Poised to deliver critique

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

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

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

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

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

Have a great day.

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

Is the media now too corrupt?

That is the question that I saw coming my way (via my brain). I stumbled on an article accusing something bad, in many ways. The issue becomes that there was only ONE source. No one touched the article. Does it make it fake news? Or is the media now so corrupt that Microsoft gets a pass on everything? It is a serious question. You see the story starts with ‘Bombshell allegations that Microsoft is using Chinese employees inside China to oversee DoD, Federal government cloud infrastructure’ after all the anti-China rumbles, they are OK with this? 

The article (at https://lawenforcementtoday.com/bombshell-allegations-that-microsoft-using-chinese-employees-inside-china-to-oversee-dod-federal-government-cloud-infrastructure) gives plenty to worry about. If not Microsoft then at least the media. The setting tarts with “In September 2023, FBI Director Christopher Wray told a conference that China has a “bigger hacking program” than the competition. He warned that Beijing has a “cyber espionage program so vast that it is bigger than all of its major competitors combined.”” And it gets a lot worse after that. We get “Tom Schiller, a senior software developer with a stellar resume, is the CEO of Next Defense, a consultancy agency specialising in Virtual Reality and Artificial Intelligence for defense training. Schiller is a subject matter expert. He reached out to Law Enforcement Today, and what he told us was chilling. He told us of a program hatched between Microsoft and the Obama administration that is directly tied to China and puts our national security in peril.” This is the first setting that the media should have referred to this article. They have no issues copying text on faceless accusations against Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud, but this is not touched? And I waited a fair amount of hours (in case all the media was suddenly asleep). And before you think that this is nothing we get “After the raid, a China-based Microsoft spokesperson emailed, “We’re serious about complying with China’s laws and committed to SAIC’s questions and concerns.” That statement contradicts the Microsoft president’s statement before the House Homeland Security Committee in June 2014, when he said that the Chinese government had previously ordered the company to comply with their laws and probes. He said the Chinese were told that he “was not allowed that and will not.” Schiller also noted that Microsoft has shared source code with China and let them insert their own source code into Microsoft’s proprietary source code. That is a direct contradiction to the Microsoft president’s statement to Congress.” So we get the setting that a key member of Microsoft made a statement to Congress that seemingly is found to be contradictive. Take time to read the article, there is way too much in there and copying the text seems a little overactive, so I am putting a pdf version of that page at the end of the article. So the end does give a hot stick of dynamite. 

We are given “Schiller advised Gimenez that he had alerted the DoD CIO and DISA IG about a possible breach in the US cloud infrastructure. 

In my expert opinion, the breach has significantly compromised all U.S. Government and DoD cloud services, posing a grave ongoing and present danger to our nation’s security and the safety of the American people. He continued to explain to Gimenez Microsoft’s use of “un-cleared Chinese nationals based in China to conduct and control over 90% of the work and support for the Microsoft U.S. Government and DoD cloud environments,” explaining that the “authorisation agreement…was inadequately written, leaving things open-ended and unclarified.” He told Gimenez that “Microsoft has taken full advantage of this and has in turn used to essentially hand over control of the U.S. Sovereign Cloud to China,” adding that this had “actively been going on since around 2016.” Schiller told Gimenez he has “three additional senior-level whistleblowers from the Microsoft U.S. Government and DoD contract who are prepared to testify.” Schiller asked Gimenez to contact him so a complete briefing of facts could take place.” So lets recap the lessons of history. America goes anti China in a heartbeat. It sanctions Huawei (A Chinese company) and tells Europe to stop handing business deals to Huawei and now we see that China is managing the clouds of the Department of Defence and the US Governments? Where is the logic in this? 

And the way the media is silencing this makes even less sense. They weren’t the source and they could have stuck with their usual BS (like inserting words like ‘alleged’ and ‘anonymous sources let us know’) we see non of that and only ONE article comes up in Google Search? This does not make sense. I will not blame Microsoft without ‘evidence’ but this article is a clear setting of time going back to 2022 and no one saw this? 

I wonder if the media suddenly wakes up, their is something amiss in all of this. It is either one side, or the other side. In this scenario there is no non-side. Oh and the source of this piece was Law Enforcement Today, so I would side with the fact that this is a serious stage for the United States, or do we call them the Peoples Republic of America from this forward?

So have a nice day and remember in China they prefer Long Jing tea, you should have some in stock if you are in America.

1 Comment

Filed under IT, Law, Media, Military, Politics

As the situation changes

The Middle East Monitor made me rethink somethings that I gave the audience (read: you). In this article (at https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20240905-saudi-issuing-licences-for-new-airlines/) we see ‘Saudi issuing licences for new airlines’ with the underlying text “A Saudi official said yesterday that the kingdom is working on issuing new licences for airlines to operate within the country. The statement was made by Abdulaziz Al-Duailej, president of the General Authority of Civil Aviation in Saudi Arabia, during his participation in the Egypt International Aviation and Space Exhibition in the Egyptian New Alamein City.” It is a setting that makes sense in a few ways. But as this setting ‘explodes’ the stages of tourism in Saudi Arabia, there is another side to consider. I raised it on the 25th of January 2024 in ‘Those happy dreams’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2024/01/25/those-happy-dreams/) there I have an image

You see, Saudi Arabia might be a little better off changing the service industry, or better stated the way it works. It might have made sense in older western days. Everyone wanted crumbs of the pie, but in this new stage a new system where we see one arrival and one departure, the NICE (an Israeli system) approach used in their cloud solution makes more sense and as such an Arabic designed system that has a cloud approach to tourism as well as a new ‘decentralised’ system might make a lot of sense. Consider that Saudi Arabia has the following settings either already there or coming soon. Trojena, Sindalah, Magna,  and Medina. After this we get the links with the UAE and Egypt. That is a multitude of hundreds of thousands of tourists. It will require a whole new way of doing business. Not the side of cashing in. It requires a new way of infrastructure, and Tourism is for the most replicating the same idea over and over again. It the past it made sense, in this setting it does not. They can all make claims that it is the way to do business. I disagree, this is how I saw the image in January. In the lower left the Arrival box and in the upper right the Departure box. In between there is nothing (at present), The setting is changing however. In stead of all replicating the same stage, have everyone access the same cloud, but with the difference that the customer is central in all this. The tourist will not have to register a multitude of ways, over and over again. They are in a cloud and everyone with the a booking for that tourist will have access to that tourist’s records and they can add their settings. 

In the end the tourist had to register mostly once, the rest will have the records and they can add their parts, a link in the record base with the reference to their own system where they can keep their records secure. There is still works that needs doing, but I had years in mind to evolve this antiquated system. Now as we see that “Saudi saw a surge in tourism in 2023, with around 27 million international visitors spending over 100 billion riyals, while domestic tourist numbers reached 77 million.” A new tourist recording stage made by Saudi’s and it is all in local hands. A new system that caters to the Arabians, and those who do not want it, will have to find another way to make money. As this setting gets developed we see that Saudi Arabia, the UAE and optionally Egypt get a new system with the tourist in the centre. In the second sight is that intelligent LLM models will be catering to the specific person, the data will be more up to date and more to the point of the tourist. I foresee that this new system will break borders in many ways and whilst some will sell an ‘AI’ system for the tourist, whilst merely braking even for the caterer in that system. This system will actually have one tourist in mind. The one it is catering too. I came to that conclusion over 6 months ago. Now that the borders are moved to include millions more tourists, this system will be clearly superior as it caters to that person, or that family in a stage that it aligns all new places. 

As I see the article in the Middle East Eye, the situation I drew came up again. A setting that is drawn from the tourist, not the hotel or flight event. There are still hurdles. Like how can this system align with other systems? My question becomes ‘How can we make things easier for the tourist?’ You see, in the next 10 years we can either address this or se the tourist go the path of comfort and that is where this approach can make a change for thousands of tourists. The centre piece in this is that the tourist is on a vacation, they want comfort and that can be approached by giving them a different ride towards their initial destination and beyond.

You see, the larger tourist group wants a unique view on their entire trip and Saudi Arabia (as well as the UAE) are delivering it to a lager degree. Now it is time to set the stage to a complete overhaul and 2030 is a mere 8 years away. If Saudi Arabia gets to have the other venues as well (Olympics to name but one) it will have to consider this larger change now or face near inhumane pressure points on several occasions. You can address the venue on its own or cater to a system that can reduce pressures all over. It would also call in a national call centre that takes care of all venues from a few points. I see opportunities all over, but I realise that there would be initial design flaws (from my side). It becomes a larger issue when some will see reason to drown this idea as they see a failing revenue point for them. In this I call to a place like Ticketmaster. How hard was their start until venues started to trust their setting? It could be a genuine opportunity for Saudi Arabia to guide and light the way to countries like the China, UAE, Egypt and Indonesia. And when more countries align to that setting the tourist industry gets a real overhaul optionally gaining more and more countries to that way of thinking.

Have a great day.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Tourism

Your (starting) fame on timing

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

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

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

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

So hop to it and gain your fame I say.

1 Comment

Filed under IT, Science

The cake is in the oven

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

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

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

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

Have a great day preferably not glowing in the dark.

Leave a comment

Filed under Military, Politics, Science

The Saudi Dissent

There is a premise, the utter need of the so called utter mighty to be kept in check. That is not a new saying, it goes back to the days of the roman empire. Some refer to this as ‘power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely’ This is to a larger stage true for all christian based governments. As first piece of evidence I would like to submit the Treaty of Clermont 1094, it set the beginning of the crusades under Pope Urban II. There are examples that go deep into the Roman Empire days with one year having 4 Roman emperors. But this example is the setting we get from a derivation of that saying, but more stated as ‘power corrupts, wannabe powers corrupt a lot quicker’. This is the premise and with this we get to the BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4gz8934wrro) The piece has a setting of baloney (as the phrase goes) and with “We were surprised that there was a royal decree to allow the ground interventions,” Jabri says. “He forged the signature of his dad for that royal decree. The king’s mental capacity was deteriorating.” It is a stage where I left the article for the most, but as we now see this being copied all over the western media. It is time to take up the baton calling the media on their BS. You see, what evidence is there? Is it Saad al-Jabri? He is both an alleged traitor and alleged thief. For this I need to take you back to another article I wrote in 2020 (August 11th) in ‘The 51st State’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2020/08/11/the-51st-state/), I had an issue with him then. The media never caught on it seems. The first was the quote

We then get :

This should have given us the setting that we need to dissect anything the man gives us especially as there is a realistic chance that the Government of Saudi Arabia has a sore feeling about the west being a speaking platform for people like that. If there was ANY evidence, we were not given it and that stage has been around for over 4 years (at present)

Then we get to 2021, the eighth of December in ‘Six of one’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2021/12/08/six-of-one/) There we get a few items, like

As well as:

Now we get the first bullet (as the saying goes), these interviews are 4 years old, at no time was there a mention of forged signatures. And this was after 4 years of Yemeni atrocities by Houthi terrorists. So I have issues. Is this some drip-drip intelligence setting? If so, the US and its CIA, as well as the NSA have been sleeping at the wheel and this in pushed onto CSIS territory. 

He did more interviews, as far as I remember the Toronto Star, the BBC, CBC and Wall Street Journal. They all dropped the ball on journalism and now the Times is following them. I have an issue with an alleged criminal with these transgressions to get such a speaking platform. Now, there could be a case that there is evidence and I think that this needs to be shown. Oh, and I have some jealousy issues with any governmental person gets to go home with well over $385,000,000, we all would have that. Perhaps a little more transparency by the CIA would have helped that these positions of government have such pay checks. It as that simple a setting and the CIA should have seen that. These simple ad-hoc statements without evidence is something the media should know better that to merely accept them. It gives the nasty vibe that they are doing the work of governments making Saudi Arabia look bad. It is somewhat of a repetition that Clermont give us in 1094. Didn’t we basically went on a pilferage there, calling it pilgrimage? That was over 1000 years ago and we are still seeing the fallout from that event.

In a ‘fair’ space Saudi Arabia might decide to lower the delivery of oil to Europe and America by 100,000 barrels a day each and offer that to China for the same amount (no real reason that it should cost Saudi Arabia). I reckon China will happily agree and Europe as well as America? Well, you made a platform for a alleged thief and alleged traitor (the display of evidence towards the forged autograph will prove that part). I reckon that these two places will implode a lot faster then they thought. 

That is merely my oversimplification of the Gordian knot. Sometimes it is just better to burn what its tying. As people will shout that I am wrong. This is fair enough, but they opened the door of spouting news without evidence or justification. The interviews going back to 2020 are online and visible. So where is the mention? There is no stage of ‘it was complex’ a non-monarch is accused of forging the monarchs signature. In the western world that is high treason and in the near past they hung people for that (see: Nuremberg trials).

Oh before I forget, I just uncovered a wannabe mole in the CIA. Can I collect please? I know it will not be $385,000,000. Yet a $38,500,000 fee is reasonable (I think). It allows me my apartment in Toronto and a house in Golden Oaks Orlando. So I can celebrate an abundant retirement in Disney World and Universal world (both in Orlando). There is an option that the CIA will object to(fair enough), but then they should give us the evidence, don’t you agree? Lets not forget that the US courts did not allow the Saudi lawyers to present evidence in their courts. Turnabout is such a nasty feeling when you become the object of evidence. 

Still, have a great day. As the Vancouverians are joining us in this Tuesday, the whole planet is now aligned to the same day. Enjoy.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Military

A secondary marker

This is about markers and my speculation on them. I would go towards presumption, but in this instance might have the folly thought that these markets haven’t evolved since 1982 and that would indeed be folly. Still, an article in the South China Morning Post aka SCMP (at https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-economy/article/3276753/saudi-arabia-seeks-chinese-tech-it-reinvents-itself-car-and-automation-hub) where we see ‘Saudi Arabia seeks Chinese tech as it reinvents itself as car and automation hub’ and this goes against Trumpism to seek 60% tariff on Chinese imports. Well, China has its own solution to this. As we are given “Saudi industry and mineral resources minister Bandar Alkhorayef is leading a delegation to visit Guangzhou, Hong Kong and Singapore from Sunday until September 8, according to a statement from his office. The trip is aimed at improving relations and exploring joint venture opportunities.” 

The setting is given, but it doesn’t seem all is given (as one could accept). You see I got news (slightly unreliable) that there was a trade show recently where China had given a presentation to Arabic parties. This seems perfectly normal, the fact that Norinco is part of that seems normal enough, its a defence contractor dream and they are all hungry for Arabic dineros (aka digital currency). The parts that we do not see here is that this Chinese tech is a lot more versatile, or better stated far reaching. It implies that the tech allows Saudi Arabia to manufacture Tiger armoured vehicles with a deployment to the customers in Oman, Bahrain and Egypt to name just three. Saudi Arabia is fulfilling its promise to cater to internal manufacturing their defence needs and gain customers at the same time. As such Trumps goals are missed completely as well as losing out their own industry towards export. See how all these blocks of censorship come tumbling down? And as we take notice that Chinese is no good. Feast your eyes on this “China lacks the necessary international standards to be considered a reliable producer of foolproof weaponry” according to Euclides Tapia, professor of International Relations at the University of Panama. Yet the thing to remember is that the setting of “necessary international standards” is not clearly given and a standard that is filtered to who can be given those reminds me of the SAS standard in the 90’s ‘SAS stamp of quality’ which SAS products got. A little one sided. Still no matter what these ‘standards’ are, America, UK and the EU nations are missing out on another set of billions to the degree that now Saudi Arabia is also becoming a manufacturing party. As such the Americans woke up to a hungry tiger. With allegedly Huawei scoring the option of communication systems deployed all over Saudi Arabia both civilian and military (still unverified) we see a better relationship between Saudi Arabia and China with several middle easters nations now following suit. I reckon that Egypt is the first and most likely player to get on board with that express line. Norinco seemingly had a net income of $1.7B in 2023 with a little over $80B revenue. 

I reckon that they are hungry for more revenue, especially as in increases their net revenue and as I see it, the Saudi link get them there fast. Is it wishful thinking? Is it presumption or speculation? All great questions and yes, there is a speculative side to this. Now consider that you have a car plant, would it be such a stretch to build a second one to get the orders for the Tiger armoured vehicles? I don’t think so, especially when we consider the 2030 promise to get 50% of the defence spending in country (as was given to us 2 years ago). That one thing will not get them there, but there is more coming and this is a whopper of a delivery towards their 2030 goal.

As such there are things that need verification, or we could wait until these plants become a reality in an expected 2026 stage. So what do you think? I believe that Chinese commerce will find a way to thrive and the Trump setting made is much easier as well as make things harder for Europe. This is the consequence of arrogance when you do not have the cash to back up your actions and America and western Europe are about to learn just how much they lose out of (as per 2026/2027). So how will Norinco stock fare when this gets released?

Have a great day.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Military

Congestification

OK, I admit that the word seemingly does not exist (at present), but it could be. It reflects on our needs to get things done in a rush, a setting that invites a congestive setting, usually in traffic. A bottleneck setting if you like. That is what the Khaleej Times (at https://www.khaleejtimes.com/uae/transport/uae-traffic-would-an-odd-even-scheme-help-ease-peak-hour-jams) sets with ‘UAE traffic: Would an ‘odd-even scheme’ help ease peak-hour jams?’ Invites to. There is an even less nice issue that those who can afford 2 cars can take turns with car they would use. 

In the dozen of so images I saw, there was one stage that did not show its nice little snout. It is the setting that one lane is reserved for busses (and emergency vehicles). Not in all the images I saw is there a bus lane showing. I know too little about Dubai to know how (or if) bus lanes are used. But that is a first that came to mind. That setting might nudge more and more car drivers to public transport. And as far as I know Dubai public transportation is really good and a lot more affordable than either Sydney or London (the one in the UK). They already have a great subway system (I saw it on YouTube), but bus lanes might be a nice stage as well. And the second part is that if you are in that traffic jam for a few hour and you see bus after bus passing you by, the inner drive to get the bus might increase. I know it is not a complete solution, but if congestion decreases by a mere 10%, it could be seen as an ad-hoc solution for Dubai and Abu Dhabi (not sure if they have a congestion problem at present). Dubai has at present a little over 3.6 million people, as such it is not the most dense city (not by a long shot) but it has a decent population. And in the United Arab Emirates with 10 million people. 40% is in Dubai and 40% is in Abu Dhabi, as such a solution for both seems essential. My personal favourite would be the bus lanes to show the car users that public transportation in some cases would be preferred (by the people) and it would grant emergency services a lane in case of congestion. That two birds and one stone symbolism. The fact that public transport is already a good option in the UAE might drive the bus lane option faster. I get that some would like to relax in the traffic jam sitting cozy in a Rolls Royce Spectre, Bugatti whatever, or a Ferrari thingamajig. But there are only so many people who could even afford one of these three bad boys. And with (additional) busses in the mix, congestion might soon be a thing of the past. And when people arrive at work refreshed from the bus ride. 

The equation seemingly solves additional problems as well. A simple setting to an overly complex problem as I see it. Will it solve all? I doubt it, but if it lowers congestion, the real question becomes, is the problem solved to an adequate level? That is the question that lingers. And the solution lies in creating two additional lanes (one for each direction) on one road where there is enough congestion. I think that it is a solution worth exploring. If it isn’t a solution, that part of the road ends up with two additional lanes. Optional an additional path to lowering congestion. 

Well, that is my Saturday with an optional solution set on paper. Now just one more thing to work on today. Have a great weekend.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media

If you Musk, you Musk

That setting is a much larger setting then we realise. The BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c5y3rnl5qv3o) gives us ‘Musk’s X banned in Brazil after disinformation row’ and I honestly don’t get it. He has the premise of gaining billions closing in on a trillion in business. We get to see “X, formerly Twitter, has been banned in Brazil after failing to meet a deadline set by a Supreme Court judge to name a new legal representative in the country” and that is merely the beginning. Judge Alexandre de Moraes has suspended X (aka Twitter) until that is done and in addition Musk sets all fines that are outstanding. I have no idea how much that amounts to. The larger premise is that Musk is sitting on IP that could gain him close to a trillion, if only these people had woken up. The current setting is that this case could invigorate a much larger anti-Musk stage and Twitter (aka X) could be banned from a whole range of nations with anti-Musk feelings. That is not a given, but Brazil just opened that door. Basically any nation with a right wing nuisance could entertain that premise diminishing Twitter and as such Jack Dorsey could buy back X/Twitter for 125 million after selling it for $44,000,000,000 not a bad deal for a 3 year gap. I surmised that it was only worth a maximum of 24 billion at that time. As such Jack Dorsey could be making a killing on the deal whilst the value of that company doubles in the first month he regains control. They say that a foolish billionaire and his money are soon parted, but here that expression takes on a whole new meaning.

And it got so far because Twitter/X, Meta and Telegram because they would not set the larger premise. There needs to be accountability and they all were eager to avoid those. Now we see that social media is being thumped on by a whole range of governments. There is such a think as accountability. I already said so in 2013, now we see that governments have had enough and this first case is likely to open the floodgates. 

If is an attack on free speech? No, I do not believe it is so. People should have free speech, but not under the guise of anonymity. If you disagree, say so, but the digital world sees a lot more flames and digital waves when they can say things without revealing themselves. It is the stopgap for chaos to spread their wings. The media has everything to do with this and they are equally guilty (like ‘unnamed sources told us’). So when was that at any time a long standing solution?

Now Elon Musk is cutting his own fingers and soon the solution he had for the world will be largely ignored, and if accepted there will be massive constraints, which would cost him up to 20% from what he could have had. In my book 20% is a lot and when you get close to a trillion it is a lot more than I have ever seen (many like me have that setting).

There is another side to this. At this point Mastodon, Reddit, Threads, Bluesky, Discord, Tumblr, and Truth Social will get to have a place to gain market share against the accounts of Twitter/X. It might not be much, but it is a start. As more nations follow suit there places will gain momentum whilst Twitter/X could she well over 10% of the accounts and even when reinstated, the time gives the others time to get the advertisement revenue that Musk losses. So how will he bring that news to the people who invested in that 44 billion dollar caper? They want to see cash and when that doesn’t come Elon Musk must put up his own cash or lose a lot more. That wasn’t hard was it?

And with the early threat that Musk is pulling out of Europe (October 2023). It becomes an early grave for Twitter. China has its own settings and that will become an increasing pressure whilst one person (aka Elon Musk) gets to live with the invoked byline ‘2022-2025 where has my $44,000,000,000 gone’. A weird setting for a person who at one time had the products that everyone on the planet wanted. 

The higher the climb the harder they fall. Enjoy your day

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Law, Media, Politics

Awareness is fuel to any cause

That is the skeptical look I have. You see social media is a flammable stage of all kinds of woke and non woke commitments. Some are real and most aren’t very real in the mindset of anyone else. I am not belittling any ‘cause’ but that is how I feel. We get exposure to a million and one causes and they are the settings for a mere speculated 100,000 people. Everyone has a cause and most of them have a dozen causes. I will not bother you with the amount of influencers touching on any cause that helps THEM get more visibility. It is a crackpot mix of people at times. So when I saw the Middle East Eye give us ‘How the UAE crushes dissent by arbitrarily revoking citizenship’, I became a little more aware. The opinion story (at https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/how-uae-crushes-dissent-arbitrarily-revoking-citizenship) gives us the link to UAE President Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan with the stage that he is pictured in Abu Dhabi on 6 December 2023 is a nice touch, but he is not mentioned in the opinion piece, not even once. So why is his picture there? Then we get to the MENA group, which is mentioned once “A report by the Mena Rights Group, published last month, exposed the extensive and troubling nature of this trend”, as such I have questions. With the “the extensive and troubling nature it is the first mention I see of this. We see the mention “3 March 2011, when 133 Emirati academics, judges, lawyers, students and human rights defenders signed a petition addressed to the president of the UAE and the Federal Supreme Council, calling for democratic reforms”. As such there are seemingly mentions of this since 2011 and this I the first time I hear of it? There is no visible mention of the MENA rights group in Al Jazeera or Arab News, as such I have questions on the validity of this. We see the mention of “Many affected by this practice are either defendants in the “UAE84” trial or their family members. With a reference that it was “politically motivated and marred by fair trial violations.” As such I raise questions. You see, if that was the case, would it not be in nearly every Muslim writing from Al Jazeera to Arab News, not to mention the Guardian, BBC and a whole range of American woke news casts? Then we get to one of the writers of the opinion piece Jenan al-Marzooqi. Is that a relative of the accused Ibrahim al-Marzooqi? It might be, but I do not know this. The opinion piece is largely a one sided mention relying on the MENA Rights group who was founded in 2018 in Geneva. I would think that if it was an actual counted group a whole range of newspapers (western and Arabic) would have made mention of it, perhaps they did, but this is the first I see of this.

We then see the mention of “citizenship revocation be applied under the principle of proportionality – a principle that was clearly disregarded in this case.” With the word proportionality referring to the link (at https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/newyork/Documents/Human-Rights-Responses-to-Foreign-Fighters-web_final.pdf) a United Nations document. This is funny, but when you read the document the reference is toward “American Convention on Human Rights, art. 20.” A serious notion, if it was not for the setting that this is playing not in America. With the stage of “deprivation of nationality must be in conformity with domestic law” we get an issue, but I am not sure it is an important one. I am not the expert on Emirati law, a setting not raised in this case. That document also gives us “Some States also allow the deprivation of nationality for naturalised mono-nationals, thereby leaving them stateless.” Is that the case in UAE law? If it is the opinion piece becomes largely pointless, if they only had thought of including that point in the opinion piece. Add to this “In July 2016, five of his six children travelled to the US for medical treatment.” Really? 5 of his 6 children? All for medical treatment? It could be, but this one liner gives a serious boost to disregarding this piece (in my humble opinion). And when we get “concluded last month with at least 43 defendants sentenced to life in prison on bogus terrorism charges” where the word ‘bogus’ is a personal view by the opinion writer and could be ignored. You see if it was serious, that line was accompanied with at least one paragraph addressing that setting, giving optional weight to the word ‘bogus’.

The more I read of this article, the more I wonder what Middle East Eye had in mind with this opinion piece. I am not saying it is invalid, it is an opinion piece after all. Validity is given through evidence, or at least that is what I have always believed. Validity and verification go hand in hand. At the end we see one answer and two more linked names. 

  • Jenan al-Marzooqi is a human rights activist and the daughter of Emirati prisoner of conscience Abdulsalam Mohammed Darwish al-Marzooqi
  • Estelle Allemann is a legal fellow at MENA Rights Group
  • Alexandra Tarzikhan is the legal adviser for Southwest Asia and North Africa with the American Bar Association Center for Human Rights.

All very neat, so we have one MENA Rights Group waving their hand for visibility, one activist and a legal adviser linked to the American Bar Association Center for Human Rights.

I would have thought that 2 of them would have created a much better piece. This gets me to the issue of what were they after? You see, I do have legal training, but I am not a lawyer, I have been a Trade Mark Attorney. And as I see it, there are all kinds of verifications missing. Basically, there is no indiction that anything illegal (according to UAE law) was done, or at least the article does not clearly shows this. I did not completely ready the links to the other articles. When a case is made in THIS opinion piece, you have to present the evidence in THIS opinion piece, not link to it. Even if you merely quote it. I feel that more and more media (news and other media) are making a mess of things. They all have to get to the news and opinion pieces faster and as such they create short cuts and deprive the readers of a complete view of the matter, whether it is an opinion piece of now and a legal adviser, as well as a Human Rights person would (or at least should) know this.

We all create awareness, mostly to fuel the fire that lights us. This is not wrong, especially in this social networking world. We have always done this to some degree, but now we have merely increased the visibility of us. Whether that is a good thing remains to be seen. If there is one winner it is the MENA rights group, they got the most visibility here.

Have a lovely day. My Friday starts in 26 minutes.

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media, Politics