Category Archives: Media

The accusation and more

Yup, we all get accused, the of course includes me. In this case it is about ‘The mind stage’ which I wrote 22 hours ago. Apart from some of the deleted hatred stuff, there were some accusation that I was exaggerating about Ubisoft. As such here is the rundown. 

In the last 24 hours we see ‘Survey Finds That 20% Of Ubisoft Employees Do Not Feel Respected Or Safe In The Workplace’, and there are 3 more, then we get a few review based links with titles like ‘Hyper Scape has not met Ubisoft’s expectations’. This last headline I have no issues with, the article is clear and focussed on the game. That is part of life, the others is about perpetuating a stage well over a month old, and I get it, Ubisoft is newsworthy, but these articles are about getting clicks, as such the story is adjusted (like the survey) and there is no real stage on how long this continues. I get it, we seek what we are interested in, yet the imbalance that comes with this is also skewing the view of the people.

This matters, mainly because it comes with dangers. I have seen this before, but this time around I found FMI (Future Market Insights) divine us ‘Top 3 Cognitive Biases That Can Skew Market Research Outcomes’ (at https://www.futuremarketinsights.com/blogs/details/skew-market-research-outcomes). The stage is set to 

  • Irrational Escalation
  • Social Desirability Bias
  • Knowledge Bias

You think that this is something that balances itself, but that is not the case, it sort of relates to the sight you cannot be set to unseen. This is easily set to another stage, almost a decade ago there was a video that was called 2 girls one cup, now I was fortunate to avoid it, but anyone who has ever seen it will forever be cursed with the ability to recall it. It is something the mind cannot set to unseen and it optionally haunts you forever, even if you are able to forget, the moment it is mentioned it comes back (in technicolor plus)

So when we get to irrational escalation, sometimes it is referred to as cognitive bias or preconceived notions, it will influence you, as such overly negative views will filter you to be negative from the start (a political, or adversarial tactic). The further away it is, the easier it is to remain negative about it, because daily events will not change or adjust it to a more balanced view. In this the mind loves any form of balancing. Some sales techniques are based on this, especially if the sales track is more than instant sales (like cars, houses and larger investments), the balanced mind accepts more options especially as it can reweighs the positive and the negative to its own setting. It is not always logical, but it works, some people have an entire stage set up for this approach and they are doing a lot better than most. 

In the stage of Social Desirability Bias, we actually continue from the previous setting, the balanced mind. It becomes about projection in the conversation, often the view is set to a relationship of something the person is ready to accept, in Ubisoft case it becomes “remember how much fun we had in Origin/Brotherhood, but now you are a Viking”. It is also a view of adjustment where the positive gets a lot more time than the negative. It is also the first page where data gets skewed, whether the data is collected or instantly available, the skewing is set to a plus point, the more positive one is not on how it is shown, but how the recipient of the information gets a skewed perspective reflective towards their own feelings on the subject. This is mostly seen in market research and how it is brought (the story maker) into a presentation that is given to share holders and stake holders of the setting, yet that same approach works on everyone that the story is trying to reach. Then there is knowledge bias, it is more generic but cannot be ignored. As such we see the station of gaming, we see the bias of positivity is used to inflate the positive and the negative part does the opposite, branding tends to be the power. An example is ‘As you see this, we see the resolution, yet the Nintendo Switch can not show us this, we could argue the the other cannot do this either, we have after all the mot powerful processor in our system’, in this we see a stage where we are given (slammed with) the term teraflop as such we now see the application of both knowledge bias as well as cognitive bias, yet what we forget is that the processor is merely one element in the setting, for people who know sound equipment, it reflects as ‘buy the most expensive amplifier, it solves everything’, yet if the speakers are ignored, the sound remains awful. The same for the processor, the environment around it will be equally important. And here is the kicker, most gamers merely look at the power of the processor, thinking the this solves it all, but like looking at any console, it is not the hardware, the games are the station of testing and the is where some come out better than others. This is a setting where Ubisoft failed, the idea was accepted and then it was given to marketing and the idea was drowned (or smothered) whilst not setting the stage correctly. I had stated a few times that testing was insufficient (or the issues could not be fixed) this ended up being seen in too many games. 

It is not just a Ubisoft issue, EA was equally stupid, relying on Knowledge Bias of the first three games and then dropping Mass Effect Andromeda on the same population, the effect is that a brand is now dealing with a massive effect of negativity (pun intended). They need to clean house and they need to do this fast (one more than the other), yet the stage is evolving and not for the good, the three markers have been used too long and too often, there is a larger bias running now, it is set to the lack of credibility and soon that will end up being the marker we see advertised and propagated. Here I need to make a jump. In 2015 Liang’an Huo (et al) gave us 

Optimal control of a rumour propagation model with latent period in emergency event’ this is important as we see here “Because network information has always suffered from a lack of credibility, people cannot believe it immediately but are able to believe news from their friends and relatives more easily. Especially, rumours mostly come from a network and then spread in real life mouth to mouth. Many rumours come from a network and are hidden in the depths of one’s heart for a period of time before he/she becomes a spreader or stifler in real life”, yet as I see it, it is not limited to information networks, there is a credible case that we can alter this into “because aided and given information has since the digital age suffered from a lack of credibility”, we see the stage where one ‘network’ one’s ‘connections’ are now a much larger stage of subjective perception (subjective bias as well as cognitive bias), and this is where the wheels come off the train and they then call it a hovercraft with needless rails. Yet when we consider “By means of the Lyapunov function and LaSalle’s invariant set theorem, we proved the global asymptotical stable results of the rumor-free equilibrium and the rumor-endemic equilibrium by using the Poincarè-Bendixson property” the paper now gives us “an optimal control problem is formulated, from the perspective of a manager in emergency events”, which applies to emergency events, yet in the mind of the buyer, a console is an emergency event (even if they ignore it), they are dealing with peer pressure and the fear of buying the bad product is optionally killing them inside. In the past we had VHS versus VCC (some might remember that) and marketing set us to the weaker product because that is where the need was, a fluctuated ‘peer pressure’ part and that is now reflective in the news we are given, they are adhering to share holders, stakeholders and advertisers, yet the people are weary. And that stage is getting flooded on a few stages where the marketeers are remaining in the ‘more is better’, yet the imbalance is now hitting people to a much larger degree and they are rejecting all information as their cognitive bias is set to minus 100. So now we see the application of market research in the field. If we consider business strategy as a solution to consoles and software, the stage changes when we consider “an organised effort to gather information about target markets and its customers; know as much as possible about them and identifying who they are”, yet the three bias flags and the flooding of less and less accepted information makes all that harder and the stories linked to them are adjusted, but are they correctly adjusted? The market knows less and less yet they proclaim that they do. As such we reflect on the Ubisoft stage, insider how accepting a vast amount of gamers are towards the marketed hype creation (a flaw Microsoft has as well), and as knowledge bias is shifted (through the teraflop stories) and cognitive bias is limited as people are less trustworthy of handed information as such they now more and more rely on their own ambassador of a product (the gamer next door), optionally the mechanic they know from school when they are considering a car, the stage changes and we see new reflective bias and the partial title of that paper ‘Optimal control of a rumor propagation model’ now comes into focus. It is seen in the conclusion where I state (an altered version) “Rumour propagation can have serious consequences; thus the study on how to take effective measures to control its spreading through filtering is of great practical significance”, I added ‘through filtering’, the setting is that we need to be able to filter through deletion of bias and controls spreading by stopping propagation of those affecting knowledge bias and cognitive bias. You think it is easy, but it is not, it will optionally become a new set of markers that will impact web surfing under 5G. Ubisoft brings it to the surface as it was the most pronounced there, but there are dozens of other sources in a similar predicament. It will stage a new form of marketing the needs to set the stage of weighted and unweighted data and the effects of boas filters, it will end up being a new form of filtering.

It is perhaps the only moment where I feel that the paper is missing something (it was not on them), It is seem when we see ‘General rumour propagation model with latent period and having constant immigration’, it is my personal view the there is a need to see ‘General rumour propagation model with adjusted weighting due to pushed trending external adjustments

1 Comment

Filed under Gaming, IT, Media, Science

The mind stage

Where is the border of sanity? The is the question that is central at this point. Yes, we are having slightly too much fun with the new President of the United Stage, it is Mr. Covid, he is only 19 but running the US. As the news is exploding all over the news and the internet, we are given name after name, cluster after cluster and it is hitting the White House, the Senate and optionally Congress as well. After that there have been the dozens of attacks on Saudi Arabia, yet Iran is left outside of consideration and Ubisoft is getting hammered. Now, in part Ubisoft has itself to thank for what is happening, and I am not referring to the news that 25% was a witness or victim of unacceptable behaviour, or whatever that means. I am not making light of the situation, I truly am not. Ubisoft is part of its own problem, as marketing is trying to inflate hypes, we see this with ‘Prince Of Persia Remake Nintendo Switch Box Art Leaks Online’, as well as ‘Ubisoft Appears To Tease Rayman Project, Deletes Post After Fans Get Too Hyped’. The problem with hypes is not the they are hypes, they are the figments of illusional marketing. To set this straight I need to take you to an alternative setting

2 out of 3

There are three levers for a new house, one has the settings Cheap-Expensive, the second is called ‘Fast build – Slow build’ and the third one is ‘High quality – Low Quality’, the issues is that you can only select two, the third one will be set against you, which ones do you choose?

Marketing has a similar stage. Large visibility- small visibility, quick – slow, large placement versus small placement and high quality versus low quality. There are a few more elements, but this is merely to illuminate, in these four only two can be set and now you see the danger for Ubisoft as it ignored timing and quality, whilst keeping visibility and placement to large, and now the ignored quality is costing them. So as we see leak after leak (which I believe has been orchestrated by marketing element), we see all the setting in place and there is no consideration towards quality. So whilst we see “The players are back in the game but the way Ubisoft handled the whole ordeal didn’t hold up to a good standard. As a way to thank the players for patience with the patch, the devs offered some freebies to lessen the inconvenience caused by tardiness. One of them was the custom Desert Eagle and the other a grand total of 1,200 Skell Credits” we see the adaptation of quantity, and to fix it the gamers are treated to ‘some freebies’, as I see it the horse has left the stable and the stable is no longer theirs. And that setting is about to be set in a real live testing. The two games where things cannot go wrong for Ubisoft is AC Valhalla and Watchdogs: Legion. If either goes wrong the larger downfall stage for Ubisoft will be set. 

As I personally see it, they seemingly just will not learn, the last time they got it right was 2017, and I believe the they are at present out of options. As their marketing hands us story after story, leak after leak, they are sailing from the setting they need to be in (and perhaps behind the screens they are), and I hope they are, but the first hurdle is 40 days away and they better not miss a beat. 

So how does this touch on Saudi Arabia?

We see marketing via the media and newspapers, anti Saudi Arabia and the silence towards Iran. First things first, Saudi Arabia now has the initial setting of full 5G completed. No matter that this is Huawei, there is a stage where China now has options to open talks on all kinds of matters. Pompeo gave us via newspapers that they are using seduction and nuclear weapons, but that might merely be a second stage. Even as Huawei is opening technology, China does have the option to open up towards larger weapons contract, destabilising US interests in the middle east. All whilst Saudi Arabia with a functioning 5G becomes a testing ground for 5G, allowing Saudi engineers to create a larger benefit, optionally setting up new apps, all tested and ready to be deployed outside of Saudi Arabia. it is merely the setting on the side and the people opposing this are the ones who are afraid to lose too much coins.

Now, I am really willing to accept that it is all in my mind, but the setting stages of media marketing and media exploitation is getting out of control and that is what we now see, we see marketing driven media out of control yet the people who need to see what is going on are ignoring it. And the weird part is that it is happening to Ubisoft and it is happening to Saudi Arabia, two seemingly unrelated pawns in a much larger game, yet is it a real larger game, or one that is merely in my mind? Ignoring this is wrong, it is the same stage that these conspiracy theories have (I am always right, I am the only one who sees this). I try to back all the things I see with other links and verified news, Yet that does not stop a person to see what that person believes, but it does not mean that it does not exist. It is a larger stage of data versus insight. One cannot compare apples to pears.

So even as I see the marketing and media frenzy, I see both elements as separate ones, these two players are merely hit in a similar way. Consider the pro Saudi News, the one relating to Neom city, so a 500 billion dollar investment and we see in Google 21,000 hits? Whilst we see 54 million negative mentions towards Saudi Arabia. Does that not strike you all as weird? Now, I am not stating that Saudi Arabia is innocent, that it has no issues, but the world (pretty much all of it) tends to go coo-coo where money is concerned, and $500,000,000,000 is a lot of money. It inspired me to make four parts of my IP. And let’s be fair, out of $500 billion, even a 0.1% is well worth anyones time (I am hoping for a mere 1% and I am willing to end with only 10% of that), so as we set that trickle, do you think that the players like Google and Apple are not ready to jump in at similar settings at a moments notice? You have got to be kidding, but the media remains silent, 21,000 hits on Neom city? Are you for real? The same can be seen in light of Ubisoft, 6.5M, yet only 1.5M when it comes to Ubisoft and PS5, a lot more mind you, but there is a stage where they seemingly overlap in treatment by the media and that is what I saw. I feel justified in what I see and I feel justified in bringing it to light. Even as a lot will agree that Ubisoft has coming what it asked for, there is a larger stage which is completely absent of fair dinkum (an Australian expression meaning fair play) and I have an issue with that, just like the never ending anti-Saudi news. I saw a right wing poll with the question “Single Greatest contributing factor behind decline of UK”, from the 3237 votes, 72% voted that Islam was the reason, a stage that together with the anti-Saudi waves has become unacceptable, yet all these governments making anti-discrimination claims are massively incapable to do anything.

We are turning several corners at the same time and I for one am completely ignorant on what might be a solution. I merely wonder if we are returning to the age of the crusades, christians against Muslims and I for one had hoped that we had learned our lesson by now.

So if you think it is in my mind, fine, I get it. However, the Google Searches, the news items, they all seemingly prove me right. And this is all before we take a notice of the growing amount of anti-Islam and anti-semitism all over the western world. Is it all truly in my mind? It is (as I personally see it) not a stage that is merely in my mind, it is a growing stage and it is out there and we can no longer continue on the path that we are.

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Military, Politics

Speculations, tomato juice and oil

Yup, when we see tomato juice and we call it blood, it is called a speculation. Until the liquid is tested, it could be blood, but that setting is quickly diminished when we test the liquid, and in this the setting of speculation is also important, when we say ‘it looks like blood’ it is one thing, yet when we say ‘I can clearly see that this is blood’ it becomes something else, yet the person could still hide behind a second statement by saying ‘I really thought it was blood’ and all is OK (from that point of view), but for others it is less clear. So that is the setting I had when I saw the article in Al Jazeera yesterday and I wrote about it in ‘To decide in anger’, I wrote about it yesterday at (https://lawlordtobe.com/2020/10/03/to-decide-in-anger/). So this morning I walked past my favourite bookshop and learned the they had the book Blood and Oil and the sales lady took me straight to it (bless her happy youthful heart), so roughly 73 seconds later, I was the owner of the book. A book I honestly would not have bought if I had not read the Al Jazeera article, so they can add the statistics to that part too. 

In this I learned early on that was in a style that I liked. It is also a dangerous style to use when it is anything else but fiction, and that is how we need to see it, it is for the larger extent a work of fiction. In this chapter 18 (In cold blood) which is about Jamal Khashoggi is as I personally see it as massively fictive.

To explain this I need to take you on a small journey. In the UN report (by UN Essay writer Agnes Calamard) we see at [208] “It also seems improbable that this plan to murder was hatched by the team on its own, or as has been apparently argued at trial, by the team leader alone, once on site”, the application of ‘seems improbable’ is clearly speculative, it makes ‘plan to murder’ fail as speculative as well. Consider that in Common law there is Murder, which requires the evidence of intent and there is manslaughter, which has a lower stage of evidence. In addition any of these actions are void of any evidence towards the Crown prince, no matter what is stated, the evidence has never ever been produced.

So when we see in the book on page 303 “the bloodcurdling detail of the brutality of the killers, dismembering Khashoggi’s body like butchers”, it is merely one of 4 issues I found in the chapter. There was never any evidence of any action, because there was never any evidence and this is what these fictional writers are setting their optional success to, it helps the they are well known writers of the Wall Street Journal. 

This is merely one of the parts of the journey. The other part is one the is a little more scientific. Consider that you add 50 quotes that have a high probability of truth, it is unproven, but those who know will of course highlight any the they know to be true. So as 20-30 out of the 50 are proven to be true, it will taint the other 20 with the ring of truthfulness.  It you give 50 quotes the are highly likely, every hit will optionally be given the ring ‘that might be true too’, this is beside the point that the chance to get one right becomes increasingly likely. It is there the the book (which is nicely written) goes from partial fiction to non-fiction. It is not new and it actually comes from Robert Ludlum (that is where I got the tactic from). He wrote about it in his book ‘The Chancellor Manuscript’ there the writer Peter Chancellor gets his fingers on details, facts he cannot prove and as an academic work it would be laughed at, but he sets it out as fiction and as people look at the book ‘Reichstag!’, people would look at it and wonder if it could be true. It is the the stage where a group called Inver Brass pushed Peter Chancellor and it was merely the beginning. This is exactly the stage the Blood and Oil find itself in and with the stage of what could be true, we can now see a larger stage. In this I looked at it differently because of all the materials I had looked at in the last few months. I do not regret buying the book, because as a fictional work, it reads nicely and plenty of us are curious about the Saudi Royal family, the pictures are a nice addition to the book. And if I can find 4 debatable offered facts in one chapter, I can find a lot more in the book, that is if we treat it as non-fiction. The setting goes on, when we see certain quotes we would consider that the leak would be the personal assistant to Mohammed Bin Salman, consider just how unlikely that is. Would ANY personal assistant be that open about the optional next regent of Saudi Arabia? It would be the highest position that any non-Royal could ever hold (I am assuming the any person assistant of the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia is not a member of the royal family). 

It is perhaps too funny, but I am just now realising the I am listening to the Mikado whilst writing this. A topsy turvy play on the gentleman of Japan. I feel that the setting is correct, and the stage where we cannot distinguish between fact and fiction is overwhelmingly appealing, but for me Blood and Oil is because of what I do know a work of fiction, the rest hat I cannot proof to be either is happily accepted in the fictive state, it makes the book easier to read. 

Even as the back of the book makes reference to ‘investigative journalism’, it is nice to see that the work from people of the Wall Street Journal can be easily seen as fictive, I wonder what other fictive works the paper optionally offers (a ha ha ha moment from my side).

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Politics

To decide in anger

We know it, we do it, even though our inner voice screams not to do that, we still at times do it. I had such a moment hours ago on a few settings, in the first there is WordPress pushing their Gothenburg editor fiasco on their users. I would think that 2/3 of the ratings being a 1 star for the new editor would be a clear message to not enforce an editor the is not ready, but there is no fighting stupidity that is linked to the ego of others, so as such we see a group of people now looking to Wix as an option, I wonder how long it takes for WordPress to catch on.

The second issue was quite the opposite, I just learned that La Famiglia Trump has the Coronavirus, I got pinged by over a dozen papers, so there is for some the small satisfaction that the coronavirus could kill him before the election does, some will be thankful, I merely see it as an option where people can consider taking the day off, stay at home and not vote, time will tell. Yet the final two were the larger anger settings. Here it is important to set a few things straight. I am a christian (Catholic), I tend to be neutral on religious matters (for the most), but the utter stupidity that we see (at https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/10/2/macron-announces-new-plan-to-regulate-islam-in-france), where we are given ‘Macron says Islam ‘in crisis’’, so how stupid does a person need to be, especially when he is a non-Muslim to make a statement like that? There is the additional “‘Islam is a religion that is in crisis all over the world today’, says Macron, as he unveils plan to defend secularism”, which only makes things worse. As I see it secularism is a form of ego driven faith in nothing but self and your own greed (or hunger for power). In a world where well over 80% believes in something more (even the agnostic adhere to that), we get an atheist thing towards us the there is nothing more, well, he is allowed to believe this, yet in a nation that is Catholic driven, why does he not state that towards the Vatican? Afraid the there is little boy movie that he might be interrupting? #JustAsking

In addition as we are given a little repetitive quote by Al Jazeera “President Emmanuel Macron has unveiled a plan to defend France’s secular values against what he termed as “Islamist radicalism”, saying the religion was “in crisis” all over the world”, we need to take notice that apart from Christianity, he also does not push the setting towards India (Hindu), which is another billion people. As such we could flag the statement as discriminatory. So why is he isolating the Muslim voice here? When we look at the issues in play in India, there is a lot we could say, President Marcron isn’t doing that, so what is his game? It is a fair question, he seems to be aware of the world issues in some way, so the question is relevant.

The last piece is from Al Jazeera as well (Qatar is in rare form today), here it is another attack on Saudi Arabia, the story (at https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2020/10/2/mbs-why-the-world-may-be-stuck-with-the-ceo-of-saudi-inc), gives us ‘MBS: Why the world may be stuck with the ‘CEO of Saudi Inc’, well as I see it stuck is a bit of a stretch. Perhaps we forget that MBS stands for Mohammad Bin Salman Al Saud, Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia. This means that when his father Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, the current King of Saudi Arabia relinquishes the crown, Mohammad Bin Salman Al Saud becomes King of Saudi Arabia. When? We do not know, yet as his father is 84 years, so there is a decent expectation that this will happen within the next 20 years. In addition, the nation of Saudi Arabia is a monarchy, so this setting was never a surprise, as such the entire ‘stuck with’ falls under the stage of what I call BS. In addition there is “Two years after the brutal murder of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi by a Saudi hit squad” we seem to ignore that never any reliable evidence was delivered. We could go on with the setting the Jamal Khashoggi is merely missing. OK, I do not believe that either, but if the media ignores vital facts, I can do the same thing, fair? And I will give Al Jazeera that they do give light to the with ‘Two years on, Khashoggi murder unresolved, body still missing’, yes, the murder remains unresolved. As such I could accept that Khashoggi is most likely killed, yet murder sets a level of intent that cannot be proven, and without a body a manslaughter conviction is a fairy tale in any Common Law court.  Anyone accused would most likely walk away, no verdict given. In the end the article is exactly what I expected, a mere written form of advertisement towards the newly released book ‘Blood and Oil’, it also gives us (on the cover), the sub-line ‘Mohammed Bin Salman’s Ruthless Quest for Global Power’, here I take a little bit of a distance. In the first I haven’t read the book, so the stage of ‘Quest for Global Power’ is optionally a stretch, in this American presidents are more easily accused of that. Yet, let’s not forget that the King and Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia have (optionally) a sworn duty to do what is best for Saudi Arabia, I wonder if the book touches on that. And in Muslims terms there is another side to the Al Said family. They are (the king is) Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, one could argue that the responsibility of the King (and optionally) the Crown Prince is larger than life. Consider that ALL Muslims accept that these two places are the heart of their faith, in this 24% of the entire population of the planet, 1.85 billion are Muslim and their faith is centred on Masjid al-Haram (the Great Mosque of Mecca) and Al-Masjid an-Nabawi (the Prophets Mosque of Medina), 

That is some responsibility, it is one that the royal family accepted and it has been the centre of their actions. I wonder how much consideration was given to these parts of the larger equation by Bradley Hope and Justin Scheck. If we look distant and fair to actions in play, we can argue the most nations are looking for Global Power. The UK, the US, Russia, China, all players seeking global power, it has been like that for decades. Yet now there is a new stage, as Saudi Arabia embraced 5G, they are no in a stage to get ahead in the game, r better stated, they could end up with a decent slice of the 5G environment, mostly because others were stupid and made accusations that had no evidence creating a vacuum, and Saudi Arabia, especially in the Neom sage has embraced whatever they could get and that is now optionally a much larger slice of a cake they never vied for. Yet the article gave me one part that was actually insightful. It was given to us by Patricia Sabga. She states: “The Saudi royal family is something of a black box. It’s largely impenetrable to outsiders, including people who have spent decades visiting and studying in Saudi Arabia. How do you go about carving a window into that black box?” There are two sides, in the first the this is optionally true, but how many royal families will allow carving a window in their private lives? And second to that, why would the Al Said family allow it, no matter whether other royal families have done so? Privacy is an expensive commodity and it seems to me that privacy should not be given away, but that is merely my take on that.

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

A new road

We all have new roads, some roads are completely new, some are ‘sort of’ new. We tend to like the ‘sort of’ new roads as they feel more familiar, but it does not imply the this is the best road. This is the way we move forward. In all this, how does one react when we go towards a road we have never seen before? Consider the stage the this is not some adventure, it is a choice of life, a choice that impacts one’s life to the latest degree, do we feel as certain? 

As some are in a stage where they are considering that President Trump could optionally die of Covid before the next election, we see that this is perhaps the weirdest years we face in half a century. In the UK we see lockdowns with a 5 minute warning, now the is one way to change the settings of any game, yet is it wise? It is in the same direction that others face, a new road, different decisions, but is it all really new? We could call all the plays in the international scene, but we have seen it before, it is a play based upon a play that is old and stale. Even now as the EU wants to limit the apps Apple and Google put on phones, it is merely a variant of Internet Explorer V3 all over again, the greed driven will never learn. So whilst we get informed on “Draft rules would force the tech giants to share their data with rivals, and limit how many of their own apps they pre-install on devices”, I am actually surprised that they did not give us “share their data with non-Chinese rivals”, a stage the we have seen before and one that we will see again, to be honest, I am not certain if the people setting the rules have any clue who the people are that they represent, merely the setting of larger tech company trying to get a grip on technology the they ignored for too long. And ever as we are told “The draft rules, known as the Digital Services Act, aim to set the ground rules for data-sharing and how digital marketplaces operate. They are expected to come into force by the end of the year”, we see a stage where tax rules are ignored, it is too complex for them, they will do it later (or so they believe). Even as we are told “The case has taken on urgency because of the dependence of thousands of EU companies on the tech giants for their business”, a setting which I regard to be a joke, because those ‘thousands of EU companies’ refused to budge on several items when too going was good, they merely latched on like leeches, getting max result for zero effort, I know this because if that was not the case, I would not have the IP I have now, and there are only two contestants for the IP to get ownership, the rest is merely dumbstruck on the side of the road and as they are realising that the digital highway os beyond their comprehension and as they feel the floor slip from under them as 5G comes into power, now they all cry like little girls, all with their own version of ‘Google/Apple is such a mean old bastard, boo hoo hoo hoo’ theatrics and optional fake tears. 

My view is given by a few quotes, the first one is “The App Store was opened on July 10, 2008, with an initial 500 applications available”, we then see the that the app store grew with 2 million apps in 2017 and now it has 1.75 million apps. So these people had a decade to get involved with Apple, as such where it their timeline? Bullet point idiots basing their needs on concepts. Where it the actual and factual engineering in place? The story for Google is pretty similar. Global businesses  (not merely EU companies) with short sighted goals, short sighted, merely because their spreadsheet was dictated by financial people, not a long term sight in place. I reckon (my speculation) the some people tarted to reconsider their position when Apple announced the 10 billion download mark somewhere in 2011, but at the point the credit crunch got in the way and the people (more lazy than anything else) decided to wait, but the Digital highway is one where waiting is a sin and Google showed the easy enough. And now, as companies are realising that 5G will merely see exponential options where established apps are in place, unless you have a third party data need and that is overwhelmingly attractive, but there the Google and Apple stores are a problem for them. They will happily play with GDPR fines, yet the Google and Apple stores are the problems and as I see it, and as I see it, the EU is stupid enough to force open the doors to others. 

My vision?

Why is this my vision, because we are told “limit which apps Apple and Google pre-install on your phone”, just like the setting it had in the Internet Explorer v3 age. I thought they would have learned by now. In the first, Apple people go iOS, Google people go Android. In all this we the consumer chose what WE want, but did you see any of the in the article? Our voice is not heard ad not given any power, because it is about appeasing ‘the dependence of thousands of EU companies’, the companies that were asleep at the wheel in the first place, not merely asleep, they have nothing to contribute, a concept at best but when you look at the staff, they have none, yet they will sure others the these people will be hired the moment certain steps are finalised, and it will be a ‘complex issue’ to say the least. In all this, these companies have never considered a new road, adjustment and aggregating what they have and what they are delivering, but they all hide behind players like Epic games with, if a game maker can do it, so can our EU business enterprise, can it not? And there we see the first flaw from the very beginning, these people are mostly clueless. Should you consider me wrong, then consider that on the digital highway beyond Apple and Google, the third player is one the started as a book shop, a bloody bookshop no less (Amazon) and its owner, who copycatted his hairstyle from Telly Savalas (just like Vin Diesel did). So consider that whilst we see another gravy train trap our choices in what THEY call open choices, but it is not, it will make life harder for the consumer, not easier and none of them will guarantee your data.

So in the words of Lieutenant Kojak “Who loves you baby!

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics

You’re useless and you know it

Yup, quite the opening headline and  would like to tell the reader the it is about him or her, but no such luck, the headline (as is) can only be given to the most useless of useless, the US Senate. Yup, as some voices stated in the past, the US has fruits (US Congress) and nuts (US Senate) and there we sit in the middle of the tutti frutti of the dance floor, one might almost invite Madonna to come over and add a little spice to the mixture.

Yet Reuters who gives us (at https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-senate-tech/senate-panel-approves-sending-subpoenas-to-ceos-of-twitter-facebook-google-idUSKBN26M6FA) the headline ‘Senate panel approves sending subpoenas to CEOs of Twitter, Facebook, Google’, with the quote “The U.S. Senate Commerce Committee on Thursday unanimously voted to approve a plan to subpoena chief executives of Twitter, Alphabet’s Google and Facebook for a hearing likely to be held before the election on a prized legal immunity enjoyed by internet companies”, We can go in every direction possible, but lets start with “passed into law as part of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) of 1996 (a common name for Title V of the Telecommunications Act of 1996), formally codified as Section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934 at 47 U.S.C. § 230. Section 230 generally provides immunity for website publishers from third-party content”, In this we see two elements, the first being that in 1996 there was no Google, no Twitter and no Facebook, in the second on larger beneficiary was the online presence of FoxNews, Yahoo and lets face it as I personally see it, Microsoft who started part of the mess we have now. 

To invoke what I did (the useless part), it is important to see “After passage of the Telecommunications Act, the CDA was challenged in courts and ruled by the Supreme Court in Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union (1997) to be partially unconstitutional, leaving the Section 230 provisions in place. Since then, several legal challenges have validated the constitutionality of Section 230”, in this Justice John Paul Stevens (Supreme Court) wrote in June 1997: “We are persuaded that the CDA lacks the precision that the First Amendment requires when a statute regulates the content of speech. In order to deny minors access to potentially harmful speech, the CDA effectively suppresses a large amount of speech that adults have a constitutional right to receive and to address to one another. That burden on adult speech is unacceptable if less restrictive alternatives would be at least as effective in achieving the legitimate purpose that the statute was enacted to serve. … It is true that we have repeatedly recognized the governmental interest in protecting children from harmful materials. But that interest does not justify an unnecessarily broad suppression of speech addressed to adults. As we have explained, the Government may not “reduc[e] the adult population … to … only what is fit for children.””, as such how stupid does a US Senator tend to be? It passed the Supreme court, it passed a few stations over the term of 20 years and optional alleged beneficiaries (Google, Facebook, Twitter) are called into a Senate hearing? Some sources even state ‘Letting Platforms Decide What Content To Facilitate Is What Makes Section 230 Work’, the latter one is up for debate, but the setting of section 230 is not, it is a legal thing, so why would someone set the stage for a hearing the is basically pointless set the stage? To get a few free dinners and perhaps tax deductibility? I do not know, I merely ask.

The setting of a stage 40 days before election, is the current view and when we see “top Democrat Maria Cantwell, who opposed the move last week, saying she was against using “the committee’s serious subpoena power for a partisan effort 40 days before an election,” changed her mind and voted to approve the move” I wonder what this really is, because as I see it, it has nothing to do with big tech, and optionally section 230 is also not in play, but what is? There is the optional quote given “Republican President Donald Trump has made holding tech companies accountable for allegedly stifling conservative voices a theme of his administration. As a result, calls for a reform of Section 230 have been intensifying ahead of the elections, but there is little chance of approval by Congress this year”, yet optional settings of “stifling conservative voice” would not change that, this is about intentional hurting facilitation, changing the premise of free expression, the moment big tech is held responsible, no opinion is heard and the anti-Trump (those who highlight stupidity) is seen nearly everywhere, as such, President Trump needs every amount he can get. I do not think that this is the right path and more important changing law on this scale to bake (not make) awareness of something set almost in stone for 20 years does not help. 

In this I want to extend my friendliness to give a shout to the largest part of the problem, mainly Republican Senator Roger Wicker, even s he gives us “After extending an invite to these executives, I regret that they have again declined to participate and answer questions about issues that are so visible and urgent to the American people”, I merely wonder if he has any clue who the American people are. This train of thought is seen as Politico gives us “under the newly unveiled Online Freedom and Viewpoint Diversity Act, the legal shield would protect the companies only when they take down specific types of content, including material “promoting terrorism” or which promotes “self-harm” or is otherwise illegal”, as such, when was there an upside when we consider ‘specific types on content’, as I see it it the setting towards a biased filter of what constitutes free speech and freedom of expression. As such the simple question becomes: ‘Who has seen S.4534 – Online Freedom and Viewpoint Diversity Act? Deputy Counsel Elizabeth Banker did and gives us “Section 230’s otherwise objectionable clause underpins crucial content moderation efforts that make their platforms safer for everyone. Eliminating that clause will make it harder, not easier, for online services to remove content like misinformation, platform manipulation, or bullying that’s neither illegal nor in the bill’s new description of allowable moderation. This bill would also hamper platforms from adapting to future moderation challenges.“We also have serious First Amendment concerns with this bill. This bill would limit the ability of private online platforms and services, including small forums for schools, churches, and local sports leagues, to set and enforce rules for their communities.””, a direct powerful view given on September 8th (at https://internetassociation.org/news/statement-in-response-to-the-introduction-of-the-online-freedom-and-viewpoint-diversity-act/), as such we takeaway “Eliminating that clause will make it harder, not easier, for online services to remove content like misinformation, platform manipulation, or bullying” does this constitute the idea that the speculated biggest bully in America wants a free pass? And there are also “serious First Amendment concerns” which cannot be ignored. 

When we see this level of issues from the very beginning, how stupid is any senator participating in this, and when we demand under freedom of information their names and tell people that this lit constitutes a list of people attacking free speech, how happy will they be? There is of course the issue of the elected Democrat from the state of Washington Maria Cantwell, I wonder what she has to say for herself, especially it he hearing happens before the elections, I reckon that President Elect Biden will not have too much need for her, but that is merely my speculation.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media, Politics

Using the limelight

It all started a few days ago and for the most I kept you all informed. The latest news was in my possession for well over an hour. I waited because I wanted to see how the others were reacting. And I was not disappointed, they did exactly what I expected, basically, they did nothing.

It all started with ‘Saudi Arabia says it took down ‘terrorist cell’ trained by Iran’ (at https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/9/29/saudi-arabia-says-it-took-down-terrorist-cell-trained-by-iran), so should we say it is real or not? It is a fair question to have, yet the quote “Saudi Arabia says it has taken down a “terrorist cell” that had received training from Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, arresting 10 people and seizing weapons and explosives”, leaves me with the setting that this is factual. We are also given “Among the items seized were improvised explosive devices (IEDs), dozens of stun guns, kilos of gunpowder and a variety of rifles and pistols, according to the statement. It did not say where last week’s raid or arrests were carried out”, yet the western media has nothing. Not the BBC, not Reuters, not European news offices, and not FoxNews. It seems to me that Iran is given an option to get away with any action that is not set in America or Europe. And this is where we get the larger issue, the news is filtering what they think we need to know, as such we see a totally destabilised view of what is going on. 

This news matters because it gives strength to something else I stated, which was speculative at the time. I speculated that someone was painting the Aramco targets so that the drones would be more effective. These 10 men could have done just that. The arrest off the 10 men does not make my setting any less speculative. It does however open a larger stage, the news was avoiding a lot of what happened, eager to use ‘speculative’ and ‘alleged’, which is not unacceptable, yet it sets the stage that the western media is optionally complicit is setting a stage that is not part of what happened (like the Khashoggi disappearance). We see even the UN side with Turkey (where the most incarcerated journalists in history are), blatant statements even as there is no evidence is supporting any of it. 

So in this we have a much larger guilt, we are part of the problem, the media is filtering what is happening and no excuse makes up for that. It goes beyond the media, there is some indication that Google and the social media are part of this. Google calls them omitted results, social media merely hides the events on the timeline altering most results and chronological results, the last part is speculative, but the seems to be happening.

Why does this matter?

The UK, US and EU have been throwing the ‘terrorist’ word at us for the longest time, and we merely had to swallow it, now that there are additional indications that Iran is part of the problem we are left in the dark. The Saudi government gives us ““The competent authorities will conduct investigations with all those arrested to find out more information about their activities and the persons connected to them in the kingdom and abroad,” the statement read”, yet I wonder if the is enough, I wonder how much shielding Iran is receiving, Yemen and the Houthi actions made it clear that this was happening, now we are set in a stage where shielding is a lot larger making the media less reliable, I wonder who they are working for, because as I personally see it, it is not the advertisers. This all does not make the 10 men guilty, but it sets a stage of questions that most do not want to entertain, what is Iran actually up to?

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Military, Politics

Lack of information

As I was browsing along, I saw a picture with the text ‘Why are we so misinformed?’, I did not read the article, but the question struck home. You see, we tend to ask questions when we need them, information tends to stop commercial traffic and getting justly informed is very very bad for commerce.

To comprehend this we need to take a look at the telecom drivers. In 2018 I needed a new phone, my Huawei P7 was on its final legs after 3 years and there would soon be no more updates, because that is how Android tends to work. More important, when your phone is 2 full versions behind, the setting is there to upgrade quickly or face other consequences. In this setting I was looking for an affordable phone the had 64GB Storage. You see, the current phone had 16GB and even as it was a massive upgrade from the previous one (with only 4GB), time would tell that 32GB would not do it and I was almost right. So I set out to look for a larger phone and would you know it, Telstra, Optus, Vodafone, none of them had ANYTHING that I could use, they merely had the models to keep the now people happy, but the tomorrow people would suffer. It is now 2020 and I am using a little over 34GB, as such what they had then would no longer suffice and that is AFTER I deleted Facebook, and I never use WhatsApp, Instagram or Pinterest, so the damage could be worse. The other phones were great contract captivators and to set a long term need some see the path of a little above board to hand the people what they think they need, not what they actually need, that is my translation and mobile phones are in a rough setting. Now the iPhone 11 will offer enough, as do some of the previous models, but $1800 is a little much for a lot of people, so there we are in a bit of a fix, for me it was fortunate that the Huawei Nova 3i offered what I needed, but I found it because I was looking intensely, not because people were informing me. Also, there was a Samsung 64GB, but none of the phone shops had it at the time, merely the 32GB. The addictive need of connection is seemingly required. It does not stop at mobile phones. The media has been protective of its advertisers and advertising opportunities since well before 2012, when I alerted them to a situation that would optionally bring pressure to millions of gamers, the news outlets ignored it, there were screenshots and there was evidence, but for them it mattered no, as I personally see it, the advertisement needs of Sony went first. 

As such, was there a lack of information, or were people optionally intentionally not looking in specific directions? I will let you be the judge of that, yet consider that even as mobile phones are the most visible ones, they are not the only ones and we will know in 7 weeks whether my setting (given yesterday) is a path that was exploited correctly. You see, how many news outlets, all crying and boasting US BS, on how far 5G is? When we look (at https://www.rcrwireless.com/20200911/5g/zain-completes-5g-network-deployment-saudi-arabia) and we see that Saudi Arabia finished the rollout of 5G to 38 cities, we see that we all are second to a Middle Eastern nation that embraced the 5G challenge rolling it out pretty much nationally. Scandinavia, Western Europe, the US, Canada, Australia, none of them are anywhere near that stage for at least a year, optionally 2 years. So what are we proud of? When we see a lack of information it also includes the screw ups that our political and business big wigs signed up for. So when we see Europe and in this case Ireland boasting “at launch it has about 35 per cent population coverage, but that will increase with the addition of 500 sites next year”, we see that they are not ready yet, they are a year away, and that whilst Saudi Arabia is 31 times bigger than Ireland and it was completed 2 weeks ago. Ireland is seemingly more ahead than anyone else in Europe and there is the kicker. You can only develop true 5G apps when the nation is ready and for the most none of them are, so when we see a lack of information, it is also because the information bringers have nothing to be proud of, and most importantly, no evidence against Huawei was ever brought, merely old farts in the intelligence community, all with links to others (big business) who are missing out and those people are really really sad (a lack of funds will do that).

So whilst I am applauding the question ‘Why are we so misinformed?’, we need to consider ‘What are we not allowed to know?’, a setting that favoured Sony in 2012, Microsoft multiple time and we can go in several directions when it is about 5G.

Have fun!

 

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Media, Politics, Science

The A-social network

That is a stage, it is a big stage and it does not care whether you live of whether you die. So let’s take this to a new level and start with a question: ‘When did you last cause the death of a person?’ I do not care whether it is you mum, your dad, your partner, your child. When did you cause their death? Too direct? Too Bad!

You see, we think that we are innocent, some are risk programmers into debt insolvency programs, yet there it is not about the people, it is about the business that needs maximisation. We pride ourself in compartmentalisation, yet in the end the programmer is just as efficient a murderer as the sniper is. When I look through the sight of a .308 rifle, the sight allows me to go for a target 450 metres away, an optimum distance, the silencer will make is silent enough so that anyone more than 4 metres away will not hear a thing and 450 metres away, a person falls to their knees, the chest wound is damaging enough to ensure that the target will be dead on arrival, even if it happens at the entrance of a hospital, for the target it is over. You think this is bad? 

The programmer writes the formula that sets a different strain of insolvency. It is a form of credit risk, as such we get “In the first resort, the risk is that of the lender and includes lost principal and interest, disruption to cash flows, and increased collection costs”, as such the credit firms hire programmers that can stretch the case to lower the risk to the lender, set the stage where there is an increased option to pay back at much higher cost. In that same way we see programs and risk assessments being created where the facilitators are not at risk, they are not to blame and they are not to be held accountable. 

So here comes Molly Russell and the BBC gives us ‘Molly Russell social media material ‘too difficult to look at’’, it starts with “The 14-year-old killed herself in 2017 after viewing graphic images of self harm and suicide on the platform”, so what ‘platform’ was that? How much was viewed and what time frame was in play? These are the first questions that rise straight from the bat. It is followed by “A pre-inquest hearing on Friday was told not all the material had been studied yet as it was too difficult for lawyers and police to look at for long”, basically at least two years later lawyers and police are unable to view what a 14 year old did, and this does not give us the hard questions? So whilst the article (optionally unintentionally) hides behind “The inquest will look at how algorithms used by social media giants to keep users on the platform may have contributed to her death”, the basic flaw is at the very basic level. How did this stuff get uploaded, why was it not flagged and hw many viewed it, in addition towards the small setting of who was the uploading party? So someone gave a 14 year old the settings and the access to materials that most adults find unwatchable and I think there are bigger questions in play. It is the line “He added certain parts of the material had been redacted and lawyers and police were trying to find out why”, as I personally see it, redaction happens when you need to hide issues and this becomes an increased issue with “the investigation was seeking the cooperation of Snapchat, WhatsApp, Pinterest, Facebook and Twitter, although until recently only Pinterest had co-operated fully”, as well as “Snapchat could not disclose data without an order from a US court, WhatsApp had deleted Molly’s account and Twitter was reluctant to handover material due to European data protection laws, the hearing was told”, On a personal footnote, Twitter has been on a slippery slope for some time, and the deletion by WhatsApp is one that is cause for additional questions. As I see it, these tech giants will work together to maximise profit, but in this, is the death of a person the danger that they cannot face, or will not face in light of the business setting of profit? Even as I am willing to accept the view of “Coroner Andrew Walker said “some or all” of those social media companies could be named as interested parties in the inquest as they would be “best placed” to give technical information for the case”, are they best placed or are we seeing with this case the setting where Social media is now the clear and present danger to the people for the case of extended profits into the largest margin available?

That is a direction you did not see, is it?

We have never seen social media as a clear and present danger, but in case of Molly Russell that might be exactly what we face and there is every indication that she is not the only case and it is possible that the redactions would optionally show that.

Yet in all this, the origin of the materials and how they were passed through social media remains a much larger issue. I wonder how much the inquest will consider that part. You see, for me, I do not care. I am sorry, the picture of the girl in the BBC article is lovely, she is pretty, but I do not care. It is cold, yet that is what it is. In Yemen well over 100,000 are dead and the world does not seem to care, as such, I need not care about one girl, but the setting, the setting I do care about. It is not for the one case, under 5G when the bulk of the people will get drowned in information and all kinds of movies, one girl will end up being between 8 and 20 people. The setting is larger, 5G will make it so ad if you doubt that, feel free to wait and watch the corpses go by.

Suddenly sniping seems such a humanitarian way to pass the time, does it not? 

We need to consider that one process influences another, as such the process is important, just like the processes risk assessors write to lower risk, the stage of what goes one way, also has the ability to go the other way. This translates into ‘What would keep Molly Russell with us?’ Now implies a very different thing, it sets the stage of a lot more. It is not merely who messaged Molly Russell, it becomes what else was send to Molly Russell on WhatsApp, so suddenly the deletion of her account does not seem that innocent, does it? It goes from bad to worse when you consider on how social media links and how links and usage is transferred. Like footprints the links go form one to the other and no one has a clue? It is in my personal view more likely that they all have a clue and for the most it is extremely profitable, Molly Russell is merely a casual situation of circumstance, so under 5G when it is not 1, but up to 20 times the victims, what will happen then?

I will let you consider that small fact, the setting where your children become the casualty of margins of profit, until death deletes the account, have a great day!

 

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Law, Media, Politics, Science

When is a summit not a summit?

This is a more important question than you might gather. You see we accept the meaning of summit “a meeting between heads of government”, yet the entire virtual thing is not really a setting that most governments are happy with. Any summit allows for the high placed people to have a little tete-a-tete (A face-to-face meeting, or private conversation between two people). In such an event the Dutch King can assure people on clean water projects, all off the books. And plenty of people want them to be off the books. So when I see “Saudi Arabia will hold the scheduled G20 summit online on November 21 and 22 I wonder how effective it will be. And virtual meeting tend to spill, on a global level. In this, when I see “Summit organisers said on Monday they planned to build on the success of the virtual special G20 summit at the end of March and on the results of more than 100 virtual working groups and ministerial meetings”, these will all be on the books and the data would be leaked the moment it is received somewhere. Even as we agree on “The G20 brings together the leaders of both developed and developing countries from every continent”, in a v brutal setting, I doubt that this will be the case. And in this setting the stage we are given with “With its one-year chairmanship of the G20, Saudi Arabia wants to focus on issues such as women and climate protection. The originally planned in-person meeting in Riyadh would have been the first regular G20 summit in the Arab world”, I am actually somewhat doubtful if anything clear will be achieved. When we see “such as women and climate protection”, we accept that in some meetings people will not oppose certain actions when there is a personal conversation between two parties, yet one person in a digital setting is not willing to submit to a decision by himself when the other 19 listen and no agreement will end up becoming a case. As such for this summit, Covid-19 is perhaps the worst thing we could ever face. 

Yet the stage is one that could be powerful, but not for them. If Huawei had prepared correctly, there will be a chance that this is the first summit where it will be completely 5G indoors. You see to weeks ago ‘Zain completes 5G network deployment in Saudi Arabia’ implying that Saudi Arabia is one of the first nations ever to deploy 5G, moreover, the US is nowhere near that setting. This summit could be the first visibility of active 5G solutions, which would be also a first and it is happening in Saudi Arabia, all whilst Sweden in May only had “Sweden’s first 5G base stations in Stockholm, Gothenburg and Malmö”, whilst Denmark gives us “Denmark customers in several Danish cities are now enjoying the benefits of 5G connectivity as Ericsson’s rapid deployment of new 5G”, the list goes on, but in Saudi Arabia we see that Zain completes network deployment, as such there is optionally a need for Saudi Arabia to show off its 5G ability, making it the first nation to have any official stage where we see the power of 5G, the stage is that much bigger. And the people who set the stage on ‘we are going to be there too’ need to realise that they weren’t there, as I expected they are slow, slow by almost 1-2 years and that stage is evolving against those who wanted to play the anti-Huawei card, now they get to see first hand what it is to be second to Saudi Arabia. And it was not a small deployment, we can see that with “Zain KSA’s 5G network now covers 38 cities across the Kingdom” their deployment is a lot larger, it is not three cities in Sweden, or a few suburbs in Denmark and when you consider that only 17 cities in Saudi Arabia are over 200,000, we can see that this is the first true victory of Saudi Arabia over the west, the first time where we see that a lack of evidence and dragging ou heels is going to be the downfall of us. Politicians will make bombastic speeches on how for now 4G is good enough, but they know that they are spilling the BS as wide as they can. Saudi Arabia is now officially a 5G development platform location and as such we would most likely get to see what else is possible and it will be visible first in Saudi Arabia and China. So when is a summit not a summit? When it is a presentation platform, and there is every indication that we are in for a whole range of goodies pithing the next 8 weeks.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Media, Politics, Science