Category Archives: Politics

August 10, 2021 · 02:08

The part we seem to forget

I was reading an article on the Guardian when something hit me. You see, we have been told parts of this again and again since the 90’s, for 30 years, more likely than not even longer, were we warned for the issues we now see unfold in Greece and all over the world. 

When we consider that and we consider ‘Major climate changes inevitable and irreversible – IPCC’s starkest warning yet’ (at https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/aug/09/humans-have-caused-unprecedented-and-irreversible-change-to-climate-scientists-warn) we see “Human activity is changing the Earth’s climate in ways “unprecedented” in thousands or hundreds of thousands of years, with some of the changes now inevitable and “irreversible”, climate scientists have warned. Within the next two decades, temperatures are likely to rise by more than 1.5C above pre-industrial levels, breaching the ambition of the 2015 Paris climate agreement, and bringing widespread devastation and extreme weather.” Yet what we do not see, not by any media, is the job the media is supposed to do, the part we expect and the part we should DEMAND they will do, but they will not. The media is the bitch of shareholders, stakeholders and advertisers and their stakeholders will not hear of it, their friends will not like this. We should demand a list, a list of EVERY scientist who opposed the papers showing these dangers for decades. We should demand a list of these scientists and the corporate links they had, the corporate donations they received. The people are entitled to them, but the stakeholders who are behind the screens will not like this and I wonder why not. Actually, I am not that surprised that stakeholders tend to be bitches too, they will have friends they cater too and they do not like it that they are not the powers they pretend to be, but the game is now in a stage where we should look at that part, even as the media is willing to let that part go, just like they play footsie with people like Martin Bashir. So as the Daily Mail gives the people ‘Diana whistleblower who sounded the alarm over ‘dirty tricks’ used by Martin Bashir to secure interview ‘will be paid £750,000 by BBC after losing career’’ we see that the BBC catered to other needs for 25 years and they do not like the limelight of catering, just like others catered to Jimmy Saville and a few others, all (as I personally see it) due to connections to stakeholders, that needs to end. I believe that any media shown to cater to non-media needs, need to get its 0% VAT status revoked for no less than 10 years, see if that motivates them. 

The Guardian gave us (at https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jun/30/climate-crimes-oil-and-gas-environment) “Instead of heeding the evidence of the research they were funding, major oil firms worked together to bury the findings and manufacture a counter narrative to undermine the growing scientific consensus around climate science. The fossil fuel industry’s campaign to create uncertainty paid off for decades by muddying public understanding of the growing dangers from global heating and stalling political action.” This is fine, but this was not enough, the scientists who put their name under some of these marketing plays need to be out in the open, they made their choices, the now need to be banned for life. Catering to stakeholders need to come at a price. It is nice to blame the fossil fuel group, it might not be wrong, but it is shallow, there was an entire support engine of academics and politicians, they need to be pushed into the limelight. Politicians that set the agenda of inaction, supported by academic statements, we need those to be out in the open in all nations, so that we can flush out. The stakeholders, a side the media is for the most unable (read: unwilling) to do. So as the Guardian also gives us “Last month, a Dutch court ordered Shell to cut its global carbon emissions by 45% by the end of the decade. The same day, in Houston, an activist hedge fund forced three new directors on to the board of the US’s largest oil firm, ExxonMobil, to address climate issues. Investors at Chevron also voted to cut emissions from the petroleum products it sells.” So, where were they in the last 2-3 decades? As I personally see it, these people could react well over a decade ago when the water was up to our necks, they decided to fill their pockets a little longer until the water was up to our eyeballs, optionally making reference that clever people had a snorkel. Yet, snorkels have weaknesses, and the eyeballs might see the waves from one direction, not from all directions in that state, for that the water needed to be at no more than neck level, less would have ben better. 

So as we are in this setting, we are all driven to blame fossil fuel and as most oil comes from the middle east it will be appealing to most, yet the truth, the ugly truth is that they could only preserve their income with political and academic support form the west and we want those names, preferable with the names of the stakeholders. 

I wonder if any media will dig into that part, they might say that they do and they might make efforts, but after 2-3 weeks there will be another crises and some stakeholder will drown the effort, that is how the world runs, greed driven against the needs of everyone and at the cost of everything that is not theirs. It is merely my point of view, but I believe it to be a correct one.

1 Comment

Filed under Media, Politics, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,

August 7, 2021 · 22:08

The simple view denied

It happens, and sometimes it is for a very decent reason, but in this case I have questions. It started months ago on March 7th, when I became aware of Ghada Oueiss via the Milli Chronicle, the article had issues, bu for now lets use another source, the source (at https://cpj.org/2021/02/ghada-oueiss-hacking-harassment-jamal-khashoggi/) gives us ‘Al-Jazeera’s Ghada Oueiss on hacking, harassment, and Jamal Khashoggi’, the first thing I notice is “Lebanese Al-Jazeera broadcast journalist Ghada Oueiss described hackers stealing private photos and videos from her phone and posting them online”, the word ‘described’ in red, linking to a Washington Post article. The article laden with emotion and set on emotional markers, yet forensic evidence is missing. So when we consider “stealing private photos and videos from her phone and posting them online”, so was the phone the only source with these pictures? From her phone means that they are selfies, the descriptions give me more than that, so was it the only place they were? I am not stating that this is a must, but it raises questions. You see, the original article (at https://millichronicle.com/2021/03/opinion-ghada-oueiss-lies-about-saudi-and-american-spies/) gives a lot more. There we see a ling to https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/1-20cv25022-002.pdf. It gives us a complaint of the Al Jazeera journalist versus Mohammed Bin Salman Bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, Mohammed Bin Zayed Al Nahyan, DarkMatter, Faisal al Bannai, Saudi 24 TV, a broadcast television station owned by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Al Arabiya, a broadcast television station owned by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Prince Mohammed Bin Salman Abdulaziz Foundation d/b/a MiSK Foundation, Saud Al Qahtani, Bader Al-Asaker, Saudi Arabian Cultural Mission, Tarek Abou Zeinab, Turki Al-Owerde, Faisal Al Menaia, Awwad Al Otaibi, Sharon Collins, Christanne Schey, Hussam Al-Jundi, Annette Smith, John Does 1-20. Yes a whole mouthful. And it continues as we see the start “This is a civil action arising out of the targeted unlawful hacking of Plaintiff, Ghada Oueiss, an international journalist who has a significant presence in the U.S. and abroad, both as a journalist for Al Jazeera Media Network (“Al Jazeera”) and as a frequent contributor to U.S. news agencies, such as The Washington Post. This unlawful hack and leak operation against Ms. Oueiss (the “Conspiracy”) was spearheaded by the crown princes of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (“UAE”) and their co-conspirators in the U.S. and elsewhere”

This leads me to:
1. How was it proven who did the hack, or how it was done.
For me it is more than funny, you see the plaintiff uses an article by the Verge on footnote 9 is something I debated before, and a few other mentions. There is no debate that Jeff Bezos was hacked, but the evidence on who was laughable, there is too much settings that were never answered, but for the lawyers of Ghada Oueiss it was enough, a plaintiff weight to coin a phrase. There are all kinds of mentions, but there is no real evidence.

2. At [97] we see “Upon information and belief, Defendant Zeinab began his employment with Defendant Saudi 24 TV in 2018. He has since used his Twitter accounts to personally attack and defame Ms. Oueiss in response to Ms. Oueiss’ criticism of the Saudi regime:” We see a personal opposition via Twitter, not hidden, not threatening, merely a tweet, well over a year before what they consider being the ‘event’.

3. At [100] we get “This brazen admission is significant evidence”, a response to a google translated Tweet, I cannot tell it is correct, I cannot tell there is misinterpretation and I cannot tell whether this has anything to do with Ghada Oueiss.

The list goes on and on and at no point, do we see clear evidence of hacking and any evidence that this is linked in any way to any Saudi or UAE party. 

Then we see “At the beginning of 2020, I started reading private stories about me on Twitter – saying I had an apartment in Beirut, my brother’s name. I don’t post anything about my family.” I am not dismissing the fact that she was hacked, I am merely questioning the setting who did it. There is no evidence proving any of that. In the case of Bezos, his consultant did a piss poor job in documenting evidence, even worse than the CIA did (if that was even possible). 

The issue is not whether people are hacked, the issue is the evidence and the way places like the Washington Post go about it, does not help, they make matter worse whilst decreasing their own credibility. I got news yesterday that the USA Defendants allegedly have just filed a rousing motion to dismiss, it seems that this might have been a ploy to keep pressure on alleged matters (the journalists no one cares about that is missing). 

I remain in the fence. On one side the press should never become the story, yet I accept that Ghada Oueiss is entitled to defence, but I also see the need for evidence against the claim. I accept that she was optionally hacked, but like Jeff Bezos, there is no evidence linking either the Saudi Government, or the government of the UAE and its governing members to this. I accept that finding evidence is hard, really hard, but evidence still matters, not unfounded accusations lacking evidence. That is the actual ballgame and in all this we see a large lacking. 

The Washington Post is also the view of clarity, as we see “In this case, the trolls were attacking Ola and I not only as journalists but as women who dared to be critical”, you see trolls imply people with high level IT skills, I personally speculate that the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia is lacking these skills. It means someone else did this, and if that is so, there needs to be evidence that he ordered it, not some flimsy CIA report with ‘we think it is very likely’, thinking and very likely do not make the evidence grade. Consider this and well over a dozen other articles negatively speaking on the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and its members and wonder who would attack on a lack of evidence, governments or the greed driven stakeholders they cater to?

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Law, Media, Politics

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

August 4, 2021 · 02:43

The flavour of a dictionary

Let’s take a look at the stage. The Intercept (at https://theintercept.com/2021/08/01/saudi-arabia-twitter-harassment-jamal-khashoggi/) gives us “Before he was murdered by Saudi Arabia, Jamal Khashoggi faced online harassment from influencers and bots”. I have an issue with this. In the first, Jamal Khashoggi is merely missing. If someone states that it is likely that something bad and terminal happened to him I will not disagree. The problem is that there is no evidence, none at all that there is ANY evidence proving that Saudi Arabia did this. That UN essay writer gave a report that is riddles with ‘it is highly likely’, but in common law it does not hold water. In addition, the UN and the Washington Post did everything to flame as many newspapers as possible to repeat whatever they were giving. As I se it ad as the law sees it, a person is innocent until proven guilty. We can argue in equal quantities that the guilt of Saudi Arabia cannot be proven, yet in opposition, the innocence of Saudi Arabia cannot be proven either. I accept that, yes a person is innocent until proven guilty and if guilt cannot be proven then that person is innocent. I agree, and I disagree. I have been around long enough that the absence of guilt does not mean that this person is innocent. The law does that, I have a few more grey levels, so I do not. Yet I am still moved by evidence and the lack of it as well as the sources are not properly investigated, not by the United Nations, not by the Washington Post and optionally ignored by the CIA. 

The intercept also gives us “A short video clip posted to YouTube and Twitter this March characterised him as a mortal enemy of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The narrator, Hussain al-Ghawi, alleged Golberg’s “entire work aims at smearing Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the UAE” — the United Arab Emirates — “by publishing fake analytics banning patriotic accounts and foreign sympathisers.”” The article gives us the view of Geoff Goldberg, he makes note of al-Ghawi, a self-proclaimed Saudi journalist. I accept that, the YouTube video could be seen as evidence, that is after a forensic data specialist digs into this. Yet there is another side here, it is given to us by Sarah Leah Whitson, the executive director of Democracy for the Arab World. She gives us “The Biden administration should ask itself what it is going to do to protect Americans from these attacks, as long as the Saudis feel that they have this uncritical U.S. backing, they’re going to continue to believe that they have a license to attack their critics in whichever way that they like. These coordinated attacks against people they dislike that begin online have already proven that they can be deadly in the real world.” She is not wrong, yet in opposition, the issues is also, When will the media be held accountable for innuendo and vague references that have for the most no direct imprint on actual and factual reality. 

You see, that same media will not give us “In response to the coup d’état and reckless endangerment of live by citizen Donald Trump, we are now made aware that two more casualties with a deadly end were added to the list of numbers. Two more Washington, D.C., police officers died after defending the U.S. Capitol during the Jan. 6 riot by Trump supporters, bringing the grim tally of such deaths to four. This is merely one of the larger numbers, numbers that are given to us with the added GOP lawmaker who downplayed the Capitol riot as ‘a normal tourist visit’ doubled-down on the remark after police testified about the violence they faced”, is it true, is it false or is it a nuance of events? It seems that the western press is all about the innuendo on outside USA events, but not on internal ones. Why is that? I am not stating that Saudi Arabia is innocent, I am not stating that Saudi Arabia is guilty, the evidence is not there either way. The fact that this happened in a country with one of the most incarcerated journalists in the world, with sources that are massively unreliable, all whilst the full tapes of events were never handed to the people who forensically established evidence on the validity of the tapes as well as the establishment of WHO was on the tapes. Sources relied on mere minutes that are debatable in a few ways, all whilst these same sources avoided mentioning Martin Bashir as the man seen to be guilty of reckless endangerment of the life of Lady Diana Spencer, optionally complicit in the manslaughter of Lady Diana Spencer. Yet they were happy to assist in mentioning of ‘faked documents’ and as they avoided the mention of ‘forged bank statements’ they optionally kept out of the reach of the Crown Prosecution Services, how good is that? But they will continue slapping others on innuendo, optionally absent of evidence.

It is the flavour of a dictionary. Don’t say he has a nightmare, mention that he is now the owner of a female night horse. The dictionary is one, the flavour is given by adding triviality to the facts, or by hiding the absence of it. It seems to me that the media is forgetting that part, which also gives us ‘Sky News Australia banned from YouTube for seven days over Covid misinformation’ (at https://www.theguardian.com/media/2021/aug/01/sky-news-australia-banned-from-youtube-for-seven-days-over-covid-misinformation) and the message here is that if we can no longer tell the difference between the spreaders of fake news, misleading news and news information, how can anyone expect the media to be held higher regard than a drug pusher on a schoolyard? 

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Politics

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

July 30, 2021 · 23:07

Iterating towards disaster

Yes, that happens, we all consider it, but did anyone thought it through? You see, innovation is essential in staying ahead, iteration tends to give you a 2 year advantage, innovation gives you a 5-7 years leap. That is not new, it has been a ‘fact’ of life for 3-4 decades. Yet that premise is about to change, it will change a lot and it will change towards the bad side of the pool. To see this we need a few items, the first is an article, an article that the Guardian gave us with ‘I’m sorry Dave I’m afraid I invented that: Australian court finds AI systems can be recognised under patent law’ (at https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/jul/30/im-sorry-dave-im-afraid-i-invented-that-australian-court-finds-ai-systems-can-be-recognised-under-patent-law), you see there is a danger here, even as the Guardian gives us “Allowing machine inventors could have numerous consequences, both foreseeable and unforeseeable. Allowing patents for inventions churned out by tireless machines with virtually unlimited capacity, without the further exercise of any human ingenuity, judgment, or intellectual effort, may simply incentivise large corporations to build ‘patent thicket generators’ that could only serve to stifle, rather than encourage, innovation overall.” This we get in the article from Australian patent attorney Dr Mark Summerfield, and he is right, you see, there is a larger danger here. It is not merely that only a few companies can AFFORD such an AI, the larger stage is that if we combine this and we add a little statistics to the pile, we get a new setting. 

SPSS (now IBM Statistics) has something called the conjoint analyses. To understand this, we need to take a look at the manual. There we see:

Conjoint analysis presents choice alternatives between products defined by sets of attributes. This is illustrated by the following choice: would you prefer a flight that is cramped, costs $225, and has one layover, or a flight that is spacious, costs $800, and is direct? If comfort, price, and duration are the relevant attributes, there are potentially eight products:

Product Comfort Price Duration
1 cramped $225 2 hours
2 cramped $225 5 hours
3 cramped $800 2 hours
4 cramped $800 5 hours
5 spacious $225 2 hours
6 spacious $225 5 hours
7 spacious $800 2 hours
8 spacious $800 5 hours

Given the above alternatives, product 4 is probably the least preferred, while product 5 is probably the most preferred. The preferences of respondents for the other product offerings are implicitly determined by what is important to the respondent. Using conjoint analysis, you can determine both the relative importance of each attribute as well as which levels of each attribute are most preferred.

This is all statistical science and it works, but the application can be changed. If data is the only premise here, we see the application in another way. What if the AI is taught the categories that enable a unique stage to own ANY patent field. Consider that this is not about a flight, what if this is about a processor.

Product Speed Processor Sampling
1 X Sycamore Bozon
2 X Sycamore Instantaneous Quantum Polynomial
3 X Tangle Bozon
4 X Tangle Instantaneous Quantum Polynomial
5 Y Sycamore Bozon
6 Y Sycamore Instantaneous Quantum Polynomial
7 Y Tangle Bozon
8 Y Tangle Instantaneous Quantum Polynomial

I am merely making a fictive sample with existing names, but what if the math of conjoint is tweaked to cover the quantum field to a larger degree, a computer can do this faster than any person and it can even start making the documents, so the AI can create a set of patents that cover the entire field, with a setting where less than 20 patents will stop commercial competitors to get traction in this field and this is not merely speculation, I feel that this is where we go to and now the big tech companies will own it all and the AI’s will have the entire patent field. Yes, there will be holes in the beginning, but as patent filing will overturn normal filings, the patent field will end up being owned by Google, IBM and Amazon. I have nothing against any of these three, but this is not what I (or anyone else) signed up for. I might just put all my 5G IP online making it all public domain, just to temporarily deflate the AI premise.

And personally, there is no way that either of the three had not considered this application, making the AI patent field a lot more debatable and I reckon that the larger law field is looking into that. In 2012 a total of 1,892 filings were made, now consider that an AI could cover a larger field with a mere 300 filings. That is not out of the realm of considerations, as such the Australian case we see in the Guardian could well end up with all kinds of nasty surprises if the stage of “The decision by the Australian deputy commissioner of patents in February this year found that although “inventor” was not defined in the Patents Act when it was written in 1991 it would have been understood to mean natural persons – with machines being tools that could be used by inventors” is not overturned. Will it? I cannot tell, but it opens a whole range of doors and some of them will end up being rather nasty.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Law, Politics, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,

July 30, 2021 · 01:53

In retrospect

I (for the most) react to facts, as I do now, but the results are not anticipated new facts, what comes next is pure speculation, no matter how correct I think I am, it is speculation and that needs to be said up front. Even as I start now, my mind is racing through speculative ideas and options in other realms (science realms no less), but I digress. The thoughts started with a Reuter article called ‘Analysis: Biden’s COVID-19 strategy thwarted by anti-vaxxers, Delta variant’, the article (at https://www.reuters.com/world/us/bidens-covid-19-strategy-thwarted-by-anti-vaxxers-delta-variant-2021-07-29/) gives us “Dr. Peter Hotez, a vaccinologist and dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine, said the Biden administration’s acknowledgement of the “terrible impact” of the anti-vaccine movement was important, but he said the government could do more. “Anti-science is arguably one of the leading killers of the American people, and yet we don’t … treat it as such. We don’t give it the same stature as global terrorism and nuclear proliferation and cyber attacks,” he said”, it might be a mere quote, it might be the paraphrasing from the article writer, which is not a negative view, but it got me thinking. When we see the anti-vaxxer movements in the US and EU, they are uncannily effective, they are almost too effective. For the most and proven since the 90’s, the anti-vaxxers are either religiously inclined like the Dutch people in Giethorn (their ‘sort of’ version of Amish) or loons (often people who are one shade away from being absolutely bug-nuts). In the first, these people are driven and they are also self isolationists, it is merely about them and their community, it makes them a danger to themselves, not to others. The second group is a danger to all, but often so stupid they merely hit other stupid people. These anti-vaxxers are driven, not merely by intelligent people, no, they are driven like they are terrorist tools, like biological DOS agents and they are growing. These people are not accepting any scientific evidence, they forward non-scientific papers as ‘their’ evidence and they are not merely more effective, they are almost centrally driven by a similar source. 

In the UK the Guardian is giving visibility to Kate Shemirani, in the USA we see Alabama Curt Carpenter and the list grows. Someone is somehow fuelling this, yes this is speculative and this is not merely the power of social media, someone had months to prepare the weaker minded and target them in a direction, limelight seeking nobodies all wanting their limelight with as large as an audience as possible. The evidence is not clear and as such this is speculation, yet consider the timelines of each of these Anti-vaxxers, what their audience was a year ago and each month after that. This goes beyond buying likes on places like Facebook. Some people are fuelling these ‘bright’ illumination spots and they are not done, even as they are retracting their ‘assistance’ there is still a digital footprint and it is now diminishing. Yes, I admit upfront that my view is speculative, but my speculation fits the profile, are the US and the EU under attack from bio-terrorists? You might think that they are not the same, but there you would be wrong. In this I grasp back to a writing from 2012 called ‘A Proposed Universal Medical and Public Health Definition of Terrorism’. Here we see “We propose the following universal medical and public definition of terrorism: The intentional use of violence — real or threatened — against one or more non-combatants and/or those services essential for or protective of their health, resulting in adverse health effects in those immediately affected and their community, ranging from a loss of well-being or security to injury, illness, or death”, in this, if even one of my speculations are proven, these anti-vaxxers become complicit in acts of terrorism. Did you even consider that? Now, there is a dangerous fence. I am not debating THEIR right to be anti vaccinated. If they die, they only have themselves to thank, just like Curt Carpenter. Yet by attacking science by non-science and debunked non-facts, the setting changes and that is where we are now. What should have been a straight path to recovery is now a much larger issue. The delay is not on President Biden, and now that we can optionally see that the US is yet again under terrorist attack his priorities need to change, attacking big-tech is futile and counter productive, the laws needs adjusting free speech, it needs to be validated by accountability. 

And for the love of god, can some well trained data analyst please take a look at the timeline of these anti-vaxxers? I think it is time to look at timelines here and that is when my brain went into some sort of overdrive. It goes back when I designed an intrusion system that stayed one hop away from a router table between two points and to infect one of the routers to duplicate packages from that router on that path, one infection tended to not be enough, 2-3 infections needed to be made so that the traffic on that route between two points could be intercepted, I called it the Hop+1 solution, I came up with it whilst considering the non-Korean Sony hack. That  thought drove me to think of an approach to find the links. In the first we most likely need to find on where and when they accessed the dark web, then we see another part, because if we can find their access, we can optionally see others too, when we have that list and we can correlate it to other anti-vaxxers we have an optional pattern for action. No matter how this is seen it will be staged towards my speculation, something that needs proof, proof is required to give validity to actions that follow. I believe that I am correct, but I admit that it is a speculative push in a path towards thinking something is what I personally think it is, not a path towards evidence, evidence needs to be found and the evidence that is made to fit the solution, is no evidence, it is like stating that there is a linear relationship when you only have two plot points. A pattern of evidence is required, it is always about the patterns. 

So when I look at the ‘in retrospect’ part, I am wondering when the connections were there in the early stages and I also wonder why the others are not on that path yet (or seemingly yet). The media is only partly to blame, yes they give limelight, but that was their job from the early days, like the people exploiting Google cookies, the media can be exploited too, seeking the limelight is not a crime, but in conjunction with a terrorist agenda we are on new shaky grounds, and that is the problem, any law eagerly over-quick created is pointless whilst inaction is useless, caught between two rocks whilst the floor is not lava it is the ever exploiting media, exploiting for clicks, for visibility and circulation, whilst calling it ‘the people have a right to know’. This has the option of heading into a really bad direction soon enough. Will it? I have absolutely no idea.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Military, Politics, Science

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

July 28, 2021 · 01:42

Retry or retrial?

It is time to revisit a few issues, actually one issue and a whole lot connected to it. To start, I decided to go with The Verge, it has its ducks decently in a row, the article ‘NSO’s Pegasus spyware: here’s what we know’ is the best of them all, they also make reference to a lot of articles, and they have a decent line. The article (at https://www.theverge.com/22589942/nso-group-pegasus-project-amnesty-investigation-journalists-activists-targeted) is best if you read it yourself. Mitchell Clark did a good job, and as you have read the article, I can make a few jumps. The important jump gets us to the Washington Post (at https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/interactive/2021/nso-spyware-pegasus-cellphones/). This came from the link in “However, much of the reporting centers around a list containing 50,000 phone numbers” and when we seek the Washington Post article, we get “reporters were able to identify more than 1,000 people spanning more than 50 countries through research and interviews on four continents: several Arab royal family members, at least 65 business executives, 85 human rights activists, 189 journalists, and more than 600 politicians and government officials — including cabinet ministers, diplomats, and military and security officers. The numbers of several heads of state and prime ministers also appeared on the list”, no evidence mind you, merely statement and boasting. I call it boast, because we see there that the Amnesty’s Security Lab examined 67 smartphones all whilst close to 50% had an inconclusive test. If this is 67, what about the other 49,933? So when we get to “NSO chief executive Shalev Hulio expressed concern in a phone interview with The Post about some of the details he had read in Pegasus Project stories Sunday, while continuing to dispute that the list of more than 50,000 phone numbers had anything to do with NSO or Pegasus”, my support goes to Shalev Hulio. The Washington Post has a declining amount of credibility and this does not help. From my point of view, I would have made a dashboard based on the 50,000 numbers with a clear separation, In the top layer the continents, then the countries, where we see number of mobiles, versus number of landlines. This basic setting was never done, how stupid is that? A second dashboard could be the identifying class (journalist, government, lawyer, NGO) just to coin a phrase, the Washington Post was all about emotion, not about fact. I see this as a prime time hack job, with the alleged journo’s being the hacks, we also do not get any level of trustworthy setting on how the leak got to the Washington Post. Question upon question and in the mean time we get to see “In Hungary, numbers associated with at least two media magnates were among hundreds on the list, and the phones of two working journalists were targeted and infected, forensic analysis showed” 4 people and 50,000 numbers, could the article be any less relevant? And the stupidity of the Washington Post does not end, no it goes further with “Amnesty’s forensics found evidence that Pegasus was targeted at the two women closest to Saudi columnist Khashoggi, who wrote for The Post’s Opinions section. The phone of his fiancee, Hatice Cengiz, was successfully infected during the days after his murder in Turkey on Oct. 2, 2018, according to a forensic analysis by Amnesty’s Security Lab”, we see ‘two women closest to Saudi columnist Khashoggi’, so how did they get there? Because the numbers were on the list? And when we see ‘The phone of his fiancee, Hatice Cengiz, was successfully infected’, so how was that evidence obtained? From my point of view the text “according to a forensic analysis by Amnesty’s Security Lab” just does not cover it. It even gets worse with “Also on the list were the numbers of two Turkish officials involved in investigating his dismemberment by a Saudi hit team”, I see it as a weak approach to mention “investigating his dismemberment” which was NEVER proven, the proof requires a body, they never got that, at best the man is theoretically still merely missing. And from there we get to “Khashoggi also had a wife, Hanan Elatr, whose phone was targeted by someone using Pegasus in the months before his killing. Amnesty was unable to determine whether the hack was successful”, consider the text “Amnesty was unable to determine whether the hack was successful”, if that is true, how come we get “targeted by someone using Pegasus in the months before his killing”, how was that timeline proven? It is a simple question, the article is a bad approach to give more visibility to a journalist no one gives a fuck about. I like the quote ““This is nasty software — like eloquently nasty,” said Timothy Summers, a former cybersecurity engineer at a U.S. intelligence agency and now director of IT at Arizona State University”, is it eloquent because the NSA never made it, or because an Israeli company has the lead on this? I wonder what Timothy would have said if this was an NSA application? 

And the Verge is on my side, they give us “WAIT, WHO MADE THIS LIST?”, as well as “At this point, that’s clear as mud. NSO says the list has nothing to do with its business, and claims it’s from a simple database of cellular numbers that’s a feature of the global cellular network”, which is supported by “A statement from an Amnesty International spokesperson, posted to Twitter by cybersecurity journalist Kim Zetter, says that the list indicates numbers that were marked as “of interest” to NSO’s various clients. The Washington Post says that the list is from 2016” and when we consider these quotes and we read the Washington Post article for the shite it seems to be, I wonder who is waking up to the fact that the media, all the other media is merely re-quoting what the Washington Post stated and it is absent of all kinds of facts, or they merely didn’t bother putting the facts there. 

The entire Pegasus setting seems like a Wag the Dog approach to whatever these papers want to create and it is optionally a setting (a speculative one) that this is the push from stakeholders who have an issue with the NSO group, all whilst no credible evidence is given to us that there is an actual issue. And in all this the money trail was ignored, I ignored it too, mainly because I was unaware, yet the Verge was aware and they give us “At the time, the costs were reportedly $650,000 to hack 10 iPhone or Android users, or $500,000 to infiltrate five BlackBerry users. Clients could then pay more to target additional users, saving as they spy with bulk discounts: $800,000 for an additional 100 phones, $500,000 for an extra 50 phones” this implies that the cheapest option would be 500 times $800,000, which gives us $400,000,000 that is a whole lot of cash for a lot of people no one cares about. Yes, there are a few alleged targets that makes the pricing worth it, but with the setting I have, there is no way that the 50,000 numbers make sense, oh and before I forget, if this is a list for multiple sources, how many of the numbers doubled up? Too many questions and the media stupidly reprinting what the Washington Post is giving us makes no sense at all, unless you are a stakeholder with anti-Israel sentiments. 

In this Shalev Hulio is right that he is “continuing to dispute that the list of more than 50,000 phone numbers had anything to do with NSO or Pegasus”, I would too and I found a lot of the disputable issues within an hour, I wonder how shortsighted the media was when they decided to reprint what the Washington Post gave them. So whilst the Guardian gives us ‘the global impact of the Pegasus project’, I merely see a storm in a teacup, because the issues in the Washington Post were never decently vetted on a few levels and that is likely the biggest failing of the media at present. It is merely my point of view and I am happy to state that I could be wrong, but the lack of credible evidence, all whilst the media has a declining level of credibility makes my view the most likely correct one, most likely, because I have not seen the evidence, but as you read the articles, that are all about details, lacking generic evidence, how would you see it?

2 Comments

Filed under IT, Media, Military, Politics, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,

July 26, 2021 · 22:06

Which side of the coin is it?

Yes, that is the question, you see a coin has three sides, heads, tails and rim. We tend to focus on the head and tail of the coin and we forget that third side, don’t we? We can consider the news article ‘Arab states condemn ‘blatant’ Houthi attacks on Saudi Arabia’ when we see yet another terrorist attack on the Saudi civilian population, but that is not really the larger story. The larger story is that the western media nearly completely ignored it, only Reuters had an article, the large players all steered clear. The stake holders have that much of an influence on the media, we are now in a stage where THEY decide what the news is. Whether they side with terrorists, or with Iran, as I personally see it they decided that Saudi Arabia is evil, and the news will suffer because if it. Not only are still not accountable for what they publish, they decide that three days old ‘Twitter and Snap add users as restrictions ease’ was more important, complete with three young ladies with masks, one by 3M and all posing for that one phone. It has come to that. And we all suffer whilst the internal media filters are set to the needs of stake holders and advertisers. If it isn’t anti Saudi Arabia, it will not get published. And this is not me, merely search “Saudi Arabia” together with either the BBC, the Guardian, The Washington Post, the NY Times, the LA Times and a few others and make a tally of negative versus positive articles, also look at the amount of times that Houthi attacks on Saudi targets, civilian targets no less were reported. The outcome will shock you. 

This is not about Saudi Arabia, it is about the amount if filtered news the media is giving us, they who claim that the people have a right to know, they claim that they can police themselves, they who claim that they are about the freedom of the press, they are now more and more about selling filtered information as press freedom. There are still a few good ones, they do give out the reports we need to see but the list of filtering elements are increasing more and more. And it cannot be me to tell you what to find, you need to look for yourself and see the results. So whilst we ignore the Arab News giving us “The Arab coalition said that the Iran-backed militia fired a ballistic missile late Saturday toward Jazan that was intercepted and destroyed”, as well as “the Iran-backed group aims to destabilise security and stability in the Arab region, through financial and weaponry support from external parties, by deliberately pursuing aggressive practices that violate the rules of international humanitarian law and ignoring all efforts to end the conflict in Yemen”. So when was the last time any media held Iran up to close examination of their support of terrorists? When was the last time any credible event by Houthi forces were shown in the limelight by western media? Now consider another side, consider other news. PinkNews gives us ‘Thousands tell Boris Johnson to ‘stop stalling on LGBT+ rights’ at Reclaim Pride march’, so how many newspapers covered that? Now consider that the UK stakeholders think ‘LGBT rights’ is a bad idea and their news is left forgotten, there was no space on the internet pages of the newspaper, or their was no one to cover it, see what happens when it happens to you. Filtered information is the largest crime against news this century and it is getting bigger, what happens when you and your life no longer holds up to the 80% of the people they have to protect? What happens when YOU become the outlier? In Australia it is age discrimination, but that is not just it. SBS News gave us last week ‘Eighty per cent of Muslims in Australia say they have experienced discrimination’. 80% is not an outlier, it is mainstream and that too is a reason where my islam game might help, if people understand something they might stop abusing and discriminating, we have to because as I personally see it, the governments do fuck all.

These are all parts of that same coin, but the third side, the third side where the media tells us what news is by filtering what their ‘friends’ are not happy to see into the open air, that too is a side and it is the side no one speaks of. So is it my delusion, does it not exist? Consider the parts I gave you and investigate, look into the matter of all the news withheld from you So how many newspapers covered LGBT+ rights? They all covered Mardi Grass, it must have been the balloons. So how much longer until you take notice? When you become the filtered news factor?

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Politics

July 21, 2021 · 20:35

Why is an official like a quilt?

The answer is simple, they both cover up. And it is this part that is the larger stage. The Reuters article reports mere hours ago in the article ‘India reports 3,998 COVID deaths after state corrects its data’ (at https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-india/india-reports-3998-covid-deaths-after-state-corrects-its-data-idUSKBN2ER0BF) gives us “India reported its highest death toll in a month on Wednesday – at nearly 4,000 – after its richest state reconciled its death count with 3,509 previously unreported fatalities, the health ministry said”. This is entertaining on a few levels. Most of the media passes this by, it passes this by even as I found in my article ‘The worst is yet to come’ on September 6th 2020 (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2020/09/06/the-worst-is-yet-to-come/) where we see “In the Coronavirus numbers we see yesterday that a new number is reached, 300,474 new cases, a new height. We are only one day away from the US with 3% of its population with the Coronavirus, 50% of all cases are in the USA, Brazil and India (based on the numbers), yet there are several indicators that we aren’t even close to knowing how many cases India actually has. Even as ABC gave us last month ‘India’s biggest slum has so far nailed coronavirus. Here’s how they did it’, I am not convinced and the data is siding with me.” Which shows that I was aware of the faulty Indian numbers almost a year ago, so to see now “The ministry did not give a reason but authorities have in the past attributed other instances of deaths going unreported to administrative errors, before the mistakes are discovered and the numbers appear in official data”, yes it is nice that Reuters takes ‘unreported to administrative errors’ as read, but is not asking the deeper questions in any way of form. We get it, what is reported is what is given. But the numbers have not made sense for close to a year and others have reported on the matter and I wrote about that too, but what is the point to fighting a sickness when governments are hiding the real deal, the real impact and are optionally masking THEIR statistics. As I stated before, India might be the most visible but I doubt that they are the only one. 

So when we are treated to “Last month, the poor northern state of Bihar raised its death toll by more than 5,000 in a day when it included some unrecorded data. The sudden appearance of previously unrecorded deaths has lent weight to suspicion that India’s overall death tally is significantly more than the official figure.” And that is not all, consider that 5.000 death were unrecorded, if that is the case, the setting that 100,000 sick are unrecorded is equally a danger. When we see India at present with 31,216,337 cases whilst making the claim that 30,390,687 recovered, we see the difference should be the active cases and the dead, now consider that the active cases (as reported) are 407,139. Now consider that they are off by 100,000, do you now see that India has a much larger problem? This is not merely a case of ‘administrative errors’, I think it is a lot more and I feel certain that there are several Indian government officials trying to hide the setting that they are in over their heads. 

That part is reinforced by ABC 5 hours ago with ‘India’s COVID-19 deaths could be 10 times higher than the official toll, according to research’, the article (at https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-07-21/india-covid-deaths-could-be-in-the-millions/100310602) gives us “India’s excess deaths during the coronavirus pandemic could be a staggering 10 times the official toll, according to the most comprehensive research yet on the ravages of the virus in the country”, I personally never considered that the numbers were off by 1000%, I did it all in my head, so I must have misplaced a comma. Yet the stage is now that we see a much larger stage, a much larger impact and not just for India. In this we see a larger premise, and if I need to be the optimistic one, when we see all the anti-vaxxer protests, it is fine by me. If they get sick they will die and I can get a more decent job (until each of the other three buy my 5G IP), so one mans needs will be filled by the death of someone else. That is how the world turns, but I wonder how the world reacts to these thousands of administrative errors?

What do you think?

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics, Science

Tagged as , , , , ,

July 19, 2021 · 03:06

From scatterplot to Unicorn

We all have these moments, even if we deny this, even if we do not want this, we get drawn in. We see the point in a plot and the mind fills in the connections. To see this, we need to take a look at two articles. The first one is ‘Australia’s spy agencies caught collecting COVID-19 app data’, which was given to us by Ted Crunch (at https://techcrunch.com/2020/11/24/australia-spy-agencies-covid-19-app-data/) last November. There we see “Australia’s intelligence agencies have been caught “incidentally” collecting data from the country’s COVIDSafe contact-tracing app during the first six months of its launch, a government watchdog has found”, in this I do not really care, I do not trust ANY contact tracing app. Most of them are quick designed apps with a need to make a few quick bucks (evidence to follow). The article also gives us “For some, fears that a government spy agency could access COVID-19 contact-tracing data was the worst possible outcome”, why? If you think that the government is your worst enemy, then read on. 

The second part is seen when we turn towards the Netherlands. They give us ‘Data leak test provider: anyone could get fake test results in app CoronaCheck’ (at https://nos.nl/artikel/2389818-datalek-testaanbieder-iedereen-kon-valse-testuitslagen-in-app-coronacheck-krijgen), there we see “Due to a major leak at a company conducting corona tests, it was possible for anyone to obtain fake travel or access certificates in the CoronaCheck app and manipulate data. The company works for Testenvoorjereis.nl, which has been set up by the government”, it is only the beginning. The additional part is “Not only was it possible to create false evidence, but sensitive personal data was also leaked from more than 60,000 people who had been tested by the provider”, here we see the issue, not only is there a pool of data from people going on, or recently went on vacation, it is possible for criminal elements to create false papers for all kind of reasons. And there were people calling me mad? I think that these two parts show just how shortsighted those pushing for quick creation are. One could argue that any of these 60.000 households can make a claim towards the people behind testenvoorjereis.nl if they get burgled. Is it me, am I seeing the unicorn in the scatterplot, or is it the alleged delusional making claims like “Incidentally, there is still no evidence that anyone other than the RTL journalist has gained access to the system, VWS informs”, a stage that is not a given and and there is a chance that they will never be able to prove that there was no access. It is a stage that can fall either way. I tend to side with the cautious side, and there is a larger stage of denial from the other side. 

The problem is not the precautions one side makes, it is the uninhibited hype towards apps and data. And in this stage the criminals are laughing their heads off. They get way too much access to too many datasets. It might be small, yet when they aggregate 2-5 of these sources, they end up with a rather large dataset that is a lot more complete than too many sources are willing to admit to. These apps all rely on phone number, or mobile serial number, optionally even with connection details. Now consider that people have been kindly logging into EVERY place, all in the name of safety. So a person goes from Whole Foods, to the Trocadero, to Regent Street, to Liberty London, the get a Corona test, they register everywhere and the criminals are taking note, especially when some are about to go on vacation. This is a lot larger than the Netherlands. I am willing to go on faith (faith of the greed driven) that most Commonwealth countries have similar flaws, if not bigger ones. 

Is it me? Am I seeing the unicorn in a scatterplot? I am willing to admit that I am on a piece of slippery ice, yet personally I do not believe that to be the case, there is too much out there to support my point of view.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Politics, Science

Tagged as , , , ,

July 17, 2021 · 20:13

The choices made for us

Yes, that happens. It happens all the time. We vote and the elected people make choices for us. We support charities and that allows them to save who they think are important. These are choices that happen, to some degree with our consent. In the other hand we are confronted with choices made FOR us, without permission and without consent. And there the problem starts, we cannot make all our decisions and all our choices, in this we also set a larger stage that we can never control, and that is where the issues begin. 

In the first stage we see ‘Covid misinformation on Facebook is killing people’, the article by the BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-57870778) gives us “The White House has been increasing pressure on social media companies to tackle disinformation”, which is nice, but utterly useless. As I see (as a Republican) that there can never be freedom of speech without accepting the accountability of what we say. To put it mildly, I wrote ‘The accountability act – 2015’ On June 4th 2012, almost 10 years ago I saw the solution that all the high and mighty lawyers are steering clear from. My thoughts never became reality, and you might wonder why not? When we see today at the BBC “Earlier on Friday, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said Facebook and other platforms were not doing enough to combat misinformation about vaccines”, I am stating that people like Jen Psaki are wording the thoughts of people who are at times too stupid for everyones good. We need to accept that solutions like Facebook are mere publishers here, the people uploading their views are to be held responsible for what they say, but politicians for well over a decade refused to do so. I get it that there should be freedom of speech and freedom of expression, but in that same setting those freedoms need to be enriched with  accountability. 

In the second stage we see ‘Under the skin of OnlyFans’, also by the BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-57269939). There we see “Soon Tina was making $2,000 (£1,450) a month and able to rent her own flat. But in January, a hacker seized control of her account, blackmailed her for $150 and uploaded streams of IS terror videos”, as such we see “one of the million content creators on OnlyFans”, yet how much is revealed on the terrorist that resorted to blackmails. So the BBC and others are all about the OnlyFans part, but only (in passing) the BBC mentions blackmail and terrorism. So how much is there on that hacker and has that person been arrested yet? We can optionally see that Tina takes accountability for HER material, but who holds the terrorist accountable? 

Then there is level three, which comes from the Dutch NOS. There we see (at https://nos.nl/nieuwsuur/artikel/2389685-zo-opereert-de-digitale-maffia) ‘This is how the Digital Mafia operates’. The articles gives us “We were able to listen in on a piece of negotiation between a Dutch security company and a hacked company. The online criminals are so professional that the negotiators work in team services. They even seem to use scripts during the negotiation – as if you were calling a customer service”, they even give a video on how a ransomware kill chain is operated by seven different groups, and the US president Joe Biden is all about blaming social media, instead of hunting down these digital criminals with optional targeted kill orders. 

As I personally see it, our freedom has been given away hiding behind ‘freedom of speech’ posters, and the freedom of expression for digital criminals is to get every penny they can get. No one is held accountable for their actions. A choice made FOR us, against us and in opposition of our safety and freedoms. 

So how does that sit with you?

Yes, we might see one side of the table, all whilst the other side is covered with a table cloth. And the Dutch version matters, in this age, after criminals executed the crime journalist Peter R. De Vries the public might get angry enough to force the issue and that gives us a new stage, the dozens of criminals feeling safe in the Netherlands might suddenly lose that freedom of action because of the acts of a person allegedly acting for (or in response) Ridouan Taghi. I reckon that it will take time to ascertain one or the other, but the public does not wait, they will act in loud response and that might be just the coin toss a few people are hoping for and especially the digital crime circles dreads, they are all about white collar crimes, all whilst the response is well above their heads and others will respond in kind, even criminals will react, all to push the limelight away from them. This is the response we get to have in a world of ‘freedom of speech’ without accountability.

In a world where no one wants to pay the bill for what they caused. This might be most visible on Covid and disinformation, but soon enough the Trumpists (drummers as well) and others will see the consequence of action without accepting the liability attached to it. Even now as life in the US becomes close to unliveable, we see that politicians are allowing QAnon speakers to take the limelight. You think the age of Donald Trump is over? Think again, as long as there is a lack of accountability is continuing this wave keeps on going on. 

And the opposition? That is easy, it will not take too long, but the intelligent people could pick up their IP and take it to Canada, the UK and the EU, when that happens and the US Credit card is considered too overdrawn, the stage of life in the US will soon change and not due to a heatwave. In 2021 $15 billion in drugs patents will expire, the year after $36 billion more, and over the next 5 years the US will see well over $20 billion in technology patents expire and now consider that an estimated $25 billion in patents move somewhere else, an economy with an immediate write-off that goes optionally beyond $100 billion lost. Now consider what happens to your credibility when your collateral is diminished by 100 billion? The US might need a new song, one that is different from blaming big tech, they are keeping the US economy alive. All drenched in choices made for us, made for us all. Yet how many of them were made FOR us? And this is not merely about the US, when they go under so does Japan and soon thereafter the EU as well. Do you still think that freedom of speech is the real saviour? It is a one sided coin of a larger stage that ignores the other side of that very same coin. 

Good luck!

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Law, Media, Politics, Science

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