Category Archives: IT

Setting of the day

On a good day
The Khaleej Times Jost informed me on how a good day comes to pass. Here (at https://www.khaleejtimes.com/uae/meet-the-uae-police-officer-who-uncovered-183-money-laundering-cases-in-15-years) we are introduced to Major Saad Ahmed Al Marzooqi. 

The headline ‘Meet the UAE police officer who uncovered 183 money laundering cases in 15 years’. We are also given “He was recently appointed as the first Emirati member of the Financial Action Task Force’s (FATF) International Cooperation Review Team” and we can be mesmerised, or brag about his abilities, but the numbers imply that he slightly uncovered more than one case a month. There are plenty of police forces all over the world where half of these numbers would imply a stellar career. As we gawk over “exposed 183 money laundering cases that are related to drugs and financial embezzlement. He had also created a database of incidents, which contributed to an increase in convictions from a monthly average of 3 to 14” we need to realise that the increase of 3 to 14 implies that this one person achieved more than any average police station in Europe. 

This is the kind of man the world needs and that will be explained in the next article, because the universe relies on balance and the imbalance we are about to see takes the cake and changes an optional day to night.

On a bad day
Yes like any hero that needs a antagonist to make things interesting, we have Microsoft in two mentions. Now this isn’t directly involving anyone at Microsoft, but the follies are a setting that makes things a lot worse.

First we get Wired (at https://www.wired.com/story/microsoft-copilot-phishing-data-extraction/) who gives us ‘Microsoft’s AI Can Be Turned Into an Automated Phishing Machine’ we get to see “Attacks on Microsoft’s Copilot AI allow for answers to be manipulated, data extracted, and security protections bypassed, new research shows” which is not good, but anything positive can me mauled into a criminal jester for organised crime. The additional “Microsoft raced to put generative AI at the heart of its systems. Ask a question about an upcoming meeting and the company’s Copilot AI system can pull answers from your emails, Teams chats, and files—a potential productivity boon. But these exact processes can also be abused by hackers.

Today at the Black Hat security conference in Las Vegas, researcher Michael Bargury is demonstrating five proof-of-concept ways that Copilot, which runs on its Microsoft 365 apps, such as Word, can be manipulated by malicious attackers, including using it to provide false references to files, exfiltrate some private data, and dodge Microsoft’s security protections.” Now, I haven’t seen this, but Wired has a solid enough level of credibility to not ignore this. And that isn’t all. Bargury gives the world “the ability to turn the AI into an automatic spear-phishing machine. Dubbed LOLCopilot, the red-teaming code Bargury created can—crucially, once a hacker has access to someone’s work email” as I speculatively see it a mediocrity solution to turn the Internet of Things into a machine serving organised crime, optionally the NSA too, well done Microsoft. As I see it, the workload of Major Al Marzooqi would increase fivefold when this hits the open world, actually it already has if I understood the words from Michael Bargury correctly. In this, we optionally an even bigger problem, or at least a lot of corporations will.

You see there is a second message, in this case from Cyber Security News (at https://cybersecuritynews.com/microsoft-entra-id-vulnerability/). They give us ‘Microsoft Entra ID (Azure AD) Vulnerability Let Attackers Gain Global Admin Access’ with the subtext “Security researchers have uncovered vulnerabilities in Microsoft’s Entra ID (formerly Azure Active Directory) dubbed “UnOAuthorized” which could allow unauthorised actions beyond expected controls” Now take these two parts together and the phishing expedition could hit every R&D system on the planet using Azure. I am certain that Microsoft will have some patch coming soon, but in the meantime the bulk of R&D (under Azure) will be vulnerable and approachable by many hacker and especially organised crime, because selling secrets to competitors tends to be a lucrative setting and most corporations aren’t that finicky in acquiring something that raises (and assures) the bonuses of the members of their boardroom. OK, this is speculative on my side, but wonder what some will do to get the upper hand in business, especially if there is a bonus raise involved. 

I wish I had a solution, but my personal feeling is that Microsoft has too many holes, loops and a whole rage of other issues and switching to either AWS, IBM cloud or Google Cloud tends to be an essential first step coming to my mind. Now, if there are sceptics who think that I am anti-Microsoft here, they are probably right. Therefor the Links to the two articles were added letting you look at the stories yourself. In the meantime I remember a story in April and it should be my ‘duty’ to inform SAMI that ‘BAE Systems and Microsoft join forces to equip defence programmes with innovative cloud technology’ had a nice article and with the two articles mentioned, SAMI could lay its hands on a truckload of BAE IP. Not sure how far they will get, but free IP is the way to go I say. So when you realise that a large corporation like British Aerospace with all the civilian and military hardware can be accessed, what chances do you think that Novo Nordisk (Denmark), LVMH (France), ASML (Netherlands), SAP (Germany), Hermez (France), L’Oreal (France) have? I do not know if any uses Azure, but it is a good moment for them to select one of the other companies. They could after the event sue Microsoft for damages, but Delta Airlines is already suing CrowdStrike and I am not sure how that will go. In the end it is my personal opinion that this could potentially bite Microsoft hard and it is one of the reasons I do not let them near my IP.

As I personally see it, the companies racing the be the first to launch their (fake) AI will now have a much larger impact. There were already fake data issues, but now the phishing options that are mentioned and when that gets linked to what Cyber Security News calls “UnOAuthorized” the entire IT game changes dramatically and I have no idea how that will play out. 

As my Sunday is almost over and Vancouver only just started there’s a chance we postulate that the next 72 hours will be an interesting one. Have a lovely day (when you are not on Azure).

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Military, Science

I missed this setting

That is the premise. So, why didn’t I think of this? We all have this and on the defence of Microsoft, they had the ‘slogan’ at the launch of Windows 95 ‘Without even thinking’ the premise was brilliant as was the innovation from Windows 3.11 to Windows 95, no doubt about it. And without even thinking applies to so many applications and conditions, it is a brilliant created stage (credit where credit is due). So here I was reading the BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c9d1y0z4z9no) and that gave me the nudge to wake up. You see I wrote about Ruja Ignatova, now mentioned in ‘Fugitive ‘Cryptoqueen’ hit by asset freeze’ with the lines “Ruja Ignatova, known as the Missing Cryptoqueen, is now subject to a global freezing order which prevents her assets from being sold or moved.” I had written about it some time ago and now we see “The freezing order, made public on Wednesday at London’s High Court, is part of a group action brought by more than 400 OneCoin investors”, I looked at this ‘crypto queen’ somewhere in May of June last year, it could have been two years ago. 

What made me consider this is that it has taken 6 years to do this. The questions come to mind is why this took 6 years. Come to think of this, why didn’t my sneaky way of thinking consider this. And in that light it she had moved all ‘her’ cash in some trust setting in Switzerland or Saudi Arabia it might not amount to anything. Those two countries have massive protections in place and anyone of them transgressing on their banking laws are in deep trouble. It is like rowing towards the end of the Niagara falls without an anchor in place.

So why did this global freezing order take 6 years? There might be a good reason, but the article doesn’t hand out the reason. Then we also get “The freezing order does not just target Ms Ignatova but seven other people and four companies – all alleged to have been connected with OneCoin in some form” which gives me another setting. Is ‘alleged’ enough to put a freezing order in place? Don’t get me wrong it sounds nice, but when was alleged enough to prosecute people and companies? Doesn’t that require proof? 

Then we get to “Sebastian Greenwood, who is in a US prison serving a 20-year sentence for his role in the fraud. Also subject to the freeze are British businessmen Christopher Hamilton and Robert MacDonald, who appeared in court in London” which get us the added “The pair are accused by US authorities of laundering OneCoin proceeds, however attempts to extradite them to the US to face trial have failed”, now I do not known enough of either Christopher Hamilton and Robert McDonald, but why did the extradition fail? There might be a procedural or legal reason, but the BBC does not give us this. It might not hit the core of this story, which is Ruja Ignatova, yet in light of the time settings it becomes a liked interest, so why is it missing? 

There are a few speculative sights to this. The first is that she was murdered (read: executed) and whomever was left with the bundles of cash is pretty much singing ‘do wa Diddy Diddy’ on a sunny beach. The second one that I considered was that she has a new identity, living it up in the UAE whilst her cash is in an optional Saudi bank, gaining 5%-10% interest over several billions, and as such you can live like a queen in Dubai or Abu Dhabi living off $100,000,000 plus each year. She might have been seeding the non captured funds to assure her of non-capture and non-freeze cash. This is all speculation but the stage that we see with 6 years vanishing makes these two the most likely scenario’s. And there are more places she could go when the cash is securely non-freezable. 

This gets me back to the number one question. Why did the global freeze order take 6 years? There might be a really good (or correct) reason, but the BBC article does not give us that.

Something to consider especially When we consider the Khaleej Times exposed last June that ‘UAE scams exposed: How thousands of residents ‘lost it all’ in bogus investment schemes’ and this is one nation. They report “over 40,000 UAE residents have collectively lost hundreds of millions of dollars to fraudulent investment schemes” that is a serious amount of money and this is one nation. Don’t you think there is now a pressing need to up the effort to upgrade banking laws to take this factor out (or at least diminish it massively). I understand that a fool and his money are soon parted and that it is everyones responsibility to take steps to make it harder for these criminals. I think that the one clear lesson is that there are no free gifts (EVER). The second part is that nothing comes for free. Now we get that not all ‘currencies’ are the same. Look at Facebook. Their currency is data and a lot of people do not care about data, especially as they do not know what it could cost them. One question I have always in mind when someone offers me a deal to good to be true is “if it is too good to be true, it must be a false setting”, this has (up to now) prevented me a few times to lose my cash. The second thing is that if someone (an unknown person) comes to me with such an offer. My initial question becomes ‘Why doesn’t he (or she) go to friends first?’ The situation might have come up, or they might not have any friends. But when you deliver on ‘great’ deals you suddenly have more friends than anyone ever bargained for. 

This is a paranoia setting, but it is not paranoia when everyone is after your bank account. Just a thought to consider.

So whether your funds are in a fridge or not. Make space by removing the venison and make yourself an awesome Bambi burger, with forrest unions and mushrooms. Bon appetite and have a lovely weekend when you get there. I get there in 2 hours. Now I need to find some venison, I suddenly feel peckish.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

How to measure success?

That is the question is was facing today. It wasn’t about my success (or lack thereof). It was about the olympics. One member (a fellow Australian) was happy because we had two additional gold members over the United Kingdom. But there was something wrong with that train of thought. It was too American. Don’t get me wrong, as I see it it is great to have more golden medals, but in my old fashioned way of life (and thinking) it is weird that the runners up get to live. I must be going soft in my old age.

You see with Australia grasping a 14-12-9 achievement and the United Kingdom holding onto 12-15-19 at present this list could go into any direction. However, this got me thinking. How do you measure success? Don’t get me wrong the gold number are nice, yet it is not a true list of achievement, is it? I have been pondering this and my mind took me to the old 1,2,3 squared allocation. So Bronze counts as 1, Silver as 4 and gold as 9. Now we get to 183 for Australia and 187 for the United Kingdom. UK won by a nose-hair as jockeys tend to say. So is this actually fair? How can medals be universally set? I don’t think that a boxer will accept equal points to an equestrian, in support, the horse will not go along with that either. Still there is a need to give some level of equality especially as the best of the best of the best in any of these disciplines are competing, yet the simple set to look at the golden medals seems wrong (possibly Canadian Summer McIntosh might agree but she just got 3 golden and one silver medal), at 17 she got (as far as I know) a tied second place with a few others all with three golden medals in the French Olympics. 

However I still ponder, is my formula the right one? It seems to be, but it might be my own shortsightedness to think so. 

Still, the question remains, how do you measure success, and not just in sports. In the 90’s I was subject KRA’s (Key Result Areas) and I accepted them as I had no knowledge on how to measure success. Even in customer care and Technical Support these numbers (when applied to the field I was in) made perfect sense. At some point you need to consider what to measure and how to measure it. Medals are a finite point of achievement, customer care is a little bit more fluidic. So how to go about it? The Olympic medallist might have kicked this off, but my brain takes into all directions. So with one movie script under my belt (for assessment with Dubai Media) am I more successful in scripting then all my friends (both of them)? They are not in that field, so how to generalise some metrics? You see we can grab Z-scores but as far as I can see that is a near obsolete approach to matters (perhaps what the people call AI use this) and now we get to the next bit and why I used Summer McIntosh as an example. These were her first Olympics, so how could there be a Z-score of her and how would it be reliable (or relatable)? Previous competitions? These were her first olympics and even in global events the pressures are different. 

And the field becomes even more complex, you see whatever they call these systems based on LLM’s and Deeper Machine Learning, it is either set by a programmer, or set by data and there the problem becomes a lot larger as both are used. Without proper verification and a number of constraints the equation becomes a GIGO rule (Garbage In Garbage Out).

I wonder how much some players consider success. Most will measure success by their ability to bring home the bonus funds. To some extent I accept that, but when you consider how they went about getting that success becomes a larger issue. In this I take the conceptual setting of Awareness versus Engagement in market research. Awareness could be shown how many impressions (or clicks) something gets, whilst engagement requires interaction with the solution. As I have always stated Engagement wins every time, but the large companies often herald views per thousand (or clicks as a secondary). So who get the price turkey at the end? Large Language Models with (Deeper) Machine Learning what some call a version of AI has issues and the world is waking up to Nvidia (not meant in a bad way). You see there is currently no AI, not yet anyway. What there is (the LLM and DML reference) is awesome and it can do great stuff, but it has issues like the legal sector recently saw. There is a lack of verification and that will be an issue in plenty of fields. 

Have a successful day.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Media, Science

When does it become a lie?

That is the question. It is not as simple as it sounds and I understand that. But here we are, the BBC gives us an article. I almost passed it, but then I saw something that didn’t read right, so I dug a little deeper. Their disadvantage was that I had just read up on several cases for material, so I reopened it and it is time to give you the fruits of my labour.

The BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy9eegg0rdvo) gives us ‘What could Google monopoly ruling mean for you?’. Well that is an open question but let me run you through the elements. 

The US said Google was currently paying firms like Apple huge amounts of money each year to be pre-installed as the default search engine on their devices or platforms”. OK, so this is a business proposition. Apple decided that the benefits of Google in their systems would help them in numerous ways and Google was willing to pay this. It was a price for services.

It comes with the repetitive quote “Apple’s Safari browser for example uses Google by default” what the BBC is not giving us is the offset that Apple would have to endure and they were getting $20,000,000,000 as a bandaid, if I got that kind of money I would say “Google slap me silly”. Now we get the parts that matter, it start with “Something that’s easier to imagine is some kind of choice screen, where people opening a browser for the first time are asked whether they’d like to use Google or an alternative like Microsoft’s Bing” This is hilarious. I have had first experience with Bing. Bing influencers were HIJACKING my search and pushing it through Bing. It took me days to undo that damage. Choosing between a bully and Google is not much of a choice. To put it mildly “Google has a 91% marketshare, Bing has 3.86%, where do you get the most bang for YOUR buck?” In this simple setting Google comes out on top EVERY time. And a secondary setting is that Bing has been around for 15 years. It isn’t just that Google is better, Bing has yet to show any level of pure innovation in searches. Microsoft lacks data, innovation and proper etiquette on search engines. 

Now we get to the issue I had, which starts with “Back in 1999, Microsoft found itself in a very similar situation to where Google is now.” You see, Netscape faced new competition from OmniWeb and Microsoft’s Internet Explorer 1.0, it continued to dominate the market in 1995 and beyond. In 1997 Netscape had 72% marketshare. That is, until Microsoft switch off the proverbial oxygen to Netscape and whilst the IE was free for all (it was installed with Windows 95), thing went south in several ways for Netscape and the one ‘ruler’ in those days became Microsoft with its Internet Explorer. Google released its browser in 2008. As such (as I see it) Microsoft wasted 10 years and within 2 years nearly everyone was using Google Chrome. They overwhelmed everyone with innovations. They released Chrome v9 in 2011 and Chrome v17 in 2012. What did Microsoft do? Nada, nothing, zip, zilch. In 2012, responding to Chrome’s popularity, Apple discontinued Safari for Windows, making it exclusively available on OS X (source: ubuntu life) . So here is the first setting. Apple made an educated choice. Create your own and reinvent the wheel or select the wheel maker of choice. Even at this point we need to recognise that Microsoft’s star was faltering and falling. That was then. Now there is a different setting. Then it was which American company gets the cake. Now it is different, China is now a much larger participant. They caught up with the US and even now the UAE and Saudi Arabia are massively catching up with America. They decide to waste the time of Google on trivial matters whilst calling it “monopolising” stating that the others should be given a ‘fair’ share. In this day and age it is handing the handling of the commerce horse to China and all the good it will do the American commerce. Small hint, it will not. 

There really more issues with Microsoft and particular with Edge and particularly Daniel Aleksandersen, who called this “clearly a user-hostile move that sees Windows compromise its own product usability in order to make it more difficult to use competing products.” There are issues with edge as Douglas J. Leith, a computer science professor from Trinity College, Dublin, Microsoft Edge is among the least private browsers. He explained, “from a privacy perspective Microsoft Edge is much more worrisome than the other browsers studied. These two quotes are on different sides of edge. But in aggregating these quotes it is my distinct believe that if Google Search is broken up, the American Department of Justice will receive roses from nearly every big organised crime syndicate. It is a mere believe I have, but after having suffered the edge bullies hijacking my browser and inserting edge ad a search engine against my wishes is the beginning of much more. The Verge accused edge of “spyware tactics”, a setting we have never seen Google use (speculation by me). In this day and age of commerce, the economy and data security you want to play with Google? I think that is a really bad idea.

Enjoy today, it is now midweek, the run to the weekend starts…….now.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Media, Science

The loser iteration

Two days ago I wrote (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2024/08/04/the-judge-shouldnt/) with the headline ‘The judge shouldn’t’, it was part speculative and part what I see (again through my eyes it could be regarded as speculative). Today a mere 4 hours ago we get through the BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0k44x6mge3o) ‘Google’s online search monopoly is illegal, US judge rules’. We are also given “Google was sued by the US Department of Justice in 2020 over its control of about 90% of the online search market.”, so lets take a look back. It started in 1995 and the ‘idea’ was completed in 1997. To turn about the setting in those days Microsoft was merely badgering their lack of knowledge and lam Netscape to get a browser dominance. Two youthful young sprouts namely Larry Page and Sergei Brin were ahead of the pack by a lot. They looked to a solution to search for text in publicly accessible documents offered by web servers, as opposed to other data. Microsoft was still trying to type words like HTTP and the clever people at Microsoft were able to type FTP. In the age of information the Google founders figured a few things out like ‘What are people trying to find’ this was against the grain for Microsoft who thought that corporations were the key and they went to ‘What are corporations willing to pay for’. The subtle difference is that Microsoft was working towards a slice of the $18,843,980,000,000 revenue that the fortune 500 represent. Google on the other hand decided to cater to its 31,000,000 employees. As such one could (oversimplified) cater to the simple fact that it would take Microsoft 9 million years to get as much data as Google. I do emphasis the oversimplification of this. I was not on the mindset of Google at first. You see I was a dedicated Yahoo user. It took 3 years until I saw that Google offered more and better result. As such in 3 years they gained a dominance. They surpassed Yahoo, Excite, Alta Vista and several other players. We can argue that it helped that Microsoft demolished Netscape. And in the decade that followed Google grew in strength and ability to cater to actual users not the CFO’s of 500 corporations. 

So when we see “It is one of several lawsuits that have been filed against the big tech companies as US antitrust authorities attempt to strengthen competition in the industry.” I believe that there is another ploy in play. The mediocrity losers (like Microsoft) want a slice of the cake they have no business being in. It isn’t just the ‘competition’ it is a reversal of technology that is in play. And in that setting the US is damaging the little benefit they have and leaving it all to China and true Chinese innovators like Huawei and Tencent. I reckon that by 2026 the mobile market will be overrun with Huawei in almost every non-americano place. They threw away the benefits when they forced Huawei to release HarmonyOS 5 years ago. 

Now we see that it is available in 77 languages and the turnover (as is) is getting stronger. Even now as EU nations are discarding the fear mongering of anti-China sentiment by American administration, and the strongest response that the EU nations give is ‘Show us evidence’, America has no answer to that other than debatable setting of ‘could’ and ‘expected’ whilst the evidence just isn’t there. And as we see an optional release this year of HarmonyOS NEXT, Android’s bough get broken on their sibling turning adult. So good luck with that.

Now we see a Judge giving us that there is a monopoly setting. I am not debating that (a lack of evidence I have), but the setting that we get from ““Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly,” Judge Mehta wrote in his 277-page opinion” as I see it, the maintenance of a unique field dominance is begotten by the lack of innovation by people like Microsoft who is spreading itself way too thin.  As evidence I ‘present’ Xbox, Solarwinds, CrowdStrike and the list goes on. You see ‘breaking up’ is merely a first step. They will then open the door and the abusive bully (Microsoft) will gleefully shout “Can I play here too?” With a debilitating browser called ‘Edge’. How is that progress? Don’t get me wrong if there is a decent player that can keep up with Google, even Google will applaud that. My worry is that the ideological setting of letting everyone in the sandbox play is all fine, but there is a reason that mothers do not allow toddlers in a sandbox until they reach a certain age. And bar them from playing when they get too old. The worry that I have is that this setting stops Google from evolving beyond the cookie (which is fine by the exploitative advertisers). The setting of other people’s greed who cannot evolve into newer territories. This could now allow Huawei and Tencent to gain even more innovative sides to push into markets where American stage are auto rejected. Tencent is on the cliffhanger to introduce their solution to 150,000,000 homes and they can get there by 2027. 

This will leave Microsoft in a stage where it has no options and no future. As these Fortune 500 will find ways to rise to new frontiers we will see them seeking IBM and Amazon solutions catering a larger downfall of Microsoft. In that stage there is certain a decent amount of space for Google. As they will hand a corporate solution to their ‘office’ suite Microsoft will lose more grounds. The only thing that keeps them up for some time is Excel. But the world is changing what was once a spreadsheet world now becomes an AWS environment and Google can cater there too. I do think that Googles forced push to breaking up is not a great solution, but Google has overcome harder challenges. 

This and my previous article ‘The judge shouldn’t’ gives us the premise that the Antitrust laws are possibly a little obsolete. Microsoft sees this as their ticket in and it is willing to cater to this as it hurts Apple and Google. Two parts the US desperately needs to work at optimum to stop themselves of being overrun by Chinese innovators. You see 7 years ago ByteDance introduced TikTok (not a Peter Pan crocodile). In 7 years it became a near equal of YouTube that was in play 12 years longer. Now I get that YouTube paved the was, but that is the usual tracks for New innovators, they go over the backs from those who went before. Now consider that and the fact that HarmonyOS is about to go toe to toe with Android in only 4 years. That is what I wrong. Not that we think about antitrust. I partially agree with antitrust sentiments. But we need to see that the greed driven use it to keep up, or not to lose their revenue. But that was never the concern of Google (or Apple for that matter). As I see it in the last decade the face of technology was set by Amazon (AWS), Apple (MacWares), Google (Android, G-wares) and IBM (large solutions and Quantum) they create the innovations, players like Microsoft should go under and seek revenue from the Fortune 500. They were the bees knees weren’t they? 

But as I see it, US District Judge Amit Mehta is allowed by law to hand it all over to Chinese innovators. When the EU, Commonwealth nations, Africa and Asia allow these innovator into their governments America becomes a party of one (with 330 million consumers). So consider that the other regions has over 7,500 million people. As I see it it is a hard lesson that America learns twice. Wasn’t the Google premise of 1997 not enough?

Enjoy your day and ponder what benefit was to be had from optionally breaking up Google and who were the actual beneficiaries (not the consumers clearly).

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Politics, Science

How right I was

I knew I was right. It wasn’t merely my own conviction of self, it was the exposure of two sets of ‘evidence’ as given by some media. The first was my view of gaming, mobile gaming to be presenting the ‘evidence’ Even as it was an ‘advertising’ of the events. It still shows that I was right. You see gaming always pushing the view forward and they forgot what they left behind. I tried to warn Amazon of this, but did they listen? I fear not. Yet that setting now gives Tencent an approachable 5 billion annually as well as give their Tencent Cloud Streaming Services (CSS) an option to not just break into cloud streaming, they also could be handing their TGP (Tencent Gaming Platform) Box a play for the title role in gaming platforms within a year. As it goes forward the TGP will not be an unknown, it will grace third position nearly instantly with only Sony and Nintendo to pass afterwards. I reckon that within 2-3 years it will surpass Sony and Nintendo after that. The benefit for Tencent will not be replacing these two, it will mean that they will be placed next to either or in some cases both. That was the setting that Amazon faced. Yet whilst they heralded ‘Amazon Luna adds more than 40 new games, all from GOG’ last month, they failed to see the larger picture and now Tencent and their TGP are optionally set in a world where they surpass the streaming game providers nearly instantly. Amazon only had to look at the historic market and considered what was possible. Yet their executives didn’t look (apparently) further than the length of their nose and non of them had the nose of Cyrano de Bergerac (or C.D. Bales for that matter). The resulting setting is that Tencent (or as the US fears, China) now gets a new area with gaming Europe and the Middle East as new customers. Another field that the US (with assistance of a short sighted Microsoft) where they hand the keys to a Chinese company. And they did this to themselves. I opened the door by informing Amazon in November 2022 that this field was approachable and ready. So what do we see three days ago in the Financial Review? They title ‘Amazon shares drop as AI costs spook market’ is merely one part, the underlying “investors have signalled growing impatience with tech companies’ efforts to profit from their massive investments in AI”, as well as “Andy Jassy has been cutting costs and focusing on profitability in Amazon’s main online retail business while spending heavily on AI services, which the company has said represent a “multibillion-dollar revenue run rate business”” and all along (for at least 21 months of options towards an estimated $5,000,000,000 annual revenue ignored. How that for captaincy of a ‘Big Tech’ company? And as I saw the gaming precedency go in all directions except for the right one I see that my vision was correct all along.

In a place here they got to drill into new customer places they handed it all to the Chinese opponents. Yay to shortsightedness. 

The second part is a little harder to spot if you do not look in the right direction. That being said, there are a few debatable sights to that. In the first it is my interpretation of these layered facts and if proven right it is less of an issue. Yet I believe that Facebook set the larger premise by not properly investigating the ‘evidence’ they claimed. Their short sighted overseeing hat is going on (relying on ‘their’ AI) and not properly looking at the ‘rules’ or policies they have implemented now gives rise to an altering consumer base that could skip town (their platform), optionally handing a decent chunk of their customer base to Tencent as well. It will not drown them. But answer me this, if you have to report that 10% is skipping your platform. How many shareholders will be happy with the underlying speculated statistics that we get is “The company estimates that 4-5% of those accounts are fake, meaning there may be as many as 150 million fake accounts.” these are the numbers from Facebook. Yet the ‘reality’ from some is that it is 10%-15%. Now consider that these numbers remain and the percentage over the 100% base becomes a number over their ‘new’ 90% base. As such the new base is that it becomes 111% and I believe that 120% is more realistic. Now consider that every investor paying X mounts of dollars now hands their money to 8.3% non valid accounts. It sets the new premise to nearly one out of 10 advertisements misses the target completely. How long until they have to drop prices or actually resolve that issue whilst millions are going somewhere else. That was the second premise that Amazon missed and now we have a massive larger issue. Tencent seemingly has a larger target. In the first to gain their new consumer base all over the world and Facebook (and others) start losing market share. If you think this is nothing ask Microsoft (edge) how they faired against Chrome and whilst they will deny any losses consider that Edge only has a 5% market share against Chrome 65% and Safari 18%. Take that into the settings. Considering that Tencent has a larger reason to promote Harmony OS. A stage that would make China happy as a clam. It will not have a short term impact in view, but in this all Android users in several nations will now have an option to switch Android devices. And the Apple case that is before these courts (se yesterdays article) merely strengthens the premise. I reckon that the Eastern Europe, African, Asian and Middle Eastern countries have a first impact and in that setting  America is the first to lose global market share. This last bit I gave you is highly speculative, but as my settings are confirmed I feel that this is a direction is a valid one. And it is all founded on two players (Amazon and Facebook) let is happen on their watch. Don’t believe me, feel free to read the articles I put on my blog from November 30th 2022 onwards (and several before that). The captains of industry and their governmental tools believed their own spin (read: marketing BS) and took what they spun as ‘truth’. All whilst there were visible parties out there. 

Granted, I am talking in my own street and that is also debatable, but you could read up and conclude for yourself. As such two elements handing billions of revenue that certain players left lying on the floor and I have no non-existent AI, merely my own noggin and it is working fine, thank you very much.

Enjoy this Monday.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Gaming, IT, Science

The judge shouldn’t

I have two things on my mind. The first is the Olympics. I do not follow it every second, but I was ‘witness’ to two events. The first is a Canadian swimmer, I refer to her as Funny Flounder. I have a thing for alliteration. It is Summer McIntosh. This 17 year young swimmer, on her first Olympic challenge got 3 golden medals and one silver one, she also broke a few of her own world records. I reckon that over the next 6 Olympics she will win a lot more. It is amazing that any person at that age can have so much drive and focus. I know I have focus, but I could never achieve that result in any discipline, not even when I was in the height of my fencing days. Then there was the Dutch Femke Bol. I saw her in the last half of the leg she did, going from 4th to 1st and win the golden medal. I have never seen such an achievement and I am happy I did now. Yet, this was not what was occupying my mind. 

On my mind was the article (at https://www.khaleejtimes.com/business/tech/apple-asks-us-judge-to-toss-antitrust-lawsuit) where we see ‘Apple asks US judge to toss antitrust lawsuit’ we are given that it is one of five blockbuster monopoly cases pending against Big Tech companies. It was a story originally by Reuters. We are given “a lawsuit by federal and state antitrust regulators accusing it of illegally monopolising the smartphone market, saying the case would have a judge redesign its popular iPhone”. Fist off, I am not an expert on anti trust lawsuits and it will probably show in a moment.

I stand by Apple in this case. You see these people are in a wrong state of mind (and then some). I do not have an iPhone, I am an Android person and I will remain an Android person. I have nothing against Apple, I have had an iPad since the very first generation in 2010, it my present from me to me to use in University. It never let me down and in 2020 I replaced it with the iPad Air. 

The first never let my down until it was replaced and I am happy with this one too. So I do like the iOS system. My issue was that the world was eager to play down the iPhone for too much and in an age of wannabe’s thinking of their ego we saw the iPhone take the market by storm. It pretty much destroyed Nokia, Motorola and Microsoft (yes they had a mobile once). It headed ahead of Samsung (a brand I hate) and made short work of Google Pixel and Huawei with their assortment of mobiles. Actually the US government reduced the market share of Huawei. So to these antitrust regulators I state ‘Screw you’ (with a clear lack of anti trust laws). You see whilst the others were propagating their own ego’s and hide behind marketing presentations that were there to ‘appease’ the share holders, Apple did something else, they approached the customers, they listened and approach clients with presentations and newish innovation. So whilst they did that and released the ear buds and the smartwatches, the people looked and listened and joined the iPhone crowd. And there is more, The Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 has ben around for a while, so where were they when Netscape was murdered by Microsoft? We have United States of America v. Microsoft Corporation, 253 F. 34 as well as the overturning in 2001, after 11 years in court. There is a difference. Apple created iOS in a presumed (by me) towards the IoT (Internet of Things) and Apple has always heralded interconnectivity on their systems. I have two really bad issues with Apple, but not with my iPod and iPad, they always functioned perfectly. 

This matters, because the US regulators are apparently fond of shooting themselves in the foot. 

And that is what will happen if a judge redesigns its popular iPhone. And the setting (as I see it) is that they never minded anything as Apple stayed in its niche market, but now with the smart phone it is different. You see ever since I looked into matters (around 2011) I saw that the stage was going to change. Mobile devices were going to be generic with optional simplified hardware, the power as going to be the software. So 5 devices and one program solution and for the most that is coming to pass. We have Apple, Google, Huawei and Samsung for the most and Microsoft is out of THAT race. The lag that Motorola and Nokia have are just too big. So when I see “The Justice Department, 19 states and Washington, D.C., accuse Apple of an illegal monopoly on smartphones maintained by imposing contractual restrictions on, and withholding critical access from, developers” I say ‘bollocks’ The issue is who are the iOS developers? In 2011 I have cess to the development kits of Apple (schoolwork) and I never entertained it other than the assignments I had. I was an Apple user, not a developer (I regret that a little right now). 

So when we see “an illegal monopoly on smartphones” I say that this is not an illegal monopoly, it is a system setting that they selected, other than Android (Google, Huawei, Samsung) and Windows (Microsoft), actually I am hard to keep a straight face when setting Windows on a mobile phone. Can you imagine the CrowdStrike damage mobile phones might have had to endure? Oh and when we see this did anyone consider the consequences that were on IBM, who basically forced people to rely on IBM hardware. Perhaps HP can rephrase the nightmare they faced on IBM with their printers. 

There is a second tier to this all, we need to consider that The Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 is no longer the best way to go about this for more and more devices. As the mobiles become more generic and it will be on the software to trample a path into this all. When we consider that Google now has the Pixel 8a, Pixel 8 Pro, Pixel 8, Pixel Watch 2, Pixel Fold, Pixel Tablet. At least three of these systems are nearly identical, they have 1-2 processors difference. Their difference becomes the software. But that is now, I expect in the next 2-3 years that there will be more devices all powered by the same software and optionally the connecting devices (through the mobile phones) . The lawmakers of 1890 would have never expected this and the differences will grow even more.  And a prime example here is Microsoft. We now get “All you’ll need is a compatible Fire TV Stick, a Bluetooth-enabled wireless controller, and an Xbox Game Pass Ultimate subscription to stream Xbox games. Microsoft is working to allow Xbox Cloud Gaming to stream your entire Xbox library, and not just titles that are part of Game Pass.” Did anyone consider “a compatible Fire TV Stick”? So how long until they revamp the gaming industry with that solution? How long until they (a speculative view) impede devices through that connection where an error stops the Sony Playstation or Nintendo Switch to no longer with with their software because (speculative) software by Microsoft impeded it? Oh, they’ll be all apologetic, but the damage will have been done. We see (at Microsoft) “The Program Install and Uninstall troubleshooter helps you automatically repair issues when you’re blocked from installing or removing programs. It also fixes corrupted registry keys”, so this issue has been around from Windows 7 (2009), and was still around in Windows 10 (2015), so it was an issue for at least 6 years. Do we really want them to get involved? Come to think of it, l I would be on the first plane to Shenzhen if it comes to that. Oh and I haven’t even considered the damage that solution would do to the Amazon Luna. Apple had a solution and it has propagated that solution to all things Apple. They marketed their solution widely and innovatively and innovation is what is missed in many Big Tech companies. Too give another example, last year Apple did something Awesome. We see a meeting with a youthful young sprout (Tim Cook) reporting to Gaia and getting lectured by her. The brilliance was that plenty of companies took a paragraph out of their time to publish that they are on track to be carbon zero. Apple made it a presentation (advertisement) whilst giving a report of their directions. It was funny and it was pretty brilliant. Google and Amazon missed the boat and there was no value in copying that. So that is the innovative presentations that are Apple. The bigger picture is that mobile phones are presented through marketing and Apple marketing slaps the marketing of Google and Samsung. So we see “an illegal monopoly on smartphones” all whilst the others aren’t doing their bit to keep up (or seemingly keep up), so why punish Apple for that?

As I see it the judge has to toss the case, of not for the logic then for the reality that if this setting is pushed and Microsoft steps in, then we come to the conclusion that the US government is merely a tools for Microsoft to stop it from collapsing on itself (my personal view).

Well that was me today. 190 minutes from Monday here now, Vancouver is still pre Sunday breakfast. Have a fun day everyone.

1 Comment

Filed under IT, Law, Science

It was never rocket science

Yup, that is the gist of it. And it seems that people are starting to wake up. You see the biggest issue I have had with any mention of AI, is that it doesn’t (yet) exist. People can shout AI on every corner, but soon the realisation comes in that they were wrong all the time will hurt them, it will hurt them badly. And this is merely a sideline to the issue. The issue is Microsoft and lets get through some articles.

1. Microsoft says cyber-attack triggered latest outage
The first one is (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c903e793w74o) where we see “It comes less than two weeks after a major global outage left around 8.5 million computers using Microsoft systems inaccessible, impacting healthcare and travel, after a flawed software update by cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike. While the initial trigger event was a Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) attack… initial investigations suggest that an error in the implementation of our defences amplified the impact of the attack rather than mitigating it,” said an update on the website of the Microsoft Azure cloud computing platform.” The easiest way of explaining this is to compare Azure to a ball. A foot ball has (usually) 12 regular pentagons and 20 regular hexagons. They are stitched together. Now under normal conditions this is fine. However software is not any given shape, implying that a lot more stitches are required. Now consider that Microsoft 365 is used by over a million corporations. Now consider that a lot of them do not use the same configuration. This implies that we have thousand of differently stitched balls and the stitches is where it can go wrong. This is where we see the proverbial “the implementation of our defences amplified the impact of the attack rather than mitigating it” Microsoft has been so driven by using it all, that they merely advance the risk. And it doesn’t end here. CrowdStrike is another example. We see the news and the fake one person claiming responsibility for it. Yet the reality is that there is a lot more wrong than anyone is considering. These two events pretty much prove that Microsoft has policy and procedure flaws. It is easy to blame Microsoft, but the reality is that we see spin and the trust in Microsoft is pretty much gone. People say “Microsoft’s cloud revenue was 39.3% higher”, yes this is the case, and considering that Amazon was originally a ‘bookshop’, so they went against the larger techies like IBM and Microsoft and they got 31% of the global market share. Not bad for a bookshop. And the equation gets worse for Microsoft, these two events could cost them up to 10% market share. In which direction these 10% go is another matter. AWS is not alone here. 

I was serious about not letting Microsoft near my IP. I had hoped that Amazon would take it (they have the Amazon Luna) but it seems that Andy Jesse is not hungry for an additional 5 billion annually (in the first stage). 

And as Microsoft adds more and more to their arsenal these problems will become more frequent and inflicts damage on more of their customers. Do I have evidence? No, but it wasn’t hard and my example might give you the consideration to ponder where you could/should go next. 

2. Microsoft Earnings: Stock Tanks As AI Business Growth Worse Than Expected
In the second story we see (at https://www.forbes.com/sites/dereksaul/2024/07/30/microsoft-earnings-stock-tanks-as-ai-business-growth-worse-than-expected/) that Forbes is giving us “shares of Microsoft cratered about 7% following the earnings announcement, already nursing a more than 8% decline over the last three weeks” with the added “Microsoft’s crucial AI businesses was worse than expected, as its 29% growth in its Azure cloud computing unit fell short of projections of 31%, and sales in its AI-heavy intelligent cloud division was $28.5 billion, below estimates of $28.7 billion” As stated by me (as well as plenty of others) there is no AI. You see AI would give the program thinking skills, they do not have any. They kind of speculate and they have lots of scenario to give you the conditional feeling that they are talking “in your street” but that is not the case. For this simple illustration we get Wired (at https://www.wired.com/story/microsoft-ai-copilot-chatbot-election-conspiracy/) giving us ‘Microsoft’s AI Chatbot Replies to Election Questions With Conspiracies, Fake Scandals, and Lies’, so how does this work? You see the program (LLM) looks at what ‘we’ search for, yet in this the setting is smudged by conspiracy theorists, troll farms and influencers. The first two push the models out of synch. Wired gives us “Research shared exclusively with WIRED shows that Copilot, Microsoft’s AI chatbot, often responds to questions about elections with lies and conspiracy theories.” Now consider that this is pushed onto all the other systems. Then we are treated to “Microsoft’s AI chatbot is responding with out-of-date or incorrect information”, so not only is the data wrong, it is out of date, as I see it what they call ‘training data’ is as I see it incorrect, out of data and unverified. How AI is that? A actual real AI is set on a Quantum computer (IBM has that, although in its infancy) a more robust version of shallow circuits (not sure if we are there yet) and is driven not by binary systems but framed on an Ypsilon particle system, which was proven by a Dutch physicist around 2020 (I forgot the name). This particle has another option. We currently have NULL, Zero and One. The Ypsilon particle has NULL, Zero, One and BOTH. A setting that changes everything.

But the implementation into servers is to be expected around 2037 (a speculation by me) then we get to the thinking programs and an actual AI. So when we see AI, we need to see that is a program that can course through data and give you the most likely outcome. I will admit that for a lot of people it will fit, but not for all and there we get the problem. You see Microsoft will blame all sources and all kind of people, but in the end it will be up to the programmer to show their algorithm is correct and as I am telling you now that it comes down to unverified data. How does that come over to you? 

When you consider that Wired also gave us “it listed numerous GOP candidates who have already pulled out of the race.” The issue of how out of date data is becomes clear. We see all these clever options that others give us, but when some LLM (labeled AI) is un-updated and unreliable, how secure remains your position when you base decision making streams on the wrong data? And that is merely a sales track. 

The last teaspoon is given to us by The Guardian. The Guardian (at https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2024/mar/06/microsoft-ai-explicit-image-safety) gave us on March 7th 2024:

3. Microsoft ignored safety problems with AI image generator, engineer complains
So when you consider the previous parts (especially CrowdStrike) “Shane Jones said he warned management about the lack of safeguards several times, but it didn’t result in any action” Microsoft will state that this is another issue. But I spoke about wrong data, out of date data and unverified data. And now we see that the lack of safeguards and inaction would make things worse and a lot faster than you think. You see as long as there is no real AI, all data needs to be verified and that does not seem to be the case in too many setting. I spoke about policy issues and procedural issues. Well here we get the gist “it didn’t result in any action” and we keep on seeing issues with Microsoft. So how many times will you face this? And that is before people realise that their IP are on Azure servers. So how many procedural flaws will your research we driven into until it is all on a Russian or Chinese or North Korean enabled server (most likely by Russia or China, which is a speculation by me).

As such, it was never rocket science, look at any corporation and in their divisions there will always be one person who thinks of number one (himself) and in that setting how safe are you? 

There is a reason that I do not want Microsoft near my IP. I can only hope that someone waked up and give me a nice retirement present ($30M post taxation would be nice).

Enjoy the day.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Science

Rules of the game

It isn’t a statement, it is actually a question. You see, something caught my eye in Al Jazeera today. The article (at https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/7/30/why-are-conservatives-claiming-google-is-covering-up-the-shooting-of-trump) gives us ‘Why are conservatives claiming Google is covering up the shooting of Trump?’. I took a look and I noticed the given “Google has come under fire from conservatives in the United States amid claims that the tech giant is suppressing information about the attempted assassination of Donald Trump in order to influence the presidential election.” Then we see “Google on Monday told NBC News that autocomplete was “not working as intended for some searches about the names of several past presidents and the current vice president”.

My issue is that there are other matters not being taken into account. I have partial knowledge of this and. Wonder on the stage we are facing. The first stage are the conservatives, the second stage are the influencers and the conspiracy theorists. Let me explain as best as I can. 

We can search for something direct [attempted assassination of Donald Trump] then we have the option [assassination + ”Donald Trump”] they are not the same you see the first one also gives use anything related to ‘attempted’ as such any combination of [attempted, assassination, of, Donald, Trump] will be caught in this. The problem is that the influencers know this, the conspiracy theorists know this and they are always try to put ‘their story’ above all the others. These two groups have elevated their knowledge of the search routines and the in’s and out’s above all others. Because they need their story to come on top.

Now consider these two groups, do you think that they influence the outcome? So when we see “autocomplete was “not working as intended”” the question becomes how to see ‘not working as intended’ I wonder how the other players influenced the ‘not working as intended’. I do not think that Google did anything wrong (speculation on my side), I think that there is more into this. You see what evidence do the Conservatives have? 

So do you think that Kansas Senator Roger Marshall who also accused Google of suppressing information looked into the whole range of this? I doubt it. These man tend to have less than an hour a day to look into matters. The Google setting requires close to a week of several people dedicated to search and autocomplete. Consider the small setting that the world has thousands of dedicated Search Engine Optimisation (SEO) people. Do you think that Google will mess around with that, or is it likely that these thousands as well as the influencers and conspiracy theorists have found a loophole that sets them above all others and when that is the case is there a clear case of malignant Google messing with an autocomplete. The last part is that it is ‘autocomplete’ as such the search could (or should) have been given completely and not via an autocomplete. Oh, and an autocomplete is relying on an anticipated result, yet when these results are pushed by SEO’s, influencers and Conspiracy theorists, what are the changes that the model sways?

All settings that could (not a given) been an influence and there is nothing of that in the Al Jazeera article. But in all this Kansas Senator Roger Marshall got his limelight. So I wonder how many holes I can shoot in that case, after all Donald Trump merely got his ear pierced and not by a qualified piercer. 

Oh and before we end this story, lets not forget that the conservatives use any option they can to get some limelight, did anyone take that into account as well?

Enjoy the day Monday is almost over for me, Vancouver will follow in 17 hours.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Media, Science

A granny named Smith

Yup, it is time to bitch about Apple products. This should be future Apple products. You see for some time I have seen that Apple has been in a wrong course. Lets not talk about to MacBook Pro. That thing actually looks phenomenal, every bit is seemingly impressive. And even though I cannot afford it (at present) the idea of a 96GB RAM with 8TB storage is overwhelming, it is a bit much (not my needs). Yet storage is what every one needs and I would be content with 4TB (and 64GB RAM). That being said, the iMac doesn’t even come close to it.

So as I saw Matt Talks Tech today, I saw the ‘announcement’ of what is to be (in about 16 weeks) and it is not good. As we see Apple doesn’t seem to learn at all. They give the ‘new users’ up to 24GB RAM, which is in many cases enough. It is the storage, still a mere 2TB. For many it would be enough. Yet the settings of 100MP camera’s is setting a new premise. Medium format in the digital field is calling new professionals and then there are the YouTubers and TikTokkers. They will all need Adobe solutions. And the full Adobe users with other software will soon find out that their 2TB hole is filled with the frustration of multiple connections. That is not why I would buy a desktop. They are throwing their market to PC (and Microsoft) troubles. What is up? Apple becomes a sour apple, a Granny Smith. Sour and meant for senile fossils, the newly adapted age of digital influencers is seemingly totally ignored.

The fact that there is no option for 4TB. We know that not everyone needs it, but any Digital streamer or medium format photographer has only the MacBook Pro. They need to be able to set to a desktop screen working in comfort, and the iMac no longer provides. They should have provided for that last year. There is some consideration that this could have come later, but the M4 news shows that the iMac just isn’t up to it (speculation by me). What are they doing? Leaving it all to Dell and HP? 

As somewhat dubiously stated by me, 96GB is a lot, even in digital edition. I would consider 32GB, even that cannot be provided for as the media tells us. More important there is no mention of set aside upgrades by Apple (32GB RAM, 4TB storage), as such whatever they gained in niche markets they are throwing away to the niche graphic designers. These people only have the MacBook Pro to look forward to. This is great, but when you are working at home, it just doesn’t cook the goose. And the setting that it is due in 16 weeks and for another year people have no real option is disturbing, because this implies that the iMac is pretty much done for. No mention of an iMac Pro either. Apple needs to revisit their presentations and what they have coming and they need to do it really fast.
They are opening the market (that they catered to for the longest time) to Asus, HP and Dell. 

So am I right? The idea that Apple is now becoming the sour Apple no one really wants is a bad move to be considering. I stated this before (last year). There are roughly “64 million YouTube creators” at present. Now they don’t all need high end solution, but most of them want something more comfortable than a laptop screen. Even is only 1% needs high end equipment, that still amounts to 640,000 users. I didn’t ever consider the 1,300,000 TikTok creators, many of them are also on YouTube. Oh and when you consider 1% is too low, the losses to Apple get to be worse. I am pretty sure that Asus likes this setting, but when we see that Apple is lowering their expectations, can we be sure this is valid? The second side to this is that the iMac cannot meet these needs, does that mean that the Tim Cook presentations of ‘innovations’ are still valid?

So this seems like a bitch moment (by me) but consider the needs of the many (well over 640K of them). Are they getting deserted by Apple? Oh and the larger Data miners, who all need storage space, how are they served? It seems to me that Apple has been dropping the ball yet again. Perhaps they should adapt the Microsoft logo? (Me rolling on the floor laughing)

Enjoy Monday, apart from the people living in Nova Scotia and eastern from there. They are still on Sunday.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Media, Science