Category Archives: Science

July 27, 2026 · 09:52

The gaming concerns

We all giggle at the ‘forecast’ of some gaming bosses. I am the same, so when I saw (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c9803j74091o) ‘Amazon gaming boss predicts future where players no longer need consoles’ we can anticipate “Yes, but that is not now, it will be in the not so near future” and the setting of “Amazon’s head of gaming Jeff Gattis has told the BBC he believes the rising cost of tech means people will turn to streaming games online rather than buying new consoles. He said the tech has developed a lot in recent years, making it more viable than it used to be – but accepted some people will still buy their own hardware.” The truth of the matter that streaming is the future, but the setting towards a thick client (to a console) will make the most sense close to a decade. 

You see, some might remember the Microsoft failure Crackdown 3 where we see “Crackdown 3 uses a cloud-based compute system for its multiplayer mode (Wrecking Zone) to offload physics and environment destruction calculations to Microsoft Azure servers, multiplying local hardware power by up to twenty times. It is also fully playable via video streaming through Xbox Cloud Gaming with supported subscriptions.” But the results were “However, this data-streaming system frequently triggers micro-stutters, texture pop-in, and occasional fast-travel freezes on PC and base consoles.” And be clear, I am not having a go at Microsoft here. I actually applaud that they took this leap in 2019. It could have been better to some extent, but it was clear that the hardware was nowhere near ready even for strong servers using distributed technology. And we haven’t gotten much better at it in gaming at this time. Yes, distributed streaming is the wave of the future and I whole support this, but we are not ready, none of the gaming systems are at present to exclude a console. So when we see “While cloud gaming has long been billed as the future of video games, previous efforts have failed to gain widespread adoption – leading to the high-profile closure of Google Stadia in 2023.” I saw a future which could have gotten Google $6 billion in annual revenue, but they had closed the Stadia a week earlier. As such I offered that solution to Amazon (Andy Jessy) but he never got back to me, as I see it, his loss. Now I am still awaiting Tencent with their solution to nibble on that setting and there is no doubt that my prediction of $6 billion is real and I wrote about it in my blog (go look for it) I am not the person to hand out solutions to any wannabe that asks. And it was a real setting with gaming options to over 50 million gamers in the first phase. I predicted (as clumsily as I could what would happen after) but I have nothing real to offer after that revenue hits $12 billion – $15 billion annual. And I based it on a three pronged solution, because as I see it, a console is there for more than one reason and it would be a shame merely to offer one side. Google made the most sense as they had developed two of the solutions, but these could be remade and I wholly believe in streaming technology.

So when we see “Gattis argued there was still a huge untapped audience beyond traditional console owners which Amazon was trying to reach. “There are somewhere between two-and-a-half and three billion people who play games around the world, but only a fraction of those own dedicated gaming hardware,” Gattis said.” I find these numbers a little debatable, because as I see it, those relying on their mobile are not really gamers, that requires a large screen (or TV) and a decent console or home computer but that might be merely my view and in all this there is a future for distributed gaming, but it requires what is referred to as a thick client (console/home computer) because these millions of people will flood the internet when they are merely use a think client and I merely have to point out the issues Sony had a mere two days ago, to see the setting of “Thin clients require a stable internet and thin clients are network-dependent” that is the setting and before 2040, there is no non console setting to be had, even then you will be catering to metro people and the rural gamers are left behind. A setting I find completely disgusting and unsavory. Gaming is for everyone and even if (at times) we see that there is a lot to be had from these ‘metro’ gamers. It is completely unacceptable to stop catering to rural gamers. If only to consider France, Germany, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Finland, Italy, Greece and that is merely Europe. Actually Sweden has the bet internet nationwide, but if we consider nations like Saudi Arabia, USA, Canada, Australia, and a few other places. How many rural gamers will be thrown into gaming darkness because of this? I boggles the mind I say. The BBC gives us more (read th article) and a lot makes sense in all this, but the setting of ““Gamers are willing to trade a little fidelity for convenience, but not to pay premium prices for something they don’t own which stutters when the Wi-Fi dips,” he said.” Is also something that needs addressing and it is done through the subscription model, as I see it, when you are a member, you get to won a game for all time, but it requires a thick client, so games at the end of their cycle need to be downloaded to the console, with an optional SD Card, to unclog the console. That might be a first setting that will gain the favour of gamers and the idea that they have at times a month to get a simple SDCard, is not to taxing on their wallet.

A simple card that supports the total of a Blu-ray can be gotten for a mere $33, as such storage becomes near obsolete as well. As such there are options but I see it for the far future, no matter what I believe that my solution holds, it will require a thick client, as the internet at present is a little to unsafe and insecure to count on. And that is before the upcoming rematch of net neutrality, a setting so intense and massively hedged against gamers, that a thin client is too dicey a choice to make at present.

Well, that is it for now. So tune in later today for a story that will make pyromaniacs water their mouths. Have a great day all and to all have a great day gaming.

Leave a comment

Filed under Gaming, IT, Media, Science

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

July 25, 2026 · 22:45

Rerun anyone?

As I wrote an article propping questions there. I see earlier today, the BBC is giving us ‘Warning shot or publicity stunt – how worried should we be about the OpenAI hack?’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cd9w22n9e4go) as such, I had some initial questions in my article: ‘Is it real or is it media?’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2026/07/24/is-it-real-or-is-it-media/) where I posted the idea ““The ChatGPT-maker said its agent – an AI system which can operate alone after human instruction – was being tested in a controlled environment but, after finding weaknesses, was able to escape the test limits.” Which is fine, but that is still programmer controlled. So as I see it “after finding weaknesses, was able to escape the test limits” it didn’t escape it merely found a weakness as its ML systems were taught to find out and went elsewhere. It reminded my of the 90s hacking setting where towards ‘password’ a clever hacker gave “1=1” invoking the ‘True’ setting. Then we get “OpenAI said the incident was “unprecedented”, and it was conducting an investigation alongside Hugging Face, whose boss Clement Delangue said in a post on X it was “mind-blowing that all of this happened autonomously”.”” And now we see “Hugging Face said the hack was different from anything it had handled before because it was done at superhuman speed by an AI with little or no human guidance.” It is the “little” addition to the sentence that is validating my setting of “that is still programmer controlled”, because as I see it, “little guidance” might merely be human ‘adjusting’. And when we see “Hugging Face researchers guessed the mysterious attackers had used one of the big AI models but they had no idea who or where the criminals were.” So, the issues is even bigger, it could have been Organized Crime setting the parameters of a sandbox, I know it sounds outlandish, but there is either a massive shortage in structure and security of DML (Deeper Machine Learning) settings (so it could either be ML or DL) but the setting that this is out there whilst there is no oversight is something that most of the media is painting over with innuendo and whether this is given by some is not in question, also irrelevant. And we see this when we get to “The Scooby-Doo-style reveal was made even more bizarre – and worrying – because OpenAI said its bot did the whole thing on its own, without permission. The firm said it all went down during a test of its tech’s hacking skills.

Two new versions of ChatGPT, designed to be master hackers, broke out of a supposedly secure test environment and gained access to the internet.” We see “broke out of a supposedly secure test environment” implies that it was not secure and the testing facility (the sandbox) is lacking security and oversight. And the statement “OpenAI said its bot did the whole thing on its own” implies that the bot was not monitored or ‘left alone in limbo’ but we all know that any computer is  never idle, it is always doing something and whilst it depends on human interactions it is fine. With autonomous systems it is a different matter and OpenAI should have known that. They are supposed whole lot better than I would ever be and I reckon that the larger issue is what did OpenAI know ad what are they hiding, because as I see it, they are hiding something. I am not sure what and it might be innocent in most cases but as I see it, hiding something is fear for some illumination. That has for themes nearly always been the case.

Then the BBC hits a note that I was playing all along a for the most I hinted to that in the previous article (listed above) but the BBC is giving us “Was it truly a stark warning about the future of AI? Or was it a publicity stunt by OpenAI to show off how powerful their models are? It’s the kind of scare marketing AI companies have been accused of for years and, since the much discussed launch of Anthropic’s Mythos model, cyber-security prowess has been a focal point. One of the top comments on OpenAI boss Sam Altman’s X post about the incident summarises this skepticism: “If y’all can’t understand that this was written to purely brag about the model then I don’t know what to tell you.”” And the ‘statement’ “If y’all can’t understand that this was written to purely brag about the model then I don’t know what to tell you” summarizes it nicely. We also get “The OpenAI and Hugging Face incident is a real-world example of a broader issue we’ve been highlighting for months,” said Dor Sarig from Pillar Security. “Sandboxes alone are not a sufficient security boundary for agentic AI.” And I tend to agree with that. Any Agentic system requires different security requirements. Whether it is Fake AI, True AI or simple ML AI. An agentic system does not work according to ‘human’ settings. I tend to go back to the original chess computers from the 80s. They will try any movement that is possible until they get the right result whilst replaying every chess match that was programmed into its memory. And the chess computer is relatively simple. Hacking into a system has all kind of places to pass. I gave the window example in my previous article. But the setting of software is that they are set to libraries that give abilities to a program. You see, a program gets linked to <stdio.h>, <stdlib.h> and <string.h>, but merely these three open up options in I/O operations, copy operations that are not part of the program, but they are in that system and it can run by all of them in mere seconds, optionally finding alternative options. Even this is not AI, a programmer had to program it in and regardless whether an agentic system does it autonomously, it only does it because it was handed that training and these instructions, and the agentic system started to combine options and learnings and it learned (using my previous examples) that it can leave a location via a window, it does not require to use a door. Which makes me remember an MSDOS program that turned the speaker into a device. So giving it the instruction:

Copy MontyPython SPKR:
Copy MontyPython SPKR:
Copy MontyPython SPKR:
Copy MontyPython SPKR:
Copy MontyPython SPKR:

And then wait from a distance, whist I added this to the autoexec.bat of a friend and watch him go nuts why his PC is singing the tune of Monty Python. It wasn’t me, someone programmed the setting of a speaker to become a SPKR: drive. So when an agentic program gets creative it might take routes no programmer could anticipate, not even when he/she programmed it. Because the reality of the setting is that no sandbox suffices to any agentic program. As I see it, it requires a sandbox in a sandbox and when the agentic program gets out of the inner sandbox the arms of the outer sandbox go off and as I see it, because it was unmentioned, that setting seemingly does not exist.  So whilst I understand the position given by “Cyber security Professor Alan Woodward from Surrey University told reporters OpenAI had “egg on it’s face”, and Katie Moussouris from Luta Security went further, suggesting the AI industry is failing to control its dangerous inventions.” I kinda disagree and it comes from the plain setting that AI does not yet exist. And all this is the consequence of ‘experts’ covering each other by making claims that all this is AI, whilst it is mere ML/DL (I call it DML) and it comes from a programmer. And even as they are covering each other, and clapping each other on the back. They know that the wrong settings are in place, but they are in too deep and it will hinder whatever comes next. There is one upside, you see, the AI Kill Switch Act might be in place before True AI comes to town and that could be the one great good thing.

I get the doubt thrown my way and I get that a lot of people have no idea, even though they gave all their IP and data to ChatGPT. I never used it and until there is a real AI, I will never use it to grow ideas. So whilst IBM (decently recent) gave us “Key concerns include autonomous system risks, data privacy violations, algorithmic bias, widespread misinformation, and intellectual property challenges” which is something I gave several times in the past and it all comes from a programmer, and as soon as they get connected to some sort of organized criminal enterprise the fence is broken open and all that IP will go anywhere and everywhere. That is the larger setting and no one is examining the ML/DL libraries that these players are making and as such when these class actions are placed beyond the settlements that they can afford, the ‘sudden’ revelation comes out and that is the moment these programmers can’t remember anything. And whilst the setting comes to point that the dollar sign no longer validates the setting of “Tech companies argue that training AI on public data falls under legal “fair use,” while creators argue it is unauthorized commercial exploitation” we will get a whole new ballgame and whilst this all plays out, the tech companies are creating new libraries with these agentic knowledge basis making a secure sandbox even more difficult. Optionally it might even contain three sandboxes in a nested structure, but that is merely my view on the matter and I might be incorrect in that assessment. 

So whilst we are facing rerun after rerun and optionally faked settings of Google vs OpenAI, both against Anthropic and all against each other when xAI enters the fold. And all that time the are still figuring out both a Trinary system (I see that as an essential setting for True AI) and how that is voiced into data systems, because they will have ramifications. Which is why I see that Oracle and Snowflake have the largest chances in that respect. I am certain that this is a race that Microsoft is unable to get into and I have no idea where Google is there. I am decently certain that IBM figured this out before I did and optionally they have this ‘under control’ through what was LISP and is now optionally coming to systems in some point in the future. Because as I see it, the setting of a trinary driven system with what I tend to call an Epsilon processor would require a LISP driven setting where the optional inclusion and exclusion would run simultaneously and this requires some form of LISP setting (a personal speculation) and all this would come with IBM shallow circuits. And all this gives IBM the largest head start, even Google might not be able to compete and I reckon that IBM might have talked to someone like Oracle on these settings. I have no idea where IBM is in databases, because in the end any true AI system is depending on the data it has. The question becomes in the meantime, how to transform binary (fake) AI into trinity true AI. The setting will become the discussion among data experts in the next few years and it hold bearing to all this, because it also impacts on how sandboxes are designed and monitored. 

And it it important because as I see it, trinary data takes a fifth of the space whilst gaining 4 times the speed of processing. And that is the setting these data farms will have to content with. As such there is plenty of evolution coming, but in this the stages of security becomes essential and whilst you consider rate quote from Katie Moussouris from Luta Security giving us “the AI industry is failing to control its dangerous inventions” and we are nowhere near the setting of true AI and that is where sandboxes require a nasty upgrade and soon, because soon enough, the kill switch might all there is between our data and whomever has access to data farms. And with security failing like we see now, we might not have that much time left and that is where I saw the need for security, because there is every chance that some AI ‘dealers’ already know that their fortune is set towards who has the most data and there is a need that we need to keep our data safe, but others might not want to do anything about it. Naming names is highly speculative because we aren’t shown the real issues and these people don’t want the real issues to come out because when the game is up, these people are playing for all the marbles in the world and there can only be one winner. That is how I see it and I might be wrong, but at present I feel that I am more right than even I think I should be. 

Have a great day today, I am now a mere 80 minutes away from Sunday.

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Media, Science

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

July 24, 2026 · 05:41

Is it real or is it media?

That is the setting, because in my mind when an AI goes rogue I see the gaming example of Shodan (System Shock, 1994) and even then, it was all set in motion by a simple programmer who wanted a nice shiny bauble (a military grade neural interface) so when the BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3ek3gvdnj3o) gives us ‘OpenAI says its AI went rogue and launched ‘unprecedented’ cyber-attack’, in my mind I merely see Sam Altman, hoping for some limelight and that tends to have media settings. So lets take a look. And don’t forget all AI is fake AI, as such it is started by programmers, that is the underlying truth in all this. It starts nice, with “OpenAI has revealed some of its most advanced AI models went rogue and hacked a start-up after it lost control of them during a security test.” You see, ‘Going Rogue’ means stop following orders, rules, or normal expectations and start acting independently. It describes a person, group, or system that breaks away from a team or authority figure to pursue their own unpredictable course. As such the programming in that setting implies that the instruction to follow its own course was taking shape. Optional it was some military implementation. As I see it, it never “Lost control of them during a security test”, but I’m willing to go with “It had poorly created boundaries and connections” and it got out of its ML loop, driven by DL making it a DML issue. In all this, ML is Machine Learning, DL is Deeper Learning and DML is Deeper Machine Learning (which is a amalgamation of DL and ML) then we get “The ChatGPT-maker said its agent – an AI system which can operate alone after human instruction – was being tested in a controlled environment but, after finding weaknesses, was able to escape the test limits.” Which is fine, but that is still programmer controlled. So as I see it “after finding weaknesses, was able to escape the test limits” it didn’t escape it merely found a weakness as its ML systems were taught to find out and went elsewhere. It reminded my of the 90s hacking setting where towards ‘password’ a clever hacker gave “1=1” invoking the ‘True’ setting. Then we get “OpenAI said the incident was “unprecedented”, and it was conducting an investigation alongside Hugging Face, whose boss Clement Delangue said in a post on X it was “mind-blowing that all of this happened autonomously”.” And the skeptic in me is considering that Clement Delangue was in on it all along. So as we see that Agentic AI’s are also not real AI’s, but it has a complicated setting of libraries and a connected knowhow of what its data gives it, it cannot look into unknown settings as it does not have connected data, but a simple input like “check all channels” will make it check all the channels it can find, even the ones the programmer did not consider. It is not clever, it merely found what a programmer never considered as such it never escaped, the programmer forgot that you can also exit a building through window, not merely a door. Then we get something interesting. “Gina Neff, head of the Minderoo Centre for Technology and Democracy at the University of Cambridge, told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that the security tests are supposed to be within “secure environments”, called sandboxes, where you can “see what the models are capable of”.” As well as ““In this case, it looks like OpenAI didn’t make a secure enough sandbox,” she added. Instead, the agents created their own cyber-attack against the sandbox itself, finding a vulnerability which allowed them to escape the restrictions.” That sounds logical, but the underlying setting is “the agents created their own cyber-attack” which is what the programmer wanted, it merely wanted it to stay in the sandbox, and that is where the programmer fell short and when the media starts comprehending that the programmer is still the activator and we see this impact, we can understand that OpenAI is merely responsible, there is no going rogue, there is merely what programmers allowed for to happen, but “going rogue” is sexy and gets digital dollars clanking and there is the rub, was this real or is this all media instigated?

Then we get another cry of whatever. With “Neil Lawrence, Professor of machine learning at Cambridge University, called it an “impressive feat”, but cautioned it “falls well within the known capabilities of the current generation” of high-powered AI models. He pointed out that OpenAI is looking to list itself on the stock market, and faces intense pressure from rival firm Anthropic, which has made headlines with its own powerful AI tool, Mythos.” And I am with him on the “OpenAI is looking to list itself on the stock market, and faces intense pressure” and we see the mention of Anthropic, but it is more, OpenAI is allegedly sliding against Gemini (Google) and DeepSeek (China) and I have no idea where the others are. And as I see it the “Intense pressure spots” is what made programmers overlook the limitations that needed to be in place, or perhaps seen as better defined. That is the (as I personally see it) the truth of the matter. 

So when we see ““OpenAI are now playing catch-up, they are trying to demonstrate their own systems’ capabilities in cyber-security.” “It shows us that OpenAI are not capable of safely deploying their own technology,” he added. In its initial disclosure of the hack on 16 July, Hugging Face said it was still assessing whether any customer or partner data was affected and would contact affected parties if necessary.” I can agree with that, because “safely deploying” is programmer territory and I reckon that there will be two minds here, what the customer thinks it is transgressed on (any client wants money) and what the programmer sees as transgressed on (he needs a playable excuse) and that is where it all ends. Because when this comes to blows, it will matter and in all this we see “Meanwhile Travis Lelle, principal security engineer at cyber-security consulting firm Guidepoint Security, said the update marked a “sobering moment in cyber-security”. “This highlights a known asymmetry,” he said. “Offensive agents are unconstrained, while the best defensive tools are locked behind guardrails that cannot understand context.”” Which is interesting as the setting that Travis Lelle gives us is the setting that OpenAI is facing, there is a sandbox setting all whilst the programmer was set towards locks behind guardrails and as I see it, he never explained context to the Agentic AI agent. It makes it Fake AI, because the AI could never see beyond its programming and that made it go nuts beyond the sandbox. It is a slippery slope and it makes a dangerous setting, because what other things did the programmer not think of? Any ML setting can become an expert hacker, because it can do things a million times faster than any keyboard puncher can and agentic settings can merely go nuts on the target, because it will reflect to anything it can push against, like the 80s chess computers it merely goes over everything it has access to, like those chess computers that compute every match it was ever given until the play matches what it needs to and as it goes through 10,000 matches in less than a minute we thought it was clever. And we are making the same mistake again. These systems are fast enough to consider the encyclopedia Brittanica and  consider anything in a few seconds, these systems will act faster than any person clearing its throat. 

So whilst the article ends with “It comes a week after Chinese AI start-up Moonshot unveiled Kimi K3 – a massive new artificial intelligence model it said could rival top US firms.” Which explains the  pressure and we get that, but any system grown to a 1000 times its venture points is not more clever and it remains fake AI, as it merely considers more and it still cannot fathom intelligence that does not hold data, these AI’s are dependent on data, making it (as I stated before) fake AI and until IBM finishes its settings (optionally Google too) True AI cannot come to life and that is the real deal. Some greedy individuals want to call AI the AI, but without the Epsilon processor it will never be, because all this is set to binary fields and that makes the loopholes more and more realistic (and larger), but it is not. As I see it, someone will push one border against the next border and enable players like organized crime to get the entire bucket of data, all the data out there and that is the reality we all face. 

So I have a few questions in all this and it seems like the media is all whistling the same tune and that is more scary that anything else, because are they not willing to look elsewhere, or are they told to look in a specific direction? It is a simple question.

Have a great day

1 Comment

Filed under IT, Media, Science

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

July 21, 2026 · 09:53

One is done

That is the setting, I completed one and I almost completed my new script ‘Information Overload’ my new nightmare towards General Joshua M. Rudd (NSA), Anne Keast-Butler (GCHQ) and optionally Nicolas Lerner (DGSE). You try to appease a population of millions, but what are the chances? So if I merely get three people on board of this nightmare, I will have filled my quota of scared bunnies. The rest of the population of those nations will follow soon enough. The media takes care of that and it is nice to use the media to fruitfully adhere to my needs. They tend to be debatable at best, but we have to start somewhere and when the NSA gets nervous, my guess is that Alexey Alexeevich Rarenko (Center16, FSB) might get twitchy too, which gets me an additional 144,998,000 (they allegedly lost 1000 Russians last night) optional interested parties. We start small and we enlarge that population through traction as we get along. But this time it is about me (my favourite subject, all the way from the township of ‘Whogivesafuck’ population: 1).

But in all this I learned a few things. No matter how Final Draft is ‘meant’ for Hollywood and scriptwriters. It has a few kinks in all this. So as I write ‘my’ script, I tend to do this in Pages. But there are two issues, when I past it into beatbox all is fine and when I try too paste it into the FD editor, things go weirdly wrong. Even when trying to adjust to FD, it seems like hidden codes make a mess of it all, in case of this script and the other one ‘How to assassinate a politician’ which got the secondary title ‘Essay’ things are different. These are relatively small. One of the scripts surpasses 50,000 words and there are three more and that is where things get dicey. 

As such I kept all the mails Final Draft sent me from the beginning, so it might be there, but at present I cannot find it. As such Final Draft might want to spend a day or two making a white paper on “From Word/Pages to Final Draft’’ as far as I could tell it isn’t there (or I missed it) So I am a little lost at present, but soon I have no other option to either type it all or make the Pages version look like it is Final Draft, a slight horrible setting. Don’t get my wrong, Final Draft is seemingly excellent. The first script went almost without a hitch, so in any way I don’t blame them, and as the pages texts go into Beatbox, I am getting the stuff across, but getting from Beatbox the text formatted into FD is slightly beyond a pain (irritating, aggravating and frustrating as well).

So I am in a little bit of a binding setting. So next on the list is dig through over 230 emails I have from Final Draft, perhaps there is a solution there. I reckon that a lot could be fixed if you could go (in the editor) in some kind of code view and delete the separate codes you see there. I reckon it should be there, because Word gives the users the most garbage codes out there, so I reckon that Final Draft has solved this option, but I didn’t find it (yet).

So whilst I have a small victory with yet another script done, there is that larger setting of the other scripts, because ‘Information overload’ is not a full movie, a short movie at best, as such reason for coffee and cakes, but only when the other three are converted the brandy and ice creams come out.

Have a great day all

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Military, Politics, Science

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

July 18, 2026 · 20:14

The unanswered question

That is what I see. I saw all the Microsoft articles pop by and it made me wonder. It is not that they are so great, not in the slightest. So, what brought this about?

First there was ‘Bethesda on Elder Scrolls VI, Fallout 5 Xbox exclusivity: ‘It’s too early to comment’’ (Source: TweakTown) which gives us “Todd Howard says it’s too early to comment on whether The Elder Scrolls VI or Fallout 5 will be Xbox exclusives. Bethesda announced four new Fallout projects, and Microsoft plans yearly exclusives (2026: Gears of War E-Day; 2027: Clockwork Revolution). Skyrim has sold over 65 million copies; Fallout 4 over 35 million.” We then get ‘Xbox Promised to Focus on Fallout and Elder Scrolls. Then It Fired the Teams Making Them.’ (source: Tech Times) This gives us pretty much the same info, but there is one difference “Former Bethesda project lead and Something Wicked Games CEO Jeff Gardiner confirmed 35 U.S.-based Bethesda Game Studios workers were cut on July 6. The OneBGS union, which represents Bethesda workers under the Communications Workers of America banner, reported at least 12 additional cuts at Bethesda’s Montreal location. Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act filings, public records pulled from state workforce agencies by Game Developer, confirmed 22 departures from Bethesda’s Austin office.” And with “The first 1,600 departures were painful. The announcement that another 1,600 more will follow by the end of fiscal year 2027 transformed pain into dread. People who kept their jobs are not experiencing relief. They are waiting.” This is setting the stage for another setting, but about that later. So then we get to ‘Elder Scrolls 6 gets first update in months from Bethesda’ (source: Gaming Bible) where we see “To say that The Elder Scrolls VI has been a long time coming is an understatement. Bethesda announced the highly anticipated fantasy RPG first during E3 2018, a time so long ago that the gaming convention no longer exists. Since that time, we have had small updates here and there, but we’re yet to learn of its release date, let alone seeing a gameplay trailer. All we’ve seen so far is the cinematic flyover trailer from the aforementioned E3 eight years ago.” And as we are given at present is that “Bethesda Softworks’s estimated annual revenue is currently $382.9M per year” and as Bethesda was part of a $7.5 billion buy, we have to ask the first question, if it takes 19 years to break even (and I am not adding the interest percentage for the loan. And if this includes millions of copies for Sony Consoles (PS3,PS4,PS5), I do not get the comment from Tod Howard “it’s too early to comment on whether The Elder Scrolls VI or Fallout 5 will be Xbox exclusives” with the Xbox at a mere 35 million Xbox-X consoles, the entire endeavor becomes nearly unplayable and as I see it, the value of Bethesda goes straight into the toilet. I saw a few other numbers, but I do not trust them as they seem massively pro Sony, I would like to see the real numbers. So with the staff of Bethesda in a caving morale setting, but the one question not asked is that Activision/Bethesda costs almost $84,000,000,000 and there is no way that this is making the money to validate such a purchase. I think I know why they did this. The previous boss wanted everyone to run to Xbox, a nice slideshow, but not a reality. Sony had too much appeal with the titles they have and I opposed the setting. Don’t get me wrong, Microsoft did nothing illegal, merely wrong and as they are figuring out just how wrong. I wonder if they are doing the same thing a Dutch bank did a decade ago. But it all that bad debt in some bank and let that go under, with all the debts attached (a wildly speculative idea from me). So as we are given half truths incomplete pictures, So as Gaming Bible gives us ‘Fallout 3 and Fallout: New Vegas remasters confirmed by Bethesda in huge studio update’ we can see why they are doing it, Oblivion 3 was a huge success (as I see it) they need the other two greats to be successes too. Optionally they might set this to the Switch 2 as well. An acceptable thought. But as I gave the world gaming IP to counter (hopefully equal) Fallout and Oblivion there would be a setting with the same population and more options. This is what innovative thinking brings and I created new ideas, new settings and of course on a non Microsoft system. It was the only way the other makers got the IP for free. I tend to ave a mean streak at times. Microsoft messed with the tranquility of gamers and I handed all others new IP (for free). As such there is a new setting. So, don’t think it was against Bethesda and all gamers will love these remade games (especially on PlayStation 5) and I am happy for Bethesda. But as I see it, Microsoft is done for. They wanted Gaming to adhere to their settings of Business Intelligence and their marketing machine and they anded up with a 84 billion dollar anchor around their necks. 

So as we are now seeing unions and others having a go at Microsoft, it is merely losing its OpenAI Microsoft’s revenue-share demands, though Microsoft remains a major shareholder and primary cloud partner and as the class actions add up, that 84 billion dollar anchor might strangle their board of directors (one could only hope) and as more and more people start seeing that all AI is fake AI, the doors of opportunity will close and the savvy BI people will start to realise that they are not gamers and that branch of Microsoft will close on them.

So, am I crazy? Am I seeing what some cannot, or am I merely delusional? I cannot rule that out, because only a crazy person will consider themselves to be completely right all the time and I could be wrong, but the signals are there and the media is no longer the investigative party they once were, they merely claim it now, but it is laced through a path of digital dollars and that is not an investigative setting.

So, as we are given ‘Xbox Promised to Focus on Fallout and Elder Scrolls’ and then they did away with 3,200 positions were eliminated across Microsoft Gaming (not merely Bethesda) and as we see ‘Unions File Unfair Labor Complaints Against Microsoft Over Decision To ‘Unlawfully’ Fire Xbox Workers’ we see that the hardship for Microsoft is nowhere near over. And I reckon that 3200 positions will affect a few more development houses. So are these projects made redundant? In addition we see ‘Cracks are starting to show in Xbox Game Pass after Microsoft removed a previously promised first‑party game it literally owns’ (source: windows central) as such I reckon that more class cases towards Microsoft will come and if I have my feelers out correctly, they will start this year and likely more than one class case, so if you are Satya Nadella, how does that $84 billion anchor feel now?

Have a great day and remember, if you are an Xbox Gamer, the Nintendo Switch, Nintendo Switch 2 and the Sony PlayStation 5 are perfectly valid options and there are 312 million gamers on these three systems and when you think of this that small cluster of Xbox Gamers does’t seem that big after all and that was clear long before Phil Spencer left. 

So have a great day and consider whatever console you select, enjoy the games you play, because joy is a first setting of a gamer and you need to protect your ability for joy.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Gaming, IT, Science

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

July 17, 2026 · 12:50

The actual tools

We tend to get smitten by bubbles and other kind of negativity. You all know (if you read my work) that I am not a fan of the misuse of the word AI, I consider all AI to be fake AI, but the real deal is that DML (Deeper Machine Language) optionally with LLM (Large Language Model) acted is a tool. A very powerful tool. As such I saw two parts of media which threw me. You see in 2027/2028 people will do (optionally) some real thinking and they will consider that tools like Salesforce will have the upper hand. I have been a Technical Support person for the longest time and I see the benefit in DML/LLM. So up to 2027 we sill see a shifting. Fake salespeople who thought they could sell some AI idea will find out the negativity they have a part of and at that point players like Salesforce will clean house. Some guy names Sherlock Holmes said that IBM Watson will be the remaining winner, but I think he is biased there. But in all honesty both are strong competitors. So where am I coming from? Both solutions are the peak of Business Intelligence. They all have their niche side and as such they will get their own following.

So in Market Research (going back to the 90s) they had a simple way of getting results, they merely did:

CROSSTABS 
/TABLES=all BY all BY all
/CELLS=COUNT ROW COLUMN TOTAL
/STATISTICS=all.

And the results came in hundreds of pages of results (destroying a tree a day for paper). But here and now we have another solution. You see, DML could sift through the garbage in mere seconds and sift out the meaningful results. As such both Salesforce and Watson could see the light and a shallow stack of results could be the setting. And to be honest there is no win in seeing the table of length by shoe size, even if you ask for the kappa statistics. This is where we separate the bitches (read: fake salespeople) from the actual sales titans. It will soon enough no longer be about the pipeline, but a setting of handholding the corporations that were drawn in by a sales loser with a pretty presentation and all over their presentation mention off AI in their presentations. 

These people will require proper handholding and optional free education in way of product driven education and showing them what matters. 

So why all this? 
Well two articles passed me by, the first was from Kavout stating ‘Has Salesforce (CRM) Stock Bottomed Out After Its Recent Sell-Off’ (at https://www.kavout.com/market-lens/has-salesforce-crm-stock-bottomed-out-after-its-recent-sell-off). The article was three months old, but the setting was already a setting for consideration almost 6 months ago. I merely saw it last night. We see here “Salesforce (CRM) shares have certainly been on a rollercoaster ride, experiencing a notable 25% decline since the start of 2026, even as the broader software application sector saw a 15% dip. This downturn comes despite the company reporting a strong fourth quarter for fiscal year 2026, beating both revenue and earnings per share (EPS) estimates. The market’s reaction highlights a deeper anxiety, primarily centered around the disruptive potential of artificial intelligence (AI) and its implications for established enterprise software giants like Salesforce.” And I object, they might get swept in the AI frenzy, but Deeper Machine Learning is a powerful tool and it could make short work of Business Intelligence settings. So even as I am not too much pro AI, there is nothing against BI and DML (optionally with LLM).

So then we are given “Salesforce’s recent announcement of a massive $50 billion share repurchase program, with half of it, $25 billion, to be funded by new debt, has certainly raised eyebrows across Wall Street. This aggressive move, which represents nearly 14% of the company’s current $183.07 billion market capitalization, is a clear signal from management that they believe the stock is significantly undervalued following its recent sell-off. CEO Marc Benioff explicitly stated, “We are so confident in the future of Salesforce,” justifying the decision to “aggressively repurchasing shares.” The strategy is not without its critics. Taking on $25 billion in senior notes to finance buybacks is a “material shift in financial policy,” according to Moody’s Ratings, which consequently downgraded Salesforce by one level to A2. S&P Global Ratings also shifted its outlook to “negative” from “stable,” citing concerns about increased leverage. While management, including CFO Robin Washington, views the company as “underleveraged,” the increased debt burden means future borrowing will likely come at a higher cost, and the company’s leverage could potentially double within the next two years.”

This makes perfect sense to me. You see we see shareholders (who are jittery like anything you have ever seen) and taking the wind out of those sails will benefit Salesforce. Consider that they have $41.52 billion, so if they buy back the $25 billion shares. They will still cop that cost, but now it optionally be $57 billion to the Board of Directors and 250 share holders instead of the Board of Directors and 4500 share holders. As such they will reclaim a whole lot of revenue. As such it makes sense (my view on the amount of shareholders is purely speculative) but that move makes sense to me. What drove me was the second article. As such Business dot com gave us (at https://www.business.com/reviews/salesforce-email-marketing/) you see, salesforce still gets a 9 out of 10, but the cons are out there.

  • Pricing can add up quickly as you add messaging credits, AI capabilities and other Salesforce marketing products.
  • The platform takes time to implement and is better suited to organizations with the resources to manage a sophisticated marketing ecosystem.
  • Many advanced marketing capabilities require separate products or add-ons, making it difficult to estimate your total investment upfront.

And here I have a few questions. The first point is merely a point when it is used buy some sales user not knowing what he/she is doing, optionally the larger stage is whatever firm it is using. If they have a firm grip on what is required and now some loser attitude to whatever more they can get and they ask the system, all whilst it is dependent on the data they already have, they are lost in the shrubberies, all whilst a statistician and a one seat of IBM Statistics could optionally hand them that setting (me being hopeful they were that clever). The entire ‘platform takes time to implement’ is a bust. They either had their ducks in a row or they did not. And last their setting of ‘marketing capabilities require separate products or add-ons, making it difficult to estimate your total investment’ is a bust because it implies that their marketing setting are as useless as their sales division and their own board of directors might be clueless to begin with. Knowing where yup are, where your data is at and is heading to is staff setting, not software setting. The software merely makes it more complete and easier to manage. It seems like some people forgot that. They  merely hired some sales dodo who never read the RTFM clause in software (aka Read The Freaking Manual). As such I see there is a lasting setting that a firm hire the proper knowledge, not have some job agency scan the over a 100 ChatGPT generated resume’s and hire the best knowledge presented. Not the actual person and as that goes wrong several times that firm is out of options and they are now seeking the software solution that hands them options and that comes at a price.

As such I reckon that Salesforce (IBM Watson too) will make a killing starting in 2027 (optionally from November 2026) because I reckon that at that point the AI class action cases will hit nearly all media and the AI wannabe will be seeking hiding places (or claim ignorance) 

That is my optionally wrong view, but that is how I see it. I reckon that IBM having Miner and Statistics in their arsenal have more to be proud of, but Salesforce established themself early enough and they have a decent following, so I see both as optional winners. 

Just my $0.0324 (2 cents corrected for devaluation). You all have a great day now. 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Science

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

July 16, 2026 · 17:37

Casual connection

In the last 24 hours I saw two articles, they might have some casual connection and I leave that up to you to decide. First up we get an article with the staged setting of ‘Why Muslims Will Suffer Most When The AI Bubble Bursts’ (at https://www.islamicfinanceguru.com/articles/ai-bubble-muslim-investors) the first thing going through my mind is that you need to get out before disaster strikes. Get out when the going remains optional, and I would personally phrase this setting that those ‘money diggers’ make claim that you are not a pussy, make sure that he is not tying his benefit to your welfare. Because those who need your money have their own agenda. So as I read “In the late 90s, everyone was piling into internet companies. The stock market was booming, and it felt like free money. Then in 2000, it imploded. Companies worth billions became worthless almost overnight, and an estimated 100 million everyday investors lost a combined $5 trillion. Now people are worried AI could be the next bubble. And if they’re right, Muslim investors could be hit the hardest, even though most of us don’t realize it yet. Here’s why, and what every Muslim investor should be doing right now to prepare.” With additional “Over the past few years, the stock market has been on an absolute tear, and almost all of it has been driven by a handful of companies: the Magnificent Seven, Microsoft, Apple, Nvidia, Amazon, Meta, Alphabet, and Tesla. All making big bets on AI. Share prices going up isn’t itself a problem. What makes people nervous is the valuation. Take Nvidia. It’s now one of the largest companies in the world, and investors are giving it a price-to-earnings ratio of around 50. That means at current earnings, it would take 50 years of profits to earn back what you paid for the stock today. That’s an enormous amount of faith in future growth. That faith might well be justified. These companies are genuinely transforming industries. But history tells us that when the story gets ahead of the fundamentals, eventually something snaps. We’re not saying it will, but it’s worth asking: what’s the most fragile part of this whole thing? What’s the single point of failure? Because there is one.” And there is one that beckons reading (the link is at the beginning) and I agree with him. But the one thing that I take from the rest of that story is ‘acknowledge the concentration risk’ there is a downside of that, when it goes, it goes almost spectacularly (the investors don’t think out is spectacular) but I have other things against this AI setting, because from my point of view all AI is Fake AI. (Read my other works for elaboration, merely go see Google and ask: 

Lawlordtobe + “AI” + “AI bubble”

You should get over a dozen articles bringing this out and it merely my personal setting, but I believe that is an almost pertaining truth in all this that no one wants to acknowledge. When you come to the end of that rainbow, which did not start at a pot of gold and does not end with a pot either, you see why I believe that this is coming to an end (and right quick). Don’t get me wrong, I believe in DML (Deeper Machine Learning) and LLM (Large Language Models) these are strong tools and a lot more will be coming from this. But it al all down to the knowledge of the programmer and it just isn’t AI, not even close. So I did not give the Muslim investor much rope. I am not Muslim and I have never been an investor. Not even close, I am not even an early adopter. So whilst we now see Sam Altman in quotes all over the internet from ‘Sam Altman: ‘It also takes a lot of energy to train a human’ — a staunch defense of the cost of AI training’, so if this was real (read: true) AI, what did he have to defend? Then there is ‘“Thought It Was Satire”: Sam Altman Takes Dig At Anthropic’s New Ad Amid Online Backlash’ where we are told that:

“Anthropic’s latest advertising campaign, “There’s Hope in Hard Questions”, was designed to show that the AI company is willing to confront difficult questions about artificial intelligence and its potential risks. Instead, the ad has sparked widespread criticism online, with many viewers describing its tone as unsettling, creepy and overly bleak.” 

As I see it, some people are starting to crying about the still missing ROI and that is not even getting close to the fold whilst some give us 

“AI Return on Investment (ROI) is highly debated and highly variable. While many companies report time savings and efficiency gains, a large percentage of executives struggle to see direct, bottom-line financial returns due to high infrastructure costs and a lack of proper workflow integration.” 

All whilst the ‘highly variable’ is driven towards a timeline which is (by some) decades away. As such some need to worry when they are given the image of a Cadillac, whilst they are buying an Edsel. This might not be completely accurate, but it is what I see. When the court cases are driven towards that the setting that “DMLA Submission to the US Copyright Office argues against rash “data mining laws.” They state that because a robust licensing market already exists, creators should not be forced to subsidize AI technology by allowing free text-and-data-mining (TDM) exemptions” and when you are at this point, you are likely to lose a massive bundle ofd your investment. All whilst the Tech Policy Press gives us that:

“A dedicated legal database known as the AI on Trial dataset has tracked at least 500 cases globally across 39 countries, encompassing intellectual property, privacy, discrimination, and platform regulation”

Sounds like a good place to keep your investment, because when these cases settle (I’m hopefully hoping for some coins from that equation) you are done with whatever you thought you had. But (there is always a but) there is an optional outcome and it was given to me at (https://maritime-executive.com/article/uae-plans-to-build-a-new-jebel-ali-to-bypass-strait-of-hormuz) by the maritime executive. With the headline ‘UAE Plans to Build a New Jebel Ali to Bypass Strait of Hormuz’ with the setting that UAE had left OPEC, they might be sitting pretty on some coins and that place might need investment. As oil is a commodity that the planet needs, there is every chance that your optional investment goes back from 50 years to up to 5 years with a decent spillage of coins coming your way. So when we read “The Financial Times has added to a number of reports that the UAE is planning to expand its port and freight-handling capacity on its East Coast, accessing the Gulf of Oman and bypassing the Strait of Hormuz. The Financial Times says that DP World is planning not only to build an entirely new port on the Fujairah coast, but also to expand capacity at the existing Fujairah container terminal. It is not clear what coordination arrangements DP World has made with the existing Fujairah terminal, which is operated by the AD Ports Group under the brand name Fujairah Terminals, following the signing of a 35-year concession agreement in 2017 with Fujairah Ports, which in turn is controlled by the Fujairah Al Sharqi Royal Family.” It is my firm believe that these players would accept Muslim investment and that means the setting that you might come out as a winner, because this place outside of the Strait of Hormuz would give the UAE (read: ADNOC) give a larger setting of up to 5,000,000 barrels of oil per day with the small grocery customers like India, Australia, Indonesia, Japan and China. It feel (read: me is not being an investor) like an almost sure thing and that tends to breed opportunity. And whilst we are given “Plans are already afoot to speed the completion of a second crude pipeline to parallel the Habshan–Abu Dhabi Crude Oil Pipeline (ADCOP), doubling capacity from 1.5 to 3 million barrels per day. Fujairah Ports also operates a bulk products terminal at Dibba, on the border with Oman’s Musandam Peninsula, and Dibba has also been slated for development and upgrade.” It might allow the UAE to double that doubled setting, which is personally vision, not fact based analyses. But in this, Muslims investors are likely to see another opportunity, they might move out of that Fake AI setting whilst the leaving is good. But don’t take my word for that, it is a mere view coming from academic and personal vision on IT and a personal view on where I see the world going and I have more than 500 reasons for my views and those 500 reasons are the most likely dampers on your return on investment. #JustSaying

So, have a great day today and I am on route to kill a few Metroids, because those critters are getting out of hand on my Nintendo Switch.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Media, Science

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

July 15, 2026 · 21:01

Where’s the blame?

That is at times the question, is it Elon Musk, its version of Twitter, the ABC News, or the hacker? Personally I do not think that ABC is to blame, but they are connected to it all (they are the unwilling participant). So how did this get started? I got last night a tweet, it wasn’t the groundbreaking news I was looking for, but I needed a new idea (and I got one as you are reading) so I decided to click on it. (See image below)

So here we see a few ‘facts’ or basically news given that makes the mind curious about what is involved. I saw the ‘tweet’ with a reference to Amazon (it merely mentions that) and I do not show the on the list, so accept that. In the background was the Australian Parliament House, as such I got interested. And I got this image several times in the previous few hours (I only saw them later) but they were allegedly tweeted by @Amenenyo1, @greciaibarra528, @DriftyGar, @Lundstromm04, @MarcelWagenveld and @ezcxs I am not connected to any of them, as such they might be trolls, or spam/scam facilitators. 

Anyway it reflects towards this article from ABC news:

The article is speculatively used because it is a long article. I reckon that the scammers need time to get information from this who push the “A few minutes after yesterday’s release” article. The link goes to TR.EE, which is an Estonian address, but the article seems to reflect an address ‘ferrariracinglegends dot com’ (I used the letter to replace the character, so that you will not fall into that same setting) all this makes me think that ABS is the unwilling participant in all this. And the larger question becomes. Who is to blame? I might have fallen for that trap last week as well and I got a call from an internet phone with an IPv6 address (which I did not answer) and after that my phone gave no evidence it was called, there was no blocked call, there was no rejected call. No evidence that I was called at all. As such I am making a few assumptions and they are mine to make. But it is clear that whomever is getting into this is using more powerful tools and more agility in the internet workings all over the field. 

  1. What is Elon Musk (his Tweety setting) amounting to?
  2. Is social media to blame?
  3. Is the advertisement department to blame?
  4. How is this managed in X (formerly known as Twitter)?
  5. How is advertisement in X managed, controlled and monitored?

5 questions that are important. Because this is inhibiting what reliability X has left, when X becomes a plaything of scammers and phishers X is pretty much done for. 

So can we blame social media? It relies of propagation and influencers, and as such scammers are top tier influencers, you are basically the tool they will use to propagate their need for cash. This sound ominous, but that is what it amounts to.

So how are advertisements managed in X? That is the first real culprit, the fact that I had that advertisement any least 6 times in an hour, with 6 different addresses makes me thing that something is very wrong in this setting, especially as I am not connected to any of them. Yes I know that this could be replicated, but that evidence (which I do not have) makes the blame squarely on the advertisement department of X (as I personally see it). And as I see it, whomever manages the advertisement setting of X has some explaining to do (optionally to Elon Musk, who might be seeing a massive drop in credibility, at the max of $44,000,000,000 and he might not like what this is amounting to. Then we get to the control and monitoring of advertisements. Because this setting has references to Amazon and ABC News who are seemingly not part of this and they might be seeking legal council in all of this. 

So as you see, I have questions. I reckon I have answers too, but without clear evidence there is no way I can comment, but the questions remain and until they are resolved anyone clicking on an advertisement is setting himself up for a long fall. That is merely how I see it and I thought it ws important to spread this news as far as I could.

Have a great day you all.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Media, Science

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

July 12, 2026 · 13:43

From a deceptive mind

Yup, that’s me. I saw an article and the sneaky mind went to work. All because some words gave me ample reasons to do so. But lets start at the beginning. It all started with a story in the Microsoft Source Australia (at https://news.microsoft.com/source/asia/features/how-commonwealth-bank-and-microsoft-are-reimagining-the-future-of-customer-service/) where we see ‘How Commonwealth Bank and Microsoft are reimagining the future of customer service’ really? Reimagining? I get that Microsoft sees a blanket of opportunity, because as I see it, on a near global scale Technical Support and Customer Care will take dives and the need of clear quality is to be found nearly everywhere. But here is the kink in this cable. There already is a supplier. It is called NICE, an Israeli cloud supplier. I saw several options for Saudi Arabia and the UAE. I wrote about it in the story ‘Dominoes’ on December 4th 2023 (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2023/12/04/dominoes/). I didn’t give the entire setting, but they were here first as such the solution ‘reimagined’ is not seen by me here.

So when I saw “Martin Lindsay had a bold vision to reimagine the Commonwealth Bank of Australia’s contact center architecture using an approach that did not yet exist. As Executive General Manager of Customer Service Direct at the banking group, Lindsay set out to bring together multiple legacy systems supporting voice, messaging and digital interactions into a single, AI-powered omni-channel platform. The goal was to create a more intuitive, conversational experience for customers, while supporting frontline teams with better tools to serve them.” I had to giggle, because that is basically what the NICE CX One platform does and in several other ways. As such is this an attempt to plagiarise an already excellent idea, or are these people making sure that the “The Commonwealth Bank of Australia (CBA) serves approximately 17 million retail, business, and institutional customers across the country, representing nearly two-thirds of the Australian population. Of this total, the bank has over 1 million business customers and 8.3 million digitally active users.” (Source: Oogly Googly Google) fall straight via Microsoft into the Cloud Act capturing settings of the United States of America? Yes, people seem to forget is trivialize that cloud act and someone needs to take a longer look at this. For example an optional pretentious Martin Lindsay who had his ideas close to 5 years after NICE did. Nice started in 1986 as Neptune Intelligence Computer Engineering and that’s evolved into the setting we see now. As such what is the setting of imagination at Microsoft? (optionally at the CBA too). And as I see it, it is an Israeli company, but NiCE is an American technology company specializing in customer relations management software (NiCE CXone), artificial intelligence, and digital and workforce engagement management. OK, as I see it the cloud act is not avoided, but the fact that some (read: Microsoft Source Australia) might want to peer their sugar coated story. So when we get to “The catalyst came in early 2024, when Lindsay partnered with leaders from Microsoft to co‑engineer the solution. The timing was driven by a rapid shift in customer expectations for instant, always-on support, while the bank’s existing virtual chatbot was being wound down.” One might have a Conspiracy Theorist mind (that would be me) seeing that I saw this a year before him, that he had an idea to take the idea from NiCE and give it a swirl and optionally he saw Microsoft as a partner in alleged crime. Alleged, because I have no idea how this went, but as we look at Nice (at www.nice.com) you can see how evolved that idea already is and as such why reinvent the wheel? I have my doubts on this idea. Especially as we can see a massively evolved system, it seems to go even further than when I saw it in 2023 (which makes sense). So as I see that setting I also see “We wanted to work with Microsoft to shape their products and deliver a platform aligned to our future strategy. We knew that meant working with Microsoft as a co-creator in our vision from day one.” But I read it as “We needed a Microsoft tainted solution where I get the credit, the commission and I call Microsoft a ‘co-creator’ so that I can get my coins”, so am I pushing the conspiracy theory setting? I might be, but this is how business is done in this modern age. Because if NiCe was rejected, the story would be “We saw a solution that didn’t match with our vision, so we talked to Microsoft and see if they would help us out” and at this point you see the consultancy solution that NiCE could offer and was rejected for a much bigger bill.

Apart from that there is nothing. As I see it, the world will have a massive Technical support and Customer Care issue from 2027 onwards. As people are fired all over the place they can hire people with a telephone voice and a good setting towards data entry, both are essential in these fields. But what do I know, I have merely be set into the Technical Support world and Customer Care world since 1992. So I know a few things, which is also why I saw the essential needed setting of NiCE. 

The rest of the story was too self adoring for me to adhere to, as people see that Customer Care has a low tolerance for failure, It is essentially humorous to see that Microsoft is clearly not using their own solution. Why? Perhaps Clippy objected? That Is a mere speculation on the matter and even in this case speculations tend to matter, because the idea is seemingly nice and merely seemingly because someone else saw that sight first and as I see it, the CBA never seemingly saw it as they went shopping at Microsoft. But what do I know? 

Have a great day you all, time for some coffee.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

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

July 10, 2026 · 22:16

Is it the water level?

Yup, we are all in that setting, but are we merely waving to the music of Debbie Harry or are we watching the waves from the shorelines. That is merely two options, but when some say that the tide is high, they might be referring to bubbles, the AI bubble to be more precise. I am not some economist saying that bubbles are blasphemy and I am no economist, but I have looked at numbers for decades and the numbers we are given do not add up, and when I was watching Inside Job something hit me, there was a familiar pattern evolving, not evolving, repeating is a better word and I have been saying this for some time. Yet today, a mere 10 minutes ago I see ‘UK Places Microsoft, Google, Amazon And Oracle Under Financial Oversight’ (at https://www.businesstoday.com.my/2026/07/10/uk-places-microsoft-google-amazon-and-oracle-under-financial-oversight/) where we see “The UK has placed Microsoft, Google, Amazon and Oracle under direct regulatory oversight after designating the cloud service providers as critical third parties to the country’s financial system. Reuters reported that effective July 13, the designation covers Microsoft Ireland Operations Ltd, Google Cloud EMEA Ltd, Amazon Web Services EMEA SARL and Oracle Corporation UK Ltd, reflecting the financial sector’s growing dependence on cloud infrastructure”, so whilst the story ends with “The designation will bring the four technology firms under direct regulatory oversight as part of efforts to safeguard the stability and continuity of the UK’s financial sector.” And it comes after we were given (at https://m.au.investing.com/news/stock-market-news/oracle-stock-shrugs-off-sp-downgrade-to-bbb-but-120b-debt-shadow-looms-4526441) where we see ‘Oracle stock shrugs off S&P downgrade to ’BBB-’, but $160B debt shadow looms’ where we see “Oracle Corp. (NYSE:ORCL) shares managed to gain 2.7% on Thursday, defying a credit rating downgrade from S&P Global Ratings. While shares edged slightly lower from their midday highs, the tech giant still traded firmly in positive territory. Investors chose to focus on Oracle’s staggering $638 billion backlog of cloud contracts rather than the immediately apparent threat to its balance sheet: S&P downgraded Oracle’s long-term issuer credit rating to ’BBB-’ from ’BBB’, retaining a stable outlook.”

Now, I am not having anything against Oracle. They have always been on the foreground of technology and innovation in its field and it is unlikely to ever change. But there is a larger setting, the entire AI bubble as I see it, it will hit them too. They all over invested in that setting and they are likely the biggest catchers of the implosion of that event. But I am still in arms over ““The official position of the Secretary and the U.S. Treasury is that Artificial intelligence will be a key driver of America’s new Golden Age,” the spokesperson said. “AI has the potential to deliver unprecedented productivity gains, expand economic opportunity, and empower American workers and businesses.”” You see, there is no golden age, there is no AI, not yet at least. There is DML and LLM and they are great, they can hand innovation and prosperity in several ways. It merely isn’ AI and that needs to be said, because soon the class actions will go for the “It’s AI and we cannot really predict what AI does” but it isn’t, it is DML and that requires a programmer, it requires data and these two hinder stones are the backdrop for prosecution. Only last week we were given ‘Anthropic Faces a New $75 Million Lawsuit for Pirating Books to Train Claude AI’ and less than 24 hours ago Harvard Business Review ‘You Outsourced the AI—but you still own the risk’ where we see “As enterprises increasingly embed third-party systems into their workflows, technological risk has led to new legal and operational responsibilities. Leaders may have little visibility into how a model was trained or how it changes, yet when it discriminates, mishandles data, or harms a customer, regulators and plaintiffs often look first to the company that deployed it. Peloton learned how that exposure can arise. Visitors to its website see a familiar invitation to “chat,” powered by a third-party vendor. According to a class-action complaint, the vendor recorded and stored conversations and used the data to improve its machine-learning models. Peloton neither built nor trained the system. Even so, a California federal judge allowed a claim against the company to proceed. The parties later jointly dismissed the case, without publicly disclosing the terms.”

Now consider the amalgamation of these factors (apart from some saying there is no bubble) there is (allegedly) “Worldwide spending on AI is forecast to reach $2.5 trillion. Venture capital and private corporate investments in AI firms sit near $258.7 billion globally, with over $750 billion in dedicated infrastructure and data center capital expenditure from major tech hyperscalers” we then see that the big players (Microsoft, Google, Amazon, Oracle) are basically overextended, facing class actions and all of them are looking at all sorts of financial hardship, because at some stage all these players will be made to rephrase the simple truth that AI is not DML/LLM, it requires more and when the programming is put under a loop that setting comes crashing down. I saw it two years ago that this is the only outcome in some sales people overselling what they had and the simplest setting is not a mere Quantum computer. It requires shallow circuits and what I tend to call The Epsilon processor. True AI cannot exist in a binary setting. The last one is my interpretation of it all and some might disagree. But the Epsilon processor allows for Null, False, True, Both and it is the Both part that makes true AI possible and of course a matching operating systems will be required as well a data carrier and in that case Oracle and Snowflake have the grounds for success. As I see it, all others will fall behind these two. 

And last month we were given that “400 newspapers sued OpenAI and Microsoft for scraping their content without permission or compensation to train artificial intelligence programs” even my data has been scraped. So how many will be successful? How many will fail? I have no idea, but the odds are decently stacked against these salespeople. And as the courts rule against these Fake AI bringers (as I see it) there will be a rush of people making a case, all who were sold AI (without clear DML/LLM settings in their contracts) are seeing their pupils transform into dollar signs and they will try to clean house. So when all these settings happen, is the stage for a bubble that far fetched? 

I am watching and watching and noting what is due. I reckon that at some point I get the one piece of evidence that will allow me to do just that, 2700 (out of nearly 4000) article scraped seemingly give me an optional case for some dollars (five million plus would be great). And I am not the greediest player in town. So at what point will the investors of $2.5 trillion ring the bell wanting to see payment for their investments? Goldman Sachs gave us last month ‘The AI Investment Boom: When Will It Pay Off?’ With “The economics of artificial intelligence are more questionable today than two years ago, says Goldman Sachs Research’s Jim Covello, as enterprise buyers, model companies, and hyperscalers have yet to show returns on their spend. In a conversation with Alison Nathan and George Lee on Goldman Sachs Exchanges, Covello discusses where we’ve seen economic value accrue to date and why semiconductor companies can’t continue to be the sole beneficiaries of the AI buildout.” As such we see people with serious economic skills worrying and wondering what comes next and I was there at least a year ago. So when will others see the doubt that I am seeing? The money people call the bubble a blasphemy, but they have vested interests. I do not. I merely see the flaws on technology that is at least 15-20 years away, data that is largely unvalidated and unverified and at this juncture people are investing trillions? Makes me all tingly that too many people are greed driven and too much vested to be part of a boom that does not exist, just like the settings of 2008, Inside Job showed that clearly and it seems that we have a similar setting evolve at least two times the previous caper. So if you consider that with all the reserves that hit took the economy 2 decades to fix and at present the reserves are gone, so what will happen now? Why aren’t others taking the stand the UK is making? Because others are in the believe that “America’s new Golden Age” is here? When you realize that it will take close to two decades to arrive, how long until too many investors pull the plug and go somewhere else? What will happen then? That is what I see coming, because at some point more and more people wake up, this is bound to happen, it always does.

So is the water high enough? Have a great day.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Media, Science

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