Category Archives: Science

September 11, 2024 · 03:01

A brief recollection

Yesterday I saw an article (source: BBC) that gave me reason to give a little recollection. The article (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckg2dpkpmv1o) giving us ‘Google’s lucrative ad tech business goes on trial’ and the text “A trial beginning on Monday will hear the Department of Justice’s case that the search engine’s parent company Alphabet illegally operates a monopoly in the market.” set me off. You see, I worked on that system as an operator, a technical account manager if you prefer. I worked on this system in 2015. This is important because in the nine following years Microsoft and its ‘system’ Bing couldn’t even remotely get anything working that presented some weak looking imitation. The system was that excellent. And excellent is the operative word. You see before that advertising agencies were taking their clients in some kind of a looting ride. Prices were out of this world for the advertisers. It was a business limited to big business. The Google ad system was made so that everyone had a clear possibility, a fair system that didn’t overcharge, something that wasn’t possible before. That was a new approach to advertising. 

Bid for placeCharged
9.001.28
3.001.27
2.001.26
1.251.25

The setting was that the higher bid was only charged one cent more than the previous one. The advertisement agencies would pocket the difference from $7.62 of the first bidder. Now consider this happening ten thousands of times every day. When you realise this you see how this was the better system. There was no monopoly, customers suddenly had a fair chance to their advertisement options. That part is missing. It is not the fault of the BBC, they merely report. They also give us “Alphabet has argued its success is due to the “effectiveness” of its services – but prosecutors say it has used its market dominance to stifle rivals” which is exactly what I am saying. But the prosecutors are exaggerating (as anyone would suggest). We then get ““It is a really important industry that grabs billions of consumer dollars every year,” said Laura Phillips-Sawyer, a professor at the University of Georgia School of Law.” A statement (possibly taken out of context) from a law professor from Georgia. The less excusable statement was “grabs billions of consumer dollars every year”, that is where my example comes in. This is not the way of this system. It tempers the cost and need for ‘over’ bidding. I gave an example of four, but the list goes on for a lot more. This illustrates the loss of Laura Phillips-Sawyer and how little she knows of this system. So its not “I think all consumers have an interest in this litigation”, I believe that Microsoft minded people want to get into this business and the prosecutor is a possible way for these people to get in. 

As such we see that the statement “Google dominates the digital ad marketplace and has leveraged its market power to stifle innovation and competition” Google innovated this market more than anyone ever considered. The fact that Microsoft has no chance and lacks expertise in software to make any dent in Google application is one part of the evidence. It also didn’t stifle competition, the fact that Microsoft had no option to push anything in Google’s path seems to me that this is the second part of the evidence is also nullified. After decades of ‘exploitation’ of customers, Google gave them all a fair chance. So why doesn’t anyone see that? How come that this is not shown to us all? Is it perhaps that the prosecutor has the ear of those people who lost their golden eggs? I am stating that not only is Google innocent in this, the world doesn’t realise how fair this system is. And the wannabe’s want to hack into this system for their own selfish needs. We are also given “It argues that competition in the digital ad space is growing, not contracting – citing increased ad growth and revenues for companies such as Apple, Amazon and TikTok as proof”, in this I say that the digital ad space is growing because Google made it more fair and as such players like Apple, Amazon and TikTok are given a space where they have millions more to advertise against the once exploitative system. What we do not get to see is that I enabled dozens of advertisers, small business units to get a grasp of advertisement space on. Monthly basis. They had the option to set a budget for as little as $5 a month to get several placements every day. Yes, they might not be above the fold as the expression goes, but they were on the page. The advertisement agencies would not have even talked to those. Now consider that this happens to tens of thousands of customers and realise that the statement “I think all consumers have an interest in this litigation” becomes folly.

When we consider this the statement “Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly” is equally folly. And I wonder who Judge Amit Mehta was serving. Even as the judge was an optional idolising fair play person we need to realise that the Google rank system was re-invented

The eigenvalue problem behind PageRank’s algorithm was independently rediscovered and reused in many scoring problems. 

In 1895, Edmund Landau suggested using it for determining the winner of a chess tournament. The eigenvalue problem was also suggested in 1976 by Gabriel Pinski and Francis Narin, who worked on scientometrics ranking scientific journals, in 1977 by Thomas Saaty in his concept of Analytic Hierarchy Process which weighted alternative choices, and in 1995 by Bradley Love and Steven Sloman as a cognitive model for concepts, the centrality algorithm. (Source: wiki). 

Now consider that Sergey Brin and Larry Page made this system 30 years ago based on ideas dating back to (as quoted) 1895. And then three times more and no one at Microsoft woke up. They were all so focussed on greed and gaining the attention of board of directors at big business. Google focussed on the millions of people working there and getting the attention of people who needed a better option. “As of September 24, 2019, all patents associated with PageRank have expired” and now these systems are under attack. However, the data is already with Google and the larger players (read: Microsoft) will need decades to catch up and they know they are not able to, in case of Microsoft I personally believe that they merely have at most 24 months left until they collapse and that is it for the once computer behemoth. As per now, fr a player like Microsoft, the ad space is a much safer option to recollect lost revenue and keep their head above water. I admit that this is speculative, but it makes the most sense. Even in 1995 I saw how Microsoft was lagging behind, but they had serious problems (read: Netscape) and it get worse after that. But that is not the aim of this article. As I have shown here Google was a true innovator and you need to wonder if monopoly is a valid setting when all the others cannot even get close because their innovators are merely presented spinners, or optionally previous exploiters. How is it a monopoly when there is no other realistic contender for the crown? Is an island with a population of one totalitarian in nature?

Simple questions that are hard to answer. Enjoy your day today, this fine Wednesday where we start yearning for the coming weekend.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Law, Media, Science

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

September 8, 2024 · 23:27

Alignments?

Less than 24 hours ago I wrote about Microsoft and the statement I gave there, namely “When you need to appease 400,000 partners things go wrong, they always do. How is anyones guess but whilst Microsoft is all focussed on the letter of the law and their revenue” led to a few questions. So, how is 400,000 partners an issue and the 12,000 partners of Salesforce are not? Well, I never said that 12,000 partners are not a problem, but as I see it the 400,000 are. 

To get where I am going, a few definition are needed. A partner (in IT) is set to “A partnership when it comes to IT is within the IT sphere and has mutual or at least some value for both companies.” But here the issue starts. You see, some have a somewhat more defined setting “In some mild cases, there are a few well-intentioned and hard-working partners who are just out of the loop. In more extreme cases, certain partners are not bought in, are not being held accountable, and are negatively impacting performance.” This is where the problem starts. Partners have an alignment to you, but they also have their own agenda. Microsoft can make all the claims they want, but this is reality. So lets get a useful presentation image. 

So see this boat, that is the Micro boat (a very soft presentation) the goal is the 100% mark, right on course. Now consider that in a polarising setting there are two directions, And the group of 400,000 is split up. In this we get that one group is larger and it has the breaching impact of the good ship Microsoft coursing to the right. Reality gives us that there will be be clusters in all directions. 

Some ahead to the left or the right, but those behind the ship will also slow it down with all kinds of budget overruns. No matter how good the Microsoft agreements are, there will always be interest groups for THEIR interest trying to ‘steer’ the ship more in their direction. As such 400,000 partners is (as I see it) folly. Revenue and greed will only help anyone so far, as I see it, Microsoft has had its problems. I reckon that not all the news is sincere and completely valid. Some were (as I personally see it) issues with alignment. Their might not have been drastic but there will have been issues. That is my point of view and in business intelligence I have seen my share of ‘issues’ not all of them drastic but plenty of them with some kind of impact. 

Take this as well as the news we saw through Wired and we get a much larger issue and now as I personally see it, partners could become debilitating. Mess with a partners revenue stream and things go pear shaped really fast. We see this 1 hours ago when we are told “Nvidia Loses $470 Billion in Value in a Week. Should Investors Be Worried? · The market as a whole is shaky · Nvidia remains in an extremely solid position.” Really? At what point does a firm remain in a solid position when they lose $470,000,000,000 in a week? Now take this setting (which might be a temporary thing) and take it to the next level. A major side to the so called AI stage. That firm loses four-hundred and seventy BILLION dollars. That’s about 20%, so this was a simple dip which recovered in mere minutes. So at what point and why did it drop to that degree? And as I see it, any partner that does not react is on a fools errand. Now consider that 400,000 partners call Microsoft at that point to learn what THEIR impact might be. So a software vendor needs to appease 400,000 partners. And I couldn’t get support (in the past) for hours. So how does this compute? Well look at the first image. These partners will not be in one direction, but in dozens of directions. So are you catching on now? So take that and News by TechTarget giving us ‘Understand Microsoft Copilot security concerns’ and the underlying text “Microsoft Copilot can improve end-user productivity, but it also has the potential to create security and data privacy issues.”and that with the news at Wired (see previous article) gives a lot more weight to “the potential to create security and data privacy issues” and now, what will the partners do? How many will optionally panic? Now watch the good ship Microsoft slow down and drop their anchors for the storm (optionally in a teacup) recede. What is the bill belonging to such a knee-jerk reaction? 

You tell me, but there will be a reaction. As I see it, they either have 400,000 customers (optionally non paying) and they will not make a sound, but it makes Microsoft seem more important, or they have 400,000 real partners and you see what I described above. I am merely throwing the terms they publish (via media). You can’t have it both ways and it all ends with the setting of Alignment. I do not know a real good read on the alignment of customers versus partners. But one gets you revenue and the other gives you a smoking hand grenade. You tell me what you prefer to deal with. 

OK, not the most positive writing, but it came from a question that gave ma additional pause to think. 

Have a great Sunday (Vancouver) and I am moving towards Monday a present (in 40 minutes).

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

September 8, 2024 · 01:09

Poised to deliver critique

That is my stance at present. It might be a wrong position to have, but it comes from a setting of several events that come together at this focal point. We all have it, we are all destined to a stage of negativity thought speculation or presumption. It is within all of us and my article 20 hours ago on Microsoft woke something up within me. So I will take you on a slightly bumpy ride.

The first step is seen through the BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20240905-microsoft-ai-interview-bbc-executive-lounge) where we get ‘Microsoft is turning to AI to make its workplace more inclusive’ and we are given “It added an AI powered chatbot into its Bing search engine, which placed it among the first legacy tech companies to fold AI into its flagship products, but almost as soon as people started using it, things went sideways.” With the added “Soon, users began sharing screenshots that appeared to show the tool using racial slurs and announcing plans for world domination. Microsoft quickly announced a fix, limiting the AI’s responses and capabilities.” Here we see the collective thoughts an presumptions I had all along. AI does not (yet) exist. How do you live with “Microsoft quickly announced a fix”? We can speculate whether the data was warped, it was not defined correctly. Or it is a more simple setting of programmer error. And when an AI is that incorrect does it have any reliability? Consider the old data view we had in the early 90’s “Garbage In, Garbage Out”. Then. We are offered “Microsoft says AI can be a tool to promote equity and representation – with the right safeguards. One solution it’s putting forward to help address the issue of bias in AI is increasing diversity and inclusion of the teams building the technology itself”, as such consider this “promote equity and representation – with the right safeguards” Is that the use of AI? Or is it the option of deeper machine learning using an LLM model? An AI with safeguards? Promote equity and representation? If the data is there, it might find reliable triggers if it knows where or what to look for. But the model needs to be taught and that is where data verification comes in, verified data leads to a validated model. As such to promote equity and presentation the dat needs to understand the two settings. Now we get the harder part “The term “equity” refers to fairness and justice and is distinguished from equality: Whereas equality means providing the same to all, equity means recognising that we do not all start from the same place and must acknowledge and make adjustments to imbalances.” Now see the term equity being used in all kinds of places and in real estate it means something different. Now what are the chances people mix these two up? How can you validate data when the verification is bungled? It is the simple singular vision that Microsoft people seem to forget. It is mostly about the deadline and that is where verification stuffs up. 

Satya Nadella is about technology that understands us and here we get the first problem. When we consider that “specifically large-language models such as ChatGPT – to be empathic, relevant and accurate, McIntyre says, they needs to be trained by a more diverse group of developers, engineers and researchers.” As I see it, without verification you have no validation and you merely get a bucket of data where everything is collected and whatever the result of it becomes an automated mess, hence my objection to it. So as we are given “Microsoft believes that AI can support diversity and inclusion (D&I) if these ideals are built into AI models in the first place”, we need to understand that the data doesn’t support it yet and to do this all data needs to be recollected and properly verified before we can even consider validating it. 

Then we get article 2 which I talked about a month ago the Wired article (at https://www.wired.com/story/microsoft-copilot-phishing-data-extraction/) we see the use of deeper machine learning where we are given ‘Microsoft’s AI Can Be Turned Into an Automated Phishing Machine’, yes a real brain bungle. Microsoft has a tool and criminals use it to get through cloud accounts. How is that helping anyone? The fact that Microsoft did not see this kink in their trains of thought and we are given “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” a simple approach of stopping the system from collecting and adhering to criminal minds. Whilst Windows Central gives us ‘A former security architect demonstrates 15 different ways to break Copilot: “Microsoft is trying, but if we are honest here, we don’t know how to build secure AI applications”’ beside the horror statement “Microsoft is trying” we get the rather annoying setting of “we don’t know how to build secure AI applications”. And this isn’t some student. Michael Bargury is an industry expert in cybersecurity seems to be focused on cloud security. So what ‘expertise’ does Microsoft have to offer? People who were there 3 weeks ago were shown 15 ways to break copilot and it is all over their 365 applications. At this stage Microsoft wants to push out broken if not an unstable environment where your data resides. Is there a larger need to immediately switch to AWS? 

Then we get a two parter. In the first part we see (at https://www.crn.com.au/news/salesforces-benioff-says-microsoft-ai-has-disappointed-so-many-customers-611296) CRN giving us the view of Marc Benioff from Salesforce giving us ‘Microsoft AI ‘has disappointed so many customers’’ and that is not all. We are given ““Last quarter alone, we saw a customer increase of over 60 per cent, and daily users have more than doubled – a clear indicator of Copilot’s value in the market,” Spataro said.” Words from Jared Spataro, Microsoft’s corporate vice president. All about sales and revenue. So where is the security at? Where are the fixes at? So we are then given ““When I talk to chief information officers directly and if you look at recent third-party data, organisations are betting on Microsoft for their AI transformation.” Microsoft has more than 400,000 partners worldwide, according to the vendor.” And here we have a new part. When you need to appease 400,000 partners things go wrong, they always do. How is anyones guess but whilst Microsoft is all focussed on the letter of the law and their revenue it is my speculated view that corners are cut on verification and validation (a little less on the second factor). And the second part in this comes from CX Today (at https://www.cxtoday.com/speech-analytics/microsoft-fires-back-rubbishes-benioffs-copilot-criticism/) where we are given ‘Microsoft Fires Back, Rubbishes Benioff’s Copilot Criticism’ with the text “Jared Spataro, Microsoft’s Corporate Vice President for AI at Work, rebutted the Salesforce CEO’s comments, claiming that the company had been receiving favourable feedback from its Copilot customers.” At this point I want to add the thought “How was that data filtered?” You see the article also gives us “While Benioff can hardly be viewed as an objective voice, Inc. Magazine recently gave the solution a D – rating, claiming that it is “not generating significant revenue” for its customers – suggesting that the CEO may have a point” as well as “despite Microsoft’s protestations, there have been rumblings of dissatisfaction from Copilot users” when the dust settles, I wonder how Microsoft will fare. You see I state that AI does not (yet) exist. The truth is that generative AI can have a place. And when AI is here, when it is actually here not many can use it. The hardware is too expensive and the systems will need close to months of testing. These new systems that is a lot, it would take years for simple binary systems to catch up. As such these LLM deeper machine learning systems will have a place, but I have seen tech companies fire up sales people and get the cream of it, but the customers will need a new set of spectacles to see the real deal. The premise that I see is that these people merely look at the groups they want, but it tends to be not so filtered and as such garbage comes into these systems. And that is where we end up with unverified and unvalidated data points. And to give you an artistic view consider the following when we use a one point perspective that is set to “a drawing method that shows how things appear to get smaller as they get further away, converging towards a single “vanishing point” on the horizon line” So that drawing might have 250,000 points. Now consider that data is unvalidated. That system now gets 5,000 extra floating points. What happens when these points invade the model? What is left of your art work? Now consider that data sets like this have 15,000,000 data points and every data point has 1,000,000 parameters. See the mess you end up with? Now go look into any system and see how Microsoft verifies their data. I could not find any white papers on this. A simple customer care point of view, I have had that for decades and Jared Spataro as I see it seemingly does not have that. He did not grace his speech with the essential need of data verification before validation. That is a simple point of view and it is my view that Microsoft will come up short again and again. So as I (simplistically) see it. Is by any chance, Jared Spataro anything more than a user missing Microsoft value at present?

Have a great day.

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

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

September 5, 2024 · 10:24

Your (starting) fame on timing

There we have it, another freebee for the eager developer who wants to increase his (or her) visibility. Last month I was (happily) forced to get the Pixel Watch 2, there would be too much time for the new Pixel Watch 3 and I didn’t have the required dineros to get it. Not to fret, the Pixel Watch 2 does everything it needs to do as such I am happy. It was not until this week that I was missing out on one thing. I still have my mobile, so there was no pressing need, but I thought, why is it not there? 

So I went looking and behold, Google had missed out on it. So here it is your chance to shine. Im not sure if there is money in it, but the eager developer will see a way to turn this visibility into cash making opportunity.

As such I present a (extremely) rough view on the tile that a lot of people are waiting for.

The stage is founded on the clock widget, as such it is possible that you can capture that data (which uses the clock program in Google). The widget supports 4 times, but in this case the fifth is wherever you are (home). I also set the home in a different colour, but that is up to you. In my case I need to keep these times in mind, but whatever your reason is, it works. In Europe you have three times all over the place and there are more reasons. Some nations do not embrace summer/winter time. As such  the clock program has this all figured it out. So you just need to capture that data when it is needed. I think it is a simple and basic requirement, but Google seemingly never caught on. And with Google shipping the pixel watch 880,000 times (as per Oct 2022) you will gain a lot of visibility. As per 2023 Apple sold over 93 million smartwatches and it is likely that the solution is almost exactly the same, as such you could get multi million views with a simple tile addition. So use the idea and gain visibility I say. And here I suggest that you look what Apple has.  I dare say that the eager programmer could create that tile in mere hours, and a day of testing. 

So hop to it and gain your fame I say.

1 Comment

Filed under IT, Science

Tagged as , , , ,

September 4, 2024 · 19:21

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

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

August 28, 2024 · 19:11

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

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,

August 24, 2024 · 21:06

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

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,

August 23, 2024 · 22:27

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

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,

August 20, 2024 · 21:53

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

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,

August 12, 2024 · 15:21

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

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