude fell 0.8 per cent to US$61.89 per barrel, weighed down not only by US-China trade friction but also by the International Energy Agency’s projection of a supply surplus in 2026. When energy prices falter amid trade tensions, it often signals weakening global demand expectations, a red flag for growth-oriented assets.

Into this volatile mix steps a novel financial innovation: Calamos Investments’ Bitcoin Laddered Structured Protection ETFs. These products represent a significant evolution in the integration of digital assets into traditional finance. Designed to provide upside exposure to Bitcoin while offering structured downside protection, they aim to neutralise the extreme volatility that has historically deterred conservative investors.

The flagship offering, the Calamos Laddered Bitcoin Structured Alt Protection ETF (ticker: CBOL), seeks to match the positive price return of the CME CF Bitcoin Reference Rate while limiting losses through a laddered protection mechanism. This structure diversifies risk across multiple strike levels, making the ETF more compatible with model portfolios and risk-managed strategies. In theory, such instruments could transform Bitcoin from a speculative gamble into a legitimate component of diversified asset allocation, particularly for institutions bound by fiduciary constraints.

The current crypto market environment offers little support for optimism. Bitcoin’s price action is being overwhelmed by three converging bearish forces. First, leverage is unwinding at an alarming pace. Derivatives open interest has plunged 19.6 per cent over the past week, with a sharp 4.35 per cent drop in just 24 hours.

Perpetual funding rates have collapsed by 76 per cent this week, signalling a dramatic retreat from speculative long positions. This deleveraging echoes the catastrophic US$19 billion market wipeout witnessed earlier in October 2025, where low liquidity turned modest corrections into cascading liquidations.

Second, Bitcoin dominance has surged to 58.79 per cent, its highest level since June 2025, as investors flee altcoins in favour of perceived safety within the crypto ecosystem. Altcoin dominance has correspondingly collapsed to 28.34 per cent, and the Altcoin Season Index has plunged 59 per cent month-over-month to just 29, a clear signal that we are deep in “Bitcoin Season.” This capital rotation starves emerging projects of liquidity, stifling innovation and reinforcing Bitcoin’s role as a digital reserve asset.

Third, new token listings are increasingly triggering profit-taking rather than accumulation. The case of YieldBasis (YB) is emblematic: after listings on Binance and OKX, its price dropped 14.25 per cent as early backers sold tokens acquired during the presale at US$0.10. A similar dynamic played out with PancakeSwap, which fell 10.6 per cent following its CAKE.PAD event.

Also Read: The rate cut rally: Earnings, gold, and Bitcoin in the balance

These “sell the news” episodes are no longer isolated incidents but a recurring pattern that injects localised selling pressure into an already fragile market. The cumulative effect is a toxic feedback loop: macro uncertainty fuels risk aversion, which accelerates leverage unwinds and altcoin abandonment, while new token launches become catalysts for distribution rather than adoption.

In this context, the launch of Calamos’ structured Bitcoin ETFs arrives at a paradoxical moment. On one hand, the product is precisely what the market needs to broaden Bitcoin’s investor base and stabilise its price dynamics over the long term. On the other hand, its immediate impact may be muted by the prevailing fear and low liquidity.

Bitcoin’s seven-day RSI currently sits at 30.62, flirting with oversold territory. Historically, such levels have preceded short-term relief rallies, but without a macro catalyst such as a de-escalation in US-China tensions, resolution of the government shutdown, or a clear signal from the Federal Reserve, any bounce is likely to be shallow and short-lived.

Ultimately, the market is navigating a period of profound transition. Traditional safe havens, such as gold, are redefining their ceilings, while digital assets are being repackaged to fit within institutional risk frameworks. Until the macro fog lifts and derivatives markets stabilise, volatility will remain the dominant theme. For now, caution is not just prudent, it is the only rational response.

—

Editor’s note: e27 aims to foster thought leadership by publishing views from the community. Share your opinion by submitting an article, video, podcast, or infographic.

Enjoyed this read? Don’t miss out on the next insight. Join our WhatsApp channel for real-time drops.

Image generated using AI.

The post Between diplomacy and panic: Markets navigate a fractured narrative appeared first on e27.

AI security isn’t just about building guardrails to prevent a future iRobot or Skynet scenario. Many people have debated those possibilities, from Isaac Asimov to Arthur C. Clarke to today’s leading thinkers. That’s not the angle I want to dwell on here.

Instead, after reading this recent article from Think China I was struck by the sovereignty aspect of AI.

The piece warns that Southeast Asia risks being locked into ecosystems that could undermine the region’s independence. History shows that picking sides rarely leads to lasting sovereignty, and the concerns raised by regional leaders deserve close attention.

AI as a sovereignty issue

In the rush to deploy AI systems, governments are beginning to recognise the risks of concentration. If critical services, from healthcare to logistics to public administration, are built entirely on a few dominant platforms, national resilience becomes fragile. As with land, food, and water security, AI security may soon be a matter of sovereignty.

Some may call this scaremongering, since today’s AI providers are focused on growth and customer acquisition they wouldn’t possibly consider restricting services in a competitive environment. Yet the risk remains: if those providers ever switch off their systems, willingly or under external pressure, the impact could be devastating. Imagine public services grinding to a halt, or supply chains breaking down.

To understand whether such concerns are justified, it’s useful to look at parallels in the global system today. These examples aren’t predictions, but they are observations I have made that illustrate why dependence on concentrated power is risky.

Lessons from global systems

• The WTO and rule-based order

The World Trade Organisation only works when all players respect its rules. When the U.S. blocked judge reappointments to the WTO Appellate Body, the system was effectively paralysed. Some viewed this as a deliberate attempt to bypass rules that no longer suited the leading trading nation. The parallel for AI is clear: global frameworks can fail if dominant players choose not to participate.

• The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP)

The U.S. withdrew from the TPP after years of negotiation. The remaining nations signed the CPTPP, but without many of the U.S.-driven provisions. For smaller nations, it showed how quickly alliances can shift, and how reliance on one or two major players can leave others exposed. The same dynamic could emerge if AI platforms consolidate too much power.

Also Read: Enterprise AI adoption: Context, not cost, defines deployment

• Financial sanctions

Sanctions have become a common tool in global diplomacy. Supporters argue they uphold international law and human rights. Critics counter that they can be instruments of coercion, placing disproportionate pressure on ordinary citizens rather than political leaders. For nations dependent on financial systems controlled by a few blocs, sanctions reveal the limits of sovereignty. The lesson for AI is similar: dependence on external platforms can leave countries vulnerable to outside leverage.

• Frozen assets

The freezing and proposed repurposing of Russian state assets has sparked heated debate. Western governments frame it as lawful enforcement for accountability and reparations, while others see it as a troubling precedent. For sovereign nations, the question is: how secure are your assets if global systems can be reshaped during political disputes? In the AI context, the same question applies to data, algorithms, and cloud access.

• Media and social platforms

TikTok bans highlight how governments are weighing data security against open market access. While officially justified on national security grounds, they also reflect broader anxieties about who controls the digital discourse. Nations are left to weigh both the benefits of open platforms and the risks of relying too heavily on services outside their regulatory reach. The same dilemma will play out even more starkly with AI systems.

• The BRICS response

The expansion of BRICS is part of a wider push for multipolarity. While still evolving, it signals a desire among nations to balance the dominance of existing blocs. For AI, the implication is that countries will seek their own capacity rather than rely wholly on external providers.

Also Read: Why AI inclusion matters: Lessons from Mongolia’s Girls Code movement

Building resilient AI security

Taken together, these examples show why it’s reasonable to question how we build AI systems. Nations need to ask: how can we benefit from the efficiencies and services AI delivers while protecting sovereignty and resilience?

Legislation is important, but so is investment in domestic capabilities: chip production, data centres, research and development, and regulatory frameworks that ensure independence. Guardrails that govern AI reasoning and transparency matter, but without control over infrastructure and assets, those guardrails could be changed or removed by foreign entities.

In short, AI security is not only about preventing harmful outputs. It is about ensuring that the systems we increasingly depend on serve national interests and remain under sovereign control.

—

Editor’s note: e27 aims to foster thought leadership by publishing views from the community. Share your opinion by submitting an article, video, podcast, or infographic.

Enjoyed this read? Don’t miss out on the next insight. Join our WhatsApp channel for real-time drops.

Image courtesy: Canva Pro

The post Artificial Intelligence as a question of national security and independence appeared first on e27.