Tag Archives: ABC

A fair call

I have been outspoken in the past on the US Administration speaking out on things they hardly understand, more specifically the nuts and fruits division (aka US Senate and US Congress), yet this morning I got confronted with one of such calls and I find it hard to disagree. The article that I initially saw on ABC (at https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-11-09/google-facebook-banking-senate-inquiry-fintech/12856080) where we get told ‘Senate inquiry asks whether Facebook, Google should be regulated like banks’ is the foundation of a much larger stage, and in the I find it weird that Apple is not named either. You see the quote “The inquiry — which in September handed down an interim report into other issues including regulation of buy now, pay later platforms such as Afterpay and Zip — is now examining whether it is dangerous to have large tech giants offering banking or other financial services”, is more than simply on the money, there is a whole range of services pushed and prodded towards consumers, if anything, the fact that players are faced with games like Gardenscape who continue their deceptive advertising trough games is a mere indication of how bad it could get. There is a basic level of protection that consumers are entitled to and as I personally see it they will not be getting it. 

Now, if these tech providers want to facilitate financial services whilst their services are not linked and behind a Chinese wall, isolating data and speculative insight away from the financial services it is one thing, it would level the playing field with the other providers. Yet in it current stage that setting is indeed extremely unbalanced, unbalanced towards their competitors and more important it will be unbalanced for the consumers who need a honest chance. 

So whilst we are getting treated to “Senator Bragg says our personal data has become an asset and the tech giants could be regulated so they use it fairly”, my response towards Andrew Bragg is that he is wrong, or perhaps incorrect is a much better word here, it is not regulation, it is isolation from internal and external data sources. Which means that if Banco Googly wants to extent a loan to Jack the Keyboard Hammer for a $99 new keyboard, they will have to do their own due diligence and use the methods the other banks and financial services have. That is the only way to keep level playing field. 

Now, player like Google Facebook and Apple might claim that the data link will allow cheaper loans, the might optionally be true, but when you get to the other side of the seesaw, and the seesaw is down for you, the data links might give you less options or more expensive options for the longest of times and the would not be fair. In that regard, have you ever seen ANY financial institution who set your wellbeing over their need for profit, please give me their name, because the alleged law firm known as Mandacious, Dissembling and Sneaky, who will inform you that there are leagues of financial institutions the always have your wellbeing at heart, all whilst you know that there are none that actually do. 

So, yes, I do believe the these tech giant have a much larger drive to own more and more money and there is nothing wrong with the, but they are doing it with a massive unfair advantage leaving banks with the empty jar of watered down milk as tech giants get to skim the cream of every milk delivery, it would be an unfair advantage, with larger implications when they start connecting financial data to the data the they already have, it would be a stage where we get a larger segregation of those who have versus those who have not. A stage that Dutch Journalist and tech savvy person Luc Sala warned us all against in the late 80’s, so 30 years ago he saw this level of segregation through technology, and when did personal segregation EVER have positive consequences? Ask the African Americans, the US Latino’s, optionally Native American Indians. Ask them what positive result they saw from segregation. Oh, and by the way good luck getting out of the room alive when you ask. 

Yet there is a larger stage the Google, Apple and Facebook will face and they already have the larger pieces in place to avoid them, as such regulation does not solve anything, it merely gives rise to legal loopholes, as I personally see it, the segregation of those services is the only decently clean and complete stage the void a lot of traps (most of them, not all), there is a larger stage where Google, Apple, Facebook and Amazon (yup they are in it too) can set the stage of offering testing data, but the should only be allowed if that data is open to all financial institutions and for the same price. You see, they are not alone, that field has has layers like Equifax, TransUnion, Dun & Bradstreet, LexisNexis and a few more, as such there is a stage where their data has more unequal benefits, which is interesting, the article never mentioned them, so whilst some are amazed by people like Andrew Bragg and their PowerPoint voice, yet the data keepers the re out in the field now are not on the ticket here, it seems weird as they have been around and their impact is not to be ignored, so why did Andrew Bragg miss that? 

And the final quote is “Senator Bragg calls it a “game changer”, although critics have pointed out that without careful consideration, it could have serious privacy implications, among other concerns”, so what is his game, when we see ‘serious privacy implications’, I merely wonder who is buttering his bread, because the few I mentioned have a much larger impact, one the is never to be ignored and they have been involved in the financial industry almost forever setting the bar of allowed data versus insincere, or unjust data, a term that should have been in the article as well. You see the unequal field is created by some having more data as well as second degree data. Second degree, or secondary data is where it is at. We can consider that Secondary data refers to data, collected by someone other than the user. Yet what is the case is that these sources of secondary data is often collected for other means and other settings, like social science which includes censuses, information collected by government ad commercial departments for other means; organisational records and data that was originally collected for other research purposes, research purposes that are now reused without the users knowledge. And that is beside the station that some of this data is cleaned badly, and often linked to settings the are no longer relevant, yet they are there connected to a user setting an unrealistic view and optionally ignoring the setting that the created debt is false. The person will soon learn the he/she cannot pay it back, or it is rated as just that little more expensive. 

All stations that players like Experian and Dunn & Bradstreet arm against, for their needs as well as the good of the people. These tech giants are nowhere near the level of clean (and optionally corrected) data. As such there is a fair call to disallow these tech giants their Fintech arm, unless it is completely isolated from their other business arms.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Politics

The end of denial

It is true, we all face it and when we do it is not always a pretty moment. I am no exception to this. It happens at some point of revelation or the consideration that I finally figure out a factor that others and I myself too had not considered. Before that it all made sense, yet after that moment and after we banged our own heads to a desk, the wall (a hardened surface) we get the thoughts “How could I have been this dim”, “WTF was I thinking” or the more popular “I have to start from scratch”, the last one is important in this. You see, most think that a mere course correction can fix this, and for the most that would be correct, yet there is the part we all ignore to take “If I forgot one element, what are the chances I forgot two?” You think it is that easy, but it is not. You see the first forgotten part could easily hide the second part and realising that is important. That is the stage that is illuminated by ‘The worst is yet to come’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2020/09/06/the-worst-is-yet-to-come/), even as I did not mention it there, the stage of escalations and even as I tipped on the stage with “other numbers give us “4,114,773”, the number is 50% off and that is merely the beginning. India might be the most visible one, but there is no way that they are the only one. There is yet more, it cannot be given full credibility”, it is a stage we go through and the confirmation became more visible as the day to day known infections raced towards 400K cases a day and on October 23 it stopped at 490K cases a day. I also observed “I believe there is a whole range of those with the Coronavirus and those who died of it are not counted for whatever reason. There is no blame here, the US and other nations had not been confronted with this situation for 100 years. The stage was never ready for this and with the bulk of all nations in a budget crunch it will not be resolved”, which is a larger truth in all this. And today the BBC gives us ‘Trump’s chief of staff admits US cannot control pandemic’, whether this is a ‘come clean moment’ or an ‘end denial moment’ doesn’t really matter, it is too late for some stage of ‘setting a solution’. Yet there we also see the next stage of denial. When we see “White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows said Covid-19 could only be defeated by “mitigation areas” like vaccines and therapeutics”, this sounds nice in theory, yet there is no vaccine, anyone making a claim to the otherwise is lying to you. The Australian ABC now gives us, 12 hours ago ‘Why is the Government now saying it could take up to 12 months to roll out a coronavirus vaccine in Australia?’ The answer is simple, there is no vaccine, you can plan and make ideas for rolling out a vaccine in early 2021, but if there is no vaccine, it is merely a spreadsheet with dates. And that is the realisation that everyone wants you to forget. ABC acknowledges this with “depending on which candidate is ultimately successful” because the party giving us the vaccine is still unknown, they are all fighting to be the best, merely because the reward (money) is too appealing. So what on earth is making industry Minister Karen Andrews say “medical company CSL and CSIRO are equipped to quickly manufacture a “protein-based” vaccine — like the type being developed by the University of Queensland”, quickly manufacture what? There is no vaccine and the quicker we realise this the better we are off. Optionally 4% of the world population WILL die, that gives us that funeral directors will need access to up to 320 million caskets. OK, that was wrong and an exaggeration, plenty will opt for cremation. And my setting is only correct for as long as the 4% mortality rate holds up, when that escalates the numbers will really go up, having your money stuck in Wall Street will see its balance melt away like snow in a heatwave. 

The BBC comment I really likes was “He added that Mr Meadows’ comments showed that the Trump administration had “given up on their basic duty to protect the American people”, it sets a new stage in the US, the people intentionally opting not to wear a mask are now in a stage where they could optionally be held liable for endangering the lives of others and law firms will be quick to coin in on that too. This will not hold in rural places, but in Los Angeles, San Francisco, Seattle, Chicago, Philadelphia, Washington DC, New York, and Boston? Yes, there we see a larger problem and the American people will have to choose between wearing a mask (a wise decision) or become optionally the subject of prosecution, in civl and possibly even criminal court. Because this too is the consequence of ‘given up on their basic duty to protect’, it is part of a blame game, when a person cannot point at the government, he or she will seek an alternative and suing is quite popular in America. As such I also feel vindicated in some form, I saw this coming months earlier and when we see “control of the virus was not a realistic goal because “it is a contagious virus just like the flu”” This stage was pretty clear 10 months ago, so why did the US administration set the bar to unrealistic goals? The article ends with a question mark. It is seen with “Speaking to the BBC on Sunday, top US infectious disease expert Dr Anthony Fauci said a Covid-19 vaccine could be available in the US before the end of the year if one proved to be “safe and effective”, but that the first doses would go to people in order of priority. He said it would take “several months into 2021” before the vaccine was more widely available.” There is a large question mark here, mainly because THERE IS NO VACCINE! It is the largest setting in this. I have no intent (or knowledge levels) to go up against Dr. Fauci and it is the stage that we need to see, because the BBC gives us “could be available”, as well as “if one proved to be” the application of ‘could’ and ‘if’, a ‘What-if’ stage with optional parameters and that is not a safe stage to be on. The rest makes sense priority cases first, and optional distribution after but the larger stage is not that distribution will come, but when it will come, there is no vaccine at present and every week it is not out, the distribution will slowly but certainly move towards the second half of 2021. And it is not merely me saying this, ABC gave us 4 days ago “First COVID vaccines on track for early-to-mid next year”, they give us the inclusion of mid next year, a realistic stage, but one that is driven by availability. And that is one of two factors. When the vaccine is a fact, how long do you think it will take to make 2 billion doses? And in this what else will surface? No matter how safe it seemingly is, the stage cannot be managed to make it safe to ALL, anyone who relies on that is plainly stupid. Even as a setting of 100 gave one person who got complications (and seemingly overcame them) it is not a given, we cannot speculate on a 100% success rate, it is short sighted and foolish. 

In September I wrote ‘the worst is yet to come’ and we are nowhere near that stage, so as idiot media (like the Daily Telegraph) create fear with ‘Australians kept in the dark on rollout of a COVID vaccine’, or given false hope with ‘Donald Trump’s advisor claims COVID vaccine will be ready by November’ (all within the last 10 hours), we need to accept one truth, there is at present NO VACCINE, when there is no vaccine there is no viable plan for a rollout, you see a vaccine needs mass production first, so there is that too. Yet, feel free to rely on that stupid fuck Chris Evans (the editor, not the actor). And when the vaccine is finalised in march 2021 (or after that), who will he blame for the articles? 

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Politics, Science

Is avoidance & evasion the same?

The stage has been set from the very beginning, Ghislaine Maxwell is out and there is a firing squad, she had hoped that it is was all going towards Epstein, but he offed himself, or so they say. So at this point there is the setting where Ghislaine Maxwell is out and in front and the firing squad wants its day, it want to fire bullets, so that they can say “I was in a firing squad”, yet the setting is less simple and when we see the deposition, we see more than we want, from the very beginning. From the very beginning those who read closer to what is actually said will see that Ghislaine Maxwell was well prepared, perhaps too prepared. I understand, this does not make sense to you, so let’s show you.

The very first question towards the girls involved is:

Q. When did you first recruit a female to work for Mr. Epstein? 

This is followed by the immediate response:

MR. PAGLIUCA: I object to the form and foundation of the question. I believe this is confidential information. I ask anyone who is not admitted in this case be excused from the room, please. 
MS. McCAWLEY: So the response to that question would — 
MR. PAGLIUCA: The subject matter of this question is confidential and I’m designating it as confidential.
 

As we see here, her attorney labelled the information ‘I’m designating it as confidential

This is the light in which this deposition sets, As I personally see it, there is a larger play at work, I would presume that the attorney has a view on a much larger playing area. This is further exposed  after certain parties are expelled from the room. 
Q: So Ms. Maxwell, when did you first female to work for Mr. Epstein? 
MR. PAGLIUCA: Again. I object to form and foundation of the question.
Q. You can answer the question. 

A. First of all, can you please clarify the question. I don’t understand what you mean by female, I don’t understand what you mean by recruit. Please be more clear and specific about what you are suggesting.

And we see more of this

Q. How old was the youngest female you ever hired to work for Jeffrey? 
MR. PAGLIUCA: Object to the form and foundation. 
Q. You can answer.
A. I have not any idea exactly of the youngest adult employee that I hired for Jeffrey. 
Q. When you say adult employee, did you ever hire someone that was under the age of 18?
A. Never 

This deposition is filled, filled to the brim of avoidance and evasionary tactics, Ghislaine Maxwell was indeed well prepared and the part you just saw is also the gravy of the train, if any of the ladies were ever under 18, that is the ballgame and she knows it, more importantly her attorneys do. This is not someone who cared, this is not someone who cared about the protection of children, and in this ABC does an even better job. They give the audience “Ms McCawley persists and asks Ms Maxwell, in different forms, a further 27 times if she believed Epstein sexually abused minors. Among Ms Maxwell’s responses were lines about how she believed Ms Giuffre was a liar and that she was not aware why Epstein had gone to jail in 2008. Epstein was originally convicted of securing and procuring an underage girl for prostitution in a plea deal that has been widely criticised” (at https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-10-23/ghislaine-maxwells-secret-jeffrey-epstein-documents-unsealed/12806036)

The fact that the same question was asked 28 times and evaded shows a larger stage and this deposition is merely one of a few pieces of paper to set the stage that her time is up, there is only so much the people will allow for and she knows this, even if she claims that she does not. So when we read: “Prosecutors will argue she lied when she gave the deposition released today when she denied knowing of Epstein’s alleged crimes”, you see the larger stage is not merely the fact tht she lied, if any of these questions, questions she evaded 27 times show that she lied, the prosecutor will have made a stage of intent, and that is a much larger setting in court, it will be the largest setting towards the 35 years in prison, a place she will not leave alive, so we see Ghislaine as a wounded animal trying to get out of the trap she laid for herself, a trap that sprung when someone allowed Jeffrey Epstein to commit suicide, because that too is still under review. So when we see “I never observed Jeffrey having sex with a minor”, whether true or not will not matter, if a minor was there and there is enough showing that she allegedly hired this person, or knew of this person, we have a stage where she is almost quite literally in the doghouse. Because either she hired the minor, or she knows who did and that is what she is seemingly desperate to avoid. Her having to point at someone else, if that person can enough reasonable doubt it will all tick to Ghislaine Maxwell and the deposition of 465 pages will have the foundation of being the rope that hangs her. This is to some degree seen on page 113 where we see 

Do you remember him visiting you and Jeffrey in New York in the spring of 2001? 

A socialite that cannot recall dates? Especially dates of important people? I have met a few socialites in my time and they all have an amazing ability to capture dates, more than I ever will, as such “spring of 2001” is almost a given, and as such the answer 

I have a recollection — you’ve asked me if I have a recollection of being in New York but if you are asking for a date, I cannot confirm that date. 

I merely see more evasion and avoidance, and any prosecutor will go over this position with a fine tooth comb, they will find more than I ever will. I merely notice one thing on page 412

MR. PAGLIUCA: I think we are out of time, counsel. 

After dozens of evasions and avoidance and countering the simplest of questions by statements of non-comprehension, we are faced with the response: I will state for the record there were questions today that remain unanswered because the witness has been instructed not to answer those questions and we will be raising our objections with the court to be able to have those questions answered in the near future.

And there we have the turnaround, at this time, there is every indication that the travels and settings of Ghislaine Maxwell are now out of time. 

I am not attaching the deposition at this time, even as it is out there on the internet, I am not sure if I am allowed to place the full 465 pages (with a massive word index at the end). Yet if you want to see the deposition, you can find it (at https://www.businessinsider.com.au/ghislaine-maxwell-epstein-questions-dodged-unsealed-deposition-2020-10).

In my opinion, when any jury driven court gets a load of this, there is no way that they have will not have the ‘What is she hiding vibe’, and that does not stop a trial from being fair, it sets the stage where minors were in at the very least in danger, and optionally Ghislaine Maxwell let it happen, that and the Miami Dade Police affidavit shows a larger stage and that stage is about to get the limelight, every corner of that stage, so anyone caught in that stage will be in serious trouble and anyone seen in that stage will also illuminate the involvement of Ghislaine Maxwell. I see no other way to see this, but then I am not an administered US court professional, am I?

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media

A no-go is not a failure

It happens, things especially in science take a little more than we think it does and it also takes more attempts than one, this was a given from the very beginning, so when I mentioned issues in ‘The worst is yet to come’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2020/09/06/the-worst-is-yet-to-come/) this wasn’t it. Yet I did give mention of it in a previous article, it was going to take time. So when we get ‘Oxford scientists: these are final steps we’re taking to get our coronavirus vaccine approved’ at September 8, 2020 8.04pm AEST, yet less than 1 hour ago we are treated to ‘AstraZeneca coronavirus vaccine trial suspended: Live news’, here we see “AstraZeneca says it has suspended trials of the coronavirus vaccine it is developing with the University of Oxford after one of the trials’ volunteers fell ill with an unexplained illness”, this is not a reason to panic, science will hit bumps and optionally this is merely a bump. Yet this bump translates to time, time that most governments no longer have. Yet it is the nature of things, so as we see “More than 27.5 million people around the world have been diagnosed with the coronavirus and 897,383 have died. More than 18.5 million people have recovered”, we see what some call dire statistics, yet in a population of 8,000 million, is it really dire? 

We also do not need to see ‘CSL unfazed by vaccine trial hold-up’, yet the text “Blood products giant CSL is pushing ahead with its preparations to manufacture the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine, despite the multinational biotech halting its phase three trial on Wednesday” raises questions. Preparations make sense when the situation has been resolved, or the issue is not a real bump, but the text “This is a routine action which has to happen whenever there is a potentially unexplained illness in one of the trials, while it is investigated, ensuring we maintain the integrity of the trials”, gives a larger worry, and when we see governments eager to push out a vaccine is what might be regarded as a false sense of security, who would benefit? Now this is speculative because the situation is fluid, and even as we get the news from several media sources, they tend to have their own agenda and 7 hours ago, ABC gave us ‘Oxford coronavirus vaccine trial on hold over ‘potentially unexplained illness’, AstraZeneca says’, we are treated to the word ‘potentially’, this is actually fair, especially in light of the quote in the ABC article “AstraZeneca said it “voluntarily paused” the phase 3 clinical trial — which kicked off in July — to allow a review of the “single event” by an independent committee”, an action triggered by a single event, the setting of AstraZeneca makes perfect sense. It is a safety setting and here the no-go (for now) is not a failure. There is every chance that we will see the found explanation in the very near future and that makes AstraZeneca the winner.

In the setting of any normal timeline, we got lucky, if (and we emphasise on if) it becomes the cure, we will see that AstraZeneca has broken records in finding an optional cure for a disease that had no cure, no vaccine and that within a year is pretty spectacular. Especially when a timeline up to 18 months was an expected setting. So even if the bump implies that there will be a delay, AstraZeneca is well ahead of schedule, and before we go out on a limb and get crazy, less than a million died, in a setting with 8,000 million people, there is room to manoeuvre.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Science

The worst is yet to come

Have you ever watched those old ‘thats Entertainment’ shows? The ones where we see the start with old blue eyes singing ‘The best is yet to come’? Well, in these days we get the new version where the worst is yet to come. In the Coronavirus numbers we see yesterday that a new number is reached, 300,474 new cases, a new height. We are only one day away from the US with 3% of its population with the Coronavirus, 50% of all cases are in the USA, Brazil and India (based on the numbers), yet there are several indicators that we aren’t even close to knowing how many cases India actually has. Even as ABC gave us last month ‘India’s biggest slum has so far nailed coronavirus. Here’s how they did it’, I am not convinced and the data is siding with me. That is seen 4 hours ago in the Indian Express where we see ‘State crosses 20,000-mark in highest single-day spike of cases’, in this we see part, but the article (at https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/mumbai/maharashtra-mumbai-pune-thane-coronavirus-live-news-updates-covid-19-cases-deaths-unlock-guidelines-6582475/) also gives us “The state on Friday reported 19,218 new cases, taking the tally to 8,63,062 while the death toll rose to 25,964. The spike in cases broke Thursday’s record of 18,105 cases” (there is in the article a typo at the 8 million mark. Yet other numbers give us “4,114,773”, the number is 50% off and that is merely the beginning. India might be the most visible one, but there is no way that they are the only one. There is yet more, it cannot be given full credibility (apart from the fact that it comes from Nine News, the headline ‘Coronavirus is the number 3 killer of all Americans’, I find it debatable, but OK, such as it is they did give me a part that was interesting the article (at https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/coronavirus-u-s-map-where-virus-has-been-confirmed-across-n1124546) gives us the part that matters. The first is the death rate; for California it is 1.8%, for Arizona it is 2.5%, for Texas it is 2%, for Florida it is 1.8%, for New York it is 7.6% and for Pennsylvania it is 5.4%. I only looked at the states with well over 100,000 cases, below that I ignored it, but the setting that the percentage is fluctuating between 1.8% and 7.6% does not add up, One of the more usual fluctuation setting (amount of cases) was circumvented by only looking at the states with well over 100,000 cases. I believe that the setting is off, I believe that these states, optionally in New York as well, is short of numbers, I believe there is a whole range of those with the Coronavirus and those who died of it are not counted for whatever reason. There is no blame here, the US and other nations had not been confronted with this situation for 100 years. The stage was never ready for this and with the bulk of all nations in a budget crunch it will not be resolved. 

Consider (speculatively) that nations are all going towards the 7.6% stage, it is not impossible, as Melbourne Australia is going forward in a new lockdown, the opposite is achieved with the anti-lockdown protests in several countries, they will get more people killed, it is a good way to drop the unemployment numbers and optionally making housing cheaper. The stage is propagated at the highest level, we see this with “They ranged in size from a few hundred people to several thousand, and spread on social media with encouragement from U.S. president Donald Trump” (Source: the Washington Post), and in all this we see the stage go forward with more and more Coronavirus cases popping up. Even as some lines are in decline, I reckon that the entire Labour day celebrations will chance it to a much larger degree. And it does not end there, the CDC is giving us that there are no numbers for the state of New York, merely a total, with no confirmed number, which w2e can understand, but if there is a larger hole in confirmations, there will be every chance that the number is incorrect and definitely incomplete. (at https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#cases)

There are too many markers out there and they all give us the same message: ‘The worst is yet to come’, when you see what is reported on, what is seen as missing and what is not reported on gives that larger stage and the people are so ready to have ‘anti-lockdown’ protests, how stupid is that?

 

2 Comments

Filed under Media, Politics, Science

Here come the drums

We all see them, at times awe merely hear them, the rattles of sabres, the sound of the drums. Politicians in a stage of ‘Them be fighting words’, and for a moment it seems that they have balls, not sure where they keep them, but that could optionally be the topic of a very different conversation. As I see it, it all started with ABC giving us ‘The hundreds of billions being poured into Defence shows Morrison’s done with the old world order’ (at https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07-01/defence-spending-scott-morrison-miliatry-strategy-jennett/12410464), yet the quote “Morrison’s blunt language about the abrupt disappearance of the “benign security environment” is calculated to jolt the public into accepting the military escalation the PM’s ordering and it is paying for. At $270 billion over a decade, the money is considerable, but dollars alone do not explain what’s happened in defence, diplomatic and national security thinking since the last Defence White Paper was handed down by Malcolm Turnbull in 2016” implies something different and something more. We might think that it is about China, but the rhetoric does not quite work, so when I see “Who else could the White Paper be referring to when it inserts the words “coerce” or “coercion” a dozen times in a document only 12 pages in length. He is not freelancing, but accurately reflecting the wider shift in thinking and disposition that the boundary riders have adopted. In their view, there’s no point in a prime minister banging on about defending the international “rules-based order” anymore — China’s not playing by those rules and Trump is rewriting them on the fly, as he sees fit, on any given day.” I see a different horse, but I will update you soon, There is another article linked to this. The article I am referring to is the one given to us on June 19th by news.com.au, the article starts with ‘Australian Government and businesses hit by massive cyber attack from ‘sophisticated, state-based actor’’ (at https://www.news.com.au/technology/online/hacking/australian-government-and-private-sector-reportedly-hit-by-massive-cyber-attack/news-story/b570a8ab68574f42f553fc901fa7d1e9), I see it differently, but lets put that aside for now. The quote gives us “In an urgent press conference called this morning in Canberra, Mr Morrison said the ongoing, “large-scale” hack was being executed by a “sophisticated, state-based cyber actor”. “This activity is targeting Australian organisations across a range of sectors, including all levels of government, industry, political organisations, education, health, essential service providers and operators of other critical infrastructure,” Mr Morrison told reporters.” Now, I am not stating that it is wrong or inaccurate, but the game is actually a little different from my point of view. You see, for the last few weeks Australians have been under attack, being it from the Department of Housing, the Justice department as a few criminal cases are coming to light and these calls are coming from a so called ‘automated voice’, yet they seemingly come from numbers like 08-92166959, 08-92100644, 08-71603541 and when you call them, these numbers are disconnected, calls over a month from multiple numbers all scam based and it was going on for a month, so we can argue that as these scammers are not stopped, how does Scott Morrison have any foundation to stop so called state-based actors? It is simple math, when the cyber sleuths can stop scammers, we can argue they might be ready for the real deal, but the real deal has superior hardware, all whilst the hunt for scammers is not really in a stage of being successful at present, I actually wonder whether they can identify these so called ‘sophisticated, state based cyber actors’, is that a foundation we can get behind? Oh and by the way, there is no evidence that these scams are Chinese, at least I saw no evidence of any kind, so I cannot make such an assumption. We can argue all we like on the need for $1-$1.3 billion on that stuff, but there is (as I personally see it) a lack of how to deal with the problem, you know, the odd execution, the simple stage of evicting these criminals (if they are not Australians), or perhaps long term eviction to a dark prison in Darwin (presumably a black site), the law stops to a larger degree the persecution as evidence is key here and so far the collection of evidence is pretty much a bust. That is not the fault of the police or the AFP, it is the lack of hardware and the lack of expertise. That is where things tend to go wrong and if these players lack the resources to find scammers, the other group remains untouchable. That is how I see it. The second stage that I see is that the Australian PM is how shall I put it, the bitch of the US president? Yup, not elegant but pretty spot on, the US is setting the stage where we can only be friends with the US if China is our enemy, a way of thinking that is massively shortsighted and the Commonwealth will pay for that acceptance dearly in several ways down the road. Now, if China was an actual enemy and danger it would be one thing, but the US has yet to deliver any substantial evidence on that effect. Yup, there is every chance it can towards the Chinese government, but not in regards to Huawei and as the US sees both as one and the same, the evidence tends to be tainted and can we afford that approach? That is the situation and as I see it the Commonwealth is being pulled down a maelstrom of bad situations that can only get worse over time. That is seen when we look at the talking points a mere two days ago when we saw ‘It is understood Australian officials believe China is responsible for recent cyber hacking activity’ in this case I am not going to hammer on evidence, there is such a thing as ‘national security’ and one can validly argue that I need not be in the know. Yet the underlying situation remains, if the scammers can continue unopposed, what chance do we have stopping any optional state funded cyber actor and why bother, we could argue that the billions will not make too big a dent, not until the expertise is in the house and the Australian house is seemingly lacking expertise, it is not stupid, it has skills, but it needs a lot more and if that billion also provides training, then it is one thing, but I wonder how much training makes up for the shortages. My view is only one view, but some share that view and even as consultants from all over the place are happy to help, we see a larger stage where defence funds are swallowed by over priced consultants, the US fell into that trap in the last 10 years and the Commonwealth needs to avoid that very same trap. 

The problem is that there is no clear cut solution, there is no bandaid fixing the situation, but it needs fixing, no one denies this, I merely hope that we go about that stage in a clearcut manner, and I do hope that we are not merely targeting the enemy of the US without proper evidence. If there is evidence that China is marking us then that is one thing, yet we need to keep the Chinese government issues and the Huawei issues separate, the US does not think that this is possible, I am not convinced it is so, but if proper evidence is presented, I would change my mind, wouldn’t you? The issue there is that the US no longer has any credibility, so we need to rely on third parties to inform us and that is not the greatest place to be in. So we can hear the drums, but who is directing the drums is one thing, in what direction they are playing is another, a cyber stage with two unknown variables, also (as I personally see it) a stage that we are not familiar with, actually three when you consider the non-reliability of an ally. 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Law, Politics, Science

What others decide

We see it every day, there is a side that withholds resources, because it is theirs to do so, and there is a side where people decide to keep resources away from others for reasons like margins, profit and needs. They are at times not nice decisions, but the decision was theirs to take, at times we have to accept that. Now we need to consider what the wisdom is in keeping information away from us. Not intelligence, that is up to those grim boffins to decide on, butthe events that have taken place and the news decides to not inform us, so what is the wisdom there and how does that reflect on them? 

ABC seemingly does not inform us, yet the BBC gives us ‘France’s ancient burial brotherhood’, Reuters has no mention of it as far as I can tell, yet the BBC gives us ‘What will clothes shopping look like’, and as I mention the BBC a few times, they have nothing either.

It is Al Jazeera that gives us ‘Saudi-led coalition says it destroyed missile targeting Najran’. The news 17 hours old gives us that Houthi forces are still targeting Saudi civil population and the people in charge of bolstering peace (or so they claim) are seemingly making sure that this news does not reach us. In that news given to us we get the words from the coalition spokesperson Turki al-Malki gives us the part that the missile was launched from Saada, all factual given. What Al Jazeera does not give us (for decent reasons) is that there is still uncertainty how much support the Houthis get from Iran, how ‘supportive’ Hezbollah remains in all this. Elements that matter, but too many sources are intentionally blind to that part of the equation. In Yemen the bulk of all UN support will falter due to a lack of funding, as such the stage of humanitarian aid will close down leaving the Yemeni population to die.

Even now as Iran makes claims that the Iranian-Russian ties serve international security, we see a faltering level of information by the newsgroups. Even as the source can be debated, the information lacks scrutiny because the public was not informed, it has not been informed for months at a time, as some ego driven politicians had the nuclear accords carrot and they needed that carrot to be looking as sweet as possible, and keeping people in the dark on what was actually happening was a first. 

Yet the Russian collaboration with Iran gives Iran the nuclear parts that they need and the Yemeni pressures are almost an insuring valve that the parts are to be used, Saudi Arabia is between the sea of Dammam and a hard case and its so called allies are floundering the support in the empty air. A stage where Iran is the larger evil and the news is either embargoed, or stupidly keeping the people in the dark on the actual setting. Because shopping for clothes is where the actual newsworthy part is at, or is it? 

We can point and blame all we like, but the Houthi events are a larger stage and the news is not covering it, why not? The largest humanitarian collapse in history is about to happen to a nation and the people are left in the dark, optionally merely because of the resources.

A stage we all made happen, and we now need to be blind of the actions that follow, why will we never learn?

We might not have resources, we might not have power, these things happen, yet when we accept that information is filtered to what others decide what we need to know, that is when we give up our own personal power, when did we decide that this was ever going to be a good thing?

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Military, Politics

Merging greed with stupidity

At times it happens smooth and almost undetectable slow, like watching paint dry. Yet it happens, the greed driven merge with the stupid stricken and the compact new package tends to foil their pound (or dollar) shaped pupils, that part can be seen in the BBC article ‘Huawei: What would happen if the UK ditched the firm?’. It is important to note that this is not about the article, or the writer of the article. So when we see “Huawei’s major 5G rivals are Nokia and Ericsson – two European firms. The networks claim that having three providers to choose from helps them negotiate lower prices” In all this, one could state that this is the first openly stupid statement. Not the fact of it, the fact is seemingly clear. Yet consider that in the time of the Ford Model T, Jaguar released the X series (as is) something that is a lot ahead of the other, why would it be cheaper? Why would it care that the Ford Model T is there? It does not give us more consideration or make prices cheaper, it merely shows that those choosing the Ford Model T as their mode of transportation, is out of business soon thereafter and that is what we face. Ericsson and Nokia are 2-5 years behind Huawei and in that time the 5G fight is fought and those relying on the Ford Model T is out of the race, like that optionally severely stupid MP stating “there were more important considerations”, so what is that? Being the bitch of American greed driven needs? We see the influence of ‘the influence of the Chinese communist party’ yet so far never one clear piece of evidence has been provided by anyone, and it is not just me, people with much higher skills in IT and cyber security are making the same noise. We are flocking to a nation that has been about exploitation and driving iteration. And now that innovation is at their front door, they scream interference whilst not providing evidence. The BBC article is important as we see “Removing Huawei would seriously delay 5G, costing the British economy up to £7bn”, I believe that the costs will be much higher. The losses will exceed £15bn as well as set the economy back 5-8 years and when that happens, others will surpass and others will get juicy service contracts, a stage the UK cannot afford to lose at present. I believe it is time to DEMAND actual answers, to DEMAND actual evidence of communist interference, I feel driven to this because there is no evidence, people a lot more clever than I had already assessed that part. And we need to realise that this is the time when the greed drive should not be allowed to get the stupid to speak up and take the stage. 

 

So when we see ABC giving us ‘British review of Huawei’s inclusion in 5G rollout welcomed by Australian security officials’, I personally merely wonder how many are sucking up to places like Telstra. In addition, unless they give clear evidence on HOW the Chinese government is taking ‘control’ I wonder how many of them will make statements that include ‘optionally could’ and a few other statements that are speculative. In all this, we show that we are all the bitches of American fear of economic collapse and some of them are likely to get nice presents around christmas, perhaps a bottle of wine. The point is not whether they do or don’t, the issue becomes that these steps will hinder our own progress, because that is what iterative technology does and if it was SO important, UK and Australian technology would drive the future needs, not follow others. In the end I do not care who we are following, this government and the one in London decided to be lazy and let others rule the technology, I can live with that, but to exclude technology on unfounded accusations is just plain stupid. Especially when others (who are slightly less stupid) get to take the reigns in mobile communication, when Asia and the Middle East take charge in forward momentum, do you think even for one second that anyone cares what we needed? That is the hidden part of American push, they do not care what we end up with, they merely need their fears of collapse to go away and when that is done they will worry about the next part. Yet at that point it is already too late for us. Is it not interesting that the 5G sales that Huawei offered received little to no investigation? It did not suit the American solution, their economy still loses and we should not care, we need to care what is best for US!

It seems that in that regime those who need to decide for us, seem to rely on ‘the world is too complex for that’ and they go about their personal needs whatever they might be. So all these people who talk on anonymity, when we put them out in the clear we will probably see a very different stage, I wonder who will wonder about that stage and exactly where WE fit in, because I am reasonably certain that in these dark days we have no consideration coming our way. 

The greed and stupid driven people are in a stage where we should demand that they are in the out and open. And I reckon that we are 2 years away from that loud demand from the people, in 2023 as others are taking the 5G lead will push more and more economy their way, that is the moment that we get wave after wave of ‘carefully phrased denials’ and ’miscommunication between officials and consultants’, at that point our goose is cooked in no uncertain ways. 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Politics, Science

FaceFlu

Yes, we have had Covid-19 v1, we are about to experience version two of that flu and neither of them speak Spanish, so now we see that the BBC is giving us ‘Facebook defends itself over virus misinformation’ less than an hour ago. Why do they have to? Who arrested David Icke over the spreading of the rumour, the false rumour that the Coronavirus was spread by 5G? Who has arrested him, who has prosecuted him? You see in all this, Facebook is fighting this fight with both hands behind their backs and every ankle has a ball and chain bound to it, not really a fair fight is it?

Another article by the BBC gives us that Malaria medication is used as a trial against the Coronavirus, why? Professor Nicholas White from Oxford University is not even sure if it is  beneficial or harmful, so as such does it even make sense to test this on 40,000 health workers? That is quite the trial, I see it as a massive overreaction, now let’s be clear, I did not study medicine, so I do not know, but I am aware that finding a vaccine is 12-18 months away and we are not even 6 months into that timeline. We see all kinds of media talk about frontrunners, with subtle undertones like “very early findings indicate the vaccine is safe and doing what it needs to do” in that path (source: ABC) can we not consider that this is corporate misinformation? Some company no one has heard of sets a record time, a record time that is close to one third? Whilst another source gives us ‘Vaccine experts say Moderna didn’t produce data critical to assessing Covid-19 vaccine’, something that ABC did not give us, or perhaps I missed it. Is misdirected hope not harmful too?

When we see “The Companies stock valuation also surged, hitting $29 billion, an astonishing feat for a company that currently sells zero products” I see that the economy is impacted several times over and all in the light of recession with a flavour of Corona (not the beer). We are so driven to slap Facebook, yet we refuse to slap the media on several fronts. 

We look at the good, we shiver at the bad, but we refuse to valuate and investigate the media bringing the news. How is that fair on Facebook? The media at large also uses Facebook to get the clicks and the views, yet they are not investigated, the balance of events is spinning out of control and we are not looking at what may be, it works for me, I am seeing an optional surge in my IP and I merely have to wait until the new Corona strikes, my IP will flourish because of it. It was never designed to do that, it was merely a happy side effect and my peers are still not looking in the directions I am and it is brilliant (for me), as there is every chance that there is another path that is opening up for me, I rejoice, yet I might have to rely on my nil existing knowledge of the Chinese language, such is life. So as the US senate is delisting China firms with a reference to the Luckin Coffee accounting scandal, I am not aware of it, but I do remember a grocery store named Tesco, how much action did the US senate take there? In 2017 the probe into PwC was called off, so as far as I can tell, we in the west have a lot more skeletons in our closets than China has. As I see it, we have plenty of problems, we do not need to inherit the short sighted, greed driven American ones. 

These are all elements that hit us and they impact our corona lockdown lives as well, because the news that we see, and the media does not care about us, it cares about its shareholders, its stakeholders and its advertisers, and they all need some bogeyman to exist, so that they can move unnoticed, and as flames are created and evidence is absent is several cases, we get handed a bag of goods, one that pleases the media and its three masters. To those four Facebook is a problem and they are making it a much larger and overly visible one, why do we not notice that? So whilst the media struggle for flames goes on, we might notice some news, but we ignore a whole lot more, because we are not informed. 

And there lies the problem, how can we know what we are not told? In some cases Al Jazeera, the BBC, the Guardian, the Washington Post and the NY Times give a decent completeview, but they are all for the most so deep into Corona issues that news slips them all. And that is the stage smeplayers need to have, yet Facebook can change that and they really do not like Facebook. Facebook can adjust instantly and that is what some do not like at present. Will we see another chapter in that? It is too soon to tell, but overall there is a stage where Facebook cold end up playing a much larger role, and if the timing is good the media will cry like a little bitch stating that they lacked resources, the only question that remains for you is how I could see this coming a mile away, the answer is simple, ithas been going on for a while now, yet the Corona virus was not anticipated, it changed a lot too fast for some and Facebook was there, like a tower, merely facilitating for the message and those messagemakers are often not in the pocket of the three controlling the media. It has been this way for years, the Coronavirus escalations are merely bringing it to the surface.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics, Science

When we are merely given a paragraph

It happens, we get offered a paragraph and for some reason we wake up, we think: ‘That’s nice! Tell me more!‘ It can be for the strangest and least connected reasons out there. No matter that the push or the reason, we only get that one paragraph and are left hanging. That feeling came right off the bat when ABC gave me ‘ASIO warns of ‘hostile intelligence services’ using social media in annual report‘ (at https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-10-17/asio-warns-of-hostile-intelligence-services-on-social-media/11609726) a day ago. Now, let’s be fair, ASIO is not really the one to play games of open communication, as its employees and governing staff were educated by the people of Sneaky, Peeping and Backstabbing incorporated, they have other markers to work with. As such as I was fed ““hostile intelligence services” using social media to target people across business and government“, which basically is a continuation (to some degree) of the quote we saw at ABC in July 2017 when we were given “help Australian security agencies get access to encrypted messages from suspected terrorists and other criminals“, in itself not an issue one would think, and there is exactly the problem, one did not think. I made references to private chat groups in Social media and extremism before 2016, just nice to know that someone gets around and wakes up every now and then. Or as I would phrase it as ‘What else is new?‘, Yet as Jade MacMillan takes us by the hand in this ABC article, we see: “A report in the New York Times earlier this year claimed China was using LinkedIn to try to recruit foreign spies“, again we go with the ‘What else is new?‘. There is nothing new under the sun as MI-6, CIA, DGSE and optionally ASIS have been using that very same tool to get information. The honey traps, the enticement parties and the stage where you are a winner, the tricks are as old as the very first sign stating: ‘Authorised Personally Only‘. In this the larger issue is avoided, you see financial entrepreneurs have been using these paths to gain information on how to find people with debts and some of them have (allegedly) been reporting those people to international whisper divisions, so that a deal could be struck. So whilst some look for foreign agents, they all ignore the debt collectors mining every bit of social media to gain a momentary advantage to collect on one debt and gain another bonus, and those people will always look for investors, especially investors that have a fluidic opinion of ethics and how to be working towards rewards.

It all comes across as silly and as mindless as “Attorney-General George Brandis said encryption was potentially the “greatest degradation of intelligence and law enforcement capability” in a lifetime“, he could not put gamers in a proper dimensional view, so why would he get this right? It is an easy enough question and there is a link. There was a reason why Facebook suspended and ended all group chat options (there were a few actually), they were off course way late, now that Lone wolves and others have found new means to get this started, they need to be more careful, but the state remains. Mining is the only way to do this and you need resources for that, as well as proper staff who comprehend data and not let some silly deep learning algorithm fix it. For example, consider that a facilitator created an auto fill chat system; it has 250,000 lines an hour, whilst the system has one anchor word, a word you can select. So as we see the chat go through, we make no sense on it, yet the users have set the word ‘الدراجين’ (meaning ‘riders’) even as the initial part makes no sense

WE now get:

يتيح للجميع وقتا طيبا والحزب

الهذيان الكبير في واحة في منتصف الليل

جميع الدراجين سباق اليوم

معلومات السباق في اللعبة

تسجيل جميع الدراجين بعد صلاة الفجر

يجب أن المؤمنين اقتبس مرور البقر

جميع الدراجين يعرفون أن السيارة مائة مؤهلة

 

Even in this setting the programming cannot make sense, and unless you knew that ‘riders’ was the operative word good luck in finding what comes next. a system like this has been in place for years, now there are dedicated programs, yet in the past there were 4-6 in a group of 100, so those 4 guest gamers would not be noticed and by the time someone woke up, it was already too late, the meeting was over and more secure conversations had taken place, this system worked global and now that Facebook chat groups are a thing of the past other means are used for all kinds of groups to find a way to pass a message along.

We get it, the employees of Sneaky, Peeping and Backstabbing incorporated are not supposed to put it in the open, yet the annual report seemingly ignores one part. Instead of having a dozen systems creating a small solution, we need to find the agencies actually working together to avert “ASIO has limited scope to redirect internal resources to address the increasing gap between demand for our counterespionage and foreign interference advice and our ability to furnish this assistance” and partially find a solution that will take care of the extremists, the organised crackpots and the corporate facilitators, if you do not consider the third group to be important, then you have remained asleep for far too long at the wheel.

So when I mentioned Brandis (never the sharpest tool in my personal opinion) we might consider the 2017 event and the quote: “If the laws are passed and technology companies comply, they could help with investigations into paedophile networks, major organised crime or terrorism”, the man is transparent as glass as he hid in the past behind ‘violent gamers’ and now he uses ‘paedophile networks’. Yet the larger issue not seen here are financial services, there is no oversight and there is no telling what an approached debt collector could find out without setting of ANY red flags. And that is with the players who are on the up and up and playing a proper game taking all the proper guidelines and consumer protection laws as noticed and complied with, this wild west group has a truckload of groups all willing to do what it takes to get the score and a foreign player is a stakeholder in finding needs. That group has been able to remain off the books for at least 2 years. They all seemingly forgot that places like Experian, Equifax, Dun & Bradstreet, have their own customer base and who checked out those credentials?

Yes, we can agree that the entire matter is too large for ASIO to deal with, but there is also the flaw that the scope of what they face is not dimensionalised in the proper fashion, it is openly misrepresented and that is optionally acceptable, as long as they know what they face in-house.

And it is not a rocket science deal; the FBI, MI5, BRGE, AIVD, MAD (yes that is the acronym for the German Intelligence Services) and the FSB all deal with these issues. OK, these players will not be calling the FSB but you get the idea. There are players that are about data and proper intelligence mining (Palantir Technologies), yet the field needs to widen but in another direction. If this is Business Intelligence then Palantir is SAS, whilst we need a more IBM statistics and IBM Modeller based solution rolled out, we do not need a solution that fits all, we need to feed clusters of investigators with power tools that allow them to surf data and mine activities to a much larger degree. We need to set server milestones with collected raw data that different clusters can attack. The intelligence branches have wanted to do it the wrong way around for too long (often pressured by wannabe politicians), what we need is a treasure trove of data that all players can have a go at and actually report findings. We create almost 3 Exabyte of data every day, and we need to find 1% of 1% in that, whilst all this happens before 5G, it is about to become 20 times worse and they cannot even handle what is out there now.

All whilst we know that the 1% of 1% remains a group of 98% which is merely misdemeanours playing around, as such we need to change the premise towards collected data, that is what we face at present so the entire matter of “greater awareness among our stakeholders of that threat — has increased demand for our advice and support”, which is misrepresentation in its own right. The stakeholders have their own needs and their own game to play. Consider the IP needs of Telstra (Australia), the Inside protection and mandates of Novartis (Pharmaceuticals), Insider trading on HSBC (Banking) and their needs are their financial protection needs and in this fearless leader Duncan Lewis (ASIO) has to optionally look out for the needs of Telstra (as some claim that hat Telstra needs, Australia needs) whilst hunting those wanting to harm Australians, in this the Stakeholders are more about the revenue and debatable a source of good (they allegedly merely want their bonus safe), as such we should optionally wonder about the needs of the stakeholders and the difference about their claim and their needs.

So whilst we see another batch of mobile swipe and pay solutions being rolled out whilst there are a few concerns on how that data is processed all over the world, we forget that those out to harm national needs are also out looking into all those apps and finding out that for the largest extent the IMEI number of any smartphone is a much easier anchor to work with and mapping the usage also gives a larger content on data and where the target might be, yet most forgot about how the old is still beneath the new, did they not? So even as we consider the title ‘ASIO warns of ‘hostile intelligence services’ using social media in annual report‘, we need to consider that ‘hostile intelligence services‘ is merely part of a much larger problem and that those services use all kinds of methods that the local knights of the round facilitating table (FBI, MI5, BRGE, AIVD, and MAD) are still not looking at (as far as I can tell).

In all this we were merely given a paragraph and whilst people wonder how to find resources, the matter on how to properly apply those resources so that they can have an impact was left off the table, and that was actually the delicious cream that should have graced the Strawberries, or are those Blackberries? I’ll let you work on that little last line conundrum yourself this weekend.

So have a nice day and let’s not forget that the weekend ends in 48 hours! #JustSaying

 

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Media, Military, Politics, Science