Tag Archives: BBC

July 4, 2024 · 20:03

In the beginning

Two issues came to light, the first one is about an American cop. The BBC gives us (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c72ver6172do) where we see ‘A Bugatti car, a first lady and the fake stories aimed at Americans’. We are given “A network of Russia-based websites masquerading as local American newspapers is pumping out fake stories as part of an AI-powered operation that is increasingly targeting the US election, a BBC investigation can reveal.

A former Florida police officer who relocated to Moscow is one of the key figures behind it.” We knew this, it is nothing new. The Dutch company Trollrensics is actively hunting down trolls and illustrating all the fake news we see (well most of it anyways). This article brought a small art to light that requires actions by both Amazon, Google and Microsoft. You see the BBC gives us “But before the truth could even get its shoes on, the lie had gone viral. Influencers had already picked up the false story and spread it widely”. This is a dangerous setting. Influencers are all about the traffic, they mostly lack integrity and have no clue on the desire to gain followers and their desire to get their golden YouTube sign. 

It is time that the United States and the European Union start to pressure these tech firms to chastise these influencers. If they cannot give ample validation of how they got the evidence how they verified the authenticity they get the full brunt of the consequences. If they are found spreading fake news, their Google rating is diminished, their video’s are all downgraded. And their video’s are skipped in searches unless a person asks for this (former) influencer by name (at which point several people can find the seekers). It is a little crude but the Russians are becoming too much of a nuisance. Oh, and by the way if they follow through on the threat to bomb the Netherlands, I will put my nuclear deterrent (a solution to make a nuclear reactor meltdown) on every BBS in Chechnya. See how they like that condition. Russia made enough enemies, if they have to protect every nuclear reactor in Russia they will lose 15% of their deployable troops protecting buildings they never had to before. Actions are needed and no one is doing them, they are all concerned with the bottom line. You see spreading fake news and false information is not a freedom. In this day and age it is a duty of everyone to not spread fake news and misinformation. Now I understand that not everyone is able to distinguish fake news from real news. I usually seek two official sources (the Guardian, BBC, Al Jazeera, Arab News, Washington Post, Boston Globe, LA Times) there are more but you get the gist. The complication is John Mark Dougan, an American ex-cop. Just questioning. Why would anyone in Florida relocate to Moscow? No matter how valid his reason is. As we are given “an AI-powered operation that is increasingly targeting the US election” we are given the notion that this is all about Trump (my speculation) and it goes from bad to worse. As such I need to do something. I am not a man of action (when you pass the 60 mark that happens) but I have a decent imagination to look outside of the box. Russia has 38 active nuclear reactors. They collectively have 200,000 people working there. Consider that the Russians would need to check them all, secure them all. That implies thousands of troops. Then they need to inspect all new arrivals. It will be a nightmare I reckon. In the mean time they face Chechnya and Pro Ukrainian Russian troops. Plenty to worry about and with the solution out in the open, the Russians get a new danger and optionally their other enemies come out of the woodwork. 

But that is another matter. For now we need to take care of the influencers. They are the first hurdle to stop traction of fake news. In this Amazon, Google and Microsoft could change the rating of anyone spreading fake news, Google especially. Put their ratings to minus 150 and the influencers seize to be a relenting problem. Remove these accounts and their flocks disperse. Now I am not sure if Google can do that. You know that any account holder of a Google/Youtube account has rights. Just changing this on the fly does not go over well. But Google can stop the fake news from spreading, they can also look at the followers of that influencer. But I get ahead of the issues. Something needs to be done and not enough (as far as I can tell) is being done. 

Enjoy the day.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Media, Military, Science

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

June 27, 2024 · 01:17

The side not illuminated

The BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c5111qxl2nro) is giving us ‘Apple in breach of law on App Store, says EU’ We get a few sides, but one side is not given to us. We are given “European Union regulators have accused Apple of being in breach of new laws designed to rein in big tech companies” It sounds nice, but at present the station “rein in big tech companies” is at least sanctimonious. We are also given “The firm charges developers an average of 30% commission on its App Store” and the penalty is given as we are given “The firm faces a potential fine of up to 10% of its global revenue if it fails to comply with the rules”. You see the one part we are NOT given is that all these developers get a channel to publish their work. The get their million by harassing people with advertising. These developers have no interest in giving gamers a real gaming satisfaction (some, but massively too little). So the EU should consider the fallout. You see Apple and Google could do two things. Pull all the games with an advertising channel, stating that this is not permitted. The second part is that they can start charging for the service. The bulk of these gaming ‘companies’ will soon thereafter collapse. You see when all these companies get CHARGED for spreading these games and cyber security. The net thing we see is that these companies will go somewhere else and the dangers of servicing hackers becomes rather large. 

The next part is that this becomes a new setting where the UAE and Saudi Arabia will get the option to offer the same thing Apple and Google did, but charging a mere 5% to 10%, the rest will probably going to China, making the EU and US lose even more revenue. 

All this because the shareholders of Epic Games wanted more revenue and they got this by throwing a tantrum like a child so that they get charged less for services. And lets be clear, they were eager to accept the deal when they were small, now that they are big they can afford to pay for the services. But that is not the only part. Epic Games wanted another path and when even one of these 3rd parties get to be hacked and the players get the damage, Epic Games will face the largest class action lawsuit in history. At that point I wonder how the shareholders will reflect on a pay cycle that will cost them billions. They had a safe environment with Apple and Google, but when that falls away these two will help to give the victims all the numbers and all the support they need to clean out the vaults of all the game developers who took the greedy way out. In addition the EU will get a new problem. As game makers fall flat and optionally move to China or the Middle East the EU will lose revenue. In the last 8 years 10 games made $13,000,000,000. So what will the EU do when that goes to China (or the Middle East)? There are over 200 companies, 105 made over $500,000,000. This was a bad call. These politicians have a socialistic mindset, Take from the rich, but they forget that these rich companies set the foundation of growth. Sergey Brin, Steve Jobs, Mark Zuckerberg and Jeff Bezos were real innovators. The mediocrity of Microsoft is pushing them back more and more. And whilst they might be shown as the richest, they are losing more and more ground. Now with the EU, more and more business will move to better (read: non-European and American) shores. 

And the EU did this to themselves. Consider the DMA:

  • Business users who depend on gatekeepers to offer their services in the single market will have a Fairer business environment (But these services come at a cost, no more Freebees)
  • allow third parties to inter-operate with the gatekeeper’s own services in certain specific situations. (If hacked those services become nullified)

Just to part, the first will nullify these innovators, they cannot afford these services and they will go to a cheap solution making them a target for hackers. The second part will end some games, gamers have no patience and no humour. So when their game stops they will all cry like little children, their toy was taken away and when a hacker does get to upper hand, the class actions will come calling for all these companies. It is a war that the EU cannot win and the larger companies will become empty shells (my prediction). 

Until this first case was decided there was merely a threat of things, now it is coming to pass. 

I wonder what happens to the ‘fake’ economy in Europe when this starts. When advertising through gaming stops. What will the damage be? Amazon, Apple and Google have other means for getting advertising revenue. The others? Anyones guess, but there is a chance that a few hundred companies are sweating because no revenue meant no cost and that could stop now. So they need to find bankers. And what will those bankers demand? All issues that the DMA (Digital Markets Act) did not consider. I believe that this Apple case is opening a can of worms  no one is ready for and the implications are long term.

And now it is Thursday, Enjoy this day when you get to this point.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Gaming, IT, Law, Science

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

June 25, 2024 · 16:01

As we revisit the issue

Before I get into this, lets revisit a number. In the previous story involving the Hajj, the number of casualties was less than 700, now it is exceeding 1300. We see all kinds of blame towards Saudi Arabia but there is another side to all this and nothing is the blame of Saudi Arabia. The article ‘US couple ‘walked for hours’ before dying in Hajj heat’ gives us another side, the failing of the media. In this case it falls on Caitriona Perry, Ana Faguy & Bernd Debusmann Jr, and their editor. 

You see when we see “A US couple who died during the Hajj pilgrimage in Saudi Arabia were walking for over two hours in scorching temperatures before they succumbed to heat stroke, their daughter has told the BBC” we are not seeing the whole picture. You see arrangements were made for all REGISTERED PILGRIMS. There were air conditioned tents, medical attention, water and all kinds provisions. So this involves a non-registered pilgrim. Something that was clear within the first minute. So why didn’t the BBC catch up? We are given “her parents’ tour group had failed to provide many of the items it promised, including food and adequate water” as well as “They went a few days having to find food for themselves, even though the package was supposed to come with meals every day.” The issue is that we are also given “through an American touring company operating out of Maryland” so at this point we should be aware that Sadi Arabia has been investigating the issues involving unregistered pilgrims. So I am thinking that this requires attention of DA Erek L. Barron (the district attorney of Maryland) but the BBC makes no effort on this. We can set the premise that this tour operator is guilty of manslaughter in the very least, possibly even murder (my personal view). But the BBC never looked at this as far as I can tell. Just another article that makes Saudi Arabia look bad. 

We are given a simple “The BBC has contacted the company for comment”, nothing more, not even the name of the company. So with “She also told the BBC that the tour company had said it would provide the proper visas and registration for the trip, but failed to do so” we get the jump from manslaughter to murder. Can the tour operator show and prove that they had taken proper steps? There is a clear message that Saudi Arabia stops unregistered pilgrims. All this I knew in a minute after reading the article by the BBC, so the editor should have known this as well. Where was the editor in all this? The BBC did give us “According to the official Saudi news agency SPA, most of the Mecca pilgrims did not have official permits”, so is that ‘most of passed away  pilgrims’ or should that have been ‘most of the unregistered passed away pilgrims’? The distinction is important here. There were 1,800,000 registered pilgrims, the 1,300 represent a mere 0.07% of all pilgrims. Now consider that most deceased were unregistered. I have no insight of percentages that these 1,300 are separated in unregistered versus registered. So if it is 50/50 (which I very much doubt) it shows the number of casualties is at best 0.035% casualties in a pool of one point eight million pilgrims in the 50 degree Celsius heat. An amazing feat, but we aren’t given that either. So the Media (the US one) is all about pounding Mr Trump on hush money towards a hooker, but here they lack insight? Anyone else find this strange?

So whilst the BBC is eager to add “Saudi Arabia has recently come under criticism for not making the Hajj safer, particularly for unregistered pilgrims” well, it is simple the Hajj is only available to registered pilgrims. The Hajj needs to be done at least once by a muslim if he (or she) is able to afford it. At least that is what I remember. There are 1,900,000,000 Muslims, so it is pretty much impossible to give access to all Muslims. And this year 1,800,000 were given access. So these unregistered pilgrims broke the law. The BBC does not carry that message. So what is this piece? A complaint from the daughter of an American pilgrim? If so why wasn’t DA Erek L. Barron involved in this? Especially as Saudi Arabia have been trying to stop these unregistered pilgrims? Why didn’t the BBC take a few more minutes to dig into it all? Because a negative nonsensical article on Saudi Arabia is preferred over properly reporting the news? 

I am asking, because what was once a great news agency is now regarded to be as a populist gossip spreader (at best). And this change was achieved in the last 5 years. 

It will take a few months until the dust settles and we get updated reports. I just wonder what the west will do, will they cooperate with Saudi Arabia on these unregistered pilgrims? Will these tour operators, who sold tickets whilst no permits came through be questioned? I am willing to accept that many pilgrims pushed for the trips, but the tour operator will need to show evidence. Evidence needs to come forth. In this case the accusation of “a lot of the things promised to them weren’t provided” might be correct, but it also depends on evidence. As such the BBC wrote correctly “According to Ms Wurie” but there was no response and this article is lower than half baked, it lacks important evidence. This is not always on the reporting media. But in this case by not adding clear parts is on the BBC and especially the editor who let this pass.

Well, this is me moving slowly towards the midweek (Almost there, a mere eight hours to go).

Enjoy your day, it is still Monday in Vancouver and California.

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Politics, Religion

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

June 22, 2024 · 23:25

In the heat of the night (and day)

I got news yesterday, I had to mull things over as this is not something I have know how on. The article was from the BBC and as they lost a lot of credibility, I had to investigate a few things.

The article (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cxrrzp479r4o) gives us ‘Egyptian pilgrims ‘totally abandoned’ in Hajj heat’, I found it to be a blatant inaccuracy given (to say the least). But let me give you the information that matters.

The article gives us “Effendiya, a widow, went to Mecca on a tourist visa, not on an official Hajj visa. She was among hundreds of thousands of unregistered pilgrims who hoped to fulfil their religious obligation this year without obtaining special Hajj permits”, as well as “Pilgrims usually stay in air-conditioned tents, have buses to drive them between holy sites and are provided with medical care. Sayyed says Effendiya and other unregistered pilgrims “had none of these facilities, they were totally abandoned”. He adds that they tried to protect themselves from the searing heat by using bedsheets to make a tent.” All this comes across as true, I cannot fault that. Where the BBC (and others) fall short is the fact that Saudi Arabia has rules. Mecca has a little over 2 million people. During the Hajj the population there is doubled. This year it had 1.8 million pilgrims. So those are the official numbers. Unregistered pilgrims are not part of this, as such they do not get any of the facilities. I certain path to death, especially as this year the Hajj was done under a searing sun pumping up the temperature to 51.8 degrees (Celsius). So these unregistered pilgrims are not given air-conditioned tents, bus rides or medical care. 

The Guardian (at https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/jun/19/hajj-heat-deaths-missing-pilgrims-search-saudi-arabia) gives us with ‘Search for missing pilgrims continues after hajj heat deaths’ an additional “Arab diplomats on Tuesday told Agence France-Presse at least 550 pilgrims had died this year, the majority due to heat-related illnesses after temperatures reached 51.8C (125F) in Mecca, Islam’s holiest city.” I believe that the BBC fell short of exposing of creating a clear message that there is a risk by going to Mecca on a tourist visa during the Hajj. The guardian gives us “Each year, tens of thousands of pilgrims attempt to perform the hajj through irregular channels as they cannot afford the often costly official permits. This had become easier since 2019 when Saudi Arabia introduced a general tourism visa, said Umer Karim, an expert on Saudi politics at the University of Birmingham.” You see there is a reason that the official permit comes at a price. The air-conditioned tents and busses as well as medical posts cost a fair bit and when you have to deal with 1.8 million pilgrims that cost will increase. Consider Taylor Swift’s Eras Tour. The cost of a stadium with 96,000 people. The cost of that and multiply it by 20, that is the reality. Compare that to the Super-bowl 2024 where only 61,629 attended. The Hajj attracts the biggest audience in the world and this year is was unduly hot. They might not have known this before they attended but that is a large slice of the issue and the BBC did not clearly identify it. They stated this, but not the indirect issues that are in play. I wonder if the 550 pilgrims mentioned are merely the registered ones. Those who had access to air-conditioning, water, busses and medical options. I reckon that there are more elements in play. They might not have directly mattered, but indirectly they could have set an influence. None of that is seen in the articles. 

In other light, the New Arab gives us “According to multiple testimonies, the deaths were caused not only by heat but by poor management of the disaster by Saudi authorities.” The question that comes to mind is due to unregistered or registered pilgrims? It matters as there are lager issues in place. As it happens we might not be able to tell who was registered or not but the unregistered pilgrims are the weight that changes whether a boat floats or sinks. In addition, 51.8 degrees is largely unheard of, even if you are in an air-conditioned tent with a fair supply of water. In addition we see “Saudi authorities have struggled to crack down against the practice, particularly this year when over two million pilgrims were expected, although they reportedly turned back over 250,000 unregistered pilgrims”, in this setting I wonder what investigation the BBC (and the Guardian) did to investigate the Egyptian travel agent that did this, because it is always about the money, which indicates a paper trail. These people had arranged flights, that means a passport. That part took less then 5 minutes for me to figure out. So when we see “Hesham’s wife, walked tens of kilometres under the scorching sun from one holy site to the next, unable to board the official Hajj buses made available to pilgrims” it is the grim reality doing that under the condition of 51.8 degrees Celsius. I doubt I would last half that distance, a 70 year old person won’t last even that long. Were mistakes made? I reckon there were, little to no doubt about that. But in regards to the unregistered pilgrims I do believe that the Saudi Arabian government and Tawfig Al-Rabiah, Minister of Hajj and Umrah are as I see it not to blame. I might alter that point of view when Saudi Arabia has conducted its own investigation, yet I also believe that these travel agents need to be hunted down and prosecuted. In addition their businesses are to be taken away from them and they shouldn’t ever be allowed to be allowed in a tourism position. They pretty much send these people to their deaths. And these people know that they are in trouble, as the BBC reports “Her family say they have been unable to contact the broker who organised her trip”, an unreachable travel broker? He probable fears the consequences (a speculation by me at present).

Enjoy this Saturday, mine is almost over.

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Religion, Tourism

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,

May 27, 2024 · 06:28

Absolute Insanity

This all started a few days ago and I had to mull a few things over. You see AI does not exist, no matter how strong the hype and the presentations are. Now we see also the term ‘spatial AI’, another joust towards hype and revenue grabbing (the easy way). There are a few issues with all this. You see machine learning and deeper machine learning are great, they are awesome. In addition the growth of Large language models (LLM) are adding to the mixture but here is the snafu (situation normal, all fucked up). It is all still in the hands of programmers and verifiers. The issue of human error comes into play.

So when we realise this The BBC Article (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c977elr6veno) called ‘Airline to ‘better manage’ flights with AI use’ should get some investors worried. The start is seen with “The use of artificial intelligence (AI) at easyJet’s new control centre has allowed its operations teams to better manage flights, the airline said.” It reminds me of an old setting in the 90’s when someone produced a program called Goldmine. Don’t get me wrong it was a good program but it relied on standardisation. That means that exceptions aren’t dealt with. The programmers never anticipated the exception thy were given, so alternative fields were used and in AI the use of alternative solutions tend to be devastating on data models. So when we see “More than 250 staff work in the control centre, managing easyJet’s daily programme of about 2,000 flights.” We might see the initial problem. Last minute changes (pilot gets food poisoning) or perhaps the flight attendant got stuck in location X. It does not matter what the issues are, things will go pear shaped. And that is before they are confronted with the ‘oversight’ of the programmer. 

Now there is the recognition that a system like this can reduce stress on these 250 staff members, but it will need human verification and that is not what an AI system needs (if it existed). In the end I reckon that investors will see in 6-12 months that operating costs have exploded. I reckon that Johan Lundgren talks a good talk, and there are benefits to Deeper Machine Learning and it will help any corporation but the missing part in this are the programmers. You see these solutions aren’t AI, they required a programmer and that programmer makes mistakes. It might be simple, it might be complex and when that is found it tends to be in the most inconvenient way possible. 

Interesting that the BBC didn’t see this part. It would have been the first step I would take. Which firm was involved in this system? How many programmers? What previous assignments did they have? I reckon that the investors might have some questions on all this and I hope for Johan Lundgren that he has answers.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Science

Tagged as , , , , , ,

May 17, 2024 · 00:54

Balances? Check please!

Two articles passed me by in the last 24 hour. The first gave me pause to think, the second was merely icing on the cake. The first article (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-69018575) is the report where the BBC tells us that 2 brothers required no more than 12 seconds to steal 25 million dollars. This happened in April 2023. Now it is time for a history lesson. In the 13th century Amatino Manucci, working for Giovanni Farolfi & Company tarted this approach in 1299 (possibly earlier). This method was still taught when I was in school 680 years later. But the IT people al rushing to get things done faster did away with parts of that. Although this last part is speculation, it makes sense that someone got lazy. Systems have seemingly done away with checks and balances. Interesting enough the BBC also gives us ““The defendants’ scheme calls the very integrity of the blockchain into question,” US Attorney Damian Williams said in a statement on Wednesday, referring to the public ledger that records crypto payments.” I am not sure if I can agree with that. Blockchain gives a timeline, change that and the timeline gets disrupted. What matters is that crypto needs a clear set of checks and balances in place to avoid ‘batch hackers’. As I see it there is an issue with the ‘pending private transactions’ why was it pending? The reason could be very valid, but then the checks and balances for pending transactions needs an overhaul. I am certain that this is not the only case. Yes, it might be the first case, but there is a larger station. You see the department of Defense (US) will have this coming year $850,000,000,000 and how much of that is set in pending transactions? Spread over Army, Navy, Airforce, Marines and Coast Guard. I reckon the US treasury department will hauling ass to get a handle on this. 

I am not arrogant enough to live by ‘this could have been prevented’ but systems evolved so quickly and with so much ‘need for greed’ that I have serious doubts whether someone set down to consider and evaluate the checks and balances on such systems. Even a odd ball geek looking at this and trying to see it inverted because that is the point where glitches are found. 

The second one was also from the BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/business-68843985). In this article Jane Wakefield gives us the goods. It is given with “There has been a common theme to these stories, and it is all about how each celebrity made vast sums of money from an online investment opportunity in crypto currencies. And if this all sounds a bit unbelievable, that’s because it is – I hadn’t done a single one of these interviews, nor written any of the articles. And none of the famous people involved, or me, would dream of endorsing crypto investments of any kind.” Is is another setting where the system is not ready for the criminal element. In my mind it lacks checks and balances. Although here it is not as simple. You see there are a dozen roads to the honey jar and sealing them all will just be a waste of time. There is a setting of cloaking and Meta does what it can, but these criminals are as good as the Meta developers, often faster too. 

For now I am still of the mind to never engage with any advertisement on Meta, it is not to be trusted. No social media is and that is a hard lesson to learn, but learn it or lose your cash. This is of course no good news to the real traders there, the real novel experiencers of hobby equipment, but it has come to this. It is time for meta to get a check mark too, one for sellers, so that the people are going to the right place. I am not sure how to go about that, it is not my field of expertise. 

It is Friday here now. Joy, joy.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,

January 24, 2024 · 20:55

The Gump setting

You remember that famous character? Forest Gump with his ‘stupid is as stupid does’. This is the setting that I saw happening when the BBC (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-68025683) alerted us to ‘US regulator admits cyber-security lapse before rogue Bitcoin post’, this is not a lapse, this is a screwup of the umpteenth order. They give us “The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) did not have multi-factor authentication (MFA) in place when hackers gained access to the account.” To give a clear view, to give you proportions. MFA was a discussed issue in University when I was at UTS 10 years ago. It was invented in 1996, well over a quarter century ago, although it was called two factor authentication. It is my speculation but I think that they left it aside until the call was needed and that call was clearly needed a decade ago. As such heads at the SEC need to roll (a queen of hearts idea). As such the quote “cyber-security experts say it should be a wake-up call for other agencies” is equally a joke. Those who aren’t ready need to be sanitised on several levels. There is no boo or bah about it. The fact that it took hackers this long to catch on is perhaps a small blessing in disguise. And the quote ““While MFA had previously been enabled on the @SECGov X account, it was disabled by X Support, at the staff’s request, in July 2023 due to issues accessing the account,” the SEC said in a statement.” The setting here is the question whether this was an SEC staff request or an X staff request (it could be read either way), but to remove security for access reasons implies stupidity of an unacceptable level. It means that systems were not ready, protocols were not ready and systems were deployed and configured in unacceptable ways. Then we get “The SEC has confirmed the account was compromised by a fraudster convincing a mobile operator to transfer an SEC employee’s phone number to a new Sim.” As such is it purely the fraudster, or is the mobile operator equally guilty? I honestly cannot tell on these facts, but multiple systems were unable to perform because the human element was not correctly set in stone. At present (based on SLA, or Service Level Agreements) there is a case that the mobile operator did not have the proper hat on because certain facts might not have been known to the mobile operator. The fact that an SEC phone number got swapped leaves the guilty party in the middle, but in this I admit that it is based on missing information. That missing information might show who went wrong (SEC or Mobile operator). And above all a properly placed MFA is intended to protect against this kind of hack (and several others). And lets be clear, this was not a grocery store, this was the SEC that got compromised in this way. 

As such stupid is indeed as stupid does and I reckon the head honchos in charge there will be upturning every process, protocol and service level agreement in place just to keep their jobs somewhat secured. That might be merely my speculative view, but I personally believe that to be the only step left for those yahoo’s.

Enjoy the middle of the week.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Media, Science

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

January 23, 2024 · 22:17

Spy Games

The first thought I had. An excellent movie with Brad Pitt and Robert Redford, yet what would you think when I told you it is now the BBC who engages this scenario? In comes the BBC (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-67945137) giving us ‘UAE has funded political assassinations in Yemen, BBC finds’. Finds? Found how? Is my initial feeling. I am not stating that the UAE is innocent, I cannot prove that, but can the BBC prove it? So here we get “Counter-terrorism training provided by American mercenaries to Emirati officers in Yemen has been used to train locals who can work under a lower profile – sparking a major uptick in political assassinations, a whistleblower told BBC Arabic Investigations.” So what mercenaries? Not stating that this wasn’t happening, but the question becomes who and to what degree. You see, the presumption linked to “sparking a major uptick in political assassinations” is nothing more than speculation and who is that whistleblower? This first stage has two speculations absent of evidence and all this is linked to American mercenaries? Not the best or most credible source. Wouldn’t you agree? The best we get is that mercenaries possibly trained Emirati officers in counter intelligence. That is quite the leap towards assassination. As I personally see, the better hit is done by the three drivers. Separation, Isolation and Assassination. Yet we can all agree that this isn’t always possible, yet Yemen has a better stage. Get a Houthi rifle (sniper rifle with silencer is best), pay a few kids to be ready to paint ‘traitor’ slogans on the targets house and in the early evening blow his head of and at that very precise moment get those kids to paint the slogans with the reward of cash and each a bag full of food for the family. Not much required for that, was it? 

Then we are given “The BBC has also found that despite the American mercenaries’ stated aim to eliminate the jihadist groups al-Qaeda and Islamic State (IS) in southern Yemen, in fact the UAE has gone on to recruit former al-Qaeda members for a security force it has created on the ground in Yemen to fight the Houthi rebel movement and other armed factions” in this, where is the evidence that “the UAE has gone on to recruit former al-Qaeda members”, what evidence is there? The press has very little credibility left. As I personally see it, at best, the UAE has a list of Houthi terrorists and spread a list around with ‘There people are wanted dead or alive’, the fact that alleged members of Al-Qaeda see that as a way to make money is beside the point. You see, what evidence is there to state that former members of any organisation are now part of a UAE security force? You see the issue is evidence and we aren’t seeing any. 

This goes on with “The killing spree in Yemen – more than 100 assassinations in a three-year period – is just one element of an ongoing bitter internecine conflict pitting several international powers against each other in the Middle East’s poorest country.” Now consider that the UN gives us “Over 150,000 people have been killed in Yemen, as well as estimates of more than 227,000 dead as a result of an ongoing famine and lack of healthcare facilities due to the war.” This implies that they are dealing with almost 380K kills from various reasons. So where are these 100+ assassinations? Where is the data? Where are the names? We don’t get any and in the first example I gave you, how can you see or prove that there was an assassination and not an execution by who gives a darn? We cannot get the west the acknowledge the Iran backed Houthis attacking Saudi civilian targets with drones and now they have a case of 100+ assassinations? I have some serious doubts here.

Then we see links to two other sources the BBC iPlayer (UK Only) that is not evidence, it is merely a BBC recruiting drive covered in a chocolaty spy story. Then we get more emotions and “Leaked drone footage of the first assassination mission gave me a starting point from which to investigate these mysterious killings. It was dated December 2015 and was traced to members of a private US security company called Spear Operations Group”, so who leaked the drone footage? Has the drone footage been verified as authentic? And suddenly out of the shrubberies comes the Spear Operations Group, so who are they? Apparently a Delaware outfit. And the source gives us a meeting in London 2020. Not dripping in any level of evidence. The other scenario is that a former Navy seal told a BBC person a spy story and he got paid for this. There is no verification on ANY level. There is a photo (anyones guess if that is a real person) with “He refused to talk about anyone who was on the “kill list” provided to Spear by the UAE – other than the target of their first mission: Ansaf Mayo, a Yemeni MP who is the leader of Islah in the southern port city of Aden”, so we will not get any facts, other then the mention that Ansaf Mayo was a target. All the news started spreading these tales 8 hours ago. In a few cases a few hours before the BBC told their story. I have some serious doubts. So who was Ansaf Mayo? The BBC article gives us nothing apart from the fact that he was an MP, so why was he killed? What evidence is there that he was assassinated? What evidence is there that who did that to this person? The list of doubts go up and it all reflects on a simple Spy game story, nowhere near good enough to be the stamped with ‘Approved by John le Carré’. Last we get to ‘investigators from the human rights group Reprieve’ with the text “They investigated 160 killings carried out in Yemen between 2015 and 2018. They said the majority happened from 2016 and only 23 of the 160 people killed had links to terrorism”, so where is their top line data? Consider that that areas had a rather large slice of 380K deaths (this list is a subset of that number) and a group with little to no visibility for the longest of time has any data on 160 people and only 23 had links to terrorism? More questions, especially as too many parties (including the UN) have been silent on Houthi terrorism, they blatantly kept silent to smear the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and this has been going on for years. The list goes on and on and this is the latest approach, now against the UAE. So what gives? The west angry that the UAE joined BRICS? They angry that the UAE is giving too much options to China? Your guess is as good as mine. I have no idea. I am merely questioning the validity of what the BBC is claiming here. I have my own version of these events, which I will not state, because it is pure speculation, I have no facts to support my version and I think that I have that in common with the BBC, we did not get to see any real evidence. Consider that if any of these sources were Iranian, or Iranian sympathisers the entire article collapses like a house of cards. 

Consider that as you start this Tuesday and I am about to enter Wednesday. A simple spy game story that isn’t worthy to sit on any shelf next to spy story masters like Le Carre, Ignatius, Herron, Greene or Deighton. It was a simple setting and I am rejecting what the BBC is telling us on the simple stage of missing evidence, missing verification and missing top line data in a stage where over 380,000 people were killed, finding 650 people (including children) that were assumed to be assassinated is extremely easy, the evidence was everything here and the BBC didn’t give us any.

Have fun today and that red dot on your chest? Pure imagination.

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media, Military, Politics

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

January 20, 2024 · 15:53

The tables are starting to turn

This is a setting I always saw coming.It wasn’t magic or predestination, it was simple presumption. Presumption is speculation based on evidence, on facts. The BBC puts out a near perfect article (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-67986611) where we see ‘What happens when you think AI is lying about you?’ There are several brilliant sides to it, as such it is best to read it for yourself. But I will use a few parts of it because there is a larger playing field in consideration. The first to realise is that AI does not exist, not yet. 

As such when we see ““Illegal content… means that the content must amount to a criminal offence, so it doesn’t cover civil wrongs like defamation. A person would have to follow civil procedures to take action,” it said. Essentially, I would need a lawyer. There are a handful of ongoing legal cases round the world, but no precedent as yet.”

This is actually a much larger setting then people realise. You see “AI algorithms are only as objective as the data they are trained on, and if that data is biased or incomplete, the algorithm will reflect those biases” Yet the larger truth is that AI does not exist, it is Machine Learning or better, as such it took a programmer, a programmer implies corporate liability. That is what corporations fear, that is why everything is as muddled as possible. I reckon that Google, Microsoft and all others making AI claims are fearing. You see when you consider “The second told me I was in “unchartered territory” in England and Wales. She confirmed that what had happened to me could be considered defamation, because I was identifiable and the list had been published. But she also said the onus would be on me to prove the content was harmful. I’d have to demonstrate that being a journalist accused of spreading misinformation was bad news for me.” I believe it is a little less simple than that. You see algorithm implies programming, as such the victim has a right to demand the algorithm be put out in court for scrutiny. The lines that resulted in defamation should be open to scrutiny and that is what big-tech fears at present, because AI does not exist. It is all based on collected data and that data should be verified by the legal team of the victim and that stops everything for the revenue hungry corporations. 

In addition I would like to add an article, also by the BBC (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-68025677) called ‘DPD error caused chatbot to swear at customer’. It clearly implies that a programmer was involved. If language skills involve swearing, who put the swear words there? When did your youngest one start to swear? They all do at some point. So what triggered this? Now consider that machine learning requires data, so where is that swear data coming from? Who inclined or instituted that to be used? So when you see ““An error occurred after a system update yesterday. The AI element was immediately disabled and is currently being updated.” Before the change could be made, however, word of the mix-up spread across social media after being spotted by a customer. One particular post was viewed 800,000 times in 24 hours, as people gleefully shared the latest botched attempt by a company to incorporate AI into its business.” Consider that AI does not exist, consider that swear words are somehow part of that library, then consider that a programmer made a booboo (this is always allowed to happen) and they are ‘updating’ this. A system is being updated to use a word library. Now consider the two separate events as one and see how much danger the revenue hungry corporations have placed themselves in. When you go by ‘Trust but verify’ we can make all kinds of assumptions, but data is the centre of that core with two circles forming a Venn diagram. One circle is data, the other is programming. Now watch how big-tech is worried, because when this goes wrong, it goes wrong in a big way and they would be accountable for billions in pay outs. It will not be a small amount and it will be almost everywhere. The one case of a defamed journalist is one and in this day and age not the smallest setting. The second is that these systems will address customers. Some will take offence and some will take these companies to court. So how much funds did they think that they could safe with these systems? All to save on a dozen employees? A setting that will decide the fate of a lot of companies and that is what some fear. Until the media and several other dodo’s start realising that AI doesn’t yet exist. At that point the court cases will explode. It will be about a firm, their programmer and the wrong implementation of data. I reckon that within 2-3 years there will be an explosion of defamation cases all over the world. The places relying on Common Law will probably be getting more and sooner than Civil Law nations, but they will both face a harsh reality. It is all gravy whilst the revenue hungry sales people are involved. When the court cases come shining through those firms will have to face harsh internal actions. That is speculation on my side, but based on the data I see at present it seems like a clear case of  precise presumption which is what the BBC in part is showing us, no matter how courts aren’t ready. In torts there are cases and this is a setting staged on programmers and data, no mystery there and that could cost those hiding behind AI are facing. It is merely my point of view, but I feel that I am closer to the truth than many others evangelising whatever they call AI.

Enjoy the weekend.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Science

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

January 18, 2024 · 20:58

Here come the eardrums

Yup, it is about sound and for a second the BBC woke me up (they tend to do that). There we see (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-68004968) ‘Gamers at risk of irreversible hearing loss and tinnitus’. I never was in a position to play music too loud, or play games too loud. I at times had my earphones and the music was up by a little. But some devices (like my MD player) had the ability to limit earphone volume to protect my hearing. Huh, what? Yes, hearing. So to read this article where we are given “The new review suggests that gamers play for long periods of time with the volume turned up, beyond safe limits. It says this could contribute to irreversible hearing loss or tinnitus, a constant ringing in the ears.” We are also given that this test was done in over 14 studies which in total involved more than 50,000 people. Now I have an issue with this. It implies that these studies had no more than 5,000 people each. This is not enough, but should not be dismissed out of hand because of it. Then there was “Some of the studies they looked at went back to the 1990s, when the gaming world was very different to now.” So the ‘damage’ is larger. It is over a much longer time making me question if a real medical investigation was done. In the 90’s games weren’t taken seriously, hardware was to some degree a joke (compared to today). Sound started to come through with the Soundblaster in 1990. It became serious with the AWE32 in 1994. But the overall setting was still not the best environmental setting. The only game who took sound serious in gaming was 

There you could be ‘heard’ and you could hear opponents. It was the first attempt to more serious stealth and they did it pretty good. Now we have a new setting. The new consoles could take the entire setting to new heights, where stealth is about hearing and not being heard. Even the Horizons series aren’t on that page yet. It is all about not being seen. Still, there is no telling where they take it in Horizons 3, the PS5 is ready for this. There are some indications (from unverified sources) that Unreal 5.5 will be ready too (not sure how Unreal Engine 5 picks it up). Gamers are visual (for the most). So stealth gaming could make a big swing in the next 5 years. Those who screwed up their hearing can rely on the next Call of Duty and Fortnite3 (or 4). It will be all about the graphics and sounds will be not an issue, if it is you (the deaf person) will become the ultimate loser in that game. 

This sounds sad and it is. We have all that hardware and certain protection stages have been either ignored or could be circumvented.

My first question becomes ‘Could more be done?’ It is not clear, because the article alerts us and does not show where the borders are. It is easy to blame the parents and they were probably the one who got him the earphones in the first place. We have seen a whole range of optical improvements, starting with the Unreal Engine all the way back to 1998, I reckon that sound is soon the next wave of improvements. I reckon that this is also the moment that there will be a huge improvement in stealth games. 

Below was my achievement some time ago. I am pretty proud of it, but I do realise that these Russians never heard me, I wonder how well I ended up if that was the case. 

I do love my stealth games, and I hope to see a whole range of improvements over the time to come. In addition, consider what happens when sound becomes a real player in the next Assassins Creed games. You still think you can sneak into places Basim? Or do you need to upgrade your stealth first? A stage that is merely waiting to happen, if you could hear that it. As such finding new protection systems for the hearing of the gamers seem to have a bigger need at present.

Just a thought to consider whilst I approach Friday in 3.1 hours.

Leave a comment

Filed under Gaming, IT, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , ,