Category Archives: Science

The cake is in the oven

That is the setting we face as we see the article on MEMRI (at https://www.memri.org/reports/article-saudi-government-daily-saudi-arabia-has-legitimate-right-develop-nuclear-weapons). I would be in favour of this. The speaker sheikh Muhammad Al-Husseini, (Lebanese in origin) is unknown to me. He also has Saudi citizenship. He wrote “Saudi Arabia has “a legitimate right” to develop and attain nuclear weapons, and in fact has “an urgent need” to do so in light of the growing threats it is facing and Iran’s rapid progress towards nuclear capabilities. Establishing a nuclear balance of deterrence in the region, he says, will enhance regional stability and cause the kingdom’s enemies to think twice before taking aggressive measures against it.” I personally agree with that point of view. Iran has become too unstable and too aggressive against the state of Israel as well as the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The second front Iran manages through Houthi forces and there is too big a chance that they will have nuclear potential. It was a setting that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad catered to in his presidency (2005-2013), it was then that Saudi Arabia had to cloak itself with a nuclear deterrent. As things go now, it might not have another option. Most of us do not want this and it was clear that Saudi Arabia didn’t want that either, yet Muhammad Al-Husseini makes a strong point. Establishing a nuclear balance of deterrence  might be unavoidable. I want to make this clear. In all matters regarding this path I would happily be proven wrong. I certainly hope it isn’t required, yet in this setting we are all reacting to the acts of Iran and that is a problem. With their approach to the state of Israel, Saudi Arabia might not be left with an option. It is better that Iran clearly knows that any attack to Saudi Arabia will have a nightmare scenario as a response. 

sheikh Muhammad Al-Husseini then gives us “Iran is working to advance its nuclear program, and is apparently approaching its goal. In light of the concerns about developments in the nuclear policy of the region’s, Saudi Arabia, which does not currently possess nuclear weapons, is entitled to discuss this issue.” I agree on this. In this light when the problems act in Iran, Saudi Arabia better have options of any kind. He ends it all with “At the same time, there is a need for prudent management of the potential dangers associated with nuclear capability” he is right again. The problem that I see is that Saudi Arabia does it in reaction to their current enemies. This take the yellow cake in directions we do not like. As I see it, the first danger I see is that the Houthis get their hands on a dirty bomb equivalent and launches it on a tactical target. Iran will state: ‘We know nothing, we never handed them anything’ and then point they finger at any would be additional target that they hope Saudi Arabia will resolve for them. This will massively increase tensions in the middle east. I would hope there would be a way to stop this, but too many weapons deliveries have gotten through to Houthi forces, so I do not think this path will be stopped any day soon. The idea that third parties will use this to set the hammer against Saudi Arabia is not without fear, the point that there are parties who will ‘act’ to get in the good graces of Iran is a real danger and they will see a mere weapon shipment to Houthi forces. That is the real danger. The acts to appease Iranian political players. There are few enemies to pick from and whomever sides with Iran on this better be ready to pay a hefty price here.

There is no need to say who, there are too many options and scenarios. But that setting does plays towards to voice that Muhammad Al-Husseini is raising. The problem here is that this voice and my view could be regarded as fear-mongering. I get that, but does Saudi Arabia have any option to avoid this? The larger problem is not Saudi Arabia, it is Iran. The Gaza tensions as well as the standing against the state of Israel is becoming a worrying setting. Then there are the settings that complicate matters, namely Syria and Hezbollah. Any of them could become a nuclear parts courier. As such there are several ways that these materials could find their way to Houthi hands and that is the real scenario. Iran pretending to have clean hands whilst Saudi Arabia get the damage and the political fallout of any nuclear strike. As such I agree with Muhammad Al-Husseini that there is a essential need for Saudi Arabia to have a nuclear deterrent in place. My original design was not meant against Russia, but against Iran who had Russian equipment. It was meant to get the plant in Sirik to melt down setting nuclear options back for at least 1-2 decades. These things are expensive and a new site would set a lot of markers back as well as the essential need to increase security to almost 5 fold which leaves them largely without troops. Al that from a simple snow globe, how sick was my creativity? 

But overall Muhammad Al-Husseini is right, Saudi Arabia needs a deterrent. Iran thinks it can play with others, but at some point the others need to react and that is where disaster could strike. 

Have a great day preferably not glowing in the dark.

Leave a comment

Filed under Military, Politics, Science

Here’s a crazy thought

Today I got made aware that Oslo seemingly has a water shortage. I could not believe my ears (eyes too). You see, Norway is 1,100 miles long and for about 90% of that distance it enjoys the tropical rains (read: implied sarcasm) of the Atlantic all year long. So I was a bit surprised to hear this. Now I understand the predicament, but have no fear, I is here. So here is a crazy thought. What if the snow clearing services get one additional task?

You see, Oslo gets its water from lake Maridalsvannet. And that place is almost as dry as a funny story by many politicians. So here’s a thought. It gets its water from Skjærsjøelva and Dausjøelva. So, what if we add to this? Consider this image (below)

Now consider that Skjærsjøelva is around 3 KM, Dausjøelva is even shorter. Now consider that pretty much every town in Norway needs the snow cleared. They normally place it where nature takes a hold and dissolves it into the Atlantic ‘river’, but that is merely an easy option. There is a line of towns from Rotnes up to Brandbu with a combined stage of thousands of houses, clearing snow every year. So what happens if a ditch is created, at times ceramic pipes with a diameter of 2 meters. And it is strategically placed to catch the melting snow and rainwater. It could mean a few thousand hectolitres of sweet sweet water all going straight to lake Maridalsvannet. This is not done in a day, the main line would take a few years to do, but it would mean a steady infusion of water to lake Maridalsvannet. The ceramic pipes make it environmentally friendly, and the snows will not be ‘wasted’ on the Atlantic river (small pun intended). 

I wonder if it is was feasible. You see we think merely of the river, but there are more ways to Oslo that per boat (Vikings swear by it). And the question becomes how much snow is cleared from these places in a year. It might even require a little more effort.

As towns place their snow in a specific place, on a catchment field, the melting snow as well as any rain falling there goes straight towards the pipeline. Now I get that not all towns will have one, but Rotnes has a population of 20 939. I reckon close to 10,000 houses, roads and it all has to be cleared. That implies up to 10,000 locations with 20 to 40 pounds/square foot snow. It has to be cleared every year (some multiple times a year) and the roads collect even more snow. So whilst it is blown aside, it could be specifically placed. I foresee that optionally additional water filtering is required, but it could take care of the shortage. And Oslo has an estimated 1,588,457, which is around one fourth of Norway. Will my solution solve it? Optionally over several years, as the number of snow streams are directed towards Oslo, it might solve it, in the short term it merely lessens the pressure on Oslo. 

It is all my brain could conceive in an hour and perhaps Norwegians will laugh at this thought stating they considered this a long time ago. That would be fair, I merely go where my creativity takes me. And even as Oslo is currently the most visible example, I am certain it is not the only one. We need to move into what we did, into what we optionally need to do now. The world is changing and the people are setting pressures into places pressure was never a consideration. That is all I have to contribute this day.

So consider the image below and wonder how much water is stored there? Could any of it find its way to Oslo? Just consider how much water you see there. In spring all that water is gone and a lot of it isn’t going to Oslo (not sure where the image was taken), but it is likely fuelling the Atlantic.

Have a great day and as diner is about to be served (by me, for me) I am signing off.

Leave a comment

Filed under Science

The price of fake stability

It is the question that flew my mind as I read a BBC article (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cwy3lxqlwl1o) here we are given the ‘plight’ (for the lack of a better word) of Boeing. The once heralded brand of a saviour of technology. Most will wonder about “A US campaign group has accused Boeing of concealing information about electrical problems on a plane that later crashed” , as well as “The organisation said more than 1,000 planes currently flying could potentially be at risk of electrical failures as a result of production problems. The foundation’s claims relate to an aircraft which hit the ground minutes after take-off from Addis Ababa in March 2019” yet whether the truth is a given here, remains the question. We are given a host of other settings in this partial boxing ring, which leads to “among the apparent issues indicated by the documents are a lack of electrical parts, missing and improperly installed wiring, and employees being placed under extreme pressure to rework defective parts” It is anyones guess how accurate these settings are, and my thoughts are that the once great airplane brand has fallen so far. Yet at this point my speculating self started to fill doubt with conjecture, a partial presumption on my side with a larger dose of speculation. And let there be no doubt, I am about to speculate, which is what one does when the facts are not completely to be trusted and when you fail to optionally see the good in people. Yet the BBC does not entirely fail to give the goods. And it does so in the last paragraph of the matter. We are given “Mr Pierson said reports from people within the factory alleged that efforts to improve conditions on the production line had so far been “woefully inadequate” – largely because FAA inspections were known about well in advance and could be prepared for

So why does the FAA give Boeing the goods? I believe it to be the faltering lines of the American economy. Another failing setting to NASDAQ would throw the American economy in a sliding scale towards an abyss. Whilst we are given that there is a positive year to year change, the reality is that Boeing hasn’t been positive since 2019, thats a 5 year thumper of debt when we see that Boeing had a revenue of 76.5 billion dollars and a net income of minus 600 million, we see that the numbers grow to a 77.8 billion with a net income of minus 2.2 billion. As such the Boeing numbers are not a good message and now we see that the FAA allegedly tells Boeing when they are coming for a ‘visit’? I believe that these firms are against the wall. And the previous CEO Dave Calhoun, who wielded the sceptre from January 2020 to August 7, 2024 has a lot to explain. He took over from Dennis Muilenburg who was fired amid safety concerns with the Boeing 737 MAX following two fatal crashes that claimed the lives of 346 passengers and crew on board. It is here that I personally believe that Dave Calhoun allegedly played a very dangerous game, the unsubstantiated believe that he played with lives using a set of dice. And as I see it, the FAA was willing to play with the lives of people. With the safety setting of Boeing at play, the FAA had no business to give advance warning. A setting we need to give rise to, so far 346 lives are lost and the economy is seemingly more important that hundreds of lives lost. America has an apparent 334,914,895 (2023) lives. Who cares how the Americans keep their population high, a few hundred is all that is needed, so fuck around and find out. And with another (speculated) 800 lost, due to the next 2-3 planes. the media will use all the soundbites to create flammable stories. In the mean time we see a system that is all about keeping the appearance of an economy high, does it matter how many lives are lost? In the end, when Boeing goes down, Airbus and Lockheed Martin. In retrospect United Airlines is waiting on 497 planes from Boeing, I reckon that they might want to change their order to Airbus (no idea if that is a valid option). The larger setting is that Boeing makes military aircrafts making it a touchy subject. I wonder if any media will truly take a look at how (as well as why) the FAA played chicken with American lives and the American economy. Is any of it a given? No, as I said there is a lot of presumption (read: in part speculation) on the subject. But anyone in Business Intelligence would have had similar thoughts. The problem is that this article by Theo Leggett is 15 hours old. I wonder what more information will be divulged to the people in the next 5 days. In addition there is a lot we do not know about Ed Pierson, a former manager at Boeing’s 737 factory in Renton, Washington State. I speculate that the FAA will face a serious shake up, the card will most likely fall against Michael Whitaker, but that is not a given. Someone will be buried alive for playing footsie with Boeing, of that I have no doubt, who? It will be anyones guess but it will be someone high up. And the stage between Boeing and its stock for the sake of stability. A faltering fake setting of a nation that couldn’t bring its debts about and merely try to play a longer game. If they did this to Boeing, who else what given some level of protection? I don’t know, but the American media is not keen on truly digging into that hornets nest.

As I said, plenty of speculation/presumption, the facts? Well, as I see it the media is no longer to be trusted, so who is? It is anyones guess I think.

Have a great day and try to enjoy tomorrow, that is, if you are not being a passenger on a Boeing.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics, Science

Is that so?

I was taken aback a little when I read the Khaleej Times yesterday. The article (at https://www.khaleejtimes.com/uae/old-smartphones-lying-in-cupboards-why-uae-residents-fear-recycling-their-devices) gave me pause to consider this. You see, when we see ‘Old smartphones lying in cupboards? Why UAE residents fear recycling their devices’ we can make all kinds of assumptions, but the clarity should be clear. There are a whole range of people who do not like their data up for grabs. The funny part is that Norton solved the issue over 40 years ago. Now we get a whole range of other options. But the simple sentiment is clear, and this is on Google and Apple to follow suit. 

I reckon that the solution will be similar for pretty much the same for both systems. The idea is that once you have transferred your mobile and data to the new phone, the old phone is pretty much redundant. So here comes Google/Apple and with their cable (in case of Google a USB-C) we can go to town, well, basically, the new phone can. 

So as I see it, the steps are as follows:

  1. Recharge old phone completely.
  2. Connect the recharged new phone to old phone.
  3. Instruct the new phone to wipe the old phone.
  4. Old phone gets wiped.

As the new phone gets the instruction to wipe the old phone, it will wipe, not delete to old phone.

This means that the new phone knows what the old phone is and will overwrite it with the value ‘EA’ (that was the old value). As such every bit off the old phone is overwritten with the value ‘EA’. It can be nearly any value, but this was the old setting I had in the 80’s. Because it is overwritten, there is nothing to undelete (read: restore). All data is wiped and no longer retrievable. In my case it was done 5 times (in case something is missed). As such the reference that the Khaleej Times gives us with “According to industry experts, fear of inappropriate use of data is one of the biggest deterrents to recycling devices among UAE residents” is no longer in effect. That being said, these ‘industry experts’ should know about this solution. And it is time for Google and Apple to be clear to the customers that their data is safe in this way. There are still a few other risks that people have, as they will readily put their data on social media, but their phones will be ‘saved’. 

What I don’t get is that both Google and Apple never touched on this subject before (as far as I know). Because iPads and other tablets face similar issues. I basically did this in my own way, in the more recent fields I did the same on my own way, but Google and Apple should have had these solutions in play already, so why was this skipped?

I cannot tell, but this article made me wonder why it was not taken care of. You see Peter Norton Computing has been around for 40 years, in 1990 it was taken over by Symantec and they had the goods, so why didn’t Apple and Google wake up to this setting? I never saw it (as far as I can remember) and it is not a weird setting. Consider all these corporate mobiles. At some point their IT departments will take a safe road by wiping their mobiles. So, why was this seemingly not done? I use the word ‘seemingly’ because it seems weird that it is only me who gets the idea. You see, doing a factory reset (as stated) gives us: “Doing a factory reset will delete nearly everything on the device”, it is the adaptation of the word ‘nearly’, I have an issue with that. Nearly isn’t everything, but what is not wiped? I reckon only the layer 1 people at Apple/Google can clearly identify them. There is still the setting that is set in motion. You could a ‘layered’ wiping of all memory through the new phone, optionally moving data from the old phone to the new phone (which Google/Android has). And doing it from phone to phone could optionally move ‘forgotten’ stuff to the new phone as well.

Oh, and that was the second part, the Khaleej Times never even mentions the factory reset part and the added GenAI settings that we see now more and more makes the wiping of old devices a lot more essential. In my story on August 11th 2024 which was ‘Setting of the day’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2024/08/11/setting-of-the-day/) gave us via Wired “Microsoft’s AI Can Be Turned Into an Automated Phishing Machine” we see the additional need for a complete wiping of all data. And as far as I can tell, there is no guarantee that some eager beaver will leave ‘discarded’ data alone. As such I feel that Apple and Google need to strap on their goods and get cracking to take the chance of certain solutions not to get a handle on your data.

I might not need it (I have other systems running) but the bulk of the users could use that little more protection. #Justsaying.

So let this be an idea that these two players get to seemingly rectify in the very near future. Darn, my Saturday starts in 92.4 minutes.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Science

As thoughts go

Here I was just minding my own business when Shohreh Aghdashloo (UN Ambassador, the Expanse and the big bad mama in Renfield) send this tweet out:

Of course it would be decently cool to make a battery reference, but my mind had other ideas. You see I had an idea last year to reduce the power uptake of several buildings in Dubai, and foremost an option to decently reduce the power needs of the Dubai mall. As things go, Dubai needs to address its power usage in some way as power will become a premium expanse in the foreseeable near future. My mind went to work on the adaptation I initially constructed and it needed to be aeronautically terrific. Hence I went to work (for about 10 minutes) and I came up with:

This is the roof of the car and the charger on top of it. The idea is to set it like a roof rack system, with a simple attach system so that it could fit any E-car roof. The idea is to get it from the boot and deploy it when the battery is at around 30% as the car rides air is pushed through the inlet driving the rotor and the electrical part is connected to the charge point. I doubt it could charge the battery, but you should get a decent amount more miles from the battery, earlier neglected. 

Here we see the overall roof charger with two additional mentions the A_cloth and B_cloth. These are two additional part one for the front, with a window part on the front and the back, the cloth covers the front and optionally the back too. These cloths will have additional solar panels (in case of a lack of wind) The hood of the car could fit a decent amount of panels, will it be enough? I do not know, I am not a solar expert, but this idea is something the Musk organisation might find workable. The top part of the charger could also be an additional panel. In the unfortunate setting that Shohreh faced, this device might give some charge over a few hours, so that she might continue the trip (beats walking route 66 I say). 

I wonder why no one came up with this. Perhaps my idea is folly and the battery needs too much power, perhaps someone came up with it and they couldn’t make it work. I think in simple terms. I am focussed on other IP, as such I leave this idea to you the reader to optionally make your fortune with this idea. Enjoy this freebee and have a wonderful day with optionally a few more ideas of your own.

Tuesday is almost at an end for me, for tomorrow I going to brood over something I read about Eric ‘the arms innovator’ googly googler Schmidt. We all need a hobby and it gave me an idea, optionally a useless one, but that is what brooding time is for.

Enjoy.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Science

What’s in an advertisement?

I have been called many things (not all of them nice) but I do not care, I call it as I see it. This time it is Google that hits the spotlight, you see it is not all Microsoft that I cater against (often I do though). This time it is Cyber News (at https://cybernews.com/news/meta-google-youtube-instagram-advertising/) that gives us the news. This came from the Financial Times and the headline gives us ‘Meta and Google had secret ad deal to target teens on YouTube’, I am not judging this, but Google has stated on a few instances that they would not target kids. Still we get here “Google Ads help page itself says that the “unknown” category refers to people whose age, gender, parental status, or household income are supposedly unidentified. In theory, this could allow ad buyers to reach a wider audience” but we are also given “according to FT, Google could use app downloads and online activity to determine “with a high degree of confidence” that the “unknown” group actually mostly consisted of younger users” Now, lets take a different look and for this I use the Apple population (not people eating Granny Smiths) So lets go by the simple set of an iPad and around 128.5 million units of tablets were shipped worldwide in 2023. A little over 40% in the USA. The younger population uses their iPad for over 4 hours a day to do gaming. I took a small measurement in two hours I was fed around 2 dozen advertisements. Now consider that we have 80 million gamers on the iPad, as such 4 hours represent 40 advertisements per user and that represents 3.2 billion advertisements EVERY DAY, you think that Google, Apple or Meta walk away from that? And when we add the mobile gamers on Android and iPhone it becomes a much larger and more interesting number. 

On one side it works out well for one of my IP issues if we consider the larger premise. You see some are all about hijacking revenues from others, I took it into a different direction. When these three players lose a little over 20% of that advertisement industry. How strapped for cash will they end up being? Don’t trivialise this (many so called captains of industry will), when you need your revenue and you get to face a decline of 20% panic is ensured to come to the table. Like the advertisement bitches who cried fowl when Google wanted to do away with cookies. The setting I had was enable Amazon to a much larger degree, optionally enabling Kingdom Holding (Riyadh). A simple setting that many forgot about, because they all wants us to look to the horizon to the land of honey and AI, but that is at least a decade away, as such I saw another shore. 

But back to the story. So the response from Google was ““We prohibit ads being personalised to people under 18, period,” Google said in a statement to the publication. “We’ll also be taking additional action to reinforce with sales representatives that they must not help advertisers or agencies run campaigns attempting to work around our policies.”” And it could have worked if Google set through the cookie stage, but they did not. Now the setting is different, advertisement gaming is developing and we get a dozen versions of the same game and they all run on advertisements. And the game becomes worse for some ad streamers now also include advertisements. As such they are one step removed from the old setting that Electronic Arts tried to include in their sport games, the billboards in a game all showing the advertisements that EA could sell. In the long run it could have given them a revenue boost. Now the game sets a different premise. You see you can fight of getting more revenue, or you can make sure the others cannot get any, that was the premise that I went for and Saudi Arabia does not have to cater to Americans, more importantly they could deny America well over 20% of that revenue. Consider that the big three techs have to report a drop of 20%, how does that work out? In addition to that loss you could capture a part of that revenue. You see the USA is all about monopolising issues, all whilst no one looked to the shores behind them to see what they lost and that was the place where revenue was all over the floor.

The setting is given, but when we consider that they either confess on targeting minors, or take the losses. And my solution doesn’t target at all, putting this solution largely in the clear.

Still, the EA premise had me thinking, not a similar approach, but a very different approach. One that give a much higher premise of engagement. Like the cheaper Netflix, set the console with a gaming portal and that portal has a niche for advertisers one that pays the viewer in credits, which could go towards a lower fee, or game coins to get free updates (enhancements) for in game shopping, any game on the platform. That was a side no one (seriously) looked at. Games are set to a developer, not to a portal and when they want to be there they will have to agree. Consider any console with 50,000,000-200,000,000 gamers, do you really think a game designer wants to be cut off? Consider that the Xbox Game Pass has only 18 million users. And the numbers I stated were conservative, this solution would be next to the PSX2 (over 155,000,000) and the Nintendo Switch (144,00,000) that is what was at stake and Google shot themselves in the foot (my speculation) as they dropped the Google Stadia, as such the Amazon Luna and the Tencent console are all that remains. And when we see those numbers, a larger base exists for advertisers, but in my view a more limited one. Still, there is (to some degree) an option whilst removing a massive chunk (I think around 20%) away from Apple, Google and Meta. It was an evolution to the system as I set it up and the advertisement funds are merely the icing on the cake. 

The added ‘protection’ that is given could sway plenty of parents to go this way, not my initial interest, especially when phase one 50 million is reached. The system will fuel itself towards users like the CBM64 did in the mid 80’s. Still the others need to rethink their system, because for now they think it is all OK, but when the setting changes it will already be too late. Look at the Cookie stage, only when they finally switched it off in part, the advertisers starting to cry like little bitches. Three days ago we were given “This latest twist in the Privacy Sandbox saga is a wake-up call for the entire digital advertising ecosystem, according to Upwave’s George London.” Wake up call? This setting was known for a couple of years, as such these people had plenty of time to revisit the sands of opportunity, but they thought that it wouldn’t get to that, and the money would keep going in. Now the premise will likely become that they lose out on a population that gets into the millions, no free ride for cookies (cookie monster ate them all) as such they will have to put the prices down by a lot, because targeting is soon to be a real issue, for this the Google and Meta setting comes into play. Either regulators demand a larger scrutiny (expected turn) or the advertisement world will lose 4.3 billion advertisements on iPad alone, now consider how many game on their mobiles? That is a reported 79% of an expected 18,250,000,000 billion in 2025. Set that to revenue numbers. Yes what one party tells is not what some do, or they tell them where not to look for certain restrictive papers. Oh, and my simplistic number stage gives me around 2.8 billion advertisement options are optionally soon lost or diminished. Yes, my 50 million consoles were hilariously conservative. 

What’s in an ad? Nothing a gamer wanted to see anyway, as well as a few other clusters of pushed to watch advertisement people. So how will Meta continue at minus 20%? Apple will do fine and Google will have its android, but when that newly reinvented shore comes, Google will also have to make due. As such,  they can bite the bullet or set up a fee for Youtube, which will make TikTok happy to no extent 

They say all is fair in love and war, did you ever consider that the people have a voice too, that they are pushed towards apps with no avoidance? What happens if you cater to those people? Google should know, they grew their search in a very similar way.

Have a lovely time and see you perhaps in a place without advertisements every couple of minutes.

Leave a comment

Filed under Gaming, IT, Media, Science

Setting of the day

On a good day
The Khaleej Times Jost informed me on how a good day comes to pass. Here (at https://www.khaleejtimes.com/uae/meet-the-uae-police-officer-who-uncovered-183-money-laundering-cases-in-15-years) we are introduced to Major Saad Ahmed Al Marzooqi. 

The headline ‘Meet the UAE police officer who uncovered 183 money laundering cases in 15 years’. We are also given “He was recently appointed as the first Emirati member of the Financial Action Task Force’s (FATF) International Cooperation Review Team” and we can be mesmerised, or brag about his abilities, but the numbers imply that he slightly uncovered more than one case a month. There are plenty of police forces all over the world where half of these numbers would imply a stellar career. As we gawk over “exposed 183 money laundering cases that are related to drugs and financial embezzlement. He had also created a database of incidents, which contributed to an increase in convictions from a monthly average of 3 to 14” we need to realise that the increase of 3 to 14 implies that this one person achieved more than any average police station in Europe. 

This is the kind of man the world needs and that will be explained in the next article, because the universe relies on balance and the imbalance we are about to see takes the cake and changes an optional day to night.

On a bad day
Yes like any hero that needs a antagonist to make things interesting, we have Microsoft in two mentions. Now this isn’t directly involving anyone at Microsoft, but the follies are a setting that makes things a lot worse.

First we get Wired (at https://www.wired.com/story/microsoft-copilot-phishing-data-extraction/) who gives us ‘Microsoft’s AI Can Be Turned Into an Automated Phishing Machine’ we get to see “Attacks on Microsoft’s Copilot AI allow for answers to be manipulated, data extracted, and security protections bypassed, new research shows” which is not good, but anything positive can me mauled into a criminal jester for organised crime. The additional “Microsoft raced to put generative AI at the heart of its systems. Ask a question about an upcoming meeting and the company’s Copilot AI system can pull answers from your emails, Teams chats, and files—a potential productivity boon. But these exact processes can also be abused by hackers.

Today at the Black Hat security conference in Las Vegas, researcher Michael Bargury is demonstrating five proof-of-concept ways that Copilot, which runs on its Microsoft 365 apps, such as Word, can be manipulated by malicious attackers, including using it to provide false references to files, exfiltrate some private data, and dodge Microsoft’s security protections.” Now, I haven’t seen this, but Wired has a solid enough level of credibility to not ignore this. And that isn’t all. Bargury gives the world “the ability to turn the AI into an automatic spear-phishing machine. Dubbed LOLCopilot, the red-teaming code Bargury created can—crucially, once a hacker has access to someone’s work email” as I speculatively see it a mediocrity solution to turn the Internet of Things into a machine serving organised crime, optionally the NSA too, well done Microsoft. As I see it, the workload of Major Al Marzooqi would increase fivefold when this hits the open world, actually it already has if I understood the words from Michael Bargury correctly. In this, we optionally an even bigger problem, or at least a lot of corporations will.

You see there is a second message, in this case from Cyber Security News (at https://cybersecuritynews.com/microsoft-entra-id-vulnerability/). They give us ‘Microsoft Entra ID (Azure AD) Vulnerability Let Attackers Gain Global Admin Access’ with the subtext “Security researchers have uncovered vulnerabilities in Microsoft’s Entra ID (formerly Azure Active Directory) dubbed “UnOAuthorized” which could allow unauthorised actions beyond expected controls” Now take these two parts together and the phishing expedition could hit every R&D system on the planet using Azure. I am certain that Microsoft will have some patch coming soon, but in the meantime the bulk of R&D (under Azure) will be vulnerable and approachable by many hacker and especially organised crime, because selling secrets to competitors tends to be a lucrative setting and most corporations aren’t that finicky in acquiring something that raises (and assures) the bonuses of the members of their boardroom. OK, this is speculative on my side, but wonder what some will do to get the upper hand in business, especially if there is a bonus raise involved. 

I wish I had a solution, but my personal feeling is that Microsoft has too many holes, loops and a whole rage of other issues and switching to either AWS, IBM cloud or Google Cloud tends to be an essential first step coming to my mind. Now, if there are sceptics who think that I am anti-Microsoft here, they are probably right. Therefor the Links to the two articles were added letting you look at the stories yourself. In the meantime I remember a story in April and it should be my ‘duty’ to inform SAMI that ‘BAE Systems and Microsoft join forces to equip defence programmes with innovative cloud technology’ had a nice article and with the two articles mentioned, SAMI could lay its hands on a truckload of BAE IP. Not sure how far they will get, but free IP is the way to go I say. So when you realise that a large corporation like British Aerospace with all the civilian and military hardware can be accessed, what chances do you think that Novo Nordisk (Denmark), LVMH (France), ASML (Netherlands), SAP (Germany), Hermez (France), L’Oreal (France) have? I do not know if any uses Azure, but it is a good moment for them to select one of the other companies. They could after the event sue Microsoft for damages, but Delta Airlines is already suing CrowdStrike and I am not sure how that will go. In the end it is my personal opinion that this could potentially bite Microsoft hard and it is one of the reasons I do not let them near my IP.

As I personally see it, the companies racing the be the first to launch their (fake) AI will now have a much larger impact. There were already fake data issues, but now the phishing options that are mentioned and when that gets linked to what Cyber Security News calls “UnOAuthorized” the entire IT game changes dramatically and I have no idea how that will play out. 

As my Sunday is almost over and Vancouver only just started there’s a chance we postulate that the next 72 hours will be an interesting one. Have a lovely day (when you are not on Azure).

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Military, Science

I missed this setting

That is the premise. So, why didn’t I think of this? We all have this and on the defence of Microsoft, they had the ‘slogan’ at the launch of Windows 95 ‘Without even thinking’ the premise was brilliant as was the innovation from Windows 3.11 to Windows 95, no doubt about it. And without even thinking applies to so many applications and conditions, it is a brilliant created stage (credit where credit is due). So here I was reading the BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c9d1y0z4z9no) and that gave me the nudge to wake up. You see I wrote about Ruja Ignatova, now mentioned in ‘Fugitive ‘Cryptoqueen’ hit by asset freeze’ with the lines “Ruja Ignatova, known as the Missing Cryptoqueen, is now subject to a global freezing order which prevents her assets from being sold or moved.” I had written about it some time ago and now we see “The freezing order, made public on Wednesday at London’s High Court, is part of a group action brought by more than 400 OneCoin investors”, I looked at this ‘crypto queen’ somewhere in May of June last year, it could have been two years ago. 

What made me consider this is that it has taken 6 years to do this. The questions come to mind is why this took 6 years. Come to think of this, why didn’t my sneaky way of thinking consider this. And in that light it she had moved all ‘her’ cash in some trust setting in Switzerland or Saudi Arabia it might not amount to anything. Those two countries have massive protections in place and anyone of them transgressing on their banking laws are in deep trouble. It is like rowing towards the end of the Niagara falls without an anchor in place.

So why did this global freezing order take 6 years? There might be a good reason, but the article doesn’t hand out the reason. Then we also get “The freezing order does not just target Ms Ignatova but seven other people and four companies – all alleged to have been connected with OneCoin in some form” which gives me another setting. Is ‘alleged’ enough to put a freezing order in place? Don’t get me wrong it sounds nice, but when was alleged enough to prosecute people and companies? Doesn’t that require proof? 

Then we get to “Sebastian Greenwood, who is in a US prison serving a 20-year sentence for his role in the fraud. Also subject to the freeze are British businessmen Christopher Hamilton and Robert MacDonald, who appeared in court in London” which get us the added “The pair are accused by US authorities of laundering OneCoin proceeds, however attempts to extradite them to the US to face trial have failed”, now I do not known enough of either Christopher Hamilton and Robert McDonald, but why did the extradition fail? There might be a procedural or legal reason, but the BBC does not give us this. It might not hit the core of this story, which is Ruja Ignatova, yet in light of the time settings it becomes a liked interest, so why is it missing? 

There are a few speculative sights to this. The first is that she was murdered (read: executed) and whomever was left with the bundles of cash is pretty much singing ‘do wa Diddy Diddy’ on a sunny beach. The second one that I considered was that she has a new identity, living it up in the UAE whilst her cash is in an optional Saudi bank, gaining 5%-10% interest over several billions, and as such you can live like a queen in Dubai or Abu Dhabi living off $100,000,000 plus each year. She might have been seeding the non captured funds to assure her of non-capture and non-freeze cash. This is all speculation but the stage that we see with 6 years vanishing makes these two the most likely scenario’s. And there are more places she could go when the cash is securely non-freezable. 

This gets me back to the number one question. Why did the global freeze order take 6 years? There might be a really good (or correct) reason, but the BBC article does not give us that.

Something to consider especially When we consider the Khaleej Times exposed last June that ‘UAE scams exposed: How thousands of residents ‘lost it all’ in bogus investment schemes’ and this is one nation. They report “over 40,000 UAE residents have collectively lost hundreds of millions of dollars to fraudulent investment schemes” that is a serious amount of money and this is one nation. Don’t you think there is now a pressing need to up the effort to upgrade banking laws to take this factor out (or at least diminish it massively). I understand that a fool and his money are soon parted and that it is everyones responsibility to take steps to make it harder for these criminals. I think that the one clear lesson is that there are no free gifts (EVER). The second part is that nothing comes for free. Now we get that not all ‘currencies’ are the same. Look at Facebook. Their currency is data and a lot of people do not care about data, especially as they do not know what it could cost them. One question I have always in mind when someone offers me a deal to good to be true is “if it is too good to be true, it must be a false setting”, this has (up to now) prevented me a few times to lose my cash. The second thing is that if someone (an unknown person) comes to me with such an offer. My initial question becomes ‘Why doesn’t he (or she) go to friends first?’ The situation might have come up, or they might not have any friends. But when you deliver on ‘great’ deals you suddenly have more friends than anyone ever bargained for. 

This is a paranoia setting, but it is not paranoia when everyone is after your bank account. Just a thought to consider.

So whether your funds are in a fridge or not. Make space by removing the venison and make yourself an awesome Bambi burger, with forrest unions and mushrooms. Bon appetite and have a lovely weekend when you get there. I get there in 2 hours. Now I need to find some venison, I suddenly feel peckish.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

How to measure success?

That is the question is was facing today. It wasn’t about my success (or lack thereof). It was about the olympics. One member (a fellow Australian) was happy because we had two additional gold members over the United Kingdom. But there was something wrong with that train of thought. It was too American. Don’t get me wrong, as I see it it is great to have more golden medals, but in my old fashioned way of life (and thinking) it is weird that the runners up get to live. I must be going soft in my old age.

You see with Australia grasping a 14-12-9 achievement and the United Kingdom holding onto 12-15-19 at present this list could go into any direction. However, this got me thinking. How do you measure success? Don’t get me wrong the gold number are nice, yet it is not a true list of achievement, is it? I have been pondering this and my mind took me to the old 1,2,3 squared allocation. So Bronze counts as 1, Silver as 4 and gold as 9. Now we get to 183 for Australia and 187 for the United Kingdom. UK won by a nose-hair as jockeys tend to say. So is this actually fair? How can medals be universally set? I don’t think that a boxer will accept equal points to an equestrian, in support, the horse will not go along with that either. Still there is a need to give some level of equality especially as the best of the best of the best in any of these disciplines are competing, yet the simple set to look at the golden medals seems wrong (possibly Canadian Summer McIntosh might agree but she just got 3 golden and one silver medal), at 17 she got (as far as I know) a tied second place with a few others all with three golden medals in the French Olympics. 

However I still ponder, is my formula the right one? It seems to be, but it might be my own shortsightedness to think so. 

Still, the question remains, how do you measure success, and not just in sports. In the 90’s I was subject KRA’s (Key Result Areas) and I accepted them as I had no knowledge on how to measure success. Even in customer care and Technical Support these numbers (when applied to the field I was in) made perfect sense. At some point you need to consider what to measure and how to measure it. Medals are a finite point of achievement, customer care is a little bit more fluidic. So how to go about it? The Olympic medallist might have kicked this off, but my brain takes into all directions. So with one movie script under my belt (for assessment with Dubai Media) am I more successful in scripting then all my friends (both of them)? They are not in that field, so how to generalise some metrics? You see we can grab Z-scores but as far as I can see that is a near obsolete approach to matters (perhaps what the people call AI use this) and now we get to the next bit and why I used Summer McIntosh as an example. These were her first Olympics, so how could there be a Z-score of her and how would it be reliable (or relatable)? Previous competitions? These were her first olympics and even in global events the pressures are different. 

And the field becomes even more complex, you see whatever they call these systems based on LLM’s and Deeper Machine Learning, it is either set by a programmer, or set by data and there the problem becomes a lot larger as both are used. Without proper verification and a number of constraints the equation becomes a GIGO rule (Garbage In Garbage Out).

I wonder how much some players consider success. Most will measure success by their ability to bring home the bonus funds. To some extent I accept that, but when you consider how they went about getting that success becomes a larger issue. In this I take the conceptual setting of Awareness versus Engagement in market research. Awareness could be shown how many impressions (or clicks) something gets, whilst engagement requires interaction with the solution. As I have always stated Engagement wins every time, but the large companies often herald views per thousand (or clicks as a secondary). So who get the price turkey at the end? Large Language Models with (Deeper) Machine Learning what some call a version of AI has issues and the world is waking up to Nvidia (not meant in a bad way). You see there is currently no AI, not yet anyway. What there is (the LLM and DML reference) is awesome and it can do great stuff, but it has issues like the legal sector recently saw. There is a lack of verification and that will be an issue in plenty of fields. 

Have a successful day.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Media, Science

When does it become a lie?

That is the question. It is not as simple as it sounds and I understand that. But here we are, the BBC gives us an article. I almost passed it, but then I saw something that didn’t read right, so I dug a little deeper. Their disadvantage was that I had just read up on several cases for material, so I reopened it and it is time to give you the fruits of my labour.

The BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy9eegg0rdvo) gives us ‘What could Google monopoly ruling mean for you?’. Well that is an open question but let me run you through the elements. 

The US said Google was currently paying firms like Apple huge amounts of money each year to be pre-installed as the default search engine on their devices or platforms”. OK, so this is a business proposition. Apple decided that the benefits of Google in their systems would help them in numerous ways and Google was willing to pay this. It was a price for services.

It comes with the repetitive quote “Apple’s Safari browser for example uses Google by default” what the BBC is not giving us is the offset that Apple would have to endure and they were getting $20,000,000,000 as a bandaid, if I got that kind of money I would say “Google slap me silly”. Now we get the parts that matter, it start with “Something that’s easier to imagine is some kind of choice screen, where people opening a browser for the first time are asked whether they’d like to use Google or an alternative like Microsoft’s Bing” This is hilarious. I have had first experience with Bing. Bing influencers were HIJACKING my search and pushing it through Bing. It took me days to undo that damage. Choosing between a bully and Google is not much of a choice. To put it mildly “Google has a 91% marketshare, Bing has 3.86%, where do you get the most bang for YOUR buck?” In this simple setting Google comes out on top EVERY time. And a secondary setting is that Bing has been around for 15 years. It isn’t just that Google is better, Bing has yet to show any level of pure innovation in searches. Microsoft lacks data, innovation and proper etiquette on search engines. 

Now we get to the issue I had, which starts with “Back in 1999, Microsoft found itself in a very similar situation to where Google is now.” You see, Netscape faced new competition from OmniWeb and Microsoft’s Internet Explorer 1.0, it continued to dominate the market in 1995 and beyond. In 1997 Netscape had 72% marketshare. That is, until Microsoft switch off the proverbial oxygen to Netscape and whilst the IE was free for all (it was installed with Windows 95), thing went south in several ways for Netscape and the one ‘ruler’ in those days became Microsoft with its Internet Explorer. Google released its browser in 2008. As such (as I see it) Microsoft wasted 10 years and within 2 years nearly everyone was using Google Chrome. They overwhelmed everyone with innovations. They released Chrome v9 in 2011 and Chrome v17 in 2012. What did Microsoft do? Nada, nothing, zip, zilch. In 2012, responding to Chrome’s popularity, Apple discontinued Safari for Windows, making it exclusively available on OS X (source: ubuntu life) . So here is the first setting. Apple made an educated choice. Create your own and reinvent the wheel or select the wheel maker of choice. Even at this point we need to recognise that Microsoft’s star was faltering and falling. That was then. Now there is a different setting. Then it was which American company gets the cake. Now it is different, China is now a much larger participant. They caught up with the US and even now the UAE and Saudi Arabia are massively catching up with America. They decide to waste the time of Google on trivial matters whilst calling it “monopolising” stating that the others should be given a ‘fair’ share. In this day and age it is handing the handling of the commerce horse to China and all the good it will do the American commerce. Small hint, it will not. 

There really more issues with Microsoft and particular with Edge and particularly Daniel Aleksandersen, who called this “clearly a user-hostile move that sees Windows compromise its own product usability in order to make it more difficult to use competing products.” There are issues with edge as Douglas J. Leith, a computer science professor from Trinity College, Dublin, Microsoft Edge is among the least private browsers. He explained, “from a privacy perspective Microsoft Edge is much more worrisome than the other browsers studied. These two quotes are on different sides of edge. But in aggregating these quotes it is my distinct believe that if Google Search is broken up, the American Department of Justice will receive roses from nearly every big organised crime syndicate. It is a mere believe I have, but after having suffered the edge bullies hijacking my browser and inserting edge ad a search engine against my wishes is the beginning of much more. The Verge accused edge of “spyware tactics”, a setting we have never seen Google use (speculation by me). In this day and age of commerce, the economy and data security you want to play with Google? I think that is a really bad idea.

Enjoy today, it is now midweek, the run to the weekend starts…….now.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Media, Science