Category Archives: Media

They just won’t learn

That happens, people Incapable of learning. IT people listening to salespeople because these sales people know what buttons to push. Board members pushing for changes so that their peer will see that they are up to speed on the inter-nest of things (no typo) and there are all other kinds of variation and pretty much every company has them. Even as Australia is still reeling from the Optus debacle, Telstra joins the stupid range (at So explain to me why an HR system needs to be online? OK, you will get away with that and there is a need for some to access it, but in what universe does this need to be so open that EVERYONE can get to it? That is the question we see raised with ‘Telstra data breach sees names and email addresses of staff uploaded online’, a blunder of unimaginable proportions. On the other hand, Telstra will be bleeding staff members left, right and forward pretty soon. You see, this list is well desired by over a dozen telecoms in Europe, North America, the Middle East and Asia. They all need staff all over the place and now their headhunters know EXACTLY where to dig. Even as the article gives us two parts. The first part is “a third party which was offering a rewards program for staff had the data breach in 2017” as well as “Telstra has not used the rewards program since 2017, the spokesperson said” in all this the question that matters are not asked. We get Bill Shorten trying to change the conversation back to Optus with: “get the information so I can stop hackers from hacking into government data and further compromising people’s privacy”. The massive part is “Why was a reward program not used for 5 years still linked to HR data?” It seems that ABC does not ask this and the others do not either. So even if we get “Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus has said he will review Australia’s privacy laws and tighter protections could be brought in by the end of the year” Yet the larger question remains unanswered. How to protect these systems from STUPID people? A reward system that has a direct link to the HR data and was not used for 5 years is stupid, plain and simple stupid. As such this affects their IT and their HR department. Yet the people (politicians and media are not asking these questions are they? They let Labor loser Shorten change the conversation. Oh, do not worry we are not even close to done with Optus, but the setting that the conversation is pushed away from Telstra allegedly implies that Telstra has too large a hold on Media and politicians. So whilst the media allowed Telstra to hide behind “while the data is of minimal risk to former employees” they fail to see the larger picture. In an age brain drains these people are worth their eight in Lithium (more valuable than gold) and it seems to me that an employment database of 30,000 telecom people will be eagerly mined in the three earlier mentioned regions. These hackers were smart, they can get a million easily (over 10-15 customers) and these customers will not care where that data comes from, they need personnel and they needs them now. So it seems that certain people just ill not learn and there is no hiding behind “in an attempt to profit from the Optus breach” Telstra claims to be so superior, of that is so either the hack would not have affected them, or these systems are in a worse shape than ever before and that is also missing from the article. Two competitors successfully hit by the same flaw? It seems that too many people are asleep at the wheel. And no one is asking the right questions, not even the media, why is that?

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Media, Politics

Law or punishment?

This is not really a reference to Crime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoevsky. You see, we have that setting, the Crime and punishment, sometimes it is a setting of Crime through punishment (the scapegoat setting) but the larger stage of Law or punishment is not really looked at. It is a setting that if there is not law, there can be no punishment, if there is punishment (the legal kind) there needs to be law and we are getting more and more that the bullies are given a free pass. This has been a central for too long a setting, decades even. So when the BBC gives us ‘Bradford City: Racist fans should be jailed for abuse – footballer’, the story (at gives us “Timi Odusina, who plays for Bradford City, said he had been subjected to “degrading” abuse during his career. He hoped harsher punishments, such as prison sentences to those convicted of racial abuse, would act as a deterrent to others”, this sounds nice, but the law is clear. The UK passed the Race Relations Act 1965 and there we see “The Act banned racial discrimination in public places and made the promotion of hatred on the grounds of ‘colour, race, or ethnic or national origins’ an offence”. As such I am posting the idea that politicians and lawmakers take their heads out of their asses and set in motion a new decree. No person is given access to ANY sport event without the option to show their personal ID, any person found guilty of racism is given a bad mark, and that means no attending sport events for 2 years. They can watch it on TV and shout whatever they like in their own homestead. I have ben seeing the racism, monkey references for years now and it is time that these two parties start a clear new change, ending this BS. I do not know Timi Odusina, I also do not care about him (as I do not like football), but this is the same in EVERY sport. Abuse and discrimination are wrong and it is time that we do something about it, regardless of age. You can be stupid on someone else’s time. 

Is my solution great? No it is not, I see that but something has to change and at some point enough is enough. There I no ‘it was a bad setting of events’, we see excuse after excuse. We see racial discrimination, we see gender discrimination, religious discrimination and we shrug. Nothing is done and I believe that there is now a larger need to change this. Are there better solutions? Perhaps but no one is doing anything and it is time to make changes. I reckon that the racist when he has to sit out sport events for 2 years it might change him. Why 2 years? One year is just not good enough, it does not stop a person like that and two years might. It remain speculation whether this really works but a clear signal needs to be given and that signal is “Enough is enough”.  There will be voices making opposite claims, but when all the discriminated against speak out, I reckon that the voices will request my view on the matter. With racial, gender and religious issues all over the field there is a large enough quorum to finally do something about discrimination. 

Just merely my view on the matter.

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media

Media discrimination

Yes this happens. The media is good at discriminating things, they don’t call it that, they call it irrelevant news, unknown news or perhaps uncertain or unverified news.  The latter group is interesting, because when it was about a columnist no one ever gave a fig about, they rolled with it. But it is not about that person who allegedly is on a deserted island with his 19 year old mistress. It is about Elon Musk, now we tend to get that news sparingly and some news they go with if it is weird enough (that robot), but what have you lately heard on the Pi phone? The las 24 hours we see 8 articles and only one of those are in English, are you catching on? 

The most interesting was the article (at where we see: 

According to Geeks ULTD, we can expect Tesla to release its upcoming Model Pi smartphone next year in April. The same publication also tells us what else we should expect at this point regarding the future gadget.” We are also given “Tesla Model Pi will be equipped with a network generated by the satellite, allowing users to enjoy the benefits offered by the phone even if they’re located in areas where there’s normally no signal, such as forests.” The interesting part here is ‘a network generated by the satellite’ to be honest, I have no idea how to see this and I am a technologist, but it implies that we might not be relying on the default 4G networks around, it will have 5G but how this all is shaped, I cannot tell and neither will a lot of others and that is weird. It is weird because the media is always so ‘helpful’ to explain us these matters, except this time. 

Then there is “This automatically implies that the hardware present on the upcoming Tesla model will be top-class. We can also expect the Tesla Model Pi to be featuring an ultrasonic fingerprint scanner, meaning that this function will feature high efficiency. Such features that allow the user to be sure that nobody else can use his phone are indeed welcomed. The fingerprint scanner will even be placed directly on the screen.” This sounds nice, but the fingerprint part is on my Google Pixel as well. 

The lack of media giving us all the information, or as much as possible is staggering, it is almost like they hate Elon Musk, I wonder why. Other sources, older ones give me “a 6.0 to 7.0-inch OLED screen with a 1080 x 2408 resolution, a 4000 to 5000-mAh battery, and 30W to 65W fast charging.” It seems fine, with the exception that it only has 128MB storage, which in light that it only has a 12MP camera should be fine, the 8GB RAM is way above required, so that is all fine, those who want a more powerful Camera can stick it with the Google Pixel which has a 48MP camera, or get an actual camera. Yet the Pi phone allegedly also has 4K, HD, HDR, night vision, and panorama options, so it does have the juice to give interesting shots. More than most people actually need. I did not see if the phone has a storage card option, yet all the images seem to imply that this is not the case. 

What I was also able to find is that it can film in 4K, HD, and 1080@240fps, as such we can get the ‘slomo’ shots. Yet all this information had to be assembled from several sources, the media (at large) is seemingly very anti Musk and in light of all the hardware geeks out these for iPhone and Android systems, this is odd, a little too odd. Even GSM Arena, one of the best sources for mobiles seem to steer clear of this, I wonder why.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media

The colour we paint ourselves with

That is thought behind my accusation towards places like News dot com dot au. It starts innocent enough. The headline ‘Saudi Arabia seeks to spend 60 billion in gaming’, my initial thought being “If they give me the $50,000,000 post taxation with a few additional items I asked for they will get a lot more than they bargained for and the option to make 1200% on investment in the beginning and many times more over the years that follow”, but I am awaiting a response from their consulate at present. The article (at gives more, but not that, merely innuendo and targeted guesses as I see it. It is “The announcements came from Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who is involved with, and believed to be one of the architects behind, the ongoing civil war in Yemen, and who is also considered by many to be responsible for the assassination of journalist Jamal Khashoggi” that got to me, so lets give the idiot (aka Junior Miyai) a little history lesson. As such “the war began in late 2014 mainly between the Rashad al-Alimi led Yemeni government and the Houthi armed movement, it was the lawfully elected president Abdrabbuh Mansur Hadi who called for help. Saudi Arabia and several other nations came to the aid of Abdrabbuh Mansur Hadi, so Saudi Arabia was involved, but was NOT the architect, the architects were the terrorist factions of Houthi forces with FULL support of Iran. A fact that many western media have been shunning to report on for a long time

Then there is the accusation of “and who is also considered by many to be responsible for the assassination of journalist Jamal Khashoggi” there we have the false and foul reporting by western media on many fronts, the United Nations was equally guilty of accusing the crown prince through an UN essay by some French person and several parties ignored essential claimed evidence, which was never tested and the involved parties were very intent of NOT mentioning that. 

It gets to me because this was about gaming and it is nothing more that a political hatched job. And like the virtual blowjob that we get from these media players, which means that there is no blowjob at all. We are given “including an acquisition of a “leading game publisher””. But we are never given the who, merely that $20,000,000,000 is merely implied, there is no real information here, there is also real information, mere references to FROMSOFTWARE, Elden Ring, Sony and it all seemingly makes it an article, seemingly being the operative word. It is a hatchet job to keep the name Khashoggi alive, a person no one ever gave a fuck about, well perhaps less than a dozen, to some extent. If anything the writer shows how obsolete and worthless the media has become. And it is not merely the writer, this went past an editor and others, and they approved this, so what about them? Well I have a few ideas but they will have to wait until the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia buys my IP, it will be so worth it to see their margins of profit flutter away.

It is merely my view, but I have written several articles on that columnist with added views on the UN report and other parts, I am too tired to repeat it all, you can find it by searching “lawlordtobe + Khashoggi” in Google, have fun! Oh and if there is any media out there who actually knows what software house they are buying for $20B, I feel certain that there are plenty of gamers who would love to know. I reckon it could be Ubisoft, but they are paying way too much for that place. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Gaming, Media, Politics

The opportune moment of my IP

There was a side I never, or almost never talked about, merely because it was interacting with other options and therefor it had a slippery side of becoming unpredictable. The second wave of my first IP bundle had an evolutionary stage that went straight into the Metaverse. Now I see that Saudi Arabia (at as I see it the Middle East Eye reports ‘Saudi Arabia’s Neom invests $1bn in metaverse’, it could cover my IP as well, so as we see “The company has invested $1bn in 2022 in AI projects that include a metaverse platform, in the hope that it will advance Tonomus’ goal of positioning Neom as the world’s first “cognitive community”” add my monthly $500M solution to that and it becomes a much larger powerhouse and it goes a lot further than making the UAE jealous. The IP as offered to the Saudi Consulate (in Sydney) gives rise to much more than I expected, if these two are united (something I hoped to do in 2024)  this goes a lot further than even I expected in the term I expected things to go and it goes beyond AI or mere Saudi interests. This impacts several nations all with access, making Neom an instant power hub for technology and streaming.  Although originally not part of their design Tonomus would have the ability to be well over 100% more powerful within 2 years. So even as we see “Dubai announced a metaverse plan in July that aims to deliver 40,000 new jobs and $4bn to the city’s economy in five years.” I saw another path that they were not looking at and now Saudi Arabia has the setting for $6,000,000,000 annual within 5 years and a lot of jobs, not that many, but their setting it total, my setting is annual, as such I win, or actually the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia wins if my structure is accepted into the whole frame and that number is merely on my side of the equation, their side could spell it to be a lot more for a lot longer because my scope enhances their scope, something I never banked on because it was not part of my design, and there is a secondary part to that too, you see the Metaverse was an optional enhancement to my IP, so there are waves upon waves (as I see it) and that means that the old approach is next to the new approach and I have to giggle to myself, when I see the utter stupidity of Optus, whilst seeing my own innovation, a side that neither Amazon nor google saw, or saw coming enhances my IP even more and should the KSA buy it, the nextgen powerhouses of IT will no longer be in the US, or EU. They will be in the Middle East because it is not merely what Saudi Arabia, or the UAE does. It is what they can achieve together, a side I never considered and I feel decently certain that none of the other players had considered that either.

Leave a comment

Filed under Gaming, IT, Media, Science

Optus seems more stupid

I wrote about this earlier, I had concerns, I had questions and I had to some degree accusations. Yet that is nothing compared to now. The BBC gives us (at ‘Optus: How a massive data breach has exposed Australia’ this shows a few sides, I was unaware of earlier. They start with “about 40% of the population – had personal data stolen in what it calls a cyber-attack” that is a lot, but Optus has a large user population. It is “Those whose passport or licence numbers were taken – roughly 2.8 million people – are at a “quite significant” risk of identity theft and fraud, the government has since said” which is close to everyone, to become most telecom members, you need 200 points of identification, which tends to include a passport or a drivers license. So when we get to “In an emotional apology, Optus chief executive Kelly Bayer Rosmarin called it a “sophisticated attack”, saying the company has very strong cybersecurity”, is that so? So when the BBC treats us to “Sydney-based tech reporter Jeremy Kirk contacted the purported hacker and said the person gave him a detailed explanation of how they stole the data. The user contradicted Optus’s claims the breach was “sophisticated”, saying they pulled the data from a freely accessible software interface. “No authenticate needed… All open to internet for any one to use,” they said in a message, according to Kirk.” This seems like there is a serious flaw in the Optus system, and when we revisit the statement from Kelly Bayer Rosmarin “I’m disappointed that we couldn’t have prevented it,” she said on Friday

I tend to side with the less diplomatic version of me stating to Kelly Bayer Rosmarin “Do you know that the condom is also used to stop making you fat? It is not just for the prevention of STD’s” now I might be ejaculating a bit premature (aka was Jeremy Kirk told a BS story or the truth) but if this is true, then Optus failed on a few levels. Protecting the data, protecting the servers and protecting their customer base. You see, the software interface might have allowed for injection of a backdoor making the Optus system now close to completely unreliable. The fact that there is a freely accessible software interface in play implies that its IT security failed, the data was collected and that happened without any red flags on access and transfer of data and we see the fact that all the data is accessible, from way too many places and that is the telecom company that Australia trusts? It gets to be even worse when we look at the article (at where we are given ‘Optus hack ‘could happen to anyone’ ex-Telstra boss warns’, a wannabe from the stables of Telstra, an immature greedy Microsoft minded telecom. There we see “Former Telstra chief executive David Thodey says the cyberattack on Optus “could happen to anyone” and urged all big and small organisations to be “vigilant” about online security”, Well David, if the information from Jeremy Kirk holds true, you better hope that you have a better cyber and IT security division, more importantly if this level of stupidity can happen to EVERONE, your systems ALL SUCK! And in my personal opinion you all need an overhaul and a 80% wage reduction. This level of stupidity when it comes to personal data is too stupid for any of you to be taken seriously as so called ‘captains of industry’ as such, please apply for an Uber or barber position. 

Now this seems overly emotional, but these are the kind of people who judged me a not being professional and THEY set data next to an open interface? This is the 101 of stupidity. OK, if JK was told a bag of lies I would owe a few people an apology, but that is for tomorrow, for now it seems that a lot of people are not aware of the level of stupid their telecom company hung their personal data on and that is more than a simple investigation, there are plenty who will pay handsomely for that much personal data. The US, Russia, India and China. 4 players willing to pay twice what the hacker wanted and they will not ask questions. A whole collection of personal data that can aid in creating deeper learning personalised rainbow tables, a whole battery of data from all kinds of social media that can now be used for granularity and a whole range of other data sets that can now be completed. And it all hangs on a (currently unconfirmed) version of a freely accessible software interface. “No authenticate needed”. How angry would you be hen these so called professionals charged you again and again and as they changed membership status so that they had more legal options. And they are not held to account? Yes, I would be angry and I am (for now still) with Optus, I get to be angry, my data is out there. So how would you feel?

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics, Science

Simplification anyone?

The BBC alerted me to something an hour ago. This happens and I initially read the article with a shrug like ‘who cares?’ But  few moments later the coin dropped and I was all about the WTF setting. You see, the article ‘Mortgage deals withdrawn in record numbers over rate rise fears’ (at, as said, I initially shrugged when I saw “Lenders withdrew a record number of mortgage products overnight, according to analysts, as they grappled with the prospect of rising interest rates”, it was always going to happen, but the awakening happened shortly thereafter when I saw “Moneyfacts, a financial information service, said that 935 mortgage products, around a quarter of the total, were taken off the shelf.” Are you effing kidding me? 935 mortgage products? How can anyone get a clear view on that many products? How can anyone see the forest through the trees in that setting? And with “lenders are withdrawing mortgage deals in order to re-price them” chaos gets a free rein. Is anyone clearly investigating these products? And that is before we get to the repricing issue. Now, I get it, things get repriced, events make that essential, but when was a mortgage holder EVER contacted because his product has been lowered in price, and there would be a windfall that would be shown in a lower monthly rate, when did that EVER happen? My guess is never. And we haven’t even touched on the crazy part. This is seen with “A total of 2,661 mortgage products are still available – but that is half the number that were on sale at the start of December last year when interest rates started to rise” this means that the people are confronted with 3600 mortgage products, this sounds way too fishy to me and no one is asking questions. I get that there are elements that make it essential to have a few products, but this is enabling a wild west of mortgage consultants and that ain’t right. So when I see “Brokers are reassuring those who already have a mortgage, or an agreement for a new mortgage, that they will be unaffected for the time being. However, when they come to remortgage, they are likely to find monthly repayments have become a lot more expensive” There is a clear setting here, mortgages are frozen for a time and this time tends to be 3-5 years, so after that time remortgage will have an impact and with the housing market reducing in price by a speculated 10% that will be a very costly event for a lot of people. And that setting is made with “When the family bought their house in Manchester in 2018, they fixed the mortgage at 2.05% for five years with monthly payments of £927, Mr Ahmad said.

Usman, a 33-year-old self-employed courier, said if he took out a fixed rate mortgage today he would be facing monthly payments of more than £1,250 a month” Yes there are a few sides here and that is not all on the people. The first is what property did they buy? Did they leave space for situations that they could not foresee? The second part is the 2.05%, that is below currency valuation, a larger setting that influences everything and that is before you realise that all these events are setting their mortgage at almost 30% higher and optionally even more in 2023 and 2024. That whilst they lose 10% of their value makes it a rather large issue. And in this I have little faith in the ‘calming’ voice of Rachel Springall from Moneyfacts. We might be given “Various lenders have been very vocal that their decision to withdraw products is a temporary measure, amid the uncertainty over interest rates” but one persons temporary setting is speculation, we just do not know what will happen and the fact that there were over 3500 mortgage products was a idiotic setting to say the least. Yes, it is personal ad there might be all kind of reasons but go to ANY bank, how many mortgage products do they have? They will not give you that 3500 list, will they and banks are still the centre piece in any mortgage and that is now becoming a much larger play. Andrew Wishart, senior property economist at Capital Economics gives us “The rise in market interest rates that has already happened will push up mortgage rates to at least 6% and reduce the size of loans that lenders can offer” if that is true, Usman Ahmad’s house is a cooked setting, from 2.05% to 6% implies a cost rise of almost 300%, he might want to get out whilst he has a chance because this is about to get really ugly in the UK. And whatever short term someone hands them is a loaded cannon, it’s like walking backwards in a minefield thinking that you are more safe that way, I never saw that reality and you should neither. I reckon that a larger investigation is needed the fact that the BBC does not think this to be important is their loss, but here do you see the stage where there are over 3500 game consoles, no business can set that stage and survive, the fact that mortgages got away with it makes me wonder if any of them had the welfare of house buyers in mind. I have my doubts here.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

Fortune cookie slogans

There is a danger in using fortune cookie approaches. There is always a danger, but some come from unexpected sides. I was walking in the mall a week ago and I was confronted with some eager girl (no negativity implied) who threw at me “Help us sponsor 1000 girls”, my deadpan answer was “I do not have a brothel that big”, she was takes aback in shock (I know I am a bit of a bastard at times). Now this was not her fault (to some degree not mine either) The poster (as displayed) is decently clear. But the mistake (as I see it) was made by not briefing the young lady correctly, or completely. You see, she is working with her hands tied to her back. And when you dissect the poster it will be about protecting these girl from harm, to give them a better future and there lies the rub, slogans do not do the job. Slogans are dangerous to say the least. 

If you doubt me, try reading the red book of Mao Tse Tung and you might get it. Slogans are great for reinforcement, but they are downright dangerous in a place where you want to start a conversation with someone who does not have the time, or the interest to be swayed from their current objective. I get it, it is hard to get something started in that situation, her job was hard to begin with and getting into a stage with dopey the dwarf (me) did not help. To see some part we need to go to the Harvard Business Review. A piece by Juliano Laran, Amy N. Dalton, and Eduardo B. Andrade  ‘Why Consumers Rebel Against Slogans, 2011’ gives you “After they were exposed to brands associated with saving money (such as Dollar Store and Kmart), they decided to spend 37% less than after they were exposed to neutral brands. The brands had the intended “priming” effect”, which is interesting, but it is followed by “when it came to slogans, the same participants exhibited the opposite of the desired behaviour”, as such slogans had a “reverse priming” effect. And that is what we face here, but the situation changes. There is no priming, the speaker becomes the primer, so that person needs to be very well trained/educated and made aware of the issues that these girls face. Yes, we have seen it, there are plenty of women with bouncy bouncy boobs to get the attention of man, there are plenty of well groomed man who get the attention of women, and that starts the conversation. That person had taken attention from the task that the person was facing, but what now?

Now, we see a new direction and the paper gives us “Our studies suggest that reverse priming occurs because consumers recognise that slogans deliberately attempt to persuade them, whereas (in their perception) brands do not”, which is interesting as I kinda realised this but it is nice to see it in writing and that is the whole ballgame. And now the following makes a lot more sense “slogans can exert a positive influence, we believe, if the consumer is led to focus on something other than the effort to persuade” change the focal point and that is good, but how can anyone change focus? It is hard, really hard to do this in a conversation. I am not saying that this is impossible, but in this day and age where people struggle to pay bills asking them to surrender dollars of their hard earned money to make payments meet for a worthy cause is difficult. There are places that rely on pensioners and retired people to hand over some dollars. Consider (I think) 4 years ago when the news was given that these people would lose $300 a month because of budget changes, how much revenue did charities lose? A direct impact and that is what we face now, but in this case it is reverse priming by a slogan. How could it be done better? That is the operative word and I do not have all the answers, yet consider would it help if there was a small table and 2-3 chairs? When the person sits down that person has accepted that this will take some minutes. That person now has time, the one element that failed of the bat. Now that person gets directly introduced to the matter at hand, perhaps a leaflet (I hate them), but what happens when the table is a QR code? Something the person can scan with their mobile? The poster could have had a QR code as well, something the person could read later, something that the person can take with them. What happens when the person bringing the cause gets that level of support and do not tell me how ‘hard’ it is, it is a simple page that is linked to a QR code, it is done every day. The slogan might still exist, but now there is something to reinforce the message, the message is at hand, something the girl did not have. And the dangers of slogans remain, but the additional information also has another part, that message will be read at home, but more likely on a bus or in a train and now the person’s mind is at rest and the message seeps through, or so I believe. 

The article end perfect, it ends with “More research is needed to understand why consumers perceive certain tactics as efforts to persuade. In the meantime, marketers should be aware that messages seen even subconsciously as manipulative can cause significant backlash.” Yes, that is definite and we do not have all the answers, but the dangers of fortune cookie slogans needs to be brought to the front, if only to make work easier for certain ladies (men also) who surrender their time to bring forward worthy causes. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Science

Bloomberg cake time

I got a nice surprise yesterday. Bloomberg handed it with the article (at, there we learn ‘Amazon is the Least Understood Company in Hollywood’. It was interesting because I do not know anything about tinseltown (Hollywood) and I put all these creators, streamers or not on one pile. It seems that there are differences and the article brings out a few sides I never considered. So when I read “Amazon has been making original series for as long as Netflix with far less to show for it. But there are signs its strategy is starting to pay off” my mind started procedure ‘Wake up’ and I took notice. You see, I created plays as stories, mini series, even a movie, but with nothing more in mind than a story. I put some of it in my blogs and that is the end of it (or so I expect) and as a storyteller. 3 series, 2 mini stories and a movie is not a bad result, especially as it is not my field, I am in technology. I am a call centre operator, a customer care person and I am happy there, even though I also miss technical support. So as we see the three things we need to be mindful “Six Gulf States told Netflix to remove videos that violate “Islamic values.”” My movie ‘How to assassinate a politician’ was specifically designed for these states. Then we get “The world’s second largest movie theater chain declared bankruptcy” yes this is sad, but it is also a sign of the times. Hollywood did not help here, they are all about creating more and too little about creating higher quality, that is definitely part of the equation and I am NOT looking at Marvel movies. Their endgame was magnificent, I still watch it at least twice a year and I might upgrade that one to a 4K edition when possible (I still do not have a 4K TV, so no rush). Then we get “Mark Bergen’s YouTube book is now for sale”, I merely wonder why that is a factor? Let’s be clear, it might be an optional work like  the Social network, you know, that movie with Mark Zuckerman’s lookalike Jesse Eisenberg. But that is optionally one movie, perhaps the book has more than I reckon, but I haven’t read it yet. So when we get to “Netflix has spent more than Amazon over the last decade, and produced a much higher volume of shows. But Amazon Studios chief Jen Salke has a $10 billion budget. If you include sports, Amazon is projected to spend $15 billion on programming this year, according to Bloomberg Intelligence. That’s comparable to what Netflix (and many others) will spend”, we see the first element I foresaw ‘produced a much higher volume of shows’, it is about more, not better. And there is the rub. Lets be clear, Netflix has created high quality work (the Sandman) no one denies this, but Hollywood produced in 2019 (pre Covid) 792 movies, that is almost 2 movies a day just to see it all, now we get that they cater to a niche and every movie house has a niche. Yet in 2000 they only produced 371 movies, that is quite the jump in less than 20 years, and as we are aware that the number of writers did not exponentially increase they either tailored to less quality or upped the pressure on writers giving that very same result, yes that is a personal view on the matter.  As we get to “Yet we know that Amazon is a very successful company that generated $470 billion in sales and $33 billion in net income last year. We also know that its advertising business is booming” we can speculate that they are doing something right, or they have additional data none of the others have. So when this is supported by “This is Amazon’s greatest strength, but also its greatest weakness. The company has seemingly unlimited resources — and no real need to win, at least not right away. While Netflix and Disney stress over whether shows attract new customers or prevent people from canceling (or churning), churn at Amazon is almost nonexistent” We optionally see a second part that is not mentioned and merely hinted at. It is not the resources, even though that helps. They can cater to THEIR population, which implies that churning is reduced to zero, and they keep focus on the projects and so far that is paying off. There is a benefit when you OWN the bank, but I reckon that they have a stage where they cater to a plan that holds 100% of their customers. Reality makes me rephrase that into ‘that holds 95% of their customers’, a stage both Netflix and to a lesser degree Disney cannot adjust for. Not unless they spend a whole lot more and that is the danger, they do not own the bank and the first insight that involves ‘Islamic values’ is actually a lot more important. Instead of creating an offspring with the focus on the gulf states, the ego of Hollywood thinks it can do it all and there is the trap that sinks 1000 titanic’s. To be honest, I would love to see the data that Amazon relies on but I reckon that only a few (at Amazon) ever get to see that whole picture. A simple lieutenant does not get the image the generals have and these generals have to make the hard calls, the tough calls and so far it seems that them at Amazon re making the right call. I personally speculate that they are playing the long game whilst the others are limited to quarterly pushes, until the next stockholders meeting. That is why in the end Amazon will overcome nearly all hurdles and most others are sunk as they were unable to see three hurdles ahead. The article holds more and Lucas Shaw did a really good job here, he showed me a few sides I never knew (why would I), and it brought information and delight all at the same time, so you should definitely read that article, it is worth your time.

Now I need to focus on fortune cookie marketeers, hopefully more in several hours.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, movies

You forgot something!

As was looking at a few matters, Reuters gives us an article (at The article named ‘Google says shared network costs is 10-year-old idea, bad for consumers’, it seems fair from a distance, but it is not. You see the smaller detail is seen in “a push by European telecoms operators to get Big Tech to help fund network cost”, so first we get misinformation, mistreatment and mismanagement form players like Orange, Vodafone, KPN, BEN, Deutsche Telekom and several others. And not THEY want big tech to pay for their stupidity? You have got to be effing kidding me. And as stated, it is a 10 year old idea, as such we see another stage where the European Commission shows itself to be useless, lacking creativity and a mere populous that enjoys the gravy train and gives and produces nothing of value. It seems harsh, but this setting was clear from 2009 onwards when we saw the gaps all over Europe and now that 5G is becoming more and more important, the mobile players in Europe are onestep short of becoming useless and pointless and when Elon Musk’s Star-thingamajig becomes active, these players are done for. So when we see “Deutsche Telekom, Orange, Telefonica and other big operators have long complained about tech rivals free-riding on their networks, saying that they use a huge part of internet traffic and should contribute financially.” And my issue here, is it really free-riding? I have a certain bandwidth, it is used for Google, LinkedIn, Twitter and a few other parts. I PAY FOR THIS AS DO OTHERS! So how is Google Free-riding? How are other big-tech free-riding? Will we get a clear explanation for that? The article also gives us “Google, owner of YouTube, has done its part to make it more efficient for telecoms providers by carrying traffic 99% of the way and investing millions of euros to do so” and there is also the part that I am willing to accept that they did these investments for selfish reasons, but that is not against the law, is it? I reckon the moment Google makes a deal with Elon Musk and we can all ‘freely’ use that network these telecom companies will cry like little chihuahua’s, the los of data they were capturing will end a few matters and that is not what we see here, are we?

Matt Brittin, president of EMEA business & operations at Google also gives us “In 2021, we invested over 23 billion euros in capital expenditure – much of which is infrastructure,” OK, fair, but I still believe that this was slightly selfish for Google business anchoring. I am not complaining and neither are many others, but that is part of the setting, the Telecom companies are realising that they are about to go the way of the Dodo (like newspapers last year) and now they cry and they require the European gravy train to fix their shortfall, their shortcomings and their lack of innovation. And they are losing more, if Saudi Arabia buys my IP, the evidence will put them in prime position to get my 5G as well and then the market changes even further. It makes sense, as Neom was the inspiration for it, should they not enjoy the benefit? 

It is at that point the clown comes to play. We see that with “EU digital chief Margrethe Vestager urging them to ensure that companies generating the largest traffic on network infrastructure should contribute in a fair and proportionate manner to the costs.” And exactly why to I make the clown reference? You see, most of the traffic is generated by USERS, by PEOPLE who want to know things and most of them seek it on Google, these PEOPLE PAY for that bandwidth, so let hope the clowns in Strasbourg wake up and smell the waterlilies. The generation is made by PEOPLE and they paid for that right, the rest is not on Google, but I reckon that Margrethe Vestager is part of the gravy train that needs to satisfy the needs of the exploitative telecom companies. And is it not strange that the people who paid for this service now see that Google must pay for this? I am certainly surprised, aren’t you?

But that is the shortsightedness of politicians for you.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics, Science