When the game changes

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

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

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

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Politics

Decision time

I had to make a decision, we all do. For the longest of times, basically since 1983 when I got into gaming, I mostly played as many systems as I was able to buy. First the VIC-20, then the CBM-64 and from there the tracks started. PSX, N64, Megadrive, Dreamcast, Gamecube, PSX2, Xbox360, PSX3, PSX4, Xbox One, Switch and soon the PSX5. I have decided to drop the Xbox as an acceptable system, I am not taking in the hype, I am dropping my Xbox One system with 20+ games. Microsoft has left too much gaming betrayal on the road as I personally see it. 

I will admit that there is another reason, my life of 18 hours a day is over, I now need more than 4 hours of sleep a night, a system has to go and Microsoft lost the toss. Too much overhyping go games (not entirely their fault). To be honest, I got the Xbox One for two reasons. The first was Elite Dangerous and the second one is Subnautica, both are now (and have been for a while) Sony games as well. The disappointing Xbox release list and the stage where both the Last of Us 2 and Ghost of Tsushima are so far above whatever the Xbox offered that the choice was simple. 

Let’s look at the station as it now is, over 6 years Microsoft refused to give in to the old station where we do not need to be online. Former boss of Microsoft stated once “We have a system for offline players, it is called Xbox360”, yet and we noticed it, as games showed issues, I have missed out on well over half a dozen achievements. In addition to the offline part, for some reason (as I showed in a previous blog), the Xbox started to upload, it uploaded well over 50% of my monthly allowance whilst I was not playing multiplayer games or online games. Microsoft help-desk said that this was between me and my internet provider. Really? The Xbox uploads without my consent and it was their fault? The entire Azure push and that is almost halfway through my issues with a console that takes the freedom of gaming and makes it a path of data collection. Then we see the headline ‘Microsoft’s xCloud Will Officially Launch in September as Part of Xbox Game Pass Ultimate’, there is nothing wrong with the state or the choices, yet it does not show us the amount of patches this gives and the amount of data you require. Even as my link is not great 60GB in one month dented my data usage, I also see that a lot of places in Europe will see more and more congestion, and less data width (especially rural places). When that pressure gives way in too high a setting, how long until the internet providers start chasing gamers? It was within 4 weeks of the Covid-19 when congestion made YouTube and Netflix lower resolution play, no more 4K movies and streaming was reduced. As the American BS war on Huawei (and China) continues, we will see reduced systems faster and more often. So what will happen to those 4K and 8K games? If it does not come in physical format, how much more congestion will we face? As such it is important to make a stand with other gamers and make a choice, I decided to drop the Microsoft console. It was a choice that happened on several factors, several choices were available and the station that is PSX has shown more promise and have left me with less disappointment over the time that I had a Playstation (1995-2020) than the Xbox One (2015-2020),  in that stage, I am clear in my voice when I see the entire stage, it is clear to me that the most powerful console in the world has no business focussing on directing gamers in a direction we need to go, especially when it gets surpassed by the weakest console currently on sale. 

A stage where we will soon see more weak promises and powerful hype creations, I personally see the stage changing by Microsoft Business needs that has less ad less to do with the joy of gaming and more with other needs. I will admit that I might be wrong, but I feel strongly to go in the direction I believe in and as I personally see it, a Microsoft Console is not that way. Over time I might replace it with a Google Stadia, so as we see the stage entering 2021, I might miss out on a game or two, yet at present Ghost of Tsushima has blown me away, The Last of Us 2 blew me away and I expect that Cyberpunk 2077 will blow me away. That will keep me settled until Q2 2021, when the upgrade to Elite Dangerous (4K) comes through (there is a lot of noise but not an official yes or no), I will be set for the largest part. I am not continuing to rely on Ubisoft as its flaws angered me enough to uninstall those games and I feel certain that the disappointments from that address have more negative news to come for gamers on any console. 

2020 has changed a lot for us and I do believe that Microsoft will hide behind hypes soon enough and give half baked information that can be bend in a few directions, yet the clear station where the games of the Nintendo Switch are more fun and more addictive than anything the MS Console can give us is a larger stage, a stage where we wonder why this system? And whilst Kotaku (at https://www.kotaku.com.au/2020/07/xbox-series-x-exclusives-phil-spencer/) gives us ‘Exclusives Are ‘Completely Counter To What Gaming Is About,’ Xbox’s Phil Spencer Says’ we see the real flaw. An exclusive game maximises what is possible and Sony has them, whilst Microsoft gave them up. If it was on multiple systems, games like God of War, Last of Us, Last of Us 2, Spiderman, and Ghost of Tsushima would not be the breathtaking results they are now. And the list is a lot larger, which also implies that some are merely on par, not beyond. Microsoft is largely lacking such a list, which is different from the Xbox360, The elder Scrolls Oblivion, Fable 2, Fable 3, and a list that goes on a long while, Microsoft threw a system advantage that put them on par with the Playstation 3 and let some bureaucrat set the long term goals into the Microsoft greed well and ignoring the population they were serving (the gamers). So now we see the not entirely unexpected ‘completely counter to what is gaming about’, yes, counter to what THEY are about. Gaming is to set the boundaries of gaming forward, to give us the wow factor that Microsoft has largely ignored. Sony never forgot that lesson, not since the first Playstation. 

As Google learns that lesson, it will see that there is more profit in catering to gamers, than to data facilitators. We will see larger shifts in 2021, but not immediately, the next Xbox will get the limelight as it deserves, yet when the issues start hampering the Xbox and as the people will get to read carefully phrased denials and carefully phrased counters, one by one it will impact the gamers more and as they switch to Nintendo Switch and PlayStation 5, we will see that Microsoft consoles will end up in 4th or 5th position. I doubt that this will happen in 2021, but 2022 yes, that is entirely possible. I predicted the fall behind Switch a year before it happened, but it did happen and I will be right again and at least now I am ahead of the curve and got rid of my system for a fair price, I wonder when others catch on.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Gaming

When is a terrorist not a terrorist?

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

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

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

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

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

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Military, Politics

Second ride to the other place

Ubisoft has released a non-leaked first view edition and it is only fair that I take a look at it. It does look a little better, yet I still fear that Ubisoft has taken its Assassins Creed franchise and put it in a casket and the grave that is where it is headed. 

In the first, no matter how it is dressed, it is no longer an Assassins Creed game, they had the option of making an optionally powerful new franchise, but Ubisoft clearly waged against it. What we see does look good, the graphical section of Ubisoft always knew what it was doing and they moved on on this trip towards excellence. Yet I see more things, and more options that make sense in one way, and seem overly pushed for in another. The fear that I had that some is a trial to push Far Cry elements into this game is not gone, but it was slightly diminished. Yet there it was, chasing tattoo sheets, just like Black Flag chasing songs, or was it the almanac pages in the third game? More of the same, trying to appease all makes for a stage that pleases none. 

The second part is yet to be proven, merely as I had to download more for Breakpoint, I decided to delete it, the patches are well over 50Gb (in total size), and I started the game late, so I missed a few patches, that is the darkest moment that this game faces. The large comments of the video poster seems to indicate the idea that was left with me. It is an RPG that has a lot towards Witcher 3, there is an attempt towards the older AC games, but I was not satisfied from what I saw. Some parts are familiar and you have done it before, some seem new and surprisingly so. The entire station is upgraded and the lack of tools are perhaps felt, but there are skills that are there now. There are feelings in me, but Ubisoft destroyed the faith to it. It seems to me that there is no questing to the degree of the past, as you need to discover events by exploration, AC Odyssey hinted at the route, but I will await a more complete edition. In shadows of ignorance, I would see this as Witcher IV, the UK travels, and that is how it looks and feels, yet it is not a CD Project Red game, it is not a Gerald of Rivia game, but the sandbox feeling is better done now than it was in AC Odyssey. The game has new parts, or basically vastly altered applied parts. Skills and inventory are the ones that stand out. Weapons and armour are not merely altered, they have been vastly upgraded. Weapons does not merely have a damage part, there is speed and impact as well, so the choice of a weapon will be more towards the gameplay and chasing the right weapon and sticking to it will matter. Armour had elements like weight and evasion, so what looks cool might not be efficient. It is an essential upgrade that matters, so do the skills, there are major and minor upgrades there and it is shown in a new light, as such, the game will have new and improved sights on this, yet this is Ubisoft, so how many patches will it require? There is no way to tell, the game is close to 3 months away from completion, but unlike the leak, this does show me that Valhalla is not an auto fail, Ubisoft might have lost a lot of credibility, there is a decent chance that this game is a game changer not unlike AC Origins was and that was a breath of fresh air, as such Valhalla might be another one, time will tell, yet that would enable Ubisoft gain some essentially required credibility. I hope that they will all it off, I might have been opposing some of their actions, but I do not hate them (hate is useless, always). 

I will advice all to take another look and not rely on the leaked part, there are a few videos out there and most will give a similar view. I personally do not go for those making a ‘my honest opinion’ approach, for the simple reason that a sandbox game is too large, and the game relies on a much broader taste in gaming as such, it applies to more and everyone has their own playing style, in the AC games for me it was stealth, which is why I found AC Odyssey disappointing. I did like the overall adaptability of Valhalla, yet I felt that the stealth part is lacking, which makes it not an AC game, but let’s be fair, when did we consider ANY viking to be a person who understood the concept of stealth? Yet the game looks impressive, there is no denying that. Yet how many patches will it face? A setting that keeps on nagging in the back of my head. 

Time will tell, but I do feel it is important for anyone taking the ‘leak’ as gospel to take another look as the leaked video is definitely selling the game short.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Gaming

Changing the mindset?

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

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

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

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

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Politics

Light at the end of the economy

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics

Can’t stop the message

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

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

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

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

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Military, Politics, Science

The Iran and Judy show

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Military, Politics

Project One Fiver

We all have the setting in our heads, we have an idea and we partially roll with it. It is there where we get the problem, some see problems, some do not. I am the one in category two, yet I also have flaws and they show themselves rather quickly. I am the entire opposite of those, I am one who quits as the challenge is gone. It is a basic law, it is stupid, but in 1989 there was a different stage, the BS artists were in charge, I was new, I knew nothing, but I had my 

Nantucket clipper compiler and a book on how to program and within weeks I was ahead of a lot of people.  I was asking container programs, admin programs and I loved it. But it came with an inner flaw. Someone in the cinema world asked me for a solution, I was not thinking like a consultant, because I was self trained, I rejected the offer, not because it was hard, but because it was easy. I had in my mind set the stage and developed the solution in an hour, I saw what was needed and my mind set the stage in minutes. The shows, the cinema’s the date’s, it was the simplest application of Clipper and dBase 3, as such I saw the premise that I was doing all the work and getting almost nothing for it, because people would state that it was too easy, and in those days the rent was due. I leaned a lot over time and I went in a different direction, but the ability to see solutions remained in me. 

So as I am watching the Battlestar Galactica series (again) an idea came to mind, what if the premise of the RPG is changed? What if the game is not one game, but 15? All linked into one massive game, into one large game that is in part driven by the parameters of other gamers? Not just that, but your achievements will be an added parameter for them? Over time your stage will be the overbearing one, but you are not one voice, you are one of a choir and over time you are the choir. As far as I can tell, that has never been done before and even as my idea grasps some idea’s from others, the stage of philosophical drives, the stage of a limited stage is not new. Other games programmed around it, I am considering it to be part of the game. And over that stage we see the ability where we intersect in a much larger stage. Yes, it sounds confusing, me talking about stages, about parameters and about requirements, yet games are like that and we fill in the blanks in stages, the stage of where we play, the stage of where a character is and we have the ability to set a much larger field of play in a  game that could set a new record in gaming in the next console war. 

A stage that has several planets, a stage that is set where we have a formula that creates 15 planets, and you have no idea where you are. This is not for the weak of mind, or those walking around in Minecraft, this is Elder Scrolls Oblivion on a scale that is 15 planets big and we do not set out to gain a flag or to kill a monster, we set out to create a dynasty and that is never a clear sailing premise. I see the solutions that other greats did before this, There was the Ultima series an RPG by Richard Garriott that is something that still drives me and why it was never refurbished in a new coat with new graphics still puzzles me. But they were not alone, there were others, to some perhaps forgotten, but with gems in its coding. Hopefully we will see a remade System Shock soon, yet it was not alone. Whist Ubisoft is all about triggers and respawning enemies, the stage is out there for a different kind of RPG, I believe that the PS5 will open up more options and different sets of games. The problems is not the game, the issue will become where is the IP, who owns it and how can it be staged in different ways. We see series like Westworld and we wonder how it can become a game. There was someone with the Westworld Shelter approach, I never saw it, I would have liked to have seen it, but it was removed before I could see it. This is not a random phrase, the question becomes that in the age we face, sources are limited, so how can we make a game enjoyable, repayable and original without it becoming a mesh of Minecraft and Animal Crossing? Whilst Ubisoft showed us how not to do it, w still need to do it and we need to do it right. It needs a hand that looks outside of what coders look at. We need to consider the creation of a strategy guide before there is a game, so that we can ensure the long term existence of the created game. And to be there for the long term you need to look with different eyes, to see in a different scope. I saw the option of scope when I created the foundation for Elder Scrolls VIII: Restoration, I saw the option of views when I considered Watch Dogs IV: Refugee, it also gave me the idea to set different dimensionalities (there was was an example in System Shock), yet the combining of elements is a much larger stage and it is a different stage. It is not like we go to the theatre, it is the entire block around the building that houses the theatre as well. That is the stage we work from, because when the surroundings are there, that is when we give size to the stage in that theatre. It has always been that way, yet in the past the computers could not deal with that stage, computers are finally catching on and even as the remade Pirates (Sid Meier) was betrayed into a diminished stage and labeled Assassins Creed: Black Flag, does not mean that it was so, we had no reason to give up on a time honoured classic, yet that stage was burned before it flourished. I wonder what we can get done when that is ignored in a future project, what happens, when we have a planet making program like we see in No Mans Sky and we prepare 15 codes, 15 places with enhanced detailing, 15 stages where the plant is the stage, where we are a person in a much larger field and we get to set up the stage of history, I reckon that it has never been done before, not to this degree and not to this reference of options, a stage much larger than ever before and to the degree where we at the end of 200-600 hours want to play it again, so far only Bethesda and CD Project Red have come anywhere near that stage, there is off course GTA5, no one denies that, so out of 2300 game developers, only 3 only got that near, would it not be the right challenge to be one of 10 ever to get that near? It is not a hard question to answer. 

I’ll let you simmer on the question and the questions that will be in your mind at this time.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Gaming

The Price of knowledge

There was an article in the BBC two days ago, I kept it on the side as I wanted the knowledge to sink in. There is optionally nothing wring with the writer, yet the stage is flawed. The stage includes everyones favourite Essay writer with a matching political agenda, It’s Eggy Calamari. Although she apparently uses her altar ego identity Agnes Calamard at 405 East 42nd Street, New York. The article (at https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-53345885) gives us ‘Qasem Soleimani: US strike on Iran general was unlawful, UN expert says’, OK, we are in a stage where we need to differ between what is just and what is lawful, and I get that. Not all just actions are lawful and plenty of lawful actions are not just. That is how it has always has been, so what gives in this case? Well that part is seen with “the US had not provided sufficient evidence of an imminent threat to life to justify the attack”. Are these people for real? Qasem Soleimani was direct threat to Middle East stability every moment he was breathing. This is not some general like most nations have them, this was an absolute virtuoso in the art of terrorism wherever he went. 

So when we see “He was in charge of the Quds Force’s clandestine missions and its provision of guidance, funding, weapons, intelligence, and logistical support to allied governments and armed groups, including Hezbollah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad”, we see that apart from whatever lawful way he had destabilising the Middle East, we also see that he funded three terrorist organisations, namely Hezbollah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad, and that is not enough evidence? These three are a constant threat to imminent threat of life any given day of the week. It seems to me that just like in previous attempts, Agnes Calamard is all about catering to the ‘concerns’ of Iran for some politicians to keep the conversation going for whatever needs these politicians have.

For those who are not in the know of General QS. Let’s take a look. First is 2019, when we consider Iraq, we are given Baghdad: The Iraqi people refuse the pro Iranian personalities”, I will let you guess what happens next, next we see “Soleimani traveled to Iraq aiming to convince various political parties to maintain Mohammed Shia’ Sabbar al-Sudani? as the new candidate for the prime ministry, the Al-Arabiya website reported on December 16. Al-Sudani? is member of the Islamic Dawa Party led by former Iraqi PM Nouri Al-Maleki who is charged with embezzlement, corruption, murder and terrorizing his opponents. al-Sudani? was also a minister in Maleki’s cabinet. Another candidate is Ghosi Al-Sahih. He was a minister in Adel Abdol Mehdi’s cabinet and close to Nouri Al-Maleki. Following his nomination for the PM post, the Iraqi people protested in numerous cities including Baghdad, Naseriyah, Najaf and Basra.” The issues becomes that Qasam Soleimani is not a diplomat, he doesn’t negotiates, he hands out ultimatums and if they do  not know that at the UN, then those people have become slightly less than useless. 

We can go back in time, 2018, 2017, 2016, Qasam Soleimani was there dispersing his brand of justice through the powerful arms of terrorist organisations in the Middle East. That can all be set to the stage of a direct threat to life, an imminent threat to life and an absolute waging of war against civilians. So when we see two botched reports (as I personally see it) against Saudi Arabia, relying on cone cure and ignoring the lack of evidence and now we see her making a black letter law call? I wonder who is paying her ticket, I am not much for conjecture but this is the third case that calls for an investigations into the acts of Agnes Calamard, the fact that this is not happening, implies that certain people require the need for Middle Eastern imbalance and who does that serve? In this economy it actually serves no one but the ones needing funds to go in specific directions for a longer time to come, whilst the need cannot be shown. I would ask the people at Palantir, but they are too busy going public regarding their shares (I am not stating that this is illegal or a bad call).

We can hide behind the price of knowledge, but the actions of Qasam Soleimani are well documented for close to half a century and the opposition got to him before he made a mess of Iraq as well. I reckon that this is the part that upsets them optionally more then taking out the financier of three terrorist organisations, and those are the three we openly know about, there is enough to indicate Qasam Soleimani in dozens of other cases, other fund distributing actions. In most cases he merely approved them, he was not directly involved and we will never find any, including his hands in the entire Yemeni situation, which is interestingly not investigated. Can anyone tell me how 50+ Iranian drones and 200+ Iranian missiles got into Houthi hands without him knowing and approving it? #Just-asking

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Military, Politics