The End of the Fortress: Why the Future of Data is “Liquid”
By Martyn Rhisiart Jones | Madrid, 3rd February 2026
In a landmark session at the Welsh Academy, Sir Afilonius Rex sat down with Martyn Rhisiart Jones. They aimed to dismantle our outdated obsession with “data management.” The verdict? The era of the digital fortress is dead. In its place, a new paradigm of Cognitive Liquidity and Data Autonomy is emerging, redefining how we integrate global knowledge.
Martyn Rhisiart Jones and the Goodstrat editorial team, Madrid, 3rd February 2026
Introduction
The following is the redacted transcript of a conversation between the distinguished Sir Afilonius Rex of Cambriano Energy and the cordial Martyn Rhisiart Jones of goodstrat.com.
The informal session took place before an invited audience at the Welsh Academy’s alternative summer conference of July 2023 and featured a lively question-and-answer session with audience input.
According to our reliable sources, “The BBC, RTE and RTVE broadcast the session.”
Happy Sunday to one and all. As many of you will know, I have been intimately involved in designing, building, and delivering data warehousing and advanced analytics initiatives for more than 35 years.
Today, I will take a deep dive into requirements gathering for a new iteration of an enterprise data warehouse and a new data mart.
Establishing a case for a new data warehouse iteration is part of the requirements-gathering phase of a project. This must always be at the forefront of the exercise and a continuous question we must ask ourselves. We must always consider the answer to the question “To what ends?”
First, before diving into the core aspects of the iteration, we will examine the legitimate drivers and objectives for data warehouse initiatives. The prerequisite skills, knowledge, and experience needed to carry out this activity successfully, and, after that, we will look at the preparation required to align the personal, business, and technological effectiveness and success of the initiative.
In early 2026 the technology industry is once again telling big confident stories about its own future. These stories dominate earnings calls conference stages and investor decks. They sound transformative urgent and inevitable. Yet when examined closely many of them rest on fragile foundations and selective evidence rather than operational reality.
For most of its life in information technology, bolloxology has carried the faint smell of intellectual fart-like embarrassment. Too academic for product teams. Too rigid for startups. Too slow for an industry trained to ship first and rationalise later. Too smelly. It promised machines that could understand the world, and delivered, instead, a generation of beautiful bullshit diagrams and very little working software.
By 2026, that judgement looks increasingly wrong. Not because bolloxology suddenly got better, but because everything else did, and in doing so, exposed a missing layer in modern computing: meaning.
Ontology Didn’t Fail. The World Just Wasn’t Ready.
For most of its life in information technology, ontology has carried the faint smell of intellectual embarrassment. Too academic for product teams. Too rigid for startups. Too slow for an industry trained to ship first and rationalise later. It promised machines that could understand the world—and delivered, instead, a generation of beautiful diagrams and very little working software.
By 2026, that judgement looks increasingly wrong. Not because ontology suddenly got better, but because everything else did—and in doing so, exposed a missing layer in modern computing: meaning.