Category Archives: Law

August 29, 2024 · 23:34

Awareness is fuel to any cause

That is the skeptical look I have. You see social media is a flammable stage of all kinds of woke and non woke commitments. Some are real and most aren’t very real in the mindset of anyone else. I am not belittling any ‘cause’ but that is how I feel. We get exposure to a million and one causes and they are the settings for a mere speculated 100,000 people. Everyone has a cause and most of them have a dozen causes. I will not bother you with the amount of influencers touching on any cause that helps THEM get more visibility. It is a crackpot mix of people at times. So when I saw the Middle East Eye give us ‘How the UAE crushes dissent by arbitrarily revoking citizenship’, I became a little more aware. The opinion story (at https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/how-uae-crushes-dissent-arbitrarily-revoking-citizenship) gives us the link to UAE President Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan with the stage that he is pictured in Abu Dhabi on 6 December 2023 is a nice touch, but he is not mentioned in the opinion piece, not even once. So why is his picture there? Then we get to the MENA group, which is mentioned once “A report by the Mena Rights Group, published last month, exposed the extensive and troubling nature of this trend”, as such I have questions. With the “the extensive and troubling nature” it is the first mention I see of this. We see the mention “3 March 2011, when 133 Emirati academics, judges, lawyers, students and human rights defenders signed a petition addressed to the president of the UAE and the Federal Supreme Council, calling for democratic reforms”. As such there are seemingly mentions of this since 2011 and this I the first time I hear of it? There is no visible mention of the MENA rights group in Al Jazeera or Arab News, as such I have questions on the validity of this. We see the mention of “Many affected by this practice are either defendants in the “UAE84” trial or their family members.” With a reference that it was “politically motivated and marred by fair trial violations.” As such I raise questions. You see, if that was the case, would it not be in nearly every Muslim writing from Al Jazeera to Arab News, not to mention the Guardian, BBC and a whole range of American woke news casts? Then we get to one of the writers of the opinion piece Jenan al-Marzooqi. Is that a relative of the accused Ibrahim al-Marzooqi? It might be, but I do not know this. The opinion piece is largely a one sided mention relying on the MENA Rights group who was founded in 2018 in Geneva. I would think that if it was an actual counted group a whole range of newspapers (western and Arabic) would have made mention of it, perhaps they did, but this is the first I see of this.

We then see the mention of “citizenship revocation be applied under the principle of proportionality – a principle that was clearly disregarded in this case.” With the word proportionality referring to the link (at https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/newyork/Documents/Human-Rights-Responses-to-Foreign-Fighters-web_final.pdf) a United Nations document. This is funny, but when you read the document the reference is toward “American Convention on Human Rights, art. 20.” A serious notion, if it was not for the setting that this is playing not in America. With the stage of “deprivation of nationality must be in conformity with domestic law” we get an issue, but I am not sure it is an important one. I am not the expert on Emirati law, a setting not raised in this case. That document also gives us “Some States also allow the deprivation of nationality for naturalised mono-nationals, thereby leaving them stateless.” Is that the case in UAE law? If it is the opinion piece becomes largely pointless, if they only had thought of including that point in the opinion piece. Add to this “In July 2016, five of his six children travelled to the US for medical treatment.” Really? 5 of his 6 children? All for medical treatment? It could be, but this one liner gives a serious boost to disregarding this piece (in my humble opinion). And when we get “concluded last month with at least 43 defendants sentenced to life in prison on bogus terrorism charges” where the word ‘bogus’ is a personal view by the opinion writer and could be ignored. You see if it was serious, that line was accompanied with at least one paragraph addressing that setting, giving optional weight to the word ‘bogus’.

The more I read of this article, the more I wonder what Middle East Eye had in mind with this opinion piece. I am not saying it is invalid, it is an opinion piece after all. Validity is given through evidence, or at least that is what I have always believed. Validity and verification go hand in hand. At the end we see one answer and two more linked names. 

  • Jenan al-Marzooqi is a human rights activist and the daughter of Emirati prisoner of conscience Abdulsalam Mohammed Darwish al-Marzooqi
  • Estelle Allemann is a legal fellow at MENA Rights Group
  • Alexandra Tarzikhan is the legal adviser for Southwest Asia and North Africa with the American Bar Association Center for Human Rights.

All very neat, so we have one MENA Rights Group waving their hand for visibility, one activist and a legal adviser linked to the American Bar Association Center for Human Rights.

I would have thought that 2 of them would have created a much better piece. This gets me to the issue of what were they after? You see, I do have legal training, but I am not a lawyer, I have been a Trade Mark Attorney. And as I see it, there are all kinds of verifications missing. Basically, there is no indiction that anything illegal (according to UAE law) was done, or at least the article does not clearly shows this. I did not completely ready the links to the other articles. When a case is made in THIS opinion piece, you have to present the evidence in THIS opinion piece, not link to it. Even if you merely quote it. I feel that more and more media (news and other media) are making a mess of things. They all have to get to the news and opinion pieces faster and as such they create short cuts and deprive the readers of a complete view of the matter, whether it is an opinion piece of now and a legal adviser, as well as a Human Rights person would (or at least should) know this.

We all create awareness, mostly to fuel the fire that lights us. This is not wrong, especially in this social networking world. We have always done this to some degree, but now we have merely increased the visibility of us. Whether that is a good thing remains to be seen. If there is one winner it is the MENA rights group, they got the most visibility here.

Have a lovely day. My Friday starts in 26 minutes.

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , ,

August 16, 2024 · 19:36

G-monopoly to the rescue?

Yup, that as the setting that imploded in my mind. It came at the doorstep of my sneaky sneaky creativity. You see when we consider the article at Reuters (with https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-judge-says-monopolist-google-cant-avoid-app-store-reforms-2024-08-14/) we might handle the stage of ‘US judge says ‘monopolist’ Google can’t avoid app store reforms’, we can agree, we can disagree (I disagree) but the setting is a stage that is not merely a mere ‘monopoliser’ it is quite a blanket cover of social inheritance. It comes at the dawn of a legion of Microsoft sycophants (agents of mediocrity) and that is a more dangerous stage then you realise. And always there is Microsoft trying to cut a nice corner for themselves. They failed five times over and they just can’t quit falling short of the rest of the pack where they want to ‘capture’ market share. For the non-regular readers of my blog the list is Adobe, Apple, Amazon, Google and Sony. And the loudest failures are Solarwinds and CrowdStrike. Even within the last week we saw several sources stage the boxing square using the Microsoft version of AI setting the dangerous premise of MAI (Microsoft AI) collecting the optional access of cloud systems. Now this is a premise that it is possible, not the setting that it has or currently is happening. But for reference when L’Oreal sees their revenue dwindle as one of the possible culprits namely Yatsen Holding, Estee Lauder, Avon Worldwide, Revlon, Coty, or CHANEL decides to take that short cut, L’Oreal will have a clear path what to do next. For their reference AWS can be found at Tour Carpe Diem, 31 Pl. des Corolles, 92400 Courbevoie, France. With the optional phone number is 3 315 660 2600.

Am I overreaching? 
It is a fair question, you see, I never much trusted cloud computing under Microsoft, not whilst there are valid options like Amazon (AWS), Apple, Google, and IBM available. I personally feel that Amazon is the superior provider, but I am NOT the best source of this information. I know too little about the G-Cloud, or the IBM version of that. Still the articles I read a few days ago scare my literally out of my skin. So there you have it.

So back to that, mainly judge James Donato in San Francisco. He heard Google and that greed driven Epic. You see Epic is in denial of an important factor. They accused Google of monopolising how consumers access apps on Android devices and how they pay for in-app transactions. The part that everyone seems to overlook is that Apple and Google had a similar plan in motion. This setting allowed Google and Apple to let everyone on-board. The small designers did not have to pay for massive amounts of money to get secure systems on-line. It is all done by these two providers. So they pay a little contribution and Epic immensely enjoyed that part of the equation and as they became more successful there need for more money (for stake holders and share holders) they decided to bite the had that fed them from poverty into wealth. Now that this part is over the hundreds of thousands developers can release an unbridled hatred towards Epic. But that is not merely the end of it. In this day and age of scammers and organised crime Epic is opening the floodgates towards these two players and I reckon that the first case (with evidence) that this is happening, both companies will both set a class action against Epic. So at that point where will the profits of Epic go? I reckon not too much towards their share holders, on the upside for them, litigation and trials are tax deductible. 

And whilst the media is all about the small player (multi billion Epic) against the titans of Industry (Apple and Google) I saw a new light. What if there was a new kind of monopoly game, with 4 players Amazon, Apple, Google and IBM and the board doesn’t represent streets, they represent cloud domains. There are still the utilities Electricity and Water (optionally called cooling) and the parks when all are obtained will give you a server-park item (hotel in the original game) and under that we get servers (up to 4) and the locations united will give you the upper hand in a server domain. The stations become continental backbones and they will have a secondary part. Should you get a station in a location, the servers get a +10% if you have all 4 you get a +20%. Now this is plenty of ‘over shadowing’ this game should have an educational side. So we have locations that invoke cyber security, social networking, AI and Data Warehousing. All have a -1% cost to your locations, if you have all 4 in one side of the board you get -10% costings (or 10% more efficiency). You see this might be a game, but the bulk or current users do not seem to comprehend the dangers that this case invoked. When the masses get to comprehend what is at stake and the fact that this is not completely set to a monopoly driven Google (or Apple for that matter), people might wake up to the danger they are exposing themselves to. And that part has been missing the to flame hungry (for the sake of money) media outlets. 

I always believed that games are a great way to teach people (when it is not Elden ring or Assassins creed) how to look at the image a little more clearly. So in that trend after the new movie yesterday, I decided to create a game for the occasion. It is the best move? OK, I am willing to concede that it might not be, but a free game that millions embrace tends to have a decent impact, more than we get now. And I am alway happy to engage with my sneaky sneaky creativity.

Well, the day is almost over, as such I will snore a forest into firewood and relax for my tomorrow hustle towards a morning with chicken and optionally some chili con carne. Enjoy your day.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Gaming, IT, Law, Media

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

August 11, 2024 · 19:40

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

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

August 7, 2024 · 12:36

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

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

August 6, 2024 · 12:12

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

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

August 4, 2024 · 21:00

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

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

July 22, 2024 · 20:17

What’s the deal?

That is the question and it goes beyond simple branding. It is the CBC (at https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/fake-labour-documents-sold-abroad-1.7253257) who gives us ‘Scams selling fake jobs to foreign workers may be operating outside Canada’ The routine is decently simple. 

  1. Someone in the world sets up links.
  2. They promise a job (at a charge)
  3. Person is scammed and in this example a 31-year-old from Lagos says a fellow Nigerian sold him fake documents after promising a job in Canada.

The problem is that not every one is internet savvy and more important. They think that Facebook (and other social media) is a safe space.

There is another way to look at this. For one “a travel agent who specialised in providing visas to Canada and the U.K.”

Let’s take this one step at a time. There are literally thousands waiting to get legally into Canada and the U.K.. With citizens in these places setting the stage. Do you really think that such a person has any chance? People in these places know people too. Do you think that they would allow the job to go to any foreigner they do not know, when they know people that they would happily offer the job to someone they know? In addition, there are genuine shortages, but they tend to be specialised jobs like nurses, doctors and so on. And when you are on social media who can tell which person is real, who is a scammer and who is a troll farm.

There is almost literally the chance that a offer that is too good to be true is either a scammer or a troll seeking intel. And the chances of a good deal go down and down more and more. 

There is a second part, but foreigners might not know that unless they investigate. You see labour market impact assessments (LMIA’s) cannot be sold, that I actually illegal. 

And on a second note, this year on the Hajj, hundred of people got killed by so called travel agents, there is every chance that they weren’t even a recognised travel agent (I have no data proving or disproving that).

Australia has a offering of empty appartments that is around 1%, do you think that those with an apartment will offer it on Facebook to strangers? They can make a bundle in cash and in social commitments to people they know. And that is mostly without risk. I would love to move to Canada (I think that an outstanding donation from Jeff Bezos or Andy Jassy has 98.9% more chance for me than any Facebook claim) and I never met any of these two youthful young sprouts. 😛

The article also has a statement that I firmly believe in “If it sounds too good to be true, it is. And generally speaking, an employer in Canada is not going to ask you for money to extend a job to you.” That is especially true for social media. The bulk of posts in social media is that they are out for money, it is the rule of me, myself and my bank account. The bulk of these people are honest dealers, tradesman or retail. But the bump of scammers is growing, especially in this economy. There is one statement I have an issue with. It is “Employment Minister Randy Boissonnault denounced LMIA fraudsters for targeting “vulnerable people.”” He is correct, but that group of people in this economy is getting larger fast. So new options are needed. I believe that here the embassies are the option. They should give clear notice to anyone going to their sites how to get on a track to become a foreign worker/resident/citizen. Also give clear scammer warning and especially that the sale of LMIA documents is illegal. Now, The Australian page for Canada is clear and direct, however I did not see the LMIA issue. I think there should be a warning for scammers (on every consul page) and why a Facebook group mail is nearly always a scam.

Me? Well I will in part rely on the sale of IP and get enough to retire in Toronto, we all have wishes and this is mine. 

Anyway have a lovely day, my day is almost done whilst in Vancouver it is 5 hours until this morning’s breakfast. Enjoy!

Leave a comment

Filed under Law

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

July 13, 2024 · 10:45

6 days a week

This article was shown on Aljazeera (at https://aje.io/lflym6). The story states ‘Why is Greece introducing a six-day working week?’ It seems like a simple enough question. The setting is that Greece needs to kickstart its economy (yet again) and as Greece has no resources, a shortage of people, hospitality is one of the few ways to get this done. We see “While some countries in the world are considering a switch to a four-day working week, Greece is swinging in the opposite direction.” It makes perfect sense to do this. But it is not that simple. We see the following rules “Greece’s new law gives employers in some industries, including businesses that offer 24/7 services, the right to compel employees to work a sixth day in return for an additional 40 percent of their daily wage added to their regular daily wage on the extra working day.” This comes down to someone making €500 a week giving the new setting of €640 a week the €500 plus €100 +40$ getting them to €640. When we see the shortages people have, plenty will accept this idea. I do oppose the setting that Elizabeth Gozme hands us with “Numerous studies have shown that overwork has a detrimental impact on one’s mental health and can often lead to burnout, she said.” I am certain that I can poke holes in that study. You see those studies were done when there was an abundance of revenue sources and when the current revenue was on the three year old premise of cost of living. Now that people are under fire from a simple thing as cost of living, the extra income will point them to a better setting of living. It is not the greatest of ideas, but there is truth in the setting. The option of more money is at present an essential need. The lowering of a debt driven setting for all families will please plenty of people. It will not please all, but with this setting of a 6 day week, call centres might have an option against their competitors in Portugal, Ireland or on Malta. 

The other disagreement I have is with “According to Eurostat, Greeks already work longer hours than most Europeans”, this might be true, but for the most part it was at a set income, now the people get the additional funds. It is not the best reason but I believe it is likely the solution to several settings. The other part iOS that Greece is trying to come into a new era. One where the debts are lowered, a setting which please both residents and government. As such I see a positive side in all of this. In this the Guardian (at https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/jul/01/greece-introduces-growth-oriented-six-day-working-week) hands us also “Pro-business government says measure is needed due to shrinking population and shortage of skilled workers” where I see that the shortage of skilled workers is the greatest handicap the Greeks currently seem to have. 

So a new work week setting is the start of a great free Saturday for me.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law

Tagged as , , , , ,

July 11, 2024 · 08:23

News I saw two days ago

Now, I get it. It is to days old. Does it still matter? Yes, it does. The article in New Lines Magazine (at https://newlinesmag.com/spotlight/why-pilgrims-are-dying-on-the-hajj/) is giving us ‘Why Pilgrims Are Dying on the Hajj’ with the subtext “Recent deaths of the old and underprepared at Mecca were caused not just by international racketeers but by Saudi visa reforms and digitisation” and I have issues with this. You see, there are several setting mentioned. 

“underprepared at Mecca” is one. This takes a few moments to explain and I will get to that in a moment. Then we get “international racketeers” which I am on board with and “Saudi visa reforms and digitisation” which is something I have not looked at, so that might be a factor. But the story gives us an interesting part which I had not seen before. We are given “Saudi Minister of Health Fahad Al-Jalajel announced that 1,301 pilgrims had died, with nearly 1,080 of them being “not authorised to perform the Hajj.”” So as I see it 83% of the people who had died did not have access to anything because they failed to get the right visa. This does give us another side, we get that 221 people died in this setting (they who had the proper access) out of 1,800,000 pilgrims. So from that we get that 0.0122% of people were a casualty of the heat. This means that 99.98% made it. I hesitate to add an ‘OK’ because I reckon that the heat got to too many, they merely were not a casualty of the heat. Yet no one is looking at that. If you would have had a concert with Taylor Swift with 1.8 million fans the damage might have been a lot worse. This does not reflect on the number one Swiftie and it might not have been on any healthcare. But none of the media reflected on the amazing job that the people under Saudi Minister of Health Fahad Al-Jalajel had achieved under one of the most horrendous circumstances. 

So when you see these facts “underprepared at Mecca” becomes more than debatable, it is a clear bad description of a setting only muslims will understand and to be clear many muslims are from an Arabic region (Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Qatar, Bahrain) so for them to be hit to that degree by the heat is something else (not sure how to describe that).

We see that the article gives all kinds of emotional settings (which I get as the media relies on emotion). We are also given “Prime Minister Mostafa Madbouly explained that some travel agencies organised Hajj programs using personal visitor visas, which barred holders from entering Mecca. These pilgrims had to take desert routes on foot, without adequate accommodation, exposing them to extreme heat”. A clear setting of “international racketeers” and Saudi Arabia had been drilling down on this. And the part that partially offends me is “In order for the visa brokers, whose market has flourished with the change in the kingdom’s tourism policy, to succeed in providing services to those who want to perform the Hajj without a permit” It offends me because this is the direct consequence of greed. And still the media point the finger at Saudi Arabia, even though the data (when available) clearly shows the ‘illegal’ action of the tourist and the greed of the travel brokers. So how many of these brokers have been arrested or be given the proper limelight exposing their actions? The Hajj is clearly controlled for safety and health reasons. And as I see it there is little to no blame on Saudi Arabia and specifically the minister of Hajj and Umrah Tawfig Al-Rabiah, I will go on and boldly state that he (and his staff) deserves a medal for guiding 99.98% of the Muslim population through a Hajj in such unbearable heat. However, the media does not look that far, because the blame game is more rewarding. 

My side
So, why am I so focussed on this? I am not a Muslim, so that is not it. It is the unreliable one sided push by the media and second is that I thought through an IP that will benefit up to 300,000,000 Muslims. That IP comes with a payday (I have non-altruistic reasons). The point becomes more interesting as Google and Amazon fumbled that ball. So I hope that either the Saudi government, Kingdom Holding Company (Al Waleed bin Talal Al Saud) or Tencent Technology does pick up that ball. A revenue stage that would ensure $5,000,000,000 in phase one and close to three times as much after that and this is annual revenue. So, I am driven to this goal. Oh, and Microsoft was not invited to this setting. They might proclaim that they are the most wealthy corporation, but like their most powerful console they claimed to have was made the bitch of Nintendo with their Switch, the weakest console of them all. That is the price of mediocrity as I personally see it. So whilst the media might be going all about how Saudi Arabia fumbled “visa reforms and digitisation”, which I cannot confirm of oppose. The clear setting is that drilling down on visa brokers by the international community becomes essential. 

So, enjoy your day today. I am now 575 steps and 45 minutes away from breakfast.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Tourism

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

June 27, 2024 · 01:17

The side not illuminated

The BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c5111qxl2nro) is giving us ‘Apple in breach of law on App Store, says EU’ We get a few sides, but one side is not given to us. We are given “European Union regulators have accused Apple of being in breach of new laws designed to rein in big tech companies” It sounds nice, but at present the station “rein in big tech companies” is at least sanctimonious. We are also given “The firm charges developers an average of 30% commission on its App Store” and the penalty is given as we are given “The firm faces a potential fine of up to 10% of its global revenue if it fails to comply with the rules”. You see the one part we are NOT given is that all these developers get a channel to publish their work. The get their million by harassing people with advertising. These developers have no interest in giving gamers a real gaming satisfaction (some, but massively too little). So the EU should consider the fallout. You see Apple and Google could do two things. Pull all the games with an advertising channel, stating that this is not permitted. The second part is that they can start charging for the service. The bulk of these gaming ‘companies’ will soon thereafter collapse. You see when all these companies get CHARGED for spreading these games and cyber security. The net thing we see is that these companies will go somewhere else and the dangers of servicing hackers becomes rather large. 

The next part is that this becomes a new setting where the UAE and Saudi Arabia will get the option to offer the same thing Apple and Google did, but charging a mere 5% to 10%, the rest will probably going to China, making the EU and US lose even more revenue. 

All this because the shareholders of Epic Games wanted more revenue and they got this by throwing a tantrum like a child so that they get charged less for services. And lets be clear, they were eager to accept the deal when they were small, now that they are big they can afford to pay for the services. But that is not the only part. Epic Games wanted another path and when even one of these 3rd parties get to be hacked and the players get the damage, Epic Games will face the largest class action lawsuit in history. At that point I wonder how the shareholders will reflect on a pay cycle that will cost them billions. They had a safe environment with Apple and Google, but when that falls away these two will help to give the victims all the numbers and all the support they need to clean out the vaults of all the game developers who took the greedy way out. In addition the EU will get a new problem. As game makers fall flat and optionally move to China or the Middle East the EU will lose revenue. In the last 8 years 10 games made $13,000,000,000. So what will the EU do when that goes to China (or the Middle East)? There are over 200 companies, 105 made over $500,000,000. This was a bad call. These politicians have a socialistic mindset, Take from the rich, but they forget that these rich companies set the foundation of growth. Sergey Brin, Steve Jobs, Mark Zuckerberg and Jeff Bezos were real innovators. The mediocrity of Microsoft is pushing them back more and more. And whilst they might be shown as the richest, they are losing more and more ground. Now with the EU, more and more business will move to better (read: non-European and American) shores. 

And the EU did this to themselves. Consider the DMA:

  • Business users who depend on gatekeepers to offer their services in the single market will have a Fairer business environment (But these services come at a cost, no more Freebees)
  • allow third parties to inter-operate with the gatekeeper’s own services in certain specific situations. (If hacked those services become nullified)

Just to part, the first will nullify these innovators, they cannot afford these services and they will go to a cheap solution making them a target for hackers. The second part will end some games, gamers have no patience and no humour. So when their game stops they will all cry like little children, their toy was taken away and when a hacker does get to upper hand, the class actions will come calling for all these companies. It is a war that the EU cannot win and the larger companies will become empty shells (my prediction). 

Until this first case was decided there was merely a threat of things, now it is coming to pass. 

I wonder what happens to the ‘fake’ economy in Europe when this starts. When advertising through gaming stops. What will the damage be? Amazon, Apple and Google have other means for getting advertising revenue. The others? Anyones guess, but there is a chance that a few hundred companies are sweating because no revenue meant no cost and that could stop now. So they need to find bankers. And what will those bankers demand? All issues that the DMA (Digital Markets Act) did not consider. I believe that this Apple case is opening a can of worms  no one is ready for and the implications are long term.

And now it is Thursday, Enjoy this day when you get to this point.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Gaming, IT, Law, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,