Category Archives: Media

What’s a tool?

There are all kinds of tools. There are chisels (used by Carpenters), there are hammers and they are used by all kinds of people in all kinds of endeavours. So let’s invert that question, what is a political tool, and who is representing them? From my point of view the media-man is becoming evermore the political tool, the man now more openly then before mis representing the events, so that the people will not look to deep into the matter at hand.

These were thoughts forming as I looked at the article at (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-60092458) 2 hours ago. There we are given ‘UN condemns deadly air strike on Yemen prison’. The news we are given gives us “a stronghold of the rebel Houthi movement in north-western Yemen, was hit on Friday”, that one line. After that we get “Millions have been displaced and much of the population stands on the brink of famine.” From my point of view, people in Yemen have been on the brink of famine for three years now, in massive part by Houthi forces. Then we get “US Secretary of State Antony Blinken also called for de-escalation”, I could continue stating that the man is an idiot, but that part will be clear soon enough (in this article). We are given “Houthis carried out a rare drone and missile attack on the UAE on Monday” here we see the word ‘rare’ added, the reason is seemingly clear, but I will inform you a little further down. We also see “the first deadly attack of its kind in the emirates

So what are we not told?
In the first, 4 weeks ago Saudi spokesperson Turki Al-Maliki gave us (via Arab News) evidence that both Hezbollah and Iran were involved in the Yemeni war. None of the western media covered that, why not? We see one sided attacks on the activities by Saudi Arabia and its allies, all whilst no one, not even the UN is holding Houthi forces to clear account. This is more than just annoying, it is the beginning of media corruption and as I personally see it, the BBC is not innocent, it has not been innocent since Martin Bashir, that journalist that got the Princess of Wales killed.

So moving on, we also get ‘F-15 destroys two ballistic missile in Sanaa’ (source: Saudi Gazette), again the western media gives us nothing. Now, if there was opposition, contra-dictionary evidence and it was mentioned, it could be regarded as an optional issue, but it is silenced by nearly all. That is the part that does not add up, yet I promised more.

The final part of all this is not seen in Yemen, it is seen in the Guardian (I reported on it yesterday). The Grenfell situation, the Guardian gave it and only something called MyLondon seems to have mentioned it, no BBC, No Express, No Daily Mail, No Times. You still think that the media is innocent? I talked about it in ‘Is there a difference?’ On January 21st. You think the media needs that much time to assess their thoughts? One sided reporting is becoming the norm, not the exception and that is more than sad, it is right out dangerous. The greed driven media is all about their digital dollars and in that process we are not given the information that we should be getting. Is there any doubt that the final hours of media will soon be coming? Remember all these crying editors claiming that they could police themselves in the Leveson report? So what is left of them at this point?

So back to the Saudi Gazette. How do Yemeni’s get ballistic missiles? They cannot create them, they have no means of manufacturing. They have no resources for ballistic missiles. This is a clear setting that the Houthis are getting supplies,. So as I personally see it that idiot Antony Blinken should have been informed by the CIA, so either he is setting a filter to NOT get that part, or the CIA has become a lot more incompetent. I will let you judge was is happening there. But there has been clear evidence for over two years that Iran is directly supporting Houthi forces and the media will not tell you, so why not? So what makes a tool a tool? When the media decides not to tell you, who do they serve? You better believe that this is not about you, this is about stakeholders and profiteering. That is how I see it, because if someone keeps us in the dark it tends to be about the opportunity of others and that tends to hold a price tag. So one final nice part about that piece. No journalist set his or her name to that article, interesting, not?

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Military, Politics

Is there a difference?

That is the question that overcame me. I was considering a new IP on gaming and it is actually going well, but about that soon. Leave it to me to create a Blizzard contender but now as public domain (for Sony and Amazon). And I do need a hobby so it might as well be sawing the chair-legs away from the Microsoft board of directors. Anyway, as I was contemplating a new path in IP, the Guardian gives us (at https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/jan/20/tower-twice-grenfell-height-planned-single-staircase-urw) with the title ‘Tower twice Grenfell’s height planned nearby with single staircase’, so the initial example on June 14th 2017 was not enough, construction and architectural companies in the UK as vying for the title of who can kill the surplus population the fastest. A few small details, the Grenfell tower was 67 metres high and became a coffin for 72 people. Now we see that the mistake is overtaken by to buildings, one of 130 metres, one 174 metres and again the singular stairs. I reckon that cladding will not be a problem either, there are always ways to avoid cost overruns. So when we are given “A planning application for a 51-storey residential tower in Docklands with one fire escape has been paused after a safety outcry”, my initial thought was “At what point will Mayor of London Sadiq Khan wake the fuck up?”. Not only was once not enough, we now see two plans, one in Docklands and one close to Grenfell, so the people will not see this nightmare, once, they optionally (if they are lucky) see it twice, what a joy greed makes!

So when the guardian treats us to “Grenfell United, a group representing the survivors and bereaved, said: “After half a decade of campaigning for safer homes, it’s shocking to hear that a new tower block, a stone’s throw from Grenfell, rigged with a fire safety defect before it’s even been built, is being planned.” It considers a single staircase inadequate for use by residents and firefighters if an evacuation is needed, even though it is allowable under building regulations.” I am left with the cornerstones.

  1. Why is this still allowed under building regulations?
  2. Why did the Guardian and Grenfell United need to bring this to the people attention?
  3. What on earth is the Mayor of London doing by allowing this targeted killing of London citizens under his watch?

You think that point 3 is overreaching? Consider the Guardian, yes I have had disagreements with them, yet they are giving us a while places like the BBC people (and others too) seemingly have nothing. So at what point will the BBC wake up, when will the larger news take this up and asks loudly the serious questions that should be asked? 

I know, only 72 died, London has roughly 9,000,000 people, so it is nothing. If this upsets you excellent! You see, we saw all the trial shenanigans. Now consider the video (from a firefighter) that some might have seen (at https://youtu.be/QM4RJE81fh4) and now consider and wonder how these two plans were set in motion, moreover we get to hear “a 51-storey residential tower in Docklands with one fire escape has been paused after a safety outcry” at what point will you consider ‘has been paused after a safety outcry’. This required an outcry? This was not stopped from the moment the plans were submitted? It would have been long before the people and in particular Grenfell United would have been aware. 

So when we see the video with the response from a firefighter ‘How is that even possible?” and now the Guardian informs us that two more apartment buildings, buildings that are even higher are planned, I reckon that a lot of people want to know who is at the helm of these folly pieces and a list of civil servants that are seemingly asleep at the wheel of city governance, because as I personally see it heads will roll on this one. So we might be drawn by “as some safety experts call current staircase rules ‘madness’”, I would be much more interested on the setting that someone signed off on this, because we see “has been paused”, this implies that someone gave the signal to go ahead on this, or not?

So when the Guardian gives us “as part of a complex of 1,760 new homes being planned by the owner of the Westfield shopping centre in west London.” I merely wonder if that Westfield complex has an undertaker on the spot, because for them business will be booming with up to 3,500-4,000 new customers soon enough. You think I am too blunt? Consider that being soft seemingly did nothing and the fact that someone was optionally willing to repeat the 72 deaths with up to 4,000 souls for bartering in a second attempt. I believe we need a sledgehammer, not the subtlety of tweezers. We did that in 2017 and it seemingly led nowhere. So as the Guardian gives us “but it will rely on the same “stay put” strategy that failed on 14 June 2017 contributing to deaths, according to planning documents.” I feel anger, but mostly because there is some logic in the ‘stay put’ setting, yet it cannot be denied that is failed completely in Grenfell, so why were ALL London building plans not stopped to investigate the logical sanity of that procedure? And moreover, why is that setting as well as the conclusions of that not in EVERY newspaper in the Commonwealth? 

I will let you ponder on this whilst I continue on the idea that gives Blizzard a run for their money, mostly it is me having a go at Microsoft for buying an ice-cream cone for $37,000,000,000 whilst the supermarket 253.4 meters away sells them by the bucket for $50,000,000. It is only a mere factor of 740, and if I get a decent result on my first attempt Microsoft stock would go straight to the basement, and that is before they get a clue on the other issues that Activision might give them, which makes my attempt a lot easier. Ah well, I hope to give you the news soon. 

When a hobby give that much satisfaction, it is almost criminal to be on an income (I would still take it), and the better case for laughter is that one in 740 implies that statistics would fall towards me no matter how it goes. Consider a dartboard. How many darts will it take for you to throw 180? Microsoft can only win if I fail 740 times any success hit sooner becomes a massive cost for them. And there is the rub, only if I fail more than 740 times will Microsoft win, now you try on a dartboard and see how many times it took you to get 180. That is the folly Microsoft started and I am about to rain the size of a blizzard on their parade. Life can be fun and rewarding at times, unless you live in an apartment building in London.

Leave a comment

Filed under Gaming, Media, Politics

Supporting Sony and Amazon

There is a time when it is not about the dough (aka money), there is a time when it is about the principle of protecting the game and the gamer. And when it is supported by a civic duty to kick Microsoft in the mouth (for civic duty and personal pleasure) the money issue does not add up to much. You see, we can toss and turn over. Few coins now, but when gaming is slaughtered by Microsoft, what does that add up to in the end? 

So in support of what I wrote yesterday in ‘At it again’ I have decided that all gaming idea’s on my site are now free to use for both Sony and Amazon. I do hope that they will give me a bonus if the 50,000,000 consoles for Amazon becomes a reality, but that is not out of bounds is it? So I already created the foundation of an entirely new RPG (as I wrote earlier), so now I need to come up with an idea for something to counter Blizzard. I reckon that the Activision problem will solve itself soon enough.

This is seen in a few articles like ‘CoD Vanguard players expose ‘pay to win’ Double Barrel Blueprint after nerfs’, as well as ‘Call of Duty Acknowledges Problems With Warzone and Vanguard’, a setting that shows that with “The publisher released a statement on the official Call of Duty Twitter account, acknowledging the struggles these games have had, and its intention to move things in the right direction. Activision plans to fix as many of these issues as quickly as it can”, this indicates that the troubles brewing are not resolved, more important, they have been going on for some time and that tends to be disastrous. Even as game makers ‘hide’ behind ‘best selling in the US’ we see another flavour of “most powerful console”, which was done away easily enough by Nintendo and its “weakest of all consoles” to bash it, surpass it in sales in almost half the time. Now with Microsoft buying software houses for a total of $37,000,000,000 (most of it for Blizzard and Activision), we are introduced to “The bigger worry is that Sony is no match against its far-larger rival as gamers look beyond consoles” (source: Reuters), yet but the statement is not correctly given, is it? With “as gamers look beyond consoles”, we see the article catering to Microsoft and its advertisement budget, but the truth is that gamers always look beyond consoles, they look for the best gaming experience and so far Microsoft has disappointed too much and too often, as did Ubisoft, as did a few others. Looking beyond consoles makes sense, there is a case for both the Google Stadia and Amazon Luna, but Google does not develop games. As such the Amazon Luna has the better advantage and handing them (as well as Sony) free access to my IP works for me as a gamer and works for gamers in total. And I have always been protective of gamers. Not to mention that there is a surprisingly satisfying feeling if my RPG idea gains traction, when Microsoft Paid $7,500,000,000 for Bethesda, only to see that Sony and Amazon can bring a new competitive RPG at a fraction of the cost, not to mention the undisclosed option for Amazon to sell an additional 50,000,000 (or more) consoles on an idea Microsoft never saw coming in the first place. The idea to surpass Microsoft left, right and centre on their shortsightedness is massively satisfying and as I am considering now a Diablo like game where the stage is a combined Gauntlet like game, as well as a first person action slice and dice game, we see (in the earliest stage) that they got an additional lemon at $27,000,000,000. A stage that makes me laugh. Microsoft has the ‘lets throw money against the shortcomings we have’ and I countered it by handing over IP to Sony and Amazon that is new, fresh and optionally grows to be the equal of what they paid for at top dollar. It might not make me rich (never a priority to me), but I can fall asleep with the biggest grin knowing I pulled the carpet from under the feet of one of the biggest software companies on the planet. 

So when we look at “Microsoft will be looking to gradually lure PlayStation gamers to its own console with new content down the line.” We see subterfuge. And I feel 98.3245% certain (roughly) that my creativity can trump their subterfuge. So when we see the two parts namely “the huge bet on Activision signals the company is serious about building a virtual world beyond a console or device”, as well as “Sony is doubling down on games exclusive to PlayStation. It may have the air of a David and Goliath match-up, but Microsoft looks to be on a whole other level.” We see the courtesan move towards advertisement. Consoles have for the longest time aimed for exclusives, the Sony exclusives have proven to be exquisite masterpieces again and again. You see, THEY might tell you that gamers want “a virtual world beyond a console or device”, yet it is not gaming, it is a world of cheats, cheating and hacks and in that world there is a larger benefit for the maker to set the ‘pay to win’ environment by selling weapons and other micro transactions to fill the war-chest of its board of directors. At some point (sooner than anyone expects) the gamer will have had enough and dump these games. With the Sony games, with gaming on a console, the only cheat you get is on yourself.  But that part will not make the media, will it? Gamers will too often feel the need to chill and play the story, enjoy the world they are in, a setting that the Microsoft games will not offer. They will make lofty promises like “Activision has announced the worst punishment yet. In short, if you’re caught cheating in Call of Duty: Vanguard, you can be banned from every CoD game in the franchise.” A statement made in
November 2021. This in response to “Numerous players reported running into blatant cheaters on Vanguard on the very first day of the release.” And no one is asking the question why cheating was made so easy, so easy that it was ready on the first day of release. But I cannot find any media asking that part, and then the response ‘you can be banned’, not ‘you will be banned’, a subtle but unmistakingly difference that they are considering action, not promising that action will be taken and when the gamers get a few more of those issues, they will walk away. A good spending of 27 billion. So whilst we cannot deny that there will be a desire for virtual world combat, until you deal with the cheaters that world will be as appealing as a tax form. In this with the cheater active from day one, it seems to me that a lot more fixing is required. Darn and I was having so much fun surpassing Microsoft with creativity, all whilst common sense might defeat them before that. Because in the end it will be common sense. The common sense that gamers want to have fun, they want to exchange blows on an honest field so that s gamers they feel enabled and the last time I checked in a game filed with cheaters no one feels enabled, merely insulted and attacked on a false premise. 

So I do not disagree with Reuters on “Microsoft looks to be on a whole other level”, especially when that is set to the stage that the Microsoft level is an inferior one. Now, you are free to disagree, but consider if you go into a virtual world and there are a dozen cheaters waiting for you, how much fun will you have as a gamer? Not that much I reckon.

Enjoy the day! I am going to mull the new Diablo station a little more, the idea is taking form, but I do know it will not be easy to offer a Diablo alternative, that franchise is a really solid one. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Gaming, Media

At it again

Yes, Microsoft is at it again. This time it is costing them $68,000,000,000 for the acquisition of Activision Blizzard. Associated Press released that information an hour ago (at https://apnews.com/article/microsoft-activision-blizzard-acquisition-call-of-duty-7a9e2bcc8f0b7b9049e4f93fe3e0a4dd). There we see “The all-cash $68.7 billion deal will turn Microsoft, maker of the Xbox gaming system, into one of the world’s largest video game companies. It will also help it compete with tech rivals such as Meta, formerly Facebook, in creating immersive virtual worlds for both work and play.” Yet what we do not see is the one Blizzard element missing, Diablo. We get “strengthen the company’s culture and accelerate business growth.” Yet I feel that there is a large need to upset fan bases and move them from the Sony path into the Microsoft path. It is a clever tactic, but not at 68 billion, there is more and I get the stage, there will be more even though the ‘META’ references do fit to some degree. 

The danger is seen in the smallest quote. I believe that ‘the world’s largest video game company’ is part of the stage and it is part of the need for Microsoft. We forget that the revenue of Candy Crush is huge and it is not merely the value of that revenue, it is the number of people generating that revenue that matters. You see these numbers are also a marketing drive and therefor a stage of doubling revenue. We think that advertisement are the key and for some they are to a degree, but what happens when the pay system becomes a marketing tool for verifiable information? We think it is assumption and presumption and for most it is, but when that data is verified with pay-cycles that game changes. And when we consider “the latest acquisitions will help beef up its Xbox Game Pass game subscription service while also accelerating its ambitions for the metaverse, a collection of virtual worlds designed as a next generation of the internet” we see a few things between the lines. In the first there is the subscription (Game Pass), so when all these games fall under subscription the game changes, the system will set a larger approval for THEIR streaming solution. It foes not impact my 50,000,000, but it does change the balance of the gaming community. When the larger battle stations involve ONLY Game Pass, but passes over Sony’s head there is added revenue. It is a brilliant tactic and it is specific. Microsoft alls it the move toward Meta. I do not doubt that, but this time it is not enough, for 68 billion it cannot just be for Meta, Meta is the side effect as I saw it in at least one other setting. Yet to united gamers all under YOUR banner whilst leaving Nintendo and Sony out in the cold is about something more, it will be to set up virtual machines on those two so that we see a Nintendo logo, but we are still connected to a Microsoft virtual machine. I believe it is a dangerous move because gaming was kept at an all time high as vendors had to be clever to get the attention of gamers, Microsoft is taking away choice, as such taking way vetting of the best gaming solution and as such limiting the choice to one and from there our choices will become ever so limited again and again until all choice is removed, then it is what Microsoft says what it is and that is what it would be. 

In gaming diversity of game makers gives us the goods, the Microsoft method does not fit in, and with Diablo optionally removed from at least one system, I will have to come up with new IP to counter the move of Microsoft. It is a hard call but I am willing to set that to Public Domain, just to piss of Microsoft (as good a reason as any). 

I truly believe there is more to it all, yet I am not certain if we will hear it in time, no matter what there is more to this and Nintendo with 26,000,000 subscribers and over 93,000,000 Nintendo Switch systems sold, 104,000,000 active Sony users (PS4/PS5/vita) Microsoft is setting up a system to entice close to 200,000,000 people to come over. And when you consider the $14,95 a month, we see setting where they stand to gain $36,000,000,000 annually, if that goes well and that is 52% of the investment right there. They will not get all, but a chunk makes it all worth it and Microsoft had the money. They are vying to become the only remaining system with choices on the market, that tactic makes sense. How will gamers react? I reckon there will be anger, because the system that sets diversity to null is not a system we can ever trust, that has been proven more than once. 

And yes there is a meta fragment in there too and when Microsoft comes to the table with such a user group they do become the most formidable gaming community, there is no denying that, but at what cost? That will the larger game that is kept hidden from us all, because a player like Microsoft will not tolerate the negative side to gain traction, it would be working against them to the largest degree. I wonder who will keep us truly informed, I truly do.

Leave a comment

Filed under Gaming, IT, Media

Principle of a chair

Yes, we get that. We sometimes we rely on the principle of a chair until we figure things out, we sit on the problem. We aren’t hiding it, we aren’t ignoring it yet at times we aren’t sure where we are in such a situation. We contemplate and I am no different. So when I saw (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-59970281) the article ‘Is the pandemic entering its endgame?’ I was not sure how to feel about that. So when I saw ““We’re almost there, it is now the beginning of the end, at least in the UK,” Prof Julian Hiscox, chairman in infection and global health at the University of Liverpool, tells me. “I think life in 2022 will be almost back to before the pandemic.”” I was not sure how to feel, was the man openly optimistic? There is optimism and there is folly. Until November 2021 there was no Omicron, there was no enhanced danger to the global health systems. Now we see that we are seeing less cases, but it is still almost 2 million new cases a day. And that is whilst we openly see that the numbers from India do not make sense. A setting where the US has a health system that is near collapsing and the UK is in no better state. Then there is the one thought we all ignore, what comes next? Omicron slapped us across the face and when is there a next version? Is this Prof Julian Hiscox trying to sell us genuine pink salmon? (A Barnum and Bailey joke). Yet we also get the good stuff here, because we are told “What’s changing is our immunity. The new coronavirus first emerged two years ago in Wuhan, China, and we were vulnerable. It was a completely new virus that our immune systems had not experienced before and we had no drugs or vaccines to help.” I agree with that part, I agree that the vaccines are the solution, yet the evolution of Covid is still largely unknown, or at least we are not being told. So a next version could spell a lot of havoc in many lives. And that fear is confirmed with “The only major curve ball would be a new variant that can outcompete Omicron and cause significantly more severe disease”, as such the article makes a lot of sense and I cannot disagree, but at what stage do we ignore what might come? When do we accept the endemic path? People are all about to get back to the job and income, but the danger with endemic and a new version in that endemic universe means more death and even as I applaud that (we are as overpopulated as we need to be), will you feel the same when it is your children or your parents whose lives are on the line? We see the line that less die but this time around we have a new setting, the lack of hospital beds could also fuel deaths and Omicron made that clear in the US and the UK. Even if we see causality in these cases, we cannot continue on a path where people die because all the beds are taken by Covid cases. That was why I supported the stage where unvaccinated cases are not allowed hospital beds, and if required only through fully paid services (upfront), if you feel it is unfair, too bad. It is shown several times over that vaccinated people can get seriously sick, but shorter and for the most not fatally. So whenever I see another hack piece where someone claims that the unvaccinated take only 50% of the beds, I kinda go ‘Yes, and the pope is Jewish!’ There is a clear station where vaccines are the solution, yes there are a few dangerous side effects possible, but that danger is nowhere near the station of the unvaccinated dying of covid. So how do we react to anti vaccine people like Kelly Ernby, Marcus Lamb, Glynn Steel, William Hartmann? We need not react, covid killed them all and a lot more like them. My only issue is that they talked others in refusing the vaccine, optionally killing them all. 

Some say we need to to make fun of them. I am on the fence on that. On one side it might make those who listened to these anti-vaxxers wake up and get vaccinated, on the other hand their graves should be a clear message and in all this misinformation continues on nearly all fronts. The only issue is that even doctors are spreading misinformation. Not many, but those who do are fuelling into vaccination feelings under the average person and that is a dangerous stage. You see, the stage of an endemic is fine as long as we are ALL vaccinated, when that is not the case we will see more mutations and more deaths and that is the larger stage, the next mutation might be a lot more deadly than Omicron was. In Omicron it was about spreading the disease, but if that evolves into a more deadly version the game changes by a lot and to stop that danger we all need to be vaccinated, there is no other option. This is a stage we face, we either act in fear (for kids, siblings, parents), we act in denial, we act in support or in acceptance. I get it, they are all stages that propel us, but that is equally wrong, as is sitting on the problem, but at times when there are too many unknown elements it feels like the best solution. I got vaccinated in the early days, I am a product of vaccines (60’s) I lived through the eradication of Polio, difteria, TBC, measles and so on. Some of these diseases still exist, but they are now so rare that we act in surprise when a case does show up. At some point this will be the case for covid as well, but not now, there are still too many dangers and to some degree the anti-vaxxers are making it happen. It is my personal believe that a mutation can only come from an unvaccinated person. I know, it might be completely wrong, but that is how I feel and the medical people still do not know what drove covid, what brought mutations and why Omicron was regarded as ‘mild’ when we knew so little. Too many questions and we see no answers that is in part the problem because it fuels the feelings of anti-vaxxers. 

The principle of a chair is at times not the wrong position to have when enough information comes towards us, yet that too has not been the case with covid and w get it, there are a lot of unknown elements and scientists do need the time to study and prove parts. But this is a setting that has gone on for well over a year and the people are burning out on all sides and their less accepting side is becoming visible more and more, especially now.

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Science

A woman’s voice

Something bothered me, it bothered me from the beginning, but I let it go. There are several important things going on in the world and this was not one of them, or was it? It was the Guardian that pushed me into action. The article ‘Hollywood stars back Emma Watson after Palestinian solidarity post’ gave me the view that is was essential to act, and believe it or not act is the central part of the whole story.

The article (at https://www.theguardian.com/film/2022/jan/13/hollywood-stars-back-emma-watson-after-palestinian-solidarity-post) gives us a few things. Now to be honest, for the most I tend to take the side of Israel, for several reasons. The setting was that Emma Watson showed an image, an image that gives us “a photograph of a pro-Palestinian protest with the banner “solidarity is a verb” written across it. It was accompanied with a quote about the meaning of solidarity from the intersectional feminist scholar Sara Ahmed.” I reckon that Emma Watson agreed and she posted the image. In the initial hours I saw responses and also the accusation of antisemitism and I thought nothing of it, I believed it to be an overreaction. In this, I also saw the tweets by Danny Danon and I believed he was wrong, he too overreacted, but I let it slide. Now that we see all these responses, I feel that it is important to respond. 

As I stated, in most cases I tend to side with Israel. Here there is a truth. The truth is simple “solidarity is a verb”, that is truth, it is a verb until it is followed by acts, commitment and actions. If you want to see that look in your history books on Poland in the 1985-1999 era, solidarity came from actions, until that is done, it is merely a verb. Yet all sources ignore the third side in all this. There is one side, there is the opposition and there is the photograph. You see the photograph is brilliant. It starts conversations,. It starts views and it does create opposition, yet nearly all ignored or overlooked the third party, didn’t you? We see the acts against a young lay, and let’s face it, she is only 382 months old. It is not an excuse, it is not negative, it merely is a fact, just like the fact that “solidarity is a verb”. And she identified with the verb, she identified with the thought. In this she is right and a lot of people are wrong. So it is good to see names like Susan Sarandon, Mark Ruffalo, Peter Capaldi, Charles Dance, Gael García Bernal, Jim Jarmusch, Maxine Peake, Viggo Mortensen and Steve Coogan standing with her. In this Danny Danon and Israeli officials did the wrong thing, perhaps Palestine was hoping for an overreaction, perhaps it was something else and in all this Miss Watson never uttered an anti-semite word and that needs to be seen and seen as soon as possible. And in all this we see a second failing. Did you pick up on it? The media merely gives us “the meaning of solidarity from the intersectional feminist scholar Sara Ahmed”. So what was the meaning? Why is it (as I personally see it) overlooked? And more important, who is Sara Ahmed? The Quote was “Solidarity does not assume that our struggles are the same struggles, or that our pain is the same pain, or that our hope is for the same future. Solidarity involves commitment, and work, as well as the recognition that even if we do not have the same feelings, or the same lives, or the same bodies, we do live on common ground.” Do you know where I got that from? Vogue Magazine! They gave a more complete story than the newspapers, how weird is that?

So as we wonder who is right and who is wrong. I gave my view, yet I will not deny that Palestine has a hard situation, in part Palestine created it, but the truth behind the setting is that “Solidarity involves commitment, and work” it is an absolute truth and I wonder all those voices screaming and parroting that Emma Watson is an anti-semite, who did their vetting, who did their investigation? I fear that this group is far too small and that should sadden us all. 

But there is also good news Emma Watson turned 382 months today, so she can celebrate her day in life, her month in life and she can do it holding her head up high, she never did anything wrong here. 

So solidarity is a verb, so is judgemental. Who thought it through and who considered that the photograph did what it needed to do, to get people talking. As I see it +15 points for Gryffindor.

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, movies, Politics

Bitches be like….

This is the start of an issue I have with a BBC article. The article is not wrong, it is merely short sighted and incorrect, yet the BBC did nothing wrong here. Let’s be clear about that. The shortsightedness comes from the complainers who want to blame Google (YouTube) for everything, but the larger picture is ignored and there my issue starts. The article (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-59967190) gives us ‘Fact-checkers label YouTube a ‘major conduit of online disinformation’’ I do not disagree here, it is, but when we get to ““livelihoods have been ruined, and far too many people have lost loved ones to disinformation”. It goes on to accuse YouTube of not making enough effort to address the problem, saying that it “is allowing its platform to be weaponised by unscrupulous actors to manipulate and exploit others”.” This is as I personally see it the moment the wheels comes from the wagon. Let’s take a look. 

Example 1
In the Netherlands there is a person named Willem Engel, he was removed from Twitter for violating rules. The man is a Dutch Covid conspiracy theorist. Now the removal seems plain and simple, yet he created close to half a dozen new accounts within 24 hours, some people go through that trouble and this is merely one person. 

This reflects on YouTube as the same thing happens there, but the problem is a lot larger. First how large is this issue? Some sources give us that EVERY MINUTE 500 hours of video are uploaded, that gives us 720,000 hours of video EVERY DAY. This also sets a different premise as YouTube is visited by 122,000,000 people every day, over a billion hours of video are watched every day.

Example 2
We are given ‘too many people have lost loved ones to disinformation’, yet who of them vet the information? We have to take responsibility people, we need to check and check the data and numbers given to us, we all do. And let’s not forget the disinformation does not merely come from conspiracy theorists. There are over 30 hedge funds channels on YouTube, yet we also get (at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQEpHwYer-o), which comes from the University of Buffalo. So is one evidence of the other? Hedge funds are too often about deception, to grow they need your money, yet in the end it is still a heads or tails game. Where is the disinformation here? Where is the disinformation when game makers use young kids offering them the game if they can write something nice? How do you think influencers are made? I have seen video’s that do not seem to be deceptive, but until you bought and tested the product, you cannot tell, so how can YouTube? 

Example 3
We get food, we get it all the time, so we are influenced what YouTube video’s offer us and (at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHjbujGPX8Q) we get the view of ‘Tricky Ways Fast Food Restaurants Deceive You’ and we get it, people can often not be completely honest when they are in marketing. 

So here is the conundrum, which are misinformation? The first for certain, yet examples two and three? Who decides that? And whilst you are contemplating this, thousands more movies were uploaded. 

So when I see “YouTube spokesperson Elena Hernandez told the Guardian the company was already investing in ways “to connect people to authoritative content, reduce the spread of borderline misinformation, and remove violative videos”.” I get the steps, but there is another step that these 80 group are ignoring. The need to make the act of spreading disinformation criminal, that is a stage they could take, but in the US there is the First Amendment, the US cannot act in Russia or China and the list of limitations goes on, and even in the US and UK (and many EU nations) we see a lack of acts mainly because the law was never meant for such actions and too many fear a first step towards a totalitarian state. I get it, but to blame YouTube again and again is just folly (but it seemingly give places the limelight they desire). 

So when we we see ‘More context and debunks rather than just deleting videos’ we see the beginning of a dangerous premise towards censorship, also that is not on YouTube is it? Debunking information is YOUR job, it is called vetting information and it has been around since before the Sudan Wars (1885), Julius Caesar dealt with misinformation by coding his letters (2100 years ago) and the list goes on, so when did we become absent of common sense? 

So when you give premise to “a British man who died with Covid-19 after refusing to be vaccinated, made – according to his family – a “terrible mistake” of being influenced by online anti-vaccine content.” As well as “Florida taxi driver Brian Lee Hitchens lost his wife to Covid-19 after they were influenced by Facebook content that claimed the pandemic is a hoax” consider that Dr. Faucci has been blowing the horn of vaccination for the longest time, a real scientist, so when were you stupid enough to listen to a nobody on Facebook, whilst a doctor who

  • Joined the National Institutes of Health (NIH) as a clinical associate in the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases’s (NIAID) Laboratory of Clinical Investigation (LCI).
  • He became head of the LCI’s Clinical Physiology Section in 1974 
  • In 1980 was appointed chief of the NIAID’s Laboratory of Immunoregulation. 
  • In 1984, he became director of the NIAID, a position he still holds.
  • Fauci has been offered the position of director of the NIH several times, but has declined each time.
  • Fauci has been at the forefront of U.S. efforts to contend with viral diseases like HIV/AIDS, SARS, the Swine flu, MERS, Ebola, and COVID-19. 
  • He played a significant role in the early 2000s in creating the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR)
  • Driving development of biodefense drugs and vaccines following the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

is largely ignored and debunked by nobodies, in some cases even by presidential nobodies. At what point does a nobody on Facebook, Twitter or YouTube have anywhere near these qualifications? So, we do not care if you kill yourself in one of the most stupid ways imaginable, however I think you need to stop whining like little chihuahua’s and just die so we can take your job and your house. The central point is vetting information and that is on us. Yes, I have been duped once or twice, but it needs to be a real clever person to dupe me (yes, it can still be done). So when I see another this will make you rich, or I can offer this house to you so cheap, I know it is a scam. You see people give good deals to friends and people they really know, if it is someone else then no one wants it, or it is a scam, scammers win by making you believe that you won the lottery even when you never bought a ticket.

My issue with the BBC article is that there is a much larger stage and the first step to that stage is the law, we all know it, but we all ignore it. Just like ‘Tax the rich’ (tax laws), we seem to fall for it every time and it saddens me. In the 70’s I was a youngling (almost a youngling) and I was trying to become smarter and around me were people that were smart (some only made that claim), now it seems that no one takes the trouble to investigate, the answers are on social media and there every minute another sucker is born. Yet in all this, how do the fact checkers look at government propaganda? How do they see through media filters that intentionally keep you in the dark? As the barrier between news organisations and filtered information bringers goes ever thinner, fact checking goes out the window. So let’s not blame YouTube for all this, perhaps more could be done, I will never deny that, but what an be done when people are unwilling to test the setting against the law, that first step? And in all this I reckon that TikTok and Facebook also bare some of the blame, but they are not mentioned here are they?

So when we see the article end with “It cannot be left to internet companies to decide how to tackle bad information or choose how transparent to be about it” we see an uncomfortable statement that is not wrong, but who will do this? Oh, and to be clear who will check TikTok? And how will these be checked? More important, what will we do about the disinformation up-loaders? That too deserves attention, if we are not willing to prosecute them and when we are unable to prosecute them, how can any of this be with YouTube/Google?

If you want to stop disinformation, you need to factcheck yourself, that has been a truth for millennia and we forget that part of the equation a little too often, do we not?

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Media, Politics, Science

Greed, Consumerism and safety?

There is a dangerous stance, a stance not on the safety of people, but on the revenue that they represent and there is every chance that this level of greed driven consumerism is at the core of a lot worse to come. 

Part 1
Part one is seen in the article (at https://www.reuters.com/world/china/us-criticizes-china-canceling-some-flights-over-covid-19-cases-2022-01-12/) called ‘U.S. criticises China over canceled flights’. There we see ““China’s actions are inconsistent with its obligations under the U.S.-China Air Transport Agreement. We are engaging with the (Chinese government) on this and we retain the right to take regulatory measures as appropriate,” a U.S. Transportation Department (USDOT) spokesperson said.” OK, we can accept that, but in that setting can that spokesperson please show us the paragraphs that deal with issues like pandemics? The greed driven will see and focus on ‘obligations’, but what of the safety of the people? The Chinese government is obliged to look after the safety of people, so where is that part? I am not taking a side whether one or the other is right and which party is wrong. Yet when I see “identify a path forward that minimises impact to travellers” I wonder who they are working for. In December, Bloomberg gave us ‘Omicron May Double Risk of Getting Infected on Planes, IATA Says’, I heard from a friend who went on vacation that the return flight was filled with people coughing and yes, two days later he had covid too. When will people learn that IF YOU ARE SICK YOU STAY AT HOME? And more important those who get sick on vacation are all about ‘safely getting home’ dangers be damned. And that is the core problem with air travel. So I cannot fault China for its position, I understand the greed driven side for getting people to travel, yet it seems to me that the greed driven do not care as long as they see the revenue, infections be damned. Those stating that they take all precautions are delusional, there will never be a safe route in this.

Part 2
The second part is given to us by SBS. There we see (at https://www.sbs.com.au/news/another-53-people-have-died-from-covid-19-as-nsw-posts-record-92-264-new-cases/4809f03d-d922-4c30-bfe8-6c1251568bfa) that ‘Another 53 people have died from COVID-19 as NSW posts record 92,264 new cases’, the issue is that when we see it next to the UK (120,000 cases) all whilst the population of the UK is 300% larger, we see that things do not add up, in that same setting the US with 829,000 cases are a larger setting. The us has around 500% of the population of the UK, yet they have a lot more infections. Now this is not the proper way to vet numbers, but there should be some linearity and these numbers are all over the place. So in this India with 247,500 cases all whilst they have 4 times the population of the US does not make sense. The numbers do not add up, I get it there could be a dozen elements influencing other facts, but the numbers are wrong, and I personally believe that India has a much larger problem, so when we consider that is it really wrong for China to act the way it does? 

The entire setting of flight have to continue in an era where we live in a pandemic, someone needs to wake up. The entire need to travel all whilst a lot of issues can be resolved virtually gets to be on the centre stage. In addition to that view we see “China has all but shut its borders to travellers, cutting total international flights to just 200 a week, or 2% of pre-pandemic levels”, is it right, it is wrong? It seems to me that it is to stop a wave of infections that have close to free rule in any nation that did not lock its borders. Last November the NY Times reported “At least 13 people who arrived in the Netherlands on two flights from South Africa on Friday were infected with the Omicron variant of the coronavirus, and more cases will most likely be found, Dutch health officials said on Sunday.” We saw South Africa protesting that it was a mild issue, now we have over 3 million new cases EVERY DAY, so how is that mild? How is the drastic shortage of hospital beds a mild consideration?

Is this what happens when greed shakes hands with consumerism? I do not know, but from where I sit, the view regarding the safety of people is close to totally ignored. There is every chance that those who closed their borders stand a much better chance. That is unless you open borders for tennis players who later admit “that he released a statement with new admissions, including the fact that he sat for an interview and maskless photoshoot knowing he had Covid without disclosing his status”, so a person who knew he had covid went knowingly and willingly maskless. And China is the one that is painted as the attacked party? I reckon that our laws and our regulations are blatantly failing in these pandemic stages, I will let you ponder on why that is and before you blame China for anything, wonder why no spokesperson raised issues on pandemic obligations that should be out there. I wonder how consumerism won that side of the battle. And before you think it will be easy peasy, consider what optionally might come AFTER Omicron and when that part is less mild, what will the consequences be? 

I do not know, but more important, the scientists that should know do not know either, it is new turf for them. So when we listen to obligations and consumerism lets also wonder how safe these obligations were in the first place, especially as yesterday gave us an additional 3,201,862 new cases. I will accept that most will be mild, but 1% might not be and that means that globally for 6-8 days 32,018 new beds need to be secured for the yesterdays cases alone. So what about tomorrow and the day after that? How many beds are left then? I do not know, do you?

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media, Politics, Science

Commencing Crazy

This all started before ‘Call for change!’ Which I wrote on October 25th 2021 (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2021/10/25/call-for-change/), I saw the numbers and the idiocy of non-vaccination. I do not care what they call it, it is their life, but in that it is their life and they also need to accept the consequences. So as I wrote “The first port is that anti-vaxxers and those not vaccinated with a good provable reason will have to pay UPFRONT for any hospital admittance for COVID. So there are no stories about “Anti-vaxxer Kristen Lowery”, or those radio hosts and stories on how sorry they were lying in a comfortable hospital bed. They can tough it out at home and optionally die there.” I saw a station we were all heading to and today (11 hours ago) the BBC gives us ‘Quebec to impose health tax on unvaccinated Canadians’, the story (at https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-59960689) is not the first one, others have reported on similar settings, we also see some of these facts here. Singapore took my advice (seemingly) which requires Covid patients to pay for their own medical bills if they are not vaccinated. Greece imposes a fine and others will follow, when their national health care systems collapse due to those non vaccinated, this is a result and it was always heading this way. I do like the response that Premier Francois Legault gives. He states “I think right now it’s a question of fairness for the 90% of the population who made some sacrifices,” Mr Legault said. “I think we owe them this kind of measure” and I agree with him. Even as some news agencies are hiding behind positive flames like ‘Omicron may be set for rapid dip in US, UK’, I merely wonder how stupid these people are. They are (clinically speaking) telling a truth, but behind that facade we see numbers that globally went from 1.7M cases on January 1st to 2.4M cases on January 9th, All whilst the cases were 50% to 65% lower a week before. This is not going away soon or quietly. It has become a numbers game and in that game the numbers are overwhelming a stretched health care system on a global stage. All this whilst one source gave us 20 hours ago ‘Intensive care doctor reveals EVERY critically ill Covid patient being treated at his hospital is unvaccinated’, that is the reality and it is not the vaccinated people who are the larger danger, they do get sick but their symptoms are seemingly mild to really mild. And in the UK with so many unvaccinated people the dip as some might call it will not matter, a lot of them will die (which brings down housing prices), so there will always be a silver lining. Just not the one the media or anti-vaxxers rely on. And still the the issue is not as good as you think it is. The numbers from India with 1.3B people does not add up, so there will be a lot more coming all our ways. So whilst CNBC gives us ‘U.S. sets fresh records for Covid hospitalisations and cases with 1.5 million new infections’ today, we see the need to vet the journo’s who give us ‘Omicron may be set for rapid dip in US, UK’, as the data show us it was not directly a lie, yet the underlying issues we are already seeing, the people catering to that article are out of their minds. And in all this I reckon that the US and UK will soon follow the path Canada is taking and it will happen to people who cannot afford to pay, so they are denied access to hospital health care. It is one way to cull the herd, but it is not one that comes from choice, it is one grown through necessity and that is a much harder lesson to face. When the systems buckle, when the systems that gave us the protection we expected, when they collapse the real crazy starts and it will be some sight to behold, that much is an absolute given. 

So, as I personally see it. Things are about to get worse and it will come with populist claims, it will come with the blame game and when the reality pulls through and we say the unvaccinated people do not get a voice in all this, that is when matters get worse fast. People are all about complaining and not about taking responsibility of their acts and their life. It is the nanny state on steroids and now we will see just how strong the nanny state vibe will be in several nations. I reckon the next two weeks will be decently exciting ones.

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Politics, Science

Media in Limelight

That is the setting, is it time to put the media in the limelight? It started yesterday in Al Jazeera which was based on an article that came from the Wall Street Journal. The article (at https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/1/9/iran-likely-smuggling-weapons-to-yemen-confidential-report) gives us ‘Iran ‘likely’ smuggling weapons to Yemen: UN report’I got there over three years ago, with a little later, in December 16th 2019 when I wrote ‘Joke of 2019: United Nations’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2019/12/16/joke-of-2019-united-nations/), where we see the UN giving us in some delusional Tate of denial “The UN has reportedly so far been unable to confirm Iran was involved in drone and cruise missile attacks on two key Saudi oil facilities in September”, they were that much in denial, one could argue that the UN allowed itself to be steered clear of any evidence involving Iran and the media was happy to oblige. If you search for these elements in Western media you will find very little. The Wall Street Journal who gave us two days ago (at https://www.wsj.com/articles/iran-navy-port-emerges-as-key-to-alleged-weapons-smuggling-to-yemen-u-n-report-says-11641651941) “Thousands of weapons seized by the U.S. along supply routes for Yemen’s Houthis likely originated from Jask in Iran’s southeast, according to a draft report” might be one of the first that takes a larger look at the acts of Iran, well, I have to say that it took them long enough. I have a three year head start on most of them as such I wonder which stakeholder is out in the cold now?

A stage most ignores for the longest time is now a hot potato. So we do hope that General Turki Al-Maliki, serving the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia will get the support he has been entitled to for well over two years. And all this is before you realise that Arab News gave us (at https://youtu.be/6Ab-8bIHY90) the setting of what Saudi Arabia was getting done in Yemen. Now, I am willing to be skeptical and not one sided, but the media did not report on any of that did they? It would be fair to see opposition, there always is, yet that part is also missing. We see blunt debatable attacks by tools like Stephanie Kirchgaessner (the Guardian, Washington DC) and a few other tools, but that is the extent, this is one of the larger first articles that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and in particular General Turki Al-Maliki has been rowing upstream for far too long all whilst the media shuts down any reporting on Iranian actions towards and in Yemen, why is that?

If there was opposition, disagreements on matters it would show, it always does, one side reports on knives being delivered, the other party will state that the manufacturers of stone knives are being pushed out of a job. This is life, but the shutdown on news regarding Iranian actions is another matter and the Wall Street Journal (as well as Al Jazeera) seemingly broke rank. And when we see the response in the WSJ “Iran’s mission at the U.N. said Iran doesn’t interfere in the conflict in Yemen, as a matter of policy. “Iran has not sold, exported, or transferred any arms, ammunition, or related equipment to Yemen in contravention of Security Council resolutions,” the Iranian mission said in an emailed statement.” We get the political side of the statement, yet the part where we see “thousands of weapons seized” tell a very different story. So whilst there will be twisting and turning for some time (which always happen) the one side that does not get to be in denial is the media, two sources? The media are all over each other whenever possible and Yemen is no exception. We need to consider the media and the irresponsible acts of keeping news from us. Keeping us in the dark on what Iran is doing, we need to set the limelight on the media and their stage of denial, it is that simple. When they all start doing their job, the job of some become more outspoken and we see a much larger wheel in motion, and perhaps the headline we saw in September 2021 ‘Iran Selling More Oil In 2021 But Middlemen Reap The Profit’, the setting is simple. In what universe does the middlemen reap the profits, close to all the profits? I wonder if the media will grace us with a list of names, yet I doubt that, the stakeholders on a few levels will not allow for that. This is of course personal speculation, yet consider the revenue that oil has and now we see that the alleged Iranian profits go somewhere else? Do you not think we need to know where they go? Do you think that the CIA, FBI (and many others) are not interested where billions in profits sailed to? The media is suddenly not interested?

If Toyota released another ISIS model, the media would be all over the design teams and asking them which of the members had middle eastern relatives. Now they are quiet? I do not think so! I believe that the Wall Street Journal (al Jazeera too) is exposing a little more than they bargained for and the call for exposing and illuminating the media in the limelight is the right call to make. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Military