Lars Hinrichsen

🚗💥 𝐆𝐞𝐫𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐲 𝐣𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐦𝐚𝐝𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐭𝐞 𝐝𝐫𝐢𝐯𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚 𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲. On July 25, 2025, a new regulation quietly dropped into the Bundesgesetzblatt: The “𝐅𝐞𝐫𝐧𝐥𝐞𝐧𝐤-𝐕𝐞𝐫𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐧𝐮𝐧𝐠”. Sounds boring? It’s not. This is 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐥𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐥 𝐛𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐤𝐭𝐡𝐫𝐨𝐮𝐠𝐡 that companies like Ottopia and Vay have been waiting for. Remote-controlled cars - steered by human operators from control centers - are now officially allowed on German roads. No more special permits. No more legal gray zones. It’s go-time. But there’s a catch (a smart one): 🔒 Max speed capped at 80 km/h. 👨‍✈️ Remote drivers must be 21+, with 3+ years of driving experience and certified training. 📡 Vehicles need real-time data links and special approvals. It’s a 𝟓-𝐲𝐞𝐚𝐫 𝐩𝐢𝐥𝐨𝐭 𝐩𝐡𝐚𝐬𝐞, but make no mistake: This is a massive leap forward. Germany is the first EU country to give remote driving a proper legal framework. ⚡ 𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐝𝐨𝐞𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐦𝐞𝐚𝐧 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐎𝐭𝐭𝐨𝐩𝐢𝐚 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐕𝐚𝐲? Both have been running trials in Hamburg and Berlin, but now they can scale up. Picture this: 👉 You order a car-sharing EV. 👉 A remote driver steers it through city traffic to your location. 👉 You hop in and drive off yourself. 👉 When you’re done, another remote driver parks it or sends it to the next customer. No in-car driver required. No parking chaos. No more 30% of city traffic spent hunting for parking. Vay already launched such services in Belgium; now Germany is next in line. 🚀 𝐖𝐡𝐲 𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐜𝐚𝐫𝐞? • For cities: Fewer cars parked on streets, cleaner air, less congestion. • For users: Convenience without waiting for autonomous vehicles to catch up. • For the economy: New jobs in tele-driving, tech infrastructure, and fleet services. 🛑 This is 𝙣𝙤𝙩 autonomous driving. It’s human-driven, just remotely. And that changes the entire debate about safety, liability, and readiness. This regulation doesn’t just open doors for Ottopia and Vay. It signals a new era for mobility in Europe. Expect to see more tele-driven ride-shares, deliveries, and rentals in your city soon. The future isn’t self-driving yet. It’s remote-driving: it’s already here. #RemoteDriving #Teleoperation #MobilityRevolution #Germany #Vay #Ottopia #SmartMobility #UrbanTransport #FutureOfDriving #EUtech #Transportation 𝘗𝘪𝘤𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦 (𝘤) 𝘖𝘵𝘵𝘰𝘱𝘪𝘢

162

16 Kommentare

𝐑𝐞𝐬𝐩𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐞 𝐝𝐨𝐞𝐬𝐧’𝐭 𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐩 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐬𝐭-𝐜𝐚𝐬𝐞 𝐬𝐜𝐞𝐧𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐨; 𝐢𝐭 𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐩𝐬 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐲𝐨𝐮’𝐫𝐞 𝐮𝐩 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐫𝐮𝐧𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚𝐠𝐚𝐢𝐧. I’ve followed Felix Gaehtgens — since his early Gartner days — and always valued his sharp industry insights (even when I didn’t fully agree). So when he sat down with Martin Kuppinger, another respected expert, I knew I had to tune in. A few key #ITDR (Identity Threat Detection and Response) takeaways: • 𝐕𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐯𝐬. 𝐎𝐛𝐬𝐞𝐫𝐯𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲: Felix highlights an important gap. Solutions often offer either visibility or observability, but organizations need both. You need to reduce attack surface 𝘣𝘦𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘦 an incident and also detect and contain threats 𝘥𝘶𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨 an attack. • 𝐈𝐓𝐃𝐑 𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐂𝐈𝐒𝐎: There’s a positive trend I took away from #Gartner research: about 30% of companies now have IAM reporting to the CISO (up from <10% when Semperis started). I’ve long believed ITDR needs to sit with, or be championed by, security leadership. • 24𝐱7 𝐑𝐞𝐬𝐩𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐞 & 𝐀𝐮𝐭𝐨𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧: While ITDR enables real-time detection, IAM teams can’t always respond instantly, especially when facing a new generation of AI threats. SOC teams might have some identity expertise, but it’s rarely enough. The answer? More automation. The critical decisions during an incident should be handled by the system, not delayed by waiting for an expert. • 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐌𝐢𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠 ‘𝐑’ 𝐢𝐧 𝐈𝐓𝐃𝐑: Felix rightly notes many solutions lack true response capabilities. At Semperis, we’ve been advocating for ITDR that goes beyond detection, with a customizable response matrix: disabling compromised accounts, alerting SOCs, undoing malicious changes, and fully restoring a trustworthy identity system. Simply put: “Response” isn’t just what you do in the moment, it’s how you get back to business, safely and confidently. More thoughts on #NHI in my next post and link to the podcast in the first comment. 

115

3 Kommentare

Why Business Architecture Was Failing for a European Client, and How We Fixed It in 90 Days   The Problem
 At ABC Solutions (Frankfurt HQ), Robert’s BA team kept losing bids. Clients complained: "Your proposals feel generic - like you’re not listening." Meanwhile, Jane, the senior business architect, noticed projects stalling because new requests clashed with unflagged legacy tech debt. The EA lead was blunt: "We’re stuck at Level 2 maturity. BAs work in silos, intake is chaotic, and we can’t adapt." Bids lost. Delivery reactive. Leadership trust: slipping fast.   The 90-Day Catalyst Program That’s when Raj (Strategic Transformation Consultant) stepped in. No theory - just 3 practical, business-focused interventions: 1.    "Fit-for-Purpose BA" Workshops (Weeks 1-4):
 → Built a "Tailoring Toolkit": Lightweight frameworks (e.g., rapid capability maps).
 → Rule: "Diagnose the client’s REAL pain point in 2 hours - THEN pick tools."   2.    Intake Clinic with EA (Weeks 5-6):
 → BA + EA + Sales co-designed an "Intake Scorecard" asking:
 ‣ Strategic Capability Impact? (EA Alignment)
 ‣ Client’s Top 3 Pain Points? (Client-Centricity)
 ‣ Hidden Risks? (Jane’s mandate for tech debt/legacy clashes)   3.    Agility Sprints & Feedback (Weeks 7-12):
 → Mentors joined live client calls.
 → Bi-weekly Retros: "What did the client NEED vs. what we delivered?"
 → Tracked EA maturity weekly via tailored practice adoption.   What Changed: Execution, Not Methodology ·     Robert Won a Berlin retail bid: Used a 2-hour lightweight capability map for a Berlin retailer (skipped TOGAF), focusing ONLY on their inventory crisis. ·     Jane’s Catch: Flagged ancient ERP dependencies in an AI project via the Scorecard. Saved 3 months of rework. ·     EA Progress: Scorecard aligned projects to target capabilities. Maturity jumped to Level 3 (Defined).   90 Days Later: ·     BAs discussed "client context" – not "methodologies." ·     Intake meetings: 30 mins (not 3 hours). ·     Tech debt surfaced early, not hidden. ·     EA dashboard turned Green - NOT perfect, but confidently progressing.   "We’re not philosophers," said Robert. "We fix problems. Now we ask how before what."
 "We lead with relevance. We don’t just build architecture, we build trust." - Jane Transform Partner – Your Strategic Champion for Digital Transformation Image Source: SAP Blog

79

8 Kommentare