Category Archives: Politics

July 24, 2020 · 23:35

The Fantastic Four and the bully

Yup its Friday! The match is set and also tempered and set against the Fantastic Four, they face it because the people who they are defending against are not that clued-in on the abilities of the digital economy and they merely want better pickings from these four, I am actually surprised that Netflix is missing there on a few stages, but perhaps they promised the not so clued in spectacle seekers to give them all the illumination they are worthy for, it is a dicey call, but when you can lose it all, you can also play it all.

They are up against a congress who has fiddled and played away well over 8 trillion in stupidity, the rest was unavoidable, they are that not clued in and the batter is about to hit the hedges, so they need a play so that they can retire unabated and without accountability. This was not new, there had been announcements and for the most, I actually thought that in light of what was playing now, that US Congress might give this a miss, but no, I was wrong.So as we look t the article (at https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-tech-congress/big-tech-ceos-ready-defenses-for-u-s-congress-hearing-into-their-growing-power-idUSKCN24O16K), we notice the lead ‘Big Tech CEOs ready defenses for U.S. Congress hearing into their growing power’, yet did we also notice “The panel is questioning the companies as part of its probe into whether they actively work to harm and eliminate smaller rivals, while not always making the best choices for their customers”, perhaps you remember the old court case, where we get the number one hilarious moment (at https://www.nbcnews.com/video/senate-gop-and-white-house-tentatively-agree-on-1-trillion-coronavirus-relief-88172613521), NBC was not the only one giving us that, but you get the idea on how clueless American Politics seems to be. You see, there are two parts in this. The first is “while not always making the best choices for their customers”. The sides here are 1. ‘Who is the customer?’, and 2. ‘What are the best choices?’, as I personally see it, congress does not have the brightest players in the first place, so there is every chance that at least 20% of that panel is clueless to the digital environment. And that is not all. If we consider “The high-profile hearing, which will bring together Amazon’s Jeff Bezos, Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg, Apple’s Tim Cook and Google’s Sundar Pichai, will be a key moment in the growing backlash against Big Tech in the United States and is likely to set up a face-off between the executives and skeptical lawmakers from both parties”, we see an optional stage of discrimination. In the first Twitter and Netflix are not there, in the second, as far as I (and others can tell), these players have acted on the letter of the law, the fact that others can’t do that, is not competition Law, it makes it something else (not sure what actually). I agree that I do not have all the answers, but this in the end we need to see that this is optionally not about what they say it is, the European Law and their GDPR is biting hard, as the US privacy shield is falling short by too much, there is every chance that the US government is missing out on terabytes of personalised data as their FISA act opted access for and that is not sitting pretty with them. So where is my evidence?

We see part off this in “Apple is likely to be quizzed about the way it manages its app store after facing criticisms it hurts newcomers. Apple told Reuters it will argue it does not have controlling market share for apps. The iPhone maker views its store as a feature designed to ensure the security and reliability of its phones.” The App Store is a rather large being, but it is amped towards Apple products, and as such security is key. So far the issues we see are a mere fraction of what could be. In this Forbes gave us that part yesterday with “With the July 22 launch of the Apple’s SRD program, security researchers will be able to go and hunt bugs much deeper within iOS. Apple said that the iPhones, which will be dedicated exclusively to such work, and known as security research devices, will come “with unique code execution and containment policies.” What this means, for example, is that the file system will be accessible for inspection rather than just looking at crash log snapshots or using jailbroken devices. The latter being far from perfect as jailbreak vulnerabilities are generally patched quickly, and so any research is more easily denied by Apple as being flawed.” Again, this shows two parts, the first is that Apps are often defined by hardware and Apple hardware is in transit, making most issues moot for Apple, the second part is that we see “the file system will be accessible for inspection rather than just looking at crash log snapshots”, we can argue that this betters the US government access to data, but does not really prove it, the merely get a better look at where to seek what they desperately want. I am still not convinced that this hearing isn’t an option for old goats (oops, I meant members of Congress) to get selfie time wit the 4 most wanted selfie objects in history.

I wil forgo on Amazon, these people have enough problems to set a proper definition of what is a hazard and how to identify it, I briefly discussed that in ‘6 simple questions’ in February this year, where a load of shortcomings, or is that shortcumings? Are set in motion, I never understand how people get their rocks of on bad work, but that might merely be me. I discussed it (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2020/02/03/6-simple-questions/) it also had a link to another article that shows questionable parts of FTI Consulting, as such and quoting CNN who gave us “The report’s limited results are a reminder that it can be extremely challenging to reconstruct the activities of a determined, well-resourced hacker”, all whilst the identity of the hacker is still up in the air, and this is set against a person who has more money than the combined resources of all who live in New York, which is saying something. He is 25% of what Congress faces? To be honest, I feel that the US audience are facing another Mickey Mouse show, which is weird as Disney is not in the dock, but I got extra popcorn, so that I can watch and giggle at the same time. Oh and by the way, I wrote this all on an innovative MacBook Air, as such we see that other players are not up to scrap to show us what is truly innovative. As I see it, this is the first truly innovative piece of hardware since the release of the G5 in 2004, so I wonder what Congress is really trying to achieve. And when we see “in recent weeks the firm has published blog posts and a white paper asserting that it still faces plenty of competition and that the fees it charges ad buyers and sellers are justified.” We see an optional path for Google, all whilst the non US Data centres of Google are being upholstered to avoid GDPR issues, as I see it the US Bully, oops, I mean Congress, are out of their depth in an age where computers and hardware changes quicker then the identity of the average man’s mistress. There are so many tackles and interactions, I have no trust in what US Congress is trying to achieve, but there is an upside for me, a they fail more and more, we see that my IP is still untouched and no one got near it, all this whilst the 5G site is going forward in most area’s, l except the USA. Perhaps Congress should have other priorities, like sorting out the tax laws that these four face, is that a little over the top?

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics

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

July 22, 2020 · 01:43

A pawn in nuclearity

There was an article, now 7 hours old, but I had seen it before, a day earlier I believe. I left it alone as I had to ponder a few items in this stage. You see the article reading ‘Nuclear Gulf: Is Saudi Arabia pushing itself into a nuclear trap?’ (at https://www.aljazeera.com/ajimpact/nuclear-gulf-saudi-arabia-pushing-nuclear-trap-200718155513128.html) is giving us the part that matters “if Iran gets them first”, and as I see it focusses less on the danger that Iran is to the entire Middle East if they have them first. Even as we notice “The spectre of the Saudi-Iran Cold War escalating into a nuclear arms race is not beyond the realm of possibility”, we remain increasingly ignorant of “EU says Iran has triggered nuclear deal dispute mechanism” (at https://www.politico.com/news/2020/07/04/eu-says-iran-has-triggered-nuclear-deal-dispute-mechanism-348680). The setting is not merely that Iran is seeking to become a Nuclear power, when we see “In January, the European architects of the deal triggered the dispute resolution mechanism provision in the accord, which is aimed at forcing Iran to return to compliance or potentially face the reimposition of international sanctions. They later suspended the action” we see the setting that the EU is sanctifying the Iranian actions, whilst diminishing the powers to stop Iran, this is a path that EU (et al) want this to happen, there are forces that want destabilisation of the Middle East and Iran having a nuclear options achieves that. 

And that is not the end of the EGO of the EU, when we see “EU’s top diplomat said that he remains “determined to continue working with the participants of the JCPOA and the international community to preserve [the deal]” and we see that this was three months ago, all whilst since then  we see no later than yesterday ‘EU Vows Greater Efforts to Safeguard Nuclear Accord’ (source: Financial times) we need to realise that this imbalance will have larger consequences in the Middle East and the players are not of the cooperative type (read: the EU and Iran). So even as Saudi Arabia is not looking forward to becoming a nuclear power, they are pushed by a larger group into this direction, and I wonder why this is. The stated setting that adding to the nuclear pool was to be stopped by nuclear forces is now setting a stage where an entire corridor from India to Israel is nuclear loaded. How is this a good idea ever? Consider India v Pakistan, Iran v Saudi Arabia & Israel, this can only end in disaster and as I personally see it the EU ego is not ready to deal with the fallout from this (literally so), as such I wonder why a larger group of nations is not standing pro-Saudi Arabia or anti-Iran in this (which of the two does not really matter). So as Al Jazeera gives us “Saudi Arabia’s nuclear ambitions date back to at least 2006, when the kingdom started exploring nuclear power options as part of a joint programme with other members of the Gulf Cooperation Council”, they fail to give us the reasoning that Saudi Arabia “Saudi Arabia’s population has grown from 4 million in 1960 to over 31 million in 2016”, as I see it, power requirements have grown somewhere between 300%-500%, making Nuclear power one of the remaining options in the short term for Saudi Arabia, Iran on the other hand has been clear about becoming a nuclear power weapons wise, Al Jazeera also does not give us the fact that Saudi Arabia openly stated that they prefer not to have Nuclear weapons, but if Iran has them, Saudi Arabia feels forced to have them as well, making Iran the instigators in all this, yet the EU is seemingly oblivious to this. I wonder why? So when we look at the Financial Times again and see “He pointed to the beginning of discussions in 2003, which led to the conclusion of JCPOA and said, “It took 12 years to break the differences and to cut a deal. It was a big success for effective multilateralism and it has been a success because the JCPOA has delivered on its promises.”” We see an absence. The absence is that it took only 3 years for the deal to be broken by Iranian violations, but it seems that this part is largely not shown in many places. Yet in all this Saudi Arabia is named the pawn. I wonder why?

So as Saudi Arabia is entering the nuclear stage soon enough, we need to worry in other ways too. The EU was massively ignorant, or perhaps from my point of view it was intentionally ignorant on all these Houthi forces (as well as Hezbollah) have been practicing their missile firing abilities on Saudi Arabia, who what happens when one of them is a nuclear one? What happens when Iran ‘accidentally’ misplaces two of them? One for Israel and one for Saudi Arabia? Where will we find these Eu ego’s? The issues we have seen over the past give rise to this train of thought and Iran is not above the act of misplacing items. Has anyone found all these misplaced drones yet that accidentally made it into Houthi hands?

When we see the amount of pussyfooting around Iran, we need to consider the trap we set up for ourselves, it does not make Saudi Arabia the pawn, it makes us all the payers of high priced oil, because when this goes bad, really bad he price of oil will be close to 400% of what it is today, so when you at the pump, you realise what is about to happen to your budget, all thanks to the ego of some EU officials who should have played hard ball from the start.

 

1 Comment

Filed under Media, Military, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,

July 21, 2020 · 13:55

Injustice, not the game

Many have heard of the game injustice, a game where you can defeat Superman as Batman, or Ryan Reynolds, oops I meant Green Lantern as the Flash. Lots of heroes, you can go through each of the timelines, and the game is for a lot satisfying, as you play your favourite hero, as you slice through the band of heroes, you feel justified.

There is another form of injustice and in the light of clampdowns regarding Covid-19 people are actually taking notice. We see the initial part from the BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53403270) and there we get a little timeline:

Epstein sex trafficking case: Timeline

  • 2005: One of Jeffrey Epstein’s alleged victims, aged 14, reports him to the police in Palm Beach
  • 2006: Epstein is charged with unlawful sex acts with a minor
  • 2007: A plea deal is struck – instead of facing federal sex-trafficking charges, Epstein pleads guilty to two charges of soliciting prostitution, including with a minor
  • 2008: Epstein gets an 18-month sentence following the plea deal
  • November 2018: The Miami Herald publishes an explosive investigation into Epstein, the plea deal, and the dozens of women alleging abuse
  • July 2019: Epstein is arrested again, accused of sex trafficking of underage girls over a number of years
  • August 2019: Epstein is found dead in his prison cell while awaiting trial
  • 2 July 2020: Ghislaine Maxwell is arrested by the FBI at her New Hampshire home
  • 14 July 2020: Ms Maxwell pleads not guilty to charges of trafficking minors for Epstein and is denied bail

I myself took notice after the press took a jab at Prince Andrew, I mentioned it in ‘That what is ignored!’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2015/01/25/that-what-is-ignored/), where I wrote “I came to serious doubts to some regard of these events as I looked into the PDF of what I believe to be the original affidavit from the Palm beach Police Department”, when you see the timeline, 3 years before the Miami Herald caught on. Things did not add up and let’s be clear, the Affidavit was not hidden, it was out in the open for all to see, so after the Catholic Clergy got their rocks off, we get to hand over our children to the billionaires. So how is your feeling of injustice at present?

And we are not even ready for the main event. And whilst the media is trying to earn extra coins from clicks in the final showdown, we are treated to ‘It is revealed’, and ‘Ghislaine Maxwell helped to procure up to three girls a day for Jeffrey Epstein’s “sexual pleasure”, an alleged victim claims’, but where were these people whilst the evidence was out in the open? I had a THREE YEAR head start on the Miami Herald, I found parts others basically ignored. In this I am not attacking the Miami Herald, but what about all these other digital click vagrants (I think you still call them journalists)? They had the same access, I had no special access. Yet I looked beyond the accusations of Prince Andrew, I found other matters that did not add up and the press left it for dead, I wonder how driven they would be if it was their child. 

In light of the stages we see now, how much ACTUAL digging have these journalists done? 

Yet that is not the real injustice, the injustice goes beyond Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. When we see the news, the actual decent news, we still see responses in many nations to the Coronavirus that many find baffling. Yet the people are not taking the questions out loud and in part the media is to blame. I state in part, because they report and they do that, yet as I see it, to some extent, the right people have not been given the amount of direct light and reporting space that should have been given. That’s how I see it, if you wonder Google “World Health Organisation Coronavirus” and see what you see in the news section, when you discard the links from the WHO themselves, you are not left with a lot. Consider that webspace costs next to nothing, now consider what news has been published. When you see the tally, these so called news agencies are not really giving you the load of daily updates, are they? And let’s not forget that the entire Jeffrey Epstein situation is at present ONE case, I wonder how we will be treated to sensationalism we will get exposed to with limiting factual information when it is the day of Ghislaine Maxwell in court. So how much worse is the real deal? How many issues never make it to court? How many others got the ‘nice’ treatment because they were powerful or because they were close friends to powerful people? In this stage of lockdowns and limited movement an increasing amount of people are looking in other places to avoid boredom and in the process they are being exposed to levels of injustice and levels of unacceptability that they would never accept and they are getting angry, in a stage where this cannot be vented. I believe that the riots in the US is merely a phase, it is not merely on BlackLivesMatter or George Floyd, they are true and real all-right, but I believe that these matters are now also gaining momentum as people realise that they are merely the tip of the iceberg and the inequality and imbalance is starting to show. And these people, not only in America are tired and angry. I reckon that a lot would not have happened, if the Corona lockdowns were not in all their faces, and let’s be honest, some governmental responses on a global stage have been off by a lot. 

So when we look forward I wonder what more will be up for evaluation.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media, Politics

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

July 20, 2020 · 16:41

You were expecting good news?

We all love the moment that we get to say ‘I told you so!’, it is like a confirmation on the silliness (stupidity is too strong a word) of certain people. Basically, I stated 5 days ago: “So as the UK is basically throwing away the economic advantage it might have all for the grace of a bully who stops mattering in the political field soon enough. We see a larger stage, the new economy in Europe will be largely in the hands of the Huawei wielders, and not for governmental reasons, but for the simple reason that their equipment is 3-5 years more advanced than whatever is out now and those making claims that they will equal it, will already be behind the new Huawei devices”, I stated this in ‘Light at the end of the economy’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2020/07/15/light-at-the-end-of-the-economy/) it was only time that was the one factor proving me correctly, so it was a small surprise that this evidence is given 5 days later (at https://news.cgtn.com/news/2020-07-19/UK-asks-Japan-for-Huawei-alternatives-in-5G-networks-SfpqYScBxK/index.html) where we see ‘UK asks Japan for Huawei alternatives in 5G networks’ and that is not all, we see “The British government asked Japan to help build its 5G wireless networks without Chinese tech giant Huawei Technologies, citing NEC Corp and Fujitsu Ltd as potential alternative suppliers, Nikkei reported on Sunday”, as well as “British officials met with their counterparts in Tokyo on Thursday, according to Nikkei, noting the move reflects Britain’s effort to bring in new equipment suppliers to foster competition and help reduce costs for the country’s wireless carriers”, and the two are actually a lot more important, not only is this about making the 5G equipment, but it also becomes about ‘help reduce costs for the country’s wireless carriers’, now consider the design path that will take up to 180 days, then we get the setting of financial stages and ‘cheaper’ chips and cheaper assembly, so we are looking at 200+ days, implying that the first workable designs will not be here before late 2021, the UK will then be a year behind others that embraced Huawei, all because of a stupid bully in the White House who refuses to show evidence. When did we ll accept that part of the equation? Now consider assembly and mass production and after that software flaws and other design flaws. The UK will now be around mid 2022 and no configurable 5G situation, it will give a first large testable pilot not before the end of 2022, at this point the UK will be staggeringly behind all other players and they will be wielding the latest Huawei options at the end of 2022. This implies (implies, which is not the same as proven) that the Huawei wielders are 1-2 years ahead of the latest that the UK installed. Or perhaps I should diplomatically state: ‘Good luck starting a new economy at that point!’ And that is merely the top of the iceberg. If Japan remains on the same track, we should see the dangers of a statement a mere 4 hours ago: “Japan’s exports suffered a double-digit decline for the fourth month in a row in June as the coronavirus pandemic took a heavy toll on global demand, reinforcing expectations that the economy has sunk into its deepest recession in decades”, I personally see (speculatively so) it getting worse, you see their economy has not reset the numbers and expected income of the delayed Olympics yet (which is officially not on the date of expectations), so we can expect a lot bad news coming from Tokyo in the next 8 weeks. That is the stage where the UK is going to whilst the players are in a state of turmoil, as such there will be a lot of debate between now and 2022, as such more delays and more ‘compromises’ and they will all be altered by certain voices so that they look good, but the people awaiting the hardware will get to pay the price of non-delivery. That is the larger stage I saw coming from a few angles (apart from the unexpected Japanese move), and this sets a much larger stage, if the UK moves towards Japan, what is now already not optionally coming in any Ericsson or Nokia solution? Did anyone expect that question?

And as Reuters gives us “The Bank of Japan has signalled confidence the economy will emerge from the slump and has ruled out the risk of deflation, suggesting the central bank has paused monetary easing after it deployed stimulus twice so far this year” I merely wonder what numbers that these ‘believes’ are founded on, I wonder how much bad news Japan will give us at the end of September when the Olympics losses will need to be on the books and then the large tamale of  bad news is given to us all. 

As I see it, those who did embrace Huawei will have a larger part of 2022 to stomp out their economic advantage, and as that becomes clearer, consider the US impact as GDPR is failing and Europe becomes a larger data pool location, at that point certain players will get a much larger advantage, and those screaming that I was ‘betraying’ my identity by offering my IP to Huawei will see that I opted for evidence and as I get to be proven correct again and again, y IP will merely boost in value beyond what I ever expected to make, which will work out lovely for me.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Politics, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,

July 19, 2020 · 00:17

When the game changes

That is the question, this is not about gaming, but Microsoft is about to get a black eye. This one is not one I saw coming for a few reasons, but the stage is set in very different ways at present.

It all starts with European Court of Justice and their Schrems II case (C-311/18), in this case we see that the Privacy shield, as US Department of Commerce concoction to appease Europe and the European Commission has fallen, like Humpty Dumpty the setting got pushed by the judges, and it cannot be superglued, it is dead. The term is ‘invalid under European Law’, So all the American contractors and subtractors of personal data in Europe (mainly Microsoft, Google, Facebook and AWS) now have a much larger issue to content with, it is the stage that President Tump cannot use, it will be another mail in his election coffin. The source Aigine also gives us “It is close to impossible that the rules of GDPR will be enforced, as US-Companies have given capabilities to US Intelligence authorities (example the No Such Agency)” The implied seizing of transfer of data to US-controlled companies will be a much harsher reality than ever seen before. Basically it works for me, but there is a larger station where data pools will have a national setting. If players like Google want to stay ahead, they will need data and hardware specialists in a much larger region of the world, happy me! And this will follow in other nations as well, the GDPR will have larger considerations in the Commonwealth as well, and as I see it the US has set the stage to open a can of worms I always saw coming, yet I believed that the EU gravy train and US Wall Street people would be more aligned, in the end it now seems that they were not and the data field will change in a much more refined way than I thought was possible. As a data cleaner my options open up, yet Google will set a new parameter of systems as they already have, however they will have a much broader need and as this war continues, we will see these players overreact to make sure that their data is lacking gaps, again, happy me.

So as we see that there is an assessment on what an how things are transferred, we will se. Much larger shift internationally. There is still a lacking state. The text “if possible, personal data should be stored within the EU, and on servers controlled by EU companies” whereas we see questions on ‘if possible’, I see options and opportunities, and the stage for legal interpretations will open up on the larger stage as older (90’s) solutions are revisited on the method of storing personal data. As such there is a new data war coming, and in this there is an open field who will grow, pretty much all European data vendors can, because there is a whole shipment of US companies who cannot rely on the FAANG group, and that is where the commercial opportunities are staged. To be honest, Microsoft has an actual opportunity now that it did not have in the past. Even as Aigine gives no consideration in this, but the Azure systems have a greater ability to decentralise, it is something that they had in place for other options, but Google did not (not to that degree is more correct), and that is the stage that pushes Sunday into the IT gathering of the week. I reckon that the news will be about the PDPR and the impact that US systems will face over the next week, but this impact is too large, I reckon that there will be a larger impact on a larger scale, yet I will agree that my view lacks the clarity of certain players and what they put in the field over the last 3-4 years. No matter how we see the EC Judgment, there were enough voices around to see a downplaying of the verdict, a verdict that is now a much larger stage than in the last 5 years.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Politics

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

July 18, 2020 · 01:23

When is a terrorist not a terrorist?

Isn’t that an interesting question? You might think it is not, but what happens when we consider our own pat, the letters of marque and the bounty arrangements many European nations had preceding the 19th century? And when we consider those ‘privateers’, how far away were they from being pirates?

That is underlying the stage we see in the Jerusalem Post when we see ‘EU must designate Hezbollah as terror organization, 230 lawmakers say’ (at https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/eu-must-designate-hezbollah-as-terror-organization-230-lawmakers-say-635378). We can argue on the premise of this, yet let’s be clear, when was Hezbollah not a terrorist organisation? The quote “The EU already recognizes Hezbollah’s military wing as a terrorist group, but has not extended that designation to the organization’s political wing. Such a designation must be made by the unanimous consent of the EU’s Council of foreign ministers, where opinions on the matter are divided”, So apparently there are white sheep and black sheep, yet what about the grey and brown sheep? The letter as stated had all these signatures, so for the record we see “Signatories to the letter included 131 members of European national legislatures, 73 members of the European Parliament, 17 members of the US Congress, eight members of the Parliament of Canada and six Knesset members” In addition we see “Among those who already recognize Hezbollah in its entirety is Argentina, Bahrain, Canada, Colombia, Germany, Honduras, Israel, Japan, the Netherlands, Paraguay, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom and the United States”, So apart from the fact that 2 EU members are already seeing Hezbollah as a complete danger, what gain is there for the EU to keep this debate going? This entire sheep fur issue is what gives Hezbollah the edge they need to remain a danger in the EU and beyond. 

This is seen in a different way, I remember, I was (indirectly) around in 1982 when Hezbollah started. When we see the quote “For Iran, the creation of Hezbollah represented the realisation of the revolutionary state’s zealous campaign to spread the message of the self-styled ‘‘Islamic revolution’’, whereas for Syria the Shia party was a fortuitous instrument for preserving its interests: Syria’s alliance with Iran presented it with the means to strike indirectly at both Israel and the United States, as well to keep Lebanese allies, including the Amal movement, in line.” We get this from The Role of Hezbollah in Lebanese Domestic Politics by Augustus Richard Norton. We see the clear and direct interaction of its political and military side, this could not have continued if military and political sides were not in the same direction, which means that they needed to align, which gets us the direct interaction. We might think that they are clever, using a seemingly Chinese wall side with different people, but they have a connection through a person and optionally through other links as well. “Hezbollah’s speedy distribution of $12,000 payments to each family made homeless by the war. The opposition alliance, formally sealed in a written compact on February 2006, has proven remarkably durable.” It comes with the reference The full translated text may be found at yalibnan.com/site/archives/2006/02/full_english_te.php. The military did not have the funds, there is a larger political connection meaning that they are not separate, no matter the reason for the interaction, there is interaction. In the stage that I see it, the EU is seemingly knowingly blind to that interaction, perhaps as a way to keep the door open for business, this is my speculative implied  consideration that when it comes to money the EU is willing to let go of whatever ethical needs it has, it is not beyond the scope of things, but the idea that they remain in denial of that small part is a little to sour for consideration. 

It all gets worse when you consider the Arab News (at https://www.arabnews.com/node/1705556) where we see ‘Desperate Lebanese forced to look to Hezbollah’, and here we get “It is already clear that the tribunal will issue a judgment concerning the four accused and not against the group to which they belong: Hezbollah. This means that each of the nowhere-to-be-found accused will be issued with a judgment independently, which insulates Hezbollah from any direct legal accusation, even though the political accusation has been issued by all since the day of the assassination of Rafik Hariri in 2005” a political push to insulate Hezbollah? Do you still think that there is not a stronger level of interactions and at what point will the military arm not herald the consequences of the desperate Lebanese? The essential pushes, now intensified through Covid-19 on a global scale means that Hezbollah has a larger and wider stage of interactions. Still the EU considers the military and political arm apart? What evidence do they have that there is no interaction when there are mountains of evidence (A Golan joke if you please) that there is interaction?

And when the issues between Israel and Syria starts, how much more interactions within Hezbollah will be ignored? At some point we will need to accept that the EU needs a much closer look on who they go to bed with and a publication of names connected to the EU Gravy train will suddenly be stopped on national security reasons, there are more interactions and there is more denial than too many politicians are comfortable with and the stage that unfolds will have a few larger traps, I wonder how it will turn out.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Military, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , ,

July 15, 2020 · 22:34

Changing the mindset?

I had an interesting stage, there is the potential that I was changing my mind in a case. The stage is given via the BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/business-53416206) ‘Apple has €13bn Irish tax bill overturned’, my first thought was (and I have written about it in the past) the clear stage where Apple (Google also) has had its fingers in the tax-is for too much and for far too long, but the article gives two parts that requires thought. The first is “The European Commission brought the action after claiming Ireland had allowed Apple to attribute nearly all its EU earnings to an Irish head office that existed only on paper, thereby avoiding paying tax on EU revenues” in that instant there is all the drive and motivation to bring that supervillain Taxman to bear on the tech giant, let them suck the blood from the body of Apple until it cries for mercy. Yet the other part is “However, he said Brussels was likely to appeal and EU efforts to tackle tax avoidance would continue” ad here we see two parts, the first is ‘tax avoidance’, you see, tax avoidance is legally allowed, it means to pay the least applicable amount of taxation. Tax evasion is illegal, it is the setting where no taxation is paid at all, as such Apple did not break the rules and the stage is actually larger, the quote ‘tackle tax avoidance would continue’ is an issue that optionally Margrethe Vestager should (or could) be regarded as a joke, the issue is not whether Apple is being dodgy, it is the fact that the tax laws after all these years (10 at least) have not been adjusted to the degree that they should be adjusted to. Instead of large windbags of claimed activity that go nowhere, we see the need that the EU had to properly set the tax laws and in this Apple (as well as other FAANG members) did not commit any crimes. They merely used the tax laws to set the proper stage and apparently you can have an empty office, just like the Apple Stores have almost no stock, it is all shipped from the US (sometimes after 9 weeks) so nearly every Apple store is basically a gigantic display case (oversimplification, I know). Yet no matter how joyful and enjoying kicking Apple is, in this case they seemingly did no wrong, the fact that a judge is willing to hand back 13 billion Euro, as such, what is Margrethe Vestager crying about? It is seemingly clear that the tax laws are at fault, in this the organisations above the European Commission have faltered and Apple lived towards the letter of the law and applied what was legally allowed. So when we realise that these laws have been unadjusted for the better part of a decade, who is to blame, Apple or the European lawmakers? 

So when we see the end of the article giving us: “However, he said Brussels was likely to appeal and EU efforts to tackle tax avoidance would continue. “We expect the EU to continue applying pressure in this area,” he said.” And when we see this, how useless is the EU? Tackle appeals whilst the tax laws themselves are flawed, and Ireland is part of this, the stage where Apple was allowed to have “an Irish head office that existed only on paper”, so there wasn’t even a staff-member member? In which universe can we blame Apple for using the law to avoid taxation? If we are a nation of laws, the stage must be that the law states “Law is commonly understood as a system of rules that are created and enforced through social or governmental institutions to regulate behaviour”, this is not me, we get that from Robertson, a bit of an expert on the subject. So when we see that part and agree that we are are a nation of laws, the entire matter we observe becomes a farce, and a bad one. We agree that we use laws as a system of rules, and then let the rules be applied in the way it was, so why blame Apple? It is merely another example on just how useless the EU has become, a gravy train without rules of accountability. 

The EU get what it deserves, as far as I can tell, and as we cannot see any opposition to the black letter law that applies here, Apple is almost scot free. We will enter a new debate soon, the spirit of the Law versus the letter of the law, and in this Apple remains innocent, optionally Ireland ends up in the dock for setting a stage where the spirit of the law is avoided. 

I never changed my mind, I merely adjusted my personal verdict to the facts that were made public.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

July 15, 2020 · 13:29

Light at the end of the economy

Yes, we all see the light at the end of the tunnel, but what if that light was the realisation that it was the end of the economy? What happens when we realise that the bullies have won, the stupid people took over? I am not talking about people with a lesser degree, an academic is not increasingly clever than an agrarian, to be an expert in livestock might not hold weight in Whitechapel, but it holds weight and more than we realise. No, I am talking about these so called clever people that make claims and then refuse to back up the claims. It is seen in ‘Huawei 5G kit must be removed from UK by 2027’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-53403793). In that part we see “Digital Secretary Oliver Dowden told the House of Commons of the decision. It follows sanctions imposed by Washington, which claims the firm poses a national security threat – something Huawei denies.” Sanctions imposed by the fat fucking bully in the White House? How about the clear claim that evidence is presented, not like the US Joker with the silver briefcase, but ACTUAL evidence. So far we see US companies being out on a limb not able to secure jack shit (pardon for the impression), but that is the short and sweet of it. If factual evidence was presented it was a different stage, but this is all greed driven and the US cannot continue its path when Huawei gets to win the massive share it gained due to true innovation, not marketed innovation that US companies have with ‘5G Evolution’, but actual factual innovation. And who are we the Commonwealth to get bullied by a nation with no solutions, a 25 trillion dollar debt, and claims that they cannot back up?

At present the 5G war will be settled in 2024 with at present Huawei, a Chinese company becoming the clear winner, Ericsson and Nokia are growing by only because of American bullies. In all the stages my voice was clear “Show us the Evidence”, the US setting its parameters on ‘should’ and ‘could optionally’, not on stages that contain ‘evidence found’ and ‘this is the stage of pressing data’, which is still being done by US companies, but the US does not care about that. It is the loss that Huawei represents that has them showing of as the number one bully, telling number 10 Downing Street what the UK needs to implement. And in light of the ‘or there will be intelligence repercussions’, all whilst the CIA has been failing and applying dew uptime conduct to its allies, is not really the most reliable situation to face.

You see, the stage would be different if actual evidence was presented and that has so far not been done, a mere example that was settled in 2011 is as bad as it gets, when we hold the jobs of these politicians to bear when they make a claim and they cannot give proof is another path, but at the point they will hide behind ‘national security’ with the added phrase ‘It is a really complex situation’, as far as I can tell, it is simple. There either is evidence, or there is not. 

Even as late as last January, politics.com give us “While US officials are declining to comment on specifically what the new evidence may encompass, one delegation member hinted that part of the risk revolves around speculation that Huawei may be engaged…”, so still after more than two years we see ‘hinted’ and ‘speculation’ and no evidence. This is not me making the claims as a novel thing, whole groups of cyber experts are in the same boat as I am in and they know these systems. So as the UK is basically throwing away the economic advantage it might have all for the grace of a bully who stops mattering in the political field soon enough. We see a larger stage, the new economy in Europe will be largely in the hands of the Huawei wielders, and not for governmental reasons, but for the simple reason that their equipment is 3-5 years more advanced than whatever is out now and those making claims that they will equal it, will already be behind the new Huawei devices. The advantage the USA has was washed away through the use of bullet point driven flaccid presenters of slides and so-called new forms of presentations, all whilst they were talking ‘concepts’ someone else made an actual device that works and that is the stage we are in now. So even as we see the Wall Street Journal (at https://www.wsj.com/articles/ericsson-emerges-as-5g-leader-after-u-s-bruises-huawei-11591095601) handing the world leadership to Ericsson last month, we need to consider part of that headline ‘After U.S. Bruises Huawei’, as per: when do we allow a bully to dictate our rules? There is no doubt, both Nokia ad Ericsson are good, but what some regard to be the two Sony sound systems, Huawei is wielding a Bang & Olofsson sound system, two are good, one is better. And for some good is good enough, I get that. There is no shame and no opposition from them if that is the choice, but to be forced to take a second choice system is not a choice and it is done because the US wants things to remain the way they are and they refuse to fix anything. We can add to this the acts of the media, even as Forbes came out with the news ‘Cisco Confirms 5 Serious Security Threats To ‘Tens Of Millions’ Of Network Devices’, we must equally herald Cisco of keeping the people in the loop. This is not an attack on Cisco, if anything they deserve their position, they have a temporary unfortunate stage, and they will resolve it, but the rest of the media largely stayed quiet, even as millions of network devices were in actual danger, but they will not inform the public. They have no issues publishing conjecture and speculation, as such they are still surprised when social media cannot tell the difference between real news and fake news? I wonder why?

In all this, it was just two years ago when we were given ‘Huawei Joins the Commonwealth Telecommunications Organisation’ with the added quote “The Commonwealth Telecommunications Organisation (CTO) is pleased to announce that Huawei, the leading global information and communications technology solution provider, has joined the organisation as ICT Sector Member. This is membership category of the CTO that is open to the private sector.” It does not matter whether the CTO is real, whether this is some virtual distinction that has no real bearing, I wonder where the actual threat is showing to be that Huawei is a danger, so far no real evidence has ever been presented other than some case that was settled 9 years ago. So as we see more noise of ‘stolen IP’ consider that Huawei is further along than anyone else, as such how can the IP be stolen? How can IP be stolen from others that sets them 3-5 years ahead of the competition? Is that not a valid question? 

In the end, when politicians proclaim in 2028 that the economy is moving along too slow because of 5G gaps, be sure to remember that elected officials put the UK and the Commonwealth in that stage in the first place. The rules of evidence also apply to real life, not merely the courts, and so far the accusing players have not presented any relevant evidence, merely speculated options that come from fear, fear of losing the super comfy life they currently have.

 

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics

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

July 14, 2020 · 15:46

Can’t stop the message

That is the name of the game, at times, no matter the source, we cannot stop the message, we can optionally reduce the impact, that is as good as it gets and that has been the centre stage, not for a day, a month, a year, a decade, but for several centuries. The message will get across, history is filled with examples of that all over the world.

So when I wrote “the same model could optionally be used to misinform (or disinform) the person through links that have ‘altered headlines’ One party could use it to flame to larger base of the other party and no matter what claims Facebook makes, the PDF report shows that they are seemingly clueless on how to stop it.” In ‘Presidents are us’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2020/07/11/presidents-are-us/) I knew what I was talking about, as such it gives me great pleasure to see the BBC give us ‘ISIS ‘still evading detection on Facebook’, report says’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-53389657) with the added text “One network’s tactics included mixing its material with content from real news outlets, such as recorded TV news output and the BBC News theme music. It also hijacked Facebook accounts, and posted tutorial videos to teach other Jihadists how to do it. Facebook said it had “no tolerance for terrorist propaganda”.”” They are basically all stages we have seen before and stages we will see again. History has shown that you can not stop the message, you can merely delay the spread and optionally the impact. That is as good as it can get and the fact that we still see: “The researchers believe that at the centre of the network was one user who managed around a third (90 out of 288) of the Facebook profiles. At times, this user would boast of holding 100 ‘war spoils’ accounts, saying: “They delete one account, and I replace it with 10 others.”” People basically never learn. 

And it is not better, not gets to be worse, I wrote in 2013 “This technology should also include Microsoft services including their search engine Bing. Tracking in mobile devices remains a key point. The big advantage of Microsoft’s emerging technology is that it could track a user across a platform.” In the article ‘Patrons of Al-Qaeda’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2013/10/22/patrons-of-al-qaeda/) that was more than 6.5 years ago, do you think that these people sit on their laurels?  So if big-tech can be flaccid and automated to keep track of nearly anyone, what do you think that Trolls and Terrorists will use to get their message across and this is not new, it is not news, it is the situation that has been out in the open for years. As the BBC gives us “another key to the survival of ISIS content on the platform was the way in which ISIS supporters have learned to modify their content to evade controls.” Yes! And that is news how? Consider that the top 10 technical universities graduate close to 15,000 every semester, so 3 teams a year. Now consider that these parts can only persuade 0.1% (which is massively low), that implies that these players gain 15 tech savvy experts every 4 months and that is before we add those who cater to organised crime, in that numbers game we see that the government’s involved are not in a place to compete, their infrastructure had been downplayed for close to a decade and as salespeople from big-tech come around on the ease of automation we see that the mess merely gets worse and that INCLUDES several defence departments in Europe, the Commonwealth and America. That is the situation and there will be no release any day soon (except for the tech person on the help desk relying on his right hand, plenty of release there). So when you consider that I was merely looking at 10 schools, and the mess is actually a lot larger, how much of a joke is the entire ‘dealing with election bias’? If players like Facebook cannot stop or largely diminish a group that nearly all want gone, how about a situation where a larger group is in doubt of acting? How many backdoors will be given to the Cambridge Analytica minded people? That question becomes a lot more important when we consider the LA Times giving us less than 5 hours ago ‘How Facebook keeps its biggest advertisers happy’ with the quote “The social media company made nearly all of last year’s $71 billion in revenue from advertising and has worked hard to build relationships with both brands and advertising companies through a clubby network of invitation-only groups called client councils”, do you think that people spending $71 billion are kept happy with “offering everything from birthday cakes to ski trips, and dinners at the Silicon Valley home of its chief operating officer, Sheryl Sandberg.” Do you think that is all it takes? So the people ending up having dinner at that place will also get access and that is where some will be looking, the people with access and that is why the message cannot be stopped, that is why some will persevere and that is before my 5G IP hits the markets. I honestly have no idea to stop some, because some will not be stopped, I can only minimise the dangers, but I am also at the mercy of some Telecom minimisers (or was that mini-misers). Anyway, if Trolls and Terrorists get through 0.5% of the time, those with election needs and other message needs are likely to get through 20-40 times as often and any of the Big-Tech players will remain unable to stop them, unless we employ the bullet through the back of the head solution, this will not ever stop, history has proven me right and the fact that I saw this well over 6 years ago and the BBC got up to speed just now (OK, that was an exaggeration) gives wind to a much larger problem. 

You can never stop the message. Wake up! It is actually that simple.

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Military, Politics, Science

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

July 13, 2020 · 17:07

The Iran and Judy show

We have seen the show, we applauded for Punch and his stick (we were kids after all), yet there is no punch this time around, punch was mixed with watermelons, pineapple, cranapple juice and blackberry juice, with a few added distilled options and he got served in a room a small meeting room on 405 East 42nd Street, New York. The meeting room had a limited population, primarily what most meeting rooms have in that building, so there is nothing special about that, and it is just like the meeting on the use of Sarin in Ghouta 2013, for some reason the important question of WHO was avoided by a whole range of paperback politicians (as well as spokespeople of the UN), so I am not surprised to see the next axe job in Al Jazeera (at https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/07/qa-agnes-callamard-drone-strike-killed-soleimani-200711080404877.html). You see the stage is a lot larger and we need to be aware. Not the question, even as the staged outcome is not one anyone not Iranian can agree with, the stage is larger and that needs to get the forefront.

So even as there is no objection to the set ‘UN’s Agnes Callamard on drone strike that killed Soleimani’, anyone who has any clue on the massive amount of stages that Qasam Soleimani was connected to sets a stage we cannot agree with, so as the article gives us “I had been speaking with a number of experts for the last year or so about focusing one or more of my thematic reports to the UN on weapons, particularly those being tested or under development, and what these may mean for the future of policing, warfare and, ultimately, the protection against arbitrary killings.” Now consider ‘the protection against arbitrary killings’, we do not disagree with this premise, as to why the Houthi stage against Saudi Arabian CIVILIANS is a much larger stage. The fact that experts have given evidence that Houthi forces have no options for produce Iranian drones, they have no expertise in building the drone, deploying the drones and managing the inflight stagers of drones sets a much larger decor in all this, the report, or at least the Al Jazeera version of it, goes out of its way to make sure that Iranian involvement in all this is averted. Why is that?

It is also set to the question that gives us: “we have entered what I have described as the second drone age, characterised by an increasing number of states and non-state actors using them, and by drones becoming stealthier, speedier, smaller, more lethal and capable to be operable by teams located even thousands of kilometres away.” It is a decent answer and I find little to oppose it, yet the stage we see in the Middle East is largely avoided, and it cannot be avoided. It is the approach that we see with “operable by teams located even thousands of kilometres away”, the optionally avoided “operable by teams located beyond the strategy of the involved theatre” is the question, she is setting the stage of a limited amount of state actors, optionally invalidating the involvement by Iran, again, why is that?

Finally there is “Drones are not unlawful weapons. What need to be regulated is both the technological development and their usage. The use of drones … must be lawful under three bodies of law: The law of self-defence, international human rights law, and international humanitarian law.” No one disagrees with that, yet the stages in several fields is not the technological side, it is out there, it is the stage where players like Iran deploys their drones via Houthi and Hezbollah forces and the report (read: UN Essay) was written to avoid all that. In a stage where Iran has ignored the existence of both International Human Rights Law and International Humanitarian Law, we see the need to chastise this report on a few lacking merits. 

So when Agnes Callamard gives us “Thus far, courts have largely refused to provide oversight to drones’ targeted killings extraterritorially, arguing that such matters are political, or relate to international relations between states and thus are non-justiciable. A blanket denial of justiciability over the extraterritorial use of lethal force cannot be reconciled with recognized principles of international law, treaties, conventions, and protocols, and violates the rights to life and to a remedy.” We find it hard to disagree with this, but in all this, the larger stage of proxy wars (and therefor Iran) is left out of the equation, out of a equation that matters NOW, so why is that?

It all coincides with “The killing of General Soleimani shows how dangerously close the world has been to a major and deadly crisis”, a stage whether valid or not is optional, but the lack of references that Saudi civilians have been under attack on well over half a dozen stages is left unexplained, as such we could wonder why the hatred of aka Eggy Calamari in regards to the Saudi people is not asked. This is the third report that attacks Saudi Arabia (without proper evidence) or negates the attacks on their civilians, all whilst those attacks were show with evidence and the stage of the refineries is show to a degree that it should have been impossible for Houthi forces to be THIS successful, the attack amounts to a person buying tickets to three different lotteries and getting the jackpot on all three of them, it is statistically so far out of reachable stages that it boggles the mood on how certain players were willing to put their name on such a disgraceful place of strategic thinking. 

I am left with the stage where the UN is massively setting the stage to Iranian needs, all whilst Iran has not now, not ever shown any humanitarian resolve, and there is decades of evidence in that bucket. So what is the UN, specifically Agnes Callamard playing at?

So as the article ends with “War is at risk of being normalised as a legitimate and necessary companion to peace. We must do all that we can to resist this deadly creep.” In that stage, can anyone explain why the absence of the actions of Iranian and Houthi forces give light of the avoidance of the deadly creep? No one disagrees that the entire drone stage is setting a much larger stage, a stage we never held before, yet doing so in a way that keeps a player like Iran out of reach of it does not really solve anything does it? And as for Qasam Soleimani? I mentioned his actions on several occasions, as such we need to read that UN Essay with a different light. The fact that the life and attacks under Soleimani does not get the 50 pages of disclosure is a much larger stage and optionally that is not up to the UN, but ignoring that whilst it matters as to why he was killed, optionally with the entire Iraqi stage as to why he was there in the first place is a little bit weird, but perhaps Agnes had some of that funky punch in the meeting room, I do not know, I am merely hazarding a speculation.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Military, Politics

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