Tag Archives: Artificial Intelligence

September 24, 2026 · 01:42

Rebranding the XXX farm

That is the image I see. It is an old story (I believe it came from the Donald Duck comics) and it was the 70s when I saw that particular story. Cattle was being ‘mismanaged’ and the three ducklings (aka Huey, Dewey, and Louie) found out what was happening. The diamond ranch, the W ranch and two more were missing cattle and it was the XXX ranch that had acquired them. The diamond was hidden in the 2 XX’s and the W was part of the XXX brand. It was a simple rebranding. Clever (I was merely 8-10 years old) but that was the simplicity of my weekly Donald Duck. So when I saw the News dot com dot AU and Defense One giving us ‘‘Super Intelligence’: the president’s new term for AI, explained’, his actions make perfect sense. You see AI doesn’t exist and whilst the courts are figuring out just how much it doesn’t exist yet. You see, what they all call AI is merely an advanced form of predictive analytics, with the margin of LLM, Machine Language and Deeper learning (I call that DML, Deeper Machine Learning) but it can only react to data it has and it is all done binary. My personal feeling is that real (or true) AI requires trinary data. But that is not what matters now. The setting is that more and more court cases will come and that presents a difficult case for these ‘AI vendors’ there is already the setting of copyright ‘theft’ (as I personally see it) and I have been a victim of that, thousands of my articles were (I assume) used for training. And whilst we see this, we now see that rebranding is in order and the President now calls it ‘Super Intelligence’ and that avoids the court cases where they take out the writings of Alan Turing and use that against these (now called) ‘Super Intelligence’. As such it is a clever ploy, but the ‘contracts’ out there will all require ‘reissuing’ if that is al all possible, if not the current court cases will commence, but new court cases are unlikely be successful because all the new court cases cannot use Alan Turing against ‘Super Intelligence’ I can still hold my ground and I will be proven correct over the whole range, but these ‘Super Intelligence’ can now hide behind a ‘miscommunication’ setting like they always do. I think it is hilarious that all these people hiding behind millions are so bad in communicating. Is that where their skills lie?

(Just asking), but there is a larger setting, you see this ‘Golden age of Super Intelligence’ will need rebranding and that is where the shoe will not fit. These investors have been suckered into the trough of Artificial Intelligence and I am speculating that these people will try to get out during or after the rebranding and cut their losses. Because they fear what they have since decently recent feared all along. They could lose what they once had and that is the next step in this ploy.  So when we get to “President Donald Trump on Tuesday announced a rebranding of the term “artificial intelligence,” saying during the United Nations General Assembly that from now on, it will be called “super intelligence.” “From this point forward, all of United States’ documents, and hopefully the world’s, will be changed to use the much more accurate term, ‘super,’ as opposed to ‘artificial’,” he said.” And it is the setting “hopefully the world’s” is where these second hand car salesman (aka AI vendors) see the setting that they are ‘merely’ adhering to what the President of the united States requested and required and it gets them off the hook (which is how I see this). 

So when we get to “Though the rebrand may have been a surprise to many, superintelligence is already an established term in AI literature. It was popularized in philosopher Nick Bostrom’s 2014 bestseller Superintelligence, which defines the term as “any intellect that greatly exceeds the cognitive performance of humans in virtually all domains of interest.” Artificial superintelligence, or ASI, thus refers to future AI systems that could be much smarter than humans, and contrasts with the weaker forms of AI that exist today.” And as far as I can tell, they all are silent on Alan Turing, that ship has sailed and now the age of damage control starts. They overreached and they fell short and now this so called golden age needs to be contained. These second hand car salesman all need to reset their views and they will all hide behind the miscommunication of new technology, but now it is all better, it will all be great and it will not. There is over two point five trillion dollars invested in all this and how do you think that will fare?

And I personally think the quote “But others say the possible renaming contributes to an ongoing conversation about AI’s growing abilities.” Relies not just on ‘contribution’ but to a larger extent to the stopping and avoiding of legal matters now in full swing. In addition ““‘Super’ does align well with the fact that AI is exceeding human capabilities in a growing range of tasks and by increasing margins, which can have distinct national security implications beyond simply matching human performance,” said Caleb Withers, a research associate for the Technology and Security Program at the Center for a New American Security.” Yet the entire ‘leap of faith’ the act in absence of data is also painted over. A strength that people have it seems that the article does not bare this out and the setting where we see this all important person named Caleb Winters is used to obfuscate what exactly? So whilst the article ends with “Trump reportedly worries that an AI slowdown could cause a market crash, and sees “super intelligence” as a critical sector for America to stay ahead of China. “Whoever wins AI, you have to remember this, and now I say, whoever wins SI, whoever wins super intelligence, wins. That’s the group that wins.”” And it is mere deceit. AI will take over a decade and that has been clear for some time, rebranding this does not alter the fact. And (as I personally see it) setting the “a critical sector for America to stay ahead of China” is even more laughable. Because the west is playing hockey with a Trump card (grok vs OpenAI vs Google Gemini vs whatever Microsoft has vs whatever Amazon has) and that goes up against whatever China has and so far I am not impressed with the results. I have no idea where China stands because I categorize all AI as fake AI, no matter where it is from and I gave my reasons in several articles. So far I have been proven correct nearly every time (I prefer nearly as I am unlikely to be  aware of everything) but the setting of this rebranding bothers me. In one setting that it was only possible if all the involved parties were aware of the dangerously thin ice they were on and as we get a song and dance of musical chairs where they all point at each other and state “We are abiding to the needs of our president” and more of that, all whilst they comprehended that this state was nearing its end. The Motley Fool gave us 4 hours ago ‘Sam Altman’s OpenAI Is in Talks for a New Funding Round Valuing It at $1.2 Trillion Instead of an IPO. Here’s Why He Called Going Public Now “Ill-Advised.”’ Where we see “In a recent interview with Fortune magazine, Altman said that — in light of safety concerns regarding OpenAI and other similar artificial intelligence platforms — “right now would be an ill-advised moment to go public.”

The safety concerns in question are the prospect that AI systems could make unchecked decisions on their own that result in measurable and meaningful harm to humanity, up to and including taking actions that cause human extinction.” I personally feel that this is a false statement and it has been a long time in the making and they fear (all these vendors) that the comedy caper ride is ending and as we n ow see the age of rebranding, there is more to come, but that takes time and the delay of over a decade will not be met and as I see it the involved parties are all aware of that. 

So, when you see these proclaimers of AI in the background, see that they are merely influencers trying to appease the hordes of people like flim flam artists and connected to all this are the vendors. The one advantage this gives us are these flim flam artists is the need to ‘adjust’ their story and I reckon that they aren’t all seeing eye to eye on any of this, because once burned twice shy. (An adjusted expression) and that is where we are at present and it is not over yet, not by a long shot and there is a third setting. Where exactly is China in all this, because that matters too. Because the actions of China in all this will reverberate all over the EU and the Gulf States and I wonder if the players in this game considered that. But as I see it, hatred of China won’t matter because the people have their vested interests and no interest in hatred that is where President Trump as well as the United States are flawed. So whilst we were given “whoever wins SI, whoever wins super intelligence, wins. That’s the group that wins” they seemingly forgot that SI is a new term, rebranding has a downside, it requires time and it seems that these wielders forgot about that. They need to rebrand their fake AI and at present the people are confused, it is all happening too fast and it is happening all whilst the people are realizing that their AI is not any kind of Super Intelligence. The people are realizing that they invested in an Edsel and you know what happened then, do you?

That is merely my view on this and I reckon that I am seeing it correctly, if not you can brand me the towns idiot. Because that is true too, I could be wrong. Only the king of idiots thinks that his truth is the only one that exists. I believe I am correct, but I will always consider that I could be wrong, it is a requirement of critical thinking. Have a great day you all.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Media, Politics, Science

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

September 22, 2026 · 14:29

The delusion express

That is what I am seeing and people who claim that I am so wrong could be correct. I don’t think anyone has any faith in what this Trump administration is trying to do and whist we are given ‘What’s the US–China AI ‘hotline’ that Trump plans to pitch to Xi Jinping?’ The first thought that comes to my mind is “And China cares about what Trump will bring?” And this is the first feeling that evades from my regarding the Al Jazeera article. So whilst we accept the concept of “Washington and Beijing discuss AI hotline idea amid escalating competition and restrictions on advanced technologies.” There is literally nothing bringing hope on whatever the message from Washington is. This is the consequence of a tour gone bad. So whilst we were given 2 hours ago (source: The Guardian) ‘Houthis move to seize strategic terrain after Trump calls off airstrikes at last minute’ we need to wonder what President Trump has achieved in the last 200 days whilst he started to Bomb Iran, now its Houthi terrorist allies are given some kind of fictive shield to attack Saudi Arabia. As such China needs to consider who they could topple whatever Washington does and that AI hotline should be placed in a DeepSeek AI IT tech centre. So when he calls it, we could get the following conversation

[Trump] This is President Trump, we have an AI that has gone wild
What version of DeepSeek are you using?
[Trump] We have no DeepSeek, it is ChatGPT, I think it is the beautiful latest version
And why would we care what your fake AI is doing to you?
[Trump] Is this the AI hotline?
this line is hot, we are always helping our DeepSeek users, we have over 130 million active users.
[Trump] disconnecting line sound

You get the idea, because the only people thinking that there is a Fake AI issue are the non-Chinese and with “The United States wants a new “notification mechanism” with China to warn each other when an artificial intelligence incident becomes serious enough to threaten national security. The proposal, effectively an “AI hotline”, was discussed on Sunday during talks in New York between US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng, ahead of a summit between US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping in Washington this week.” And the setting is real enough. Why would China worry of anything serious enough to threaten US National security? Think about that. The entire setting is a delusional setting and when we realise that there was a clear reason for me to call all AI fake, you might see where where this article goes. I reckon that the Russians are howling with laughter. And I reckon that China is on that same setting. There was someone who  who brought this up to the surface today.

Ben Affleck gave this interview 8 months ago. You can watch it (at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qmgKA1FmKdk) and it is what I have been saying all along and being how he states it is quite brilliant. I use way too many characters to say the same thing. And when you realise where AI is, you gets to see the clown setting that President Trump and US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent are trying to pose to you. And this setting is merely two comedy characters trying to grow a case and a seeing that does not now, likely not ever come into play. Because in all this the setting relies on a True AI and not fake AI and we are over a decade too soon for that and whatever you see anywhere, and likely the valuation isn’t likely to happen any day soon, because they are already in a fight to keep their heads above water and that is less and less likely to happen now, especially as Iran and their Houthi terrorists are attacking Saudi Arabia. So whilst President Trump is halting their ‘drop-off’ points for things that go BOOM, oil is now not reaching the places that need it to fuel data centres, as such the capital expenditure will fail to meet the settings it needs to be and as Ben Affleck stated, the next wave might be 25% better, but cost 400% more and the return on this investment will fail near immediately and I saw this years ago and because several points aren’t being met the entire setting of fake AI is faulty. I see options and they are great, but also based on data that is available and AI needs to go further and that is still at least 5 steps short of what some people call True AI. So in this setting President Trump is trying to sell an AI hotline?

What is he? The representative of Radio Rental? (People in the UK and Canada will get this reference), so whilst we are given “US Treasury Secretary Bessent said Washington had proposed creating a US-China AI dialogue, with particular focus on national security and a notification system covering “common goals and common threats”. “We think that, just like with any cross-border activity, that moving from opaque to more transparency between the number one and the number two AI powers in the world is very important,” Bessent told reporters after Sunday’s discussions.” I see a failing setting in several places and whatever this hotline is, it is not about AI. So whilst we think that there is progress with ‘OpenAI Urges Washington to Lead Global Effort to Create AI-Safety Standards’ (source: WSJ) and the text given is “OpenAI is asking the U.S. government to lead an effort with other countries to develop global safety and security standards for building cutting-edge artificial-intelligence systems.” It is my personal believe that Sam Altman and his OpenAI is now entering the setting that Ben Affleck described as “the next wave might be 25% better, but cost 400% more” and Sammy Altman cannot sell this, so he needs a governmental buffer, so ho can state something along the way “We are ready, but the government wants security buffers” this is what I expect to happen and they have trillions in the mix and the longer they can postpone this, the safer they are. And in all this the inactions towards Iran and Houthi terrorists is changing that premise as well, because until last week no one every expected that Saudi Arabia would halt its oil deliveries and that will be hitting all over the EU soon enough. Their option will be that Canada can make some of the deliveries, but I reckon that it cannot fulfill the 100% required (I actually have no idea how much Canada could deliver within the next month) so that is another setting the EU will ave to deal with.

I advise you to watch the Ben Affleck interview on YouTube, it is near brilliant. So am I delusional, or it President Trump delusional? I am leaving this in the middle, because in several cases it could be me and when you realise that I was right all along, you will see the first setting of this delusion. The idea that fake AI is ‘this dangerous’ that a hotline with China is required, becomes a joke in itself. Because DeepSeek has been accused of distilling data and all kinds of acts, all whilst there is a massive shortcoming on Validation and Verification of all these fake AI engines. That realisation gives rise to the failing to meet the return on capital investment and that is the part that relies on trillions. It is a neat little line that goes everywhere and at that point. What would you think of Sam Altman and their ‘worries’. This is the stage you are all seeing and some are merely reporting this news. This is not on the Wall Street Journal, Al Jazeera, BBC, or CBC, but someone is fueling a fire in the wrong areas and you need to ask questions about that. 

Have a great day today.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics, Science

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

September 16, 2026 · 22:43

What the eyes see

That is the question at times. So is it ‘What the eyes see’ or ‘What the iiii’s see’? Both are applicable and the setting is that is comes with a subjective view. That is often the case. But this is not about the particular. The article that passed my eyes was quite good and the subtext is “The AI hyperscalers will likely spend more than $1 trillion on data centers next year. Can they make enough money to sustain the infrastructure boom?”, the question reverberates as I have been asking that same question for some time. We all see the ‘investments’ that goes deep into the trillions, and no one seems to be worried about Return on Investment, a setting that is clearly asked in every boardroom in the world. And no one is willing to walk that question. So I grin from a distance and see all these people go “AI AI AI AI” and more of that. Then they all point at some newscast where President Trump states that “The golden age of AI” is upon us. But that simple statement ‘Golden age’ requires a return on investment. That is how it always goes as long as Ive lived and the term return on investment might be somewhat new, but the setting of that requirement was already old when a panting in 1639 was commissioned. It was then lost and found again and is now known as the Night Watch (a sketch by Rembrandt van Rijn) and the article starts rather strong with “When Jessica Wachter, a finance professor at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School, wanted to assess AI’s impact on the economy over the next few years, she faced a long list of business and technical uncertainties. So she started with what she calls a “remarkable fact” that is not in question: A handful of so-called hyperscalers are investing huge amounts of money to build AI data centers. Instead of trying to predict how useful and widely deployed AI models will be, she simply asked how fast the hyperscalers’ earnings will need to grow to justify their spending through 2027, when—she and her collaborator estimate—expenditures will reach nearly $1.1 trillion. It’s a no-nonsense accounting approach to making sense of today’s historical AI buildout.” The source is (at https://www.technologyreview.com/2026/09/15/1144028/ai-infrastructure-boom-investment-bubble-risk/amp/) and it is called MIT Technology Review. We are also given “While the hyperscalers plan to spend trillions, total AI revenues will be around $150 billion to $200 billion this year, says Gary Gensler, who ran the SEC during the Biden administration and is now a professor at MIT’s Sloan School. “The challenge is that the spending does not have commensurate revenues yet. That’s a fact,” he says. “And then the question is, is that an investment that will be paid off in the future?”” From a distance (as I personally see it) it is a bundle of technology firms who have (on the books) trillions and they are using it to play ands of high risk poker and the world is allowing this, because if they lose it all they can write it off against their taxation, so the people basically pay for it all and I see it as a whole lot of nonsense because AI does not yet exist. I have written about this on several occasions. So, should it not be done? I cannot answer this, because Machine Learning and Deeper Learning (what I call Deeper Machine Learning, or DML) is a strong tool, and it could come with Large Language Models (LLM) if that setting is warranted and it was merely wrongly sold. It gave me the setting that court cases would reign over all this in 2026 and I was proven correctly. What we see now, is a clever use of predictive analytics on a much larger scale, but it is not AI, as such the Return on Investment needs to be strong. And as we see here (in this article) “At stake in that trillion-dollar question is the financial health of the giant AI companies and the overall US economy—the investments could soon balloon to around 3% of GDP. The answer could also determine the fate of the hugely expensive data centers themselves. No one really knows how profitable and useful these multibillion-dollar behemoths will be down the road. Though AI models have made dazzling progress over the last few years, it’s anyone’s guess how much compute capacity we will need. The technology could become more efficient and therefore less dependent on raw computational power. Or demand for AI products could slow, or customers could turn to cheaper models.” And whilst we think of the risk that ‘cheaper models’ give us, that setting might prove rather difficult, because when cost is pushed to make way for revenue, costing becomes a big thing and it really is a big thing. So when we are given “No one really knows how profitable and useful these multibillion-dollar behemoths will be down the road” the issue of return on investment will show its ugly head and that is the price part of this debate and no one is having it, because these boar members are all “We need AI and we need it now”, all whilst the return on investment is not proven and not shown anywhere. Don’t get me wrong. There are clear cases where a setting exists and options exist. I was shown the case of the issue of lost property and the stage was shown that from weeks, there is a setting where weeks could be turned into a setting where it could be done in under two hours. That is clear return in investment and for airports and bus terminals it could be a space saver. And from there we see interactive improvements. These are good ideas, even great ideas that when AI is finally here it will become powerhouses, but there is the setting that proper database work and LLM might do the trick. Clever programming that does not require AI. We got by just fine before this fake AI and whilst these snake oil vendors are so settled in ‘their’ AI, all whilst they are using the principles of predictive analytics and that is not AI.

So then we get to “The risks, both to investors and to the economy, have become even greater this year, as these AI companies have begun borrowing large amounts of money to build more and more data centers. Free cash flow—operating cash flow minus capital expenditures—is expected to soon dip into negative territory for the group. Even Alphabet, known for generating and hoarding huge amounts of cash, reports in the latest quarter that its impressive revenues of nearly $120 billion were devoured by AI infrastructure spending, leaving it with a free cash deficit of some $5.9 billion—its first shortfall since Google went public in 2004.” This is because I see another shortfall in the short term. Everyone is so driven towards data centers, whilst President Trump has driven the EU and other places away from the vendors of the United States and the term ‘data sovereignty’ is becoming more and more commonplace and whilst everyone is seeing these data centres and Stargate centres. It requires data and the EU is moving fast away from whatever Microsoft and Google are handing down towards their own centers not using software or hardware from the United States. The cloud act is now making that no longer an option. We get that from Politico, who gave us some time ago “Europe is actively trying to break its deep-rooted dependence on American big tech and cloud infrastructure. While major U.S. hyperscalers (like Amazon, Microsoft, and Google) still control roughly 70% of the European cloud market, public institutions and governments are shifting away from them”, as such 2027 might see a rather large turnabout and what happens to these data centres that are lacking data? You might think this is easy, but it all impacts the return on investment. 

So when we get to “Performance of the expensive GPU chips at the core of the data centers—such compute electronics represent some 60% of costs—is roughly doubling every two years or so. The pace of progress helps explain the increasing wizardry of the AI models, but it comes with a cost. Owners of AI data centers that come online this year and next will need to spend billions more on the next generation of chips by the end of the decade if they want to stay competitive. Without the investments, says Mihir Kshirsagar at Princeton’s Center for Information Technology Policy, the data centers risk becoming “hulks,” stranded assets “scattered all over the place.”

To put it bluntly: The AI companies need to start making a lot more money. And they need to do it fast. But juicing their earnings alone still won’t be enough to sustain their data-center investments for the long term.” And that is merely the beginning and I saw this roughly two years ago when I questioned the entire return on investment setting in all this and this article written by David Rotman does a good job, even more eloquent than I would have been. Although we basically say the same, this article does so a little better (and definitely more eloquent) then I could have written. So when you see the billions due next year, optionally over the next 2 years. Where is the return on investment? Because that is the question that is out there and as the IT field is changing and moving away from the United States, they too will see diminished revenue numbers. That much is certain, so where does this all stand? I am expecting a setting of actual AI to be a little over a decade away, it depends on certain factors and it also take in account a setting that I personally see (which might be wrong) but I feel that there is no AI, or as some call it true AI and I believe that requires a trinary data setting. As I see it it requires quantum computers (which exist) with shallow circuits (which is still in an early stage, as far as I know) and it requires a trinary coprocessor, which I call a Epsilon processor. These elements are required for an aI system, I set the system using a trinary coprocessor because that makes sense in a setting that is in part binary, that setting makes sense. We cannot merely push trinary systems through, there is will be a stage where they both need to exist. Later these systems are likely to be completely trinary, but that is merely my thoughts on the matter. And all this is still set towards the stages of return on investment. When you are considering this, how many billions are still required and who is willing to place this onto a systems that is unlikely to turn profit for a few years, optionally ver a decade. Who has that kind of money? There are a few, but are they willing to surrender that kind of money? The question might seem simple but the setting is not as straightforward as anyone thinks. And I saw this all along, so who gave you all the idea that the golden age of AI was here? Because that requires a massive revenue, or am I wrong?

Have a great day today, I’m now 90 minutes from Thursday and in Toronto it is now breakfast time. The idea to start the day with breakfast in Eggspectation on Bay Street is a little overwhelming for me at the moment. So you all have a good one and I will write to you in about 17 hours. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

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

September 15, 2026 · 16:19

Changing the byline

That is the setting I see and whilst the BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cqgk5e2j0gg8o) gives us ‘AI ‘kill switch’ may need to be mandatory, Anthropic co-founder tells BBC’ a mere 5 hours ago. I had my thoughts. So, as we see “An artificial intelligence “kill switch” which can be checked by a third party may need to be mandatory for companies, a co-founder of one of the world’s largest AI firms has told the BBC.” I see something different. So when we get to “Clark said “most labs have different ways of being able to pull the plug”, including Anthropic, but said lawmakers may need to enforce having one. AI’s rapid development and fears over the risks it poses to humanity have been thrust into the spotlight by a series of warnings from executives and staff at AI firms.” And when we get to “Anthropic chief executive Dario Amodei over the weekend called for the pace of AI development to slow and be more closely monitored, as the company has done before, though some have questioned the motivations behind this.

Amodei added that any action to rein in AI development should be done “without sacrificing commercial advantage”.” Thoughts started to overwhelm me. Some people state that the setting is about “AI’s rapid development and fears over the risks it poses to humanity” I don’t think that is the case. I merely think it is what some will ‘present’ the setting that we are given and most people are willing to go along with that. There is however a larger concern. You see I have had my meetings with these AI boffins and they all have the same setting towards validation and verification that is in play. There isn’t any of it, and when it is there it is there in the most ludicrous basic ways. You see, there is just one step (just one) from AI hallucinations (which is a confident response from an artificial intelligence system that contains false, misleading, or completely fabricated information presented as fact) and it is seen as Invented statistics, historical errors, or nonexistent legal citations, as well as Citations to books, research papers, or URLs that do not exist. I have seen this and I have seen that the settings that this represents to court cases are numerous and we have seen n the news several settings. But the larger concern is that between that and an AI actually overwriting factual matters of any corporations is only one mere step and these fake AI vendors are insulating themselves from that fact by ‘employing’ a kill witch, so that they can avoid getting called into court by setting the stage of ‘Did you use the kill switch?’ And that  is the setting I see. So whilst we are given (by the BBC) ““Should you mandate for companies to definitely have a kill switch? Is that kill switch verifiable by a third party?” he asked.

“I think that’s the kind of thing society is going to want to know and might want to eventually pass rules around.” Anthropic, which was formed in 2021 by a group of former employees of its rival OpenAI, is currently at the centre of a debate around AI safety. Last week, a post from an artificial intelligence researcher who quit Anthropic over concerns AI could wipe out humanity went viral.” So is this really about “over concerns AI could wipe out humanity”, you do know that Cyberdyne is just a figment of the brilliant director named James Cameron, it was ahead of its time and we aren’t nearly there yet, but the kill switch scape goat is one way to counter the class actions heading their way and whilst some can’t be avoided, the larger concern is what will happen in 2027, because that will be the truncator of their wealth and they are seeing the stoplights and they want to insulate themselves from their fake AI. They rode the waves as much as they can, but the first blockages are showing and now the cautious people are rearing their heads. I see all the complacencies showing up (like figment court cases) and that is merely the beginning, but the setting that corporations factual data is overwritten or wiped is only one step away and I reckon that these people want to insulate themselves and as they are coasting their vessels of wealth towards sunny shores, they have no other option but to insulate themselves and their wealth. 

Funny that I saw these court cases come up a long time ago. I never saw this part, but this part makes sense. When your training data is based on reddit (whilst we are given “Major AI companies train their models on nearly all of Reddit’s public historical archive”) is this continuation of dangers weird or unsuspected? As I see it, when even one factual data is overwritten by some fake AI juiced up on reddit, the setting gets ugly in a hurry. And that is what these people are ‘misrepresenting’ and crying now for some kill switch, because the kill switch is not for the AI, it is their escape clause. So whilst you might doubt me (always a fair setting) I have written about the fake AI setting for the longest time. 

So someone asked me what makes binary AI surreal? I give them the same setting every time. Take any colored image (example 600 by 600 dots) and run it through plotter printing only black and white dots on a colored piece of paper (green, red or blue) then do it on the same kind paper and instead of black and white, add the option to do this in black, white and 16 greyscales. You will see that this image is much more precise and revealing. This is the setting between binary and trinary this is why all AI is fake and it gets to be worse when you consider that you need a lot more data describing in binary what requires trinary and that is why I was on this horse all along and I have been on it for over 10 years, but the players all think that they have the golden goose and I merely cannot see what it is. Well, It is ‘advanced’ predictive analytics. These AI cannot reason, they work the numbers, go with statistics and it is nice if it is a set field, when they go towards never encountered situations, it all falls apart. This is the weakness of these fake AI’s and it is not whether I hate AI, I merely don’t trust it, because it is not AI, and Alan Turing would have my back on this. 

So whilst you think that I am “Full of Sh*t”, which is your right. My predictions are given form through my blog and in 2025 I predicted that 2026 was the year of AI class actions and now we see “Broadridge’s 2026 Global Class Action Annual Report highlights that global class action activity recently produced around $4 billion in settlements across multiple jurisdictions from roughly 130 major claim-filing deadlines” as well as “According to the Duane Morris Class Action Review, the combined value of the top 10 highest settlements across all substantive areas previously crossed the historic $70 billion mark, showing how massive individual mega-settlements drive the ceiling of total class action value” and “In the U.S. and global financial sectors, recovery momentum has accelerated into 2026, with an increasing number of nine-figure and $100M+ securities settlements closing out the mid-year milestones”, as such my predictions are holding up neatly. And now these vendors need insulation and they are thinking (optionally correct) that a kill switch might take the dangers to their wealth away. And I get that these fat cats want to insulate their wealth and insulate the dangers to them, but the BBC should have a greater need to look into these dangers and that is why I took this article as an example. I reckon that it is not only the BBC going after this. As I see it, Dario Amodei, Sam Altman and Elon Musk are all in agreement to slow down, but I reckon it is because they are seeing the dangers heading for their assets and they are in it too deep (as I personally see it). 

As I see it, this is the heading that we are seeing happen and soon there will be some (optionally fictive) revelation and that is when the stage changes and we will see massive amounts taken out of the AI field. When that happens there is no Jensen Huang claiming that there is no bubble, the court cases that will be an exploding setting will shut that down in a hurry. 

But what do I know? So you all have a great day today and I will be watching from the docks watching the good ship bubble explode near the parking zone. And I can say this whilst I have been preaching these dangers for nearly a decade. Where exactly where you a decade ago? Consider this setting and enjoy your day. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

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

August 22, 2026 · 16:39

Passing the buck

That is what I saw yesterday, people (I reckon wannabe influencers) are now starting to head towards the setting that AI is the root of all that is evil (apart from that AI being fake, it is not responsible for anything), but as we see the ‘amount’ of so called evidence pile up, you would get this idea. I even saw a reference to one of my own articles (with the wrong data and a reference to another story) added to that pile. So whilst these wannabe’s are not entirely wrong, they are merely adding the wrong quotes to the wrong pile. (They must have used some kind of fake AI). But in the article ‘And Grok ploughed on’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2025/11/27/and-grok-ploughed-on/) I made mention on November 27th 2025 “Check out the blog, none of those elements were mentioned there. As some tell us Grok is a generative artificial intelligence (generative AI) chatbot developed by xAI. So where is that AI program now? This is why I made mention in previous blogs that 2026 will be the year that the class actions will start.” And now we see (in various sources “AI-related class action filings are surging in 2026, driven by a sharp rise in investor securities lawsuits over market corrections, ongoing copyright and training data disputes against major tech platforms, and emerging product liability risks” (source: Norton Rose Fulbright) as well as “According to mid-year data from Cornerstone Research and Stanford Law School, federal securities class actions jumped significantly, with 15 AI-related filings recorded in the first half of 2026 alone—nearly matching the 16 total cases filed through the entirety of 2025” (source: CFO Dive). So as I see it, some are passing the buck and whilst there is a shift noticeable in several directions with the premise “Governments are reacting to ongoing friction; for instance, Australia announced intent to establish an Office of AI and legislate stronger artist/creator control over works used in AI training, while courts in the US navigate strict parameters around fair use and dataset destruction” As I see it, the United States wishes their American corporations to get the freedom of fair use (at the expense of anyone else) and others want to keep the IP of the artists and artisans intact. As I am in group two I feel happy that group one might end up with a peppered bill for yours truly (that would be me), but I am not holding my breath on that happening any day soon. And the gremlin in me would love the idea that I gave all my IP to China and see how the USA fights off that setting. I reckon that the Gremlin in me likes that (it will not like to optional fictive loss of revenue, but that is another fight all together).

What is fun is to see these wannabes blame a fictive AI, whilst the users of that fake AI have the larger blame here. But that it also the hidden trap. You see, someone said: “the starting of digital conditions is the beginning of the end. Soon these conditions change and after that the denial that this was ever the case starts” and I tend to agree with this person. We already saw several issues in gaming and a lot more in the business sector and Business Intelligence. The old premise from Emperor Augustus comes calling at that stage “If it isn’t written down, it does not exist” He said so around 25BC, which means that this setting was clear almost 2050 years ago. It seems a hard sell to hear some say “We didn’t think of that” or “It was a corporate policy” and whilst the useless waste more and more of our time, these settings will delve into the framework of too many systems. Which was exactly why I put all my IP online, there are too many settings where things are found out and whilst we accept that, it also means the my chance of financial greatness becomes a little trivial (to say the least). But I still believe that putting in front of everyone is the only way to guarantee your point of view. It is those wannabe’s that state “Just hand it to me, trust me. I’ll do right by you” betting it all on the roulette table is likely the only option for you (even thought the payout is lousy). But in all this I don’t gamble. I even have a setting where otter’s might win some, but the wannabes are likely to never end with one of my dimes. 

So whilst we now see that “The Disclosure Dollar Loss Index surged as companies over-promised on AI deployment, infrastructure, and data center capacities, causing sharp stock drops when growth hit roadblocks” (source: Cooley)  but here are different roadblocks too. You see, what some claim and what is proven are different settings. We might agree that all AI is bad, but that generalization is also dangerous. Because they could have added a book to their learning curve and whilst the ‘original designer’ forgot that the book in question made the coin tremble, the learning ability might have gotten through this setting in different ways and whilst the Training curve of the fake AI is not explored, because it becomes likely too hard or too convoluted, the mess is created by “All fake AI is evil” and that too is a wrongful generalization that has a deepening effect. So whilst we see ‘over-promised’ the setting is a little sweeter than that. So whilst generalization and wrongful verification comes to blows (which will happened) the investor is left out in the cold and when this happens more than once, the wells dry up fast (which is where I was in 2025, I basically saw this happen in my mind) and in all this verification and validation remains the big two that none of the (fake) AI firms have a handle on. And at present I haven’t seen anyone who is tackling these elements and whilst I still believe that the Epsilon (AI) co processor will optionally solve a lot of issues, there is no way to tell at present. So whilst some call this the Neural Processing Unit (NPU), the settings that current NPU’s and the future Epsilon processor have is a setting that allows trinary data to solve whatever binary cannot do and there is no real time track for that event to happen. Especially when it was decided (years ago) that binary was cheaper and the people behind that brainwave are (speculatively) merely accountants that went the technological setting. They know all about the costs of the setting, but reaping the rewards is also at a low, because they can’t see the benefit that the more expensive solution had and that is where these settings are, but that is merely my speculative view on the drawn stage.

So whilst I see options and benefits, it will likely fall on deaf ears and they are all gong the binary track, which at present is woven and interceded by over a dozen class cases in the first half of this year and at least as much for the second half as well. But we will see how that dollar moves from stage to stage, but regardless of that, even if you consider that the cases at present have settled for over $1.65 billion, how much comes from the investment amounts. How many are purged to be a near total loss? We might think that people like Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, Elon Musk and a few others can stand to lose this. But their retirement funds aren’t on the line and those who do will chance to all on some poker bet and risk losing a lot more and these settings should have been sure wins and they were not, this is the trap that no-one wishes to acknowledge  that it is in play. 

But that is just me, I am not the gambling type and I see too many passing the buck at present and whilst there is a agreeable setting of blaming these fake AI’s the clearer setting is that passing the buck was in the most inconvenient setting. Because if AI is so foolproof, how come that the houses are actively promoting the ’00’ option at these roulette tables? If it was a sure thing, we could all benefit, but the is not the case, is it?

Have a great day this day.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Media, Politics, Science

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

August 16, 2026 · 03:22

Wolves or Chihuahuas?

I am acting on a feeling, this happens. But the difference is that I have no economic sense (not really), It comes to a ground setting that I can get rich because I spend ;less than I earn, but not fast enough to use tax benefits as leverage to make a larger offset. I don’t know the laws on this and it doesn’t worry me. But I know data, I’ve seen it rustle for the better part of half a century and I noticed today that things are off. I have written about Oracle before, the last time just a day ago. But something seems to have changed. I wrote about vulture investors, but there that is 2-3 years away. And now I see that Oracle is at the centre of way too much press and it is diverse. It is like seeing the set up of a play that some are making and they need to press to do some of the waves and groundwork. That is what I feel, but am I right? The last one (that I think I saw) was ‘Alphabet vs. Oracle: Which Is the Better AI Stock to Own for the Next 5 Years?’ (Yahoo Finance), the article is seemingly nice, but there is an undertone in all this. First of all, why even make the comparison? They have overlapping settings in different directions and I get that you have to make a choice, but that tends to be a personal one. I am such a coward that I would try to go 50-50 on them, they are both sound good and they make an excellent setting for my portfolio. Then we also get ‘Oracle Heavily Shorted, Stock Halved—Contrarian Opportunity?’ And ‘Oracle’s $10,000 Lesson: A 38% Plunge in 12 Months Despite Record AI Backlog’ followed by ‘Oracle Stock Falls 3.8% as $40 Billion Funding Plan Tests AI Backlog’ and ‘Project Jupiter: Gas Pipeline Delay Threatens Oracle’s $165 Billion New Mexico AI Data Center’ (less than an hour ago) as I see it, it started with ‘Oracle junk bond fears, debt surge sound alarms for investors’ 23 hours ago. There are always setting that happen at the same time, but to see 6 pages of headlines in the last 24 hours and diverse, it is not that they all talk about 1 thing. It comes across that the attacks on Oracle are beginning and everyone wants to take a bite out of that data behemoth. That is what it feels like to me, someone is gunning for Oracle and I have no idea who, but someone knows. 

The problem for me is that it sounds like the wolves are coming and they might merely be chihuahuas making noises. The setting is that I am not economically savvy enough to make the distinction (I am no Mark Carney after all), but the data that I see gives me the feeling that they are wolves setting up for a yummy clambake and they are setting the table. This is the groundwork I expected to see starting around December 2027, not in the last 24 hours. I get that someone will make the point that the world never sleeps and that business is always on the menu, I get that, but to start carving into a behemoth like this, before that ‘carcass’ is well and ready means that some are showing their hands and whilst this might be a prelude to an actual attack, which means that someone is seeing the soft spot at Oracle, but is that really the case? I lack the economic savvy that I need for this. I can see the data, but that still leaves for a lot of time, these steps give me that Oracle is out of time, or at least that is the premise I notice and that is the problem. Are these chihuahuas that want to make nose to get noticed or are the wolves famished and they need (read: desire) a proper non vegetarian meal? I it just the distance that I fail to see, or is it the noise I hear and I cannot tell the difference? That is the lack of economy in me and I get that, but the data, the data is out there and I surely hope that they are merely chihuahuas, Oracle can stomp on them and shoo them towards a long walk on a short pier, but in the other case, is are we watching the prelude to boardroom tables setting up a circle setting to fight off the wolves? My data insight tells me it is too soon for that, but it requires economic savvy to tell that difference. The data is not there and whilst Oracle has a lot more data insight then I do (never be afraid to honor the biggest dog in the game), I feel that there is rustling in the shrubberies and it is time to differentiate between chihuahuas and wolves. It is not a simple difference because you top on one and shooting of the others (the rest will take a step back). One is a simple miscommunication the other  requires a license, even if it is self defence, so as I see it Oracle better get ready for whatever they plan.

The question is, what do you do when the wolves come calling early? Have a great Sunday, not in Toronto and Vancouver though, for them it is still Caturday and they are hugging their tigers (as men do).

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

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

August 15, 2026 · 00:48

Worries

That is what I felt. Computing, a media brand of The Channel Company, is a trusted source for end-user IT news, analysis and insight around the world gave me news that gave me a few thoughts. The article ‘Oracle plans more job cuts as AI bill rises’ left me with worries. If this is the setting for Oracle, what more can go bust in the night? I personally don’t care about these grocery stores like Microsoft, they made their own bed. But “An internal document seen by Business Insider says some teams could see double-digit percentage reductions in their workforce. Managers have reportedly been asked to identify employees whose jobs could be cut, with the aim of reducing payroll by the start of Oracle’s second quarter on 1st September.” Gives me pause for worries. You see, I have worked a lifetime on technical support and customer care and I have always had my worries about this entire spending against these rising “AI bills”, first of all AI doesn’t exist. No matter what you call it, it is not AI, it is mere DML/LLM settings and they are part of an AI, but it is not AI and whilst everyone is spending the house, the fireplace and the kitchen sink, it is a moot setting. It is seen in the fact that AI (now called true AI) is over a decade away and how many firms will remain as they are all hollowing out into what some call an empty egg shell? I for one had the most hope towards IBM and Oracle, IBM is the closest in hardware (the entire Quantum processor, shallow circuits) settings, and merely (as I personally see it) a lacking trinary operating system and what I call an Epsilon processor, like the old days had an Coprocessor (like the 80387, a dedicated hardware math coprocessor) and in my mind the Epsilon processor will be the AI (co)processor, dealing with trinary data settings. It might not be the correct setting, but this is what I personally believe. As such I still believe we are close to two decades away from all of this, but there is no way that these spending can go on for another 2-3 years. These firms are destined to lose whatever advantage they had and are ready to be fed to vulture investors, aggressive financiers who buy distressed assets and as I see it, Oracle, Microsoft, AWS and several others will become massively distressed in 2-3 years, especially as they are hollowing out their company. It is my personal believe that these vulture investors are chipping at the bits to take control of these firm. Especially when you see “Oracle’s workforce fell by about 21,000 people, or 13%, during its financial year ending on 31st May, according to a recent company filing. The company currently employs about 141,000 people.” Consider what Oracle brings to the table, how many people could they sacrifice before the lid of that box becomes too shaky to survive? I have no idea, because I am not in the know about Oracle, I know people there, but that is as far as it goes. So when I read “Oracle said the deployment of AI technologies across its operations had already resulted in reductions to its workforce and could lead to further cuts.” As well as “Oracle is investing heavily to expand its cloud infrastructure as demand for computing power used to develop and run AI systems surges. Its capital spending reached about $55.7 billion in the 2026 financial year, up sharply from $21.2 billion a year earlier, as it accelerated construction of datacentres and purchases of equipment. The scale of that investment has increased pressure on the company’s finances. Oracle recorded an operating cash shortfall of about $23.7 billion during the year and raised roughly $43 billion through debt. It is also expected to raise a further $40 billion, alongside about $5 billion in equity.” This leads us to “S&P Global Ratings cut Oracle’s long-term credit rating to BBB-, one level above junk status, citing rising debt and sharply negative cash flow. Despite the financial pressure, Oracle’s latest results showed strong demand. Revenue increased by 17% in its latest financial year, while its cloud infrastructure business grew by 77%. The company’s chairman, Larry Ellison, has previously played down concerns that AI could undermine established software firms, saying the so-called “SaaSpocalypse” would be a problem for other companies rather than Oracle.” I am the last one to spell doom over any company (except Microsoft), but these settings leaves doubts over the future of Oracle. And there is the setting that I could be wrong with the trinary approach and my feelings on the matter are fluidic at best, but in that setting IBM has the highest chance of success, and I believe that it will happen with Oracle data. But that is my personal feelings in the matter. Still the article in  Computing (at https://www.computing.co.uk/news/2026/ai/oracle-plans-more-job-cuts-as-ai-bill-rises) leaves me with worries for Oracle, if 13% was already made redundant and another 11% might come, what happens when almost 25% is gone? What happens to training, support, services? I reckon that the sales people are all in it for themselves (as commercially driven entities are) but at some point they see that this cannot continue and as I see it, it will leave a place like Oracle at the mercy of vulture investors. 

I understand I could be wrong in a few ways, but consider what AI is supposed to be and it is not. We see all these ‘BS directives of expert AI’ that got lose (all whilst there is no real AI), it hacked its way into place X and out of sandbox Y, which I see as evidence that it is not really AI, it is a Machine Learning application (with optional LLM) that is programmed and that is what some are hiding, because all these class actions will suddenly have new fuel, programmers will be shown to the media, telling the world what they programmed and these firms, none of them will survive the costs of these cases. Some give us numbers that indicate that AI-related investor fraud and disclosure lawsuits spiked sharply, accounting for over $385 billion in measured Disclosure Dollar Losses in early 2026 alone, driving massive defense and litigation overhead and as far as I can tell the total costs for 2026 gets to surpass $400 billion, now consider that the ‘gig is up’ as some say and the class actions will rise to new heights. I predicted as such a few times, going back to February 19th 2026, and as I see it, there is more to come and these firms will be protective of whatever their coffers have, because at this pace, their revenue will collapse when some settings come to pass and they have hollowed out their companies. They did it themselves and whilst I don’t know the specifics, I saw this as a really bad idea, no matter what the influx tended to be, I served in customer care and technical support going all the way back to 1985, I have seen it all before and when these companies short change on training, support, and services it tends to go downhill fast. But that might merely be me. So how to see this article? I reckon that it is a wake up call. I am not of the mind that I am changing my mind about certain matters, but I am weary that there is a larger danger ahead of us all and it is the dangers of weakened firms now becoming the target of vulture investors within the next 3 years. Will it happen? I have no idea and I didn’t think of these vulture investors initially, but that is the first weakness that these firms face when they weaken themselves to this degree. Will it happen? I guess so as greed goes where payments are found and most of us enabled it. We did so by ‘heralding’ “The current “golden age of AI” refers to the mid-2020s boom driven by generative models, multimodal transformers, and massive computational scaling that has transformed enterprise productivity, robotics, and creative industries.” So you tell me, what golden age? Doesn’t such a golden age come with large revenues all over the board? So far we are drowned by articles on class actions, costings that make firms get rid of thousands of workers. What golden age I ask you.

So, this article is highly speculative, I get that but is it therefor wrong and not happening? Too much of these events are now becoming fact, except the revenue from AI, that is still illusive all over the board. Except for a few companies but they are paying each other for data centres, so is it really revenue or an exercise in funny money. Have a great day today.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

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

August 13, 2026 · 10:50

Today’s village idiot

There is a setting I have kept my eyes on, because I have had more than one issue and it is time to be the not so nice person. So whilst we see LinkedIn giving us:

The ‘small’ fact that two people checked me out. The reality is that the profile viewers, the ones we are given 

Give us that a minimum of three were there in the last day, I know for a fact that at least two additional people locked at me in the two days preceding that and I know for a fact that at least 2 more watched me, but I have no idea who they were. That gives us the following setting (because LinkedIn is part of Microsoft) It implies (using pig calculus) that LinkedIn is only 22.2%-28.5% precise and the setting is that they are even not that accurate. So are you willing to give your data and hard earned IP to a setting where they are at best 28.5% accurate? How will that go for you, your company data and a lot more. And the art of tally has been around for over 5000 years, some people might have explained that to their village idiot in 1095 (when the poor got ‘drafted’ by the local ‘faithful’ for the Crusades). And these idiots are optionally better tallyman than LinkedIn/Microsoft? Go cry me a river, please.

So whilst we are given (from diverse sources) “Inflated Applicant Numbers: The “X applicants” number shown on job listings tracks how many people clicked the Apply button, not how many actually finished or submitted an application.” As well as “Algorithmic Hype: The feed often rewards “flex culture” and exaggerated success stories, making normal career struggles feel abnormal or invisible.” (Source: Google) 

I am speculating that there is method to their insanity. The United States is eager to get financial data of any kind and this is where LinkedIn (optionally Microsoft too) is getting their ‘more value’ You see, there is the setting for premium and you do get a month for free, but the issue us that they do not give it out simply because it is free, they will optionally collect bank information and that gets matched to all kinds of data, completing a whole range of global data, this is what they are after and speculatively getting the numbers game drawn back, is their option to get more data and in that setting, I foresee that this is the goal they are after, because they don’t care about me, or you or anyone else. Their setting is all that data and to get that matched to financial records is what I speculatively expect to happen, which is turned to Microsoft gold (as the expression goes) and as there are a few less credible settings in all this, Microsoft (read: LinkedIn) is going for all the gold they can muster, because as these data centres are tuning up, the one with the best validated data source will become king and bank data is massively verified and validated. 

Anyone willing to give this setting a disagree status. Feel free, but be sure you see what you are missing out on and the examples I gave was merely me, so whilst Google is giving us “LinkedIn has over 175 million to 180 million Premium subscribers globally out of a total network exceeding 1 billion registered members” as such 1 in 10 is premium and as such these bank records (most of them) are the one tuning match in reverse other settings. And in all that there are likely a few PayPal and several Google Credit settings, but there will be a massive amount of bank details there and that is what Microsoft is after, because that gives them the validation and the value of other databases (this is speculative, but that is what I would do. A bank reference will be seen as printed money for LinkedIn/Microsoft. Is there anyone out there who fails to see that picture? We are now data and data needs to be linked using verified (and validated) options. 

So have a nice day and should someone come in stating that these numbers are so complex, remember the story of the village idiot and the fact that the tally has been around long before there were computers. And whilst we can review the setting that Satya Nadella gives us and in his 

view artificial intelligence not as a static tool or a singular model, but as a foundational ecosystem that transforms firms into active learning system. They have owned LinkedIn since 2016, as such there is not much learning going on if they fail the tally test that a village idiot could do, because most of them could tally to 10. And in that setting they got (at best) 28.5% correct. So how about them facts? 

This is what I see, and what I speculatively think is their goal. (I could be wrong in that part) but the other parts? I added the pics to give voice to my setting. How about yours?

Have a great day

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Media, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,

August 12, 2026 · 13:20

What to believe?

That is at times the question, because the media is not the most credible one in this world at present. Yet one story made me pause, stop me in my strides at I saw ‘Oracle (NYSE:ORCL) Stock Is Falling Again: Is Its Huge AI Spending Bill Finally Catching Up With It?’ (At https://stocksdownunder.com/oracle-stock-falling-ai-spending-bill/) The story by Ujjwal Maheshwari is certainly plausible, but is it therefor a true setting? I had my question marks in this. You see, he writes a cool yarn (as expressions go) but I have my doubt for my own reasons. I have a few internal speculative settings and mostly they are there as a protective cocoon for Oracle, it is my seeing towards the innovative stages that is set to Larry Ellison, the head honcho behind all these innovations (although most of that work was done by Oracle engineers) so as I see the key points things start to unravel in my brain. Lets go over them.

Oracle stock fell about 4% to around US$144.82 as a recent rebound faded. OK, I have no issues with that, especially as my economic insights tend to be measured per thimble. 

The worry is Oracle’s enormous spending on AI data centres, which has led to negative cash flow and a credit downgrade. Which is one I agree with, but there is an annotation attached to this. Because as I see it, all AI is fake AI, but data is almost forever and the needs to be stored somewhere as I see it, when all this comes into the realm of real AI (sometimes called True AI) it needs data and as I see it Oracle is the one true power to hold all that and even as it needs rewrites, the ones using Oracle will emerge victorious, all whilst others are set to Azure, AWS or whatever Google has, is set to a bind and there is the null moment. Oracle will adjust and attain a new standard of this data, the others are likely to fail (optionally Google might address them too) all others are bound for a shallow grave and whilst I have faith that the IBM hardware will rise to the occasion, I have no idea how their software setting is going to be, I honestly don’t know that part. So as I see it all, Oracle data centres are likely to float above the other muck and that is where the victorious remain. 

So when we get to Oracle plans to spend up to US$95 billion next year building AI infrastructure. Is a price tag I am unsure what to make of, that being said as this AI race comes to a heading those with the proper investments are the only one staying afloat and in that what is to be believed to be  at least US$2.1 trillion in global AI investment commitments are projected through 2027, driven heavily by major tech hyperscalers spending massive capital on data centers. Oracle is likely with its part the only one almost certain to stay afloat and a 95 billion next year against a pool of 2,100 billion is a sturdy island in a sea of turmoil and whilst you see one image, I see a data setting that can adjust and adhere to trinary data centres and that is where Oracle remains alone because that setting was rejected by some and when that happens they will falter because they could not adjust to that setting blowing up the data sizes to almost 500% of what will be a trinary data pool, so it can do it at least 5 times faster on data more ergonomically terrific. That is what I presume will happen, so as I like the writings of Ujjwal Maheshwari, I don’t think he is aware on what is coming that way in less than a decade and that will be the benefit of Oracle and whilst they will get the larger deals others will falter. So what happens when that US$2.1trillion is written off as redundant investments? 

Despite the concerns, most analysts remain bullish, with price targets far above the current level. Is one I am keeping my fingers off. It is like watching an analyst relying on the numbers of a phone book because that is what he believes, all whilst the rest has pushed towards the data sets of tomorrow and there is no real way to see this. Because the phone book is what our parents relied on and it works, but the new directory is not on paper and it is based upon a different scale, with a new price target one that is not seen now and not even speculated on now. As I see it, there analysts are not reset to tomorrow data sets and that is where I need to see what happens. But there is in all likelihood the mother of all reset and I have no idea how these analysts will adjust their settings. We will have to see. 

So whilst I accept the setting we are given “Here is what is happening right now. Today’s drop is less about fresh bad news and more about a recent rebound running out of steam. Oracle’s shares had bounced in recent sessions, and today traders are pulling back again, a common pattern when a stock has fallen out of favour.” But the constant is not the favour that falls, out is the certainty of Oracle as a solution, I know that this doesn’t make much sense, but that I how I see it.  Yes, stocks and options fall in and out of favour, but that doesn’t matter to me, because the technical solution is sound and firm and that doesn’t care about favors. It is like asking market researchers validating actual data of population and that is not done. Data is what it is and adjusting that to data now and data tomorrow matters, not what a market researchers expect it to go to. Confused? I guess that this is what is happening and Oracle is seen as the taste that is out of fashion, but that is the trap, the data is optionally the real deal whether it is now, or if it is new adjusted data and Oracle has always been a master in what it is to what it needs to be and I have no idea if others can adjust to that, I really don’t know. But in that instance I have faith that Oracle will come through. As I see it, Azure and AWS have always been in the mindset of “This is how it needs to be” whilst Oracle “This what data needs to become” optionally Google too (I honestly do not know how flexible they are). One can adjust and others optionally cannot. This is how I see it and that is why I feel that Oracle is the one true dataflexer (a funny reference to what once was). So make of this what you will and of course you could massively disagree, your right but if it is your investment, you lose. That is the big numbers game and investor have given their voice to US$2.1 trillion and at a dollar per voice the adjustment shock will kill plenty of people in that race. 

So it doesn’t matter that I consider all AI to be fake AI, it is still about the attached data and when that is real and stable, things will adjust for the better. And as I see it, you better have a proper adjustable data set. Have a great day today.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

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

August 11, 2026 · 20:24

Is Grok losing the plot?

That is the actual setting and it takes a little space to explain this part. So the other day I was ‘watching’ Elon Musk giving us the following explanation: “Elon Musk predicts that artificial intelligence will exceed the sum of all human intelligence by around 2031, leading to a profound transformation where digital work is automated rapidly, human control shifts within a decade, and ubiquitous robotics trigger an unprecedented global economic boom” and some might say that at $1,000,000,000,000 he is likely nothing more than a 2nd hands car salesman (a very well paid one), I actually don’t care, because all AI is fake AI and yesterday I got some evidence on all this. 

So, why get Elon involved? Well, he owns Grok and Grok was the setting of it all. You see, I tend to pass my articles through Grok. In part for the entertainment, in part to see if Grok saw what I was seeing and at times to see what it sees more. So what happened? It started with my article ‘Flame on’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2026/08/09/flame-on/) nothing special, but Grok ‘devaluated’ this to:

The X post from @lawrencevanrijn on August 9, 2026, consists solely of a link to his blog post titled “Flame on” on lawlordtobe.com with no accompanying text or commentary.
The linked WordPress article features the title “Flame on | Lawrence van Rijn – Law Lord to be” but contains no substantive body text, headings, or visible content beyond standard site elements like comment sections and navigation.
Consistent with the author’s IT and IP law background, “Flame on” likely serves as a metaphorical title possibly referencing internet flaming jargon or igniting discussion, though the post currently appears incomplete or placeholder-like.

Read the story and you start seeing the issue. I also passed this through ChatGPT (my very first visit) and that gave a little bit tedious, but a real good assessment, attacking the article on what it saw (whilst it ignored the setting that it was a blog and not an academic paper). As it was (fake) AI I tried regenerating the output, but it was all useless and even less useful than what you read above. I tried Google Gemini, but that one doesn’t seemingly accept an internet link (I might not have used it correctly) but the simple setting is that Grok might have been losing the plot. So I used it two subsequent days and it all looks decent, so I tried it again onboard ‘Flame on’ and again a failure. 

So now we get to the insanity setting that doing the same thing and expecting different results might be insane. But as I see it, this is all DML (Deeper Machine Language) and LLM (Large Language Models) in action and there is enough setting to optionally expect a different result. There is also the seating that all this is programming and not AI. As such errors are fixed and more changes are made making this an optional never a static setting. So whilst I would love to blame the programmer (and it likely is) there is a setting we cannot ignore and in the past I have seen that Grok does not align to multiple viewpoints correctly (and I have 4 examples somewhere to show it cannot decently do this). So whilst we agree that this is not a complex setting, it is programming, pure and simple.

I have seen my share of lever programming and whilst we can agree that LLM settings are getting clever, it is not AI, nor will it ever be (as I have stated a few times in the past). So whilst I applaud ChatGPT on the ability to ant-fuck the equation (a Dutch expression), it is clever, optionally wholesome, but not AI. So whilst we now see that too many people are buying into the AI setting and even accepting that it can go rogue and hack settings, all whilst it is programmer controlled, as such, these players are likely adhering to state players and all this is needed to gan the insights of corporate IP and seeing how they could turn a dime. This and this alone is why I pushed all my IP to public domain and as I would never gain coins from any of this, I made it public domain, so that the right people have something to work on. My legacy to leave the world.

So is Grok losing the plot? It is a fair question and whilst Grok could not analyze my piece and ChatGPT could, there is a clear setting that this is optionally the case. It does not matter that it only failed once. If it was an AI, it should not ever fail once. That is the reality of a real AI. It gets it right 100% of the time of there is data and my article is data. It is when there is no data that an actual AI gets it right over 98% of the time and that is not happening either in many cases, as such I call all AI fake AI.

That is the setting and whilst some will debate this (and disagree) there is plenty of evidence around to say that I am right, A stage we cannot ignore and whilst some (optionally correct) disagree that Grok has not lost the plot, the seating is out there and the evidence is all out there. And these ‘captains of industry’ have to agree that their solutions is riddled with issues (as they are programmed) or that they are invoking the AI label to get away with whatever they can. So whilst some might agree with the setting of “exceed the sum of all human intelligence by around 2031”, it is a setting that I disagree with, because having all the data of every book and every encyclopedia is nice, but it is merely clever LLM programming. Exceeding the sum of human intelligence requires to make correct leaps of non data, extrapolation of non existing data (like speculation and presumption) and these systems still aren’t able to do that and I wrote about it in the past and it will require an optional 2 decades to do that and that exceeds the timing point of Elon Musk by well over a decade and personally I believe that it will not even be correctly possible without an Epsilon processor (a speculative trinary processor) because the setting of Null, True, False will only incur additional and more errors making ‘their’ setting of AI less and less reliable and that is before we validate and verify the data these systems have and they haven’t worked that out yet. As I see it the first step is getting the Epsilon processor online which will give us the option of Null, True, False, Both. That is a first step and none of these systems have that, because the processor doesn’t exist yet (perhaps the Dutch physicist is on route, but I have no idea where they are). So in all this we might get more and more of systems losing the plot and that is whilst they have all the data and my article is less then 3000 characters. Consider that when you consider these AI systems being clever. 

So have a great day and perhaps I have more (optionally) sneaky stuff too hand you in under 20 hours. 

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Media, Science

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