Tag Archives: BBC

August 13, 2024 · 23:48

How Presidents become sniffling bitches

It is strong, it is optionally regarded as disrespectful, but seeing the BBC give us ‘Ukraine claims to control 1,000 sq km of Russian territory’, the story (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx2lmr29ygjo) comes with the underline of President Putin called stating “Russian President Vladimir Putin has described the incursion as a “large-scale provocation” that involved “indiscriminate shelling of civilian buildings, residential houses and ambulances.”” (Source: Baltimore Sun). So how does it feel to have the shoe on the other foot?

Lets not forget 

Russia has bombed hospitals, churches, refuge’s and civilians with intention. Now after almost devastating losses the Ukraine is expanding into Russia. Ukraine is coming to Russia and calling these new lands optionally their new home. It is a little bit speculative, because there is no clear path. As I can see it, Moscow will soon have another name (my wishful thinking) and the Ukraine has already found a new home as their community building, it will be the Kremlin. It might be a little too soon for that thought. But there is another setting. The other setting is that several GRU members will be wanting a way out. Not everyone is agreeing with the picture that President Putin is painting and as such GRU officers with folders on the agreements on Pascal Hillebrand, Thierry Baudet and other like minded people will be eagerly wanted by the Dutch AIVD and media. Not to mention the army of internet troll media arrangers who are doing real damage to European, American, Australian and Canadian democracies. All that became an optional reality when Ukraine took land from Russia. 

This hasn’t happen since Stalin (1941) when the Germans started operation Barbarossa. Now there is a setting we shouldn’t dispense with, Russia could mobilise their entire army now. The problem is that they have plenty to sow into that region. It weakens the Russian forces to a massive degree. When you have an army that merely covers 70% of your country and pushing it to different areas, more areas will be weakened. The second setting is that it will take longer for Russia to ever recover. The amounts lost and the lack of a properly functioning logistics and equipment supervision, for that matter the actual availability of equipment are all matters that are strangling Russian forces. Using your finger saying ‘pew, pew, pew’ doesn’t really work on forces who have seen their homes devastated, and it was an unprovoked devastation. Being that the Russian forces are relying on North Korean and Chinese arms to an increasing degree is also not to be underestimated. 

On a sideline (making it about me), there is still the plans to ‘make’ Russian nuclear reactors go into meltdown mode. Should Ukrainian forces enable that part than the loss of a mere 3 reactors will put Moscow into dark mode, no electricity and no heating. Taking in consideration that things turn cooler in November which lasts until mid February and it stays snowy until April. You see concrete and steel buildings are nice, but without heating they nearly instantly turn into refrigerators and sleeping there is a one stop location to the death sleep. 

Frightened yet? 

That was the part Russia forgot about, and people like Vladimir Solovyov and Vladimir Molchanov forgot about. We saw their ranting on YouTube and they all forgot what happens when their turn is up. They never thought Russia could be attacked, but the aggressive nature that Russia employed since February 2022 now has a new wrinkle. As Putin announced the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, he claimed to commence a “special military operation”, side-stepping a formal declaration of war. Now that comes to bite him and his ‘friends’ will soon be a lot more afraid then they thought they ever could be. In the mean time I designed several new weapons, one to cluster down on Russian harbours and that is a nice piece of icing (DARPA eat your heart out). You see most weapons are about destruction, as such I designed a steal approach to dislodging. It seems less ‘effective’ but there is nothing as effective as taking an entire port out of commission. OK, I admit that some harbours will merely be in part less effective. Russia has a nice navy when it doesn’t work it is merely a bundle of steel going nowhere. And as they lose their Black Sea and Atlantic abilities, they will see the disaster they unfolded in 2022. Consider (merely consider) that Zapadnaya Litsa is take off the operational board, that and their Arkhangelsk become set pieces in a Russian comedy called ‘What do we do now’?

How will it go from here?
I have no idea, but the fact that the Ukraine captured land from Russia was unforeseen by everyone, Russia least of all. So when we consider “A senior British military source, who asked not to be named, told the BBC there was the risk that Moscow will be so angered by this incursion that it could redouble its own attacks on Ukraine’s civilian population and infrastructure” is decently accurate, but then Russia had bombed Ukraine pretty much into the stone age. This is the setting where we see that people stated that this would be over in 2-3 days, it is now year two and Russia is losing lands. That is the reality they fece and as such a lot more domino stones will be falling over. I am partially hoping that several GRU and FSB officers will defect the bad place they are in and come with their files to other places outside Russia. They still need proper vetting as this is a tactic that dead spies cater too (a Sun Tzu reference, Chapter 13). But it is clear that Russia has now a different kettle of fish on their table and they were never ready for that part.

So as we revisit the current losses consider how come that the 20th strongest army is setting such losses on one of the top three armed armies of the world?

When we consider that for about 5 hundred years we have seen the expedition of logistics, hardware distribution, armed forces and intelligence gathering. So how come that a 2-3 day war has become a 2-3 year war? I stated a partial in ‘On the subject of failure’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2023/02/27/on-the-subject-of-failure/), yet an capture the land against Russia was never a reality, how wrong I was and I was not alone there as the BBC now shows me.

All war is founded in deception, a quote that China came up with over 2000 years ago, to see it to this degree is almost unbelievable, so President Putin had clear documentation that could have prevented this. How the mighty fall.

Enjoy this day, my Tuesday ends in 20 minutes, Vancouver is just about to start their day with waffles, eggs and more. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Military, Politics

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

August 9, 2024 · 15:20

I missed this setting

That is the premise. So, why didn’t I think of this? We all have this and on the defence of Microsoft, they had the ‘slogan’ at the launch of Windows 95 ‘Without even thinking’ the premise was brilliant as was the innovation from Windows 3.11 to Windows 95, no doubt about it. And without even thinking applies to so many applications and conditions, it is a brilliant created stage (credit where credit is due). So here I was reading the BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c9d1y0z4z9no) and that gave me the nudge to wake up. You see I wrote about Ruja Ignatova, now mentioned in ‘Fugitive ‘Cryptoqueen’ hit by asset freeze’ with the lines “Ruja Ignatova, known as the Missing Cryptoqueen, is now subject to a global freezing order which prevents her assets from being sold or moved.” I had written about it some time ago and now we see “The freezing order, made public on Wednesday at London’s High Court, is part of a group action brought by more than 400 OneCoin investors”, I looked at this ‘crypto queen’ somewhere in May of June last year, it could have been two years ago. 

What made me consider this is that it has taken 6 years to do this. The questions come to mind is why this took 6 years. Come to think of this, why didn’t my sneaky way of thinking consider this. And in that light it she had moved all ‘her’ cash in some trust setting in Switzerland or Saudi Arabia it might not amount to anything. Those two countries have massive protections in place and anyone of them transgressing on their banking laws are in deep trouble. It is like rowing towards the end of the Niagara falls without an anchor in place.

So why did this global freezing order take 6 years? There might be a good reason, but the article doesn’t hand out the reason. Then we also get “The freezing order does not just target Ms Ignatova but seven other people and four companies – all alleged to have been connected with OneCoin in some form” which gives me another setting. Is ‘alleged’ enough to put a freezing order in place? Don’t get me wrong it sounds nice, but when was alleged enough to prosecute people and companies? Doesn’t that require proof? 

Then we get to “Sebastian Greenwood, who is in a US prison serving a 20-year sentence for his role in the fraud. Also subject to the freeze are British businessmen Christopher Hamilton and Robert MacDonald, who appeared in court in London” which get us the added “The pair are accused by US authorities of laundering OneCoin proceeds, however attempts to extradite them to the US to face trial have failed”, now I do not known enough of either Christopher Hamilton and Robert McDonald, but why did the extradition fail? There might be a procedural or legal reason, but the BBC does not give us this. It might not hit the core of this story, which is Ruja Ignatova, yet in light of the time settings it becomes a liked interest, so why is it missing? 

There are a few speculative sights to this. The first is that she was murdered (read: executed) and whomever was left with the bundles of cash is pretty much singing ‘do wa Diddy Diddy’ on a sunny beach. The second one that I considered was that she has a new identity, living it up in the UAE whilst her cash is in an optional Saudi bank, gaining 5%-10% interest over several billions, and as such you can live like a queen in Dubai or Abu Dhabi living off $100,000,000 plus each year. She might have been seeding the non captured funds to assure her of non-capture and non-freeze cash. This is all speculation but the stage that we see with 6 years vanishing makes these two the most likely scenario’s. And there are more places she could go when the cash is securely non-freezable. 

This gets me back to the number one question. Why did the global freeze order take 6 years? There might be a really good (or correct) reason, but the BBC article does not give us that.

Something to consider especially When we consider the Khaleej Times exposed last June that ‘UAE scams exposed: How thousands of residents ‘lost it all’ in bogus investment schemes’ and this is one nation. They report “over 40,000 UAE residents have collectively lost hundreds of millions of dollars to fraudulent investment schemes” that is a serious amount of money and this is one nation. Don’t you think there is now a pressing need to up the effort to upgrade banking laws to take this factor out (or at least diminish it massively). I understand that a fool and his money are soon parted and that it is everyones responsibility to take steps to make it harder for these criminals. I think that the one clear lesson is that there are no free gifts (EVER). The second part is that nothing comes for free. Now we get that not all ‘currencies’ are the same. Look at Facebook. Their currency is data and a lot of people do not care about data, especially as they do not know what it could cost them. One question I have always in mind when someone offers me a deal to good to be true is “if it is too good to be true, it must be a false setting”, this has (up to now) prevented me a few times to lose my cash. The second thing is that if someone (an unknown person) comes to me with such an offer. My initial question becomes ‘Why doesn’t he (or she) go to friends first?’ The situation might have come up, or they might not have any friends. But when you deliver on ‘great’ deals you suddenly have more friends than anyone ever bargained for. 

This is a paranoia setting, but it is not paranoia when everyone is after your bank account. Just a thought to consider.

So whether your funds are in a fridge or not. Make space by removing the venison and make yourself an awesome Bambi burger, with forrest unions and mushrooms. Bon appetite and have a lovely weekend when you get there. I get there in 2 hours. Now I need to find some venison, I suddenly feel peckish.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

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

August 7, 2024 · 12:36

When does it become a lie?

That is the question. It is not as simple as it sounds and I understand that. But here we are, the BBC gives us an article. I almost passed it, but then I saw something that didn’t read right, so I dug a little deeper. Their disadvantage was that I had just read up on several cases for material, so I reopened it and it is time to give you the fruits of my labour.

The BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy9eegg0rdvo) gives us ‘What could Google monopoly ruling mean for you?’. Well that is an open question but let me run you through the elements. 

“The US said Google was currently paying firms like Apple huge amounts of money each year to be pre-installed as the default search engine on their devices or platforms”. OK, so this is a business proposition. Apple decided that the benefits of Google in their systems would help them in numerous ways and Google was willing to pay this. It was a price for services.

It comes with the repetitive quote “Apple’s Safari browser for example uses Google by default” what the BBC is not giving us is the offset that Apple would have to endure and they were getting $20,000,000,000 as a bandaid, if I got that kind of money I would say “Google slap me silly”. Now we get the parts that matter, it start with “Something that’s easier to imagine is some kind of choice screen, where people opening a browser for the first time are asked whether they’d like to use Google or an alternative like Microsoft’s Bing” This is hilarious. I have had first experience with Bing. Bing influencers were HIJACKING my search and pushing it through Bing. It took me days to undo that damage. Choosing between a bully and Google is not much of a choice. To put it mildly “Google has a 91% marketshare, Bing has 3.86%, where do you get the most bang for YOUR buck?” In this simple setting Google comes out on top EVERY time. And a secondary setting is that Bing has been around for 15 years. It isn’t just that Google is better, Bing has yet to show any level of pure innovation in searches. Microsoft lacks data, innovation and proper etiquette on search engines. 

Now we get to the issue I had, which starts with “Back in 1999, Microsoft found itself in a very similar situation to where Google is now.” You see, Netscape faced new competition from OmniWeb and Microsoft’s Internet Explorer 1.0, it continued to dominate the market in 1995 and beyond. In 1997 Netscape had 72% marketshare. That is, until Microsoft switch off the proverbial oxygen to Netscape and whilst the IE was free for all (it was installed with Windows 95), thing went south in several ways for Netscape and the one ‘ruler’ in those days became Microsoft with its Internet Explorer. Google released its browser in 2008. As such (as I see it) Microsoft wasted 10 years and within 2 years nearly everyone was using Google Chrome. They overwhelmed everyone with innovations. They released Chrome v9 in 2011 and Chrome v17 in 2012. What did Microsoft do? Nada, nothing, zip, zilch. In 2012, responding to Chrome’s popularity, Apple discontinued Safari for Windows, making it exclusively available on OS X (source: ubuntu life) . So here is the first setting. Apple made an educated choice. Create your own and reinvent the wheel or select the wheel maker of choice. Even at this point we need to recognise that Microsoft’s star was faltering and falling. That was then. Now there is a different setting. Then it was which American company gets the cake. Now it is different, China is now a much larger participant. They caught up with the US and even now the UAE and Saudi Arabia are massively catching up with America. They decide to waste the time of Google on trivial matters whilst calling it “monopolising” stating that the others should be given a ‘fair’ share. In this day and age it is handing the handling of the commerce horse to China and all the good it will do the American commerce. Small hint, it will not. 

There really more issues with Microsoft and particular with Edge and particularly Daniel Aleksandersen, who called this “clearly a user-hostile move that sees Windows compromise its own product usability in order to make it more difficult to use competing products.” There are issues with edge as Douglas J. Leith, a computer science professor from Trinity College, Dublin, Microsoft Edge is among the least private browsers. He explained, “from a privacy perspective Microsoft Edge is much more worrisome than the other browsers studied. These two quotes are on different sides of edge. But in aggregating these quotes it is my distinct believe that if Google Search is broken up, the American Department of Justice will receive roses from nearly every big organised crime syndicate. It is a mere believe I have, but after having suffered the edge bullies hijacking my browser and inserting edge ad a search engine against my wishes is the beginning of much more. The Verge accused edge of “spyware tactics”, a setting we have never seen Google use (speculation by me). In this day and age of commerce, the economy and data security you want to play with Google? I think that is a really bad idea.

Enjoy today, it is now midweek, the run to the weekend starts…….now.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Media, Science

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

August 6, 2024 · 12:12

The loser iteration

Two days ago I wrote (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2024/08/04/the-judge-shouldnt/) with the headline ‘The judge shouldn’t’, it was part speculative and part what I see (again through my eyes it could be regarded as speculative). Today a mere 4 hours ago we get through the BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0k44x6mge3o) ‘Google’s online search monopoly is illegal, US judge rules’. We are also given “Google was sued by the US Department of Justice in 2020 over its control of about 90% of the online search market.”, so lets take a look back. It started in 1995 and the ‘idea’ was completed in 1997. To turn about the setting in those days Microsoft was merely badgering their lack of knowledge and lam Netscape to get a browser dominance. Two youthful young sprouts namely Larry Page and Sergei Brin were ahead of the pack by a lot. They looked to a solution to search for text in publicly accessible documents offered by web servers, as opposed to other data. Microsoft was still trying to type words like HTTP and the clever people at Microsoft were able to type FTP. In the age of information the Google founders figured a few things out like ‘What are people trying to find’ this was against the grain for Microsoft who thought that corporations were the key and they went to ‘What are corporations willing to pay for’. The subtle difference is that Microsoft was working towards a slice of the $18,843,980,000,000 revenue that the fortune 500 represent. Google on the other hand decided to cater to its 31,000,000 employees. As such one could (oversimplified) cater to the simple fact that it would take Microsoft 9 million years to get as much data as Google. I do emphasis the oversimplification of this. I was not on the mindset of Google at first. You see I was a dedicated Yahoo user. It took 3 years until I saw that Google offered more and better result. As such in 3 years they gained a dominance. They surpassed Yahoo, Excite, Alta Vista and several other players. We can argue that it helped that Microsoft demolished Netscape. And in the decade that followed Google grew in strength and ability to cater to actual users not the CFO’s of 500 corporations. 

So when we see “It is one of several lawsuits that have been filed against the big tech companies as US antitrust authorities attempt to strengthen competition in the industry.” I believe that there is another ploy in play. The mediocrity losers (like Microsoft) want a slice of the cake they have no business being in. It isn’t just the ‘competition’ it is a reversal of technology that is in play. And in that setting the US is damaging the little benefit they have and leaving it all to China and true Chinese innovators like Huawei and Tencent. I reckon that by 2026 the mobile market will be overrun with Huawei in almost every non-americano place. They threw away the benefits when they forced Huawei to release HarmonyOS 5 years ago. 

Now we see that it is available in 77 languages and the turnover (as is) is getting stronger. Even now as EU nations are discarding the fear mongering of anti-China sentiment by American administration, and the strongest response that the EU nations give is ‘Show us evidence’, America has no answer to that other than debatable setting of ‘could’ and ‘expected’ whilst the evidence just isn’t there. And as we see an optional release this year of HarmonyOS NEXT, Android’s bough get broken on their sibling turning adult. So good luck with that.

Now we see a Judge giving us that there is a monopoly setting. I am not debating that (a lack of evidence I have), but the setting that we get from ““Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly,” Judge Mehta wrote in his 277-page opinion” as I see it, the maintenance of a unique field dominance is begotten by the lack of innovation by people like Microsoft who is spreading itself way too thin.  As evidence I ‘present’ Xbox, Solarwinds, CrowdStrike and the list goes on. You see ‘breaking up’ is merely a first step. They will then open the door and the abusive bully (Microsoft) will gleefully shout “Can I play here too?” With a debilitating browser called ‘Edge’. How is that progress? Don’t get me wrong if there is a decent player that can keep up with Google, even Google will applaud that. My worry is that the ideological setting of letting everyone in the sandbox play is all fine, but there is a reason that mothers do not allow toddlers in a sandbox until they reach a certain age. And bar them from playing when they get too old. The worry that I have is that this setting stops Google from evolving beyond the cookie (which is fine by the exploitative advertisers). The setting of other people’s greed who cannot evolve into newer territories. This could now allow Huawei and Tencent to gain even more innovative sides to push into markets where American stage are auto rejected. Tencent is on the cliffhanger to introduce their solution to 150,000,000 homes and they can get there by 2027. 

This will leave Microsoft in a stage where it has no options and no future. As these Fortune 500 will find ways to rise to new frontiers we will see them seeking IBM and Amazon solutions catering a larger downfall of Microsoft. In that stage there is certain a decent amount of space for Google. As they will hand a corporate solution to their ‘office’ suite Microsoft will lose more grounds. The only thing that keeps them up for some time is Excel. But the world is changing what was once a spreadsheet world now becomes an AWS environment and Google can cater there too. I do think that Googles forced push to breaking up is not a great solution, but Google has overcome harder challenges. 

This and my previous article ‘The judge shouldn’t’ gives us the premise that the Antitrust laws are possibly a little obsolete. Microsoft sees this as their ticket in and it is willing to cater to this as it hurts Apple and Google. Two parts the US desperately needs to work at optimum to stop themselves of being overrun by Chinese innovators. You see 7 years ago ByteDance introduced TikTok (not a Peter Pan crocodile). In 7 years it became a near equal of YouTube that was in play 12 years longer. Now I get that YouTube paved the was, but that is the usual tracks for New innovators, they go over the backs from those who went before. Now consider that and the fact that HarmonyOS is about to go toe to toe with Android in only 4 years. That is what I wrong. Not that we think about antitrust. I partially agree with antitrust sentiments. But we need to see that the greed driven use it to keep up, or not to lose their revenue. But that was never the concern of Google (or Apple for that matter). As I see it in the last decade the face of technology was set by Amazon (AWS), Apple (MacWares), Google (Android, G-wares) and IBM (large solutions and Quantum) they create the innovations, players like Microsoft should go under and seek revenue from the Fortune 500. They were the bees knees weren’t they? 

But as I see it, US District Judge Amit Mehta is allowed by law to hand it all over to Chinese innovators. When the EU, Commonwealth nations, Africa and Asia allow these innovator into their governments America becomes a party of one (with 330 million consumers). So consider that the other regions has over 7,500 million people. As I see it it is a hard lesson that America learns twice. Wasn’t the Google premise of 1997 not enough?

Enjoy your day and ponder what benefit was to be had from optionally breaking up Google and who were the actual beneficiaries (not the consumers clearly).

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Politics, Science

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

July 31, 2024 · 16:40

It was never rocket science

Yup, that is the gist of it. And it seems that people are starting to wake up. You see the biggest issue I have had with any mention of AI, is that it doesn’t (yet) exist. People can shout AI on every corner, but soon the realisation comes in that they were wrong all the time will hurt them, it will hurt them badly. And this is merely a sideline to the issue. The issue is Microsoft and lets get through some articles.

1. Microsoft says cyber-attack triggered latest outage
The first one is (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c903e793w74o) where we see “It comes less than two weeks after a major global outage left around 8.5 million computers using Microsoft systems inaccessible, impacting healthcare and travel, after a flawed software update by cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike. While the initial trigger event was a Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) attack… initial investigations suggest that an error in the implementation of our defences amplified the impact of the attack rather than mitigating it,” said an update on the website of the Microsoft Azure cloud computing platform.” The easiest way of explaining this is to compare Azure to a ball. A foot ball has (usually) 12 regular pentagons and 20 regular hexagons. They are stitched together. Now under normal conditions this is fine. However software is not any given shape, implying that a lot more stitches are required. Now consider that Microsoft 365 is used by over a million corporations. Now consider that a lot of them do not use the same configuration. This implies that we have thousand of differently stitched balls and the stitches is where it can go wrong. This is where we see the proverbial “the implementation of our defences amplified the impact of the attack rather than mitigating it” Microsoft has been so driven by using it all, that they merely advance the risk. And it doesn’t end here. CrowdStrike is another example. We see the news and the fake one person claiming responsibility for it. Yet the reality is that there is a lot more wrong than anyone is considering. These two events pretty much prove that Microsoft has policy and procedure flaws. It is easy to blame Microsoft, but the reality is that we see spin and the trust in Microsoft is pretty much gone. People say “Microsoft’s cloud revenue was 39.3% higher”, yes this is the case, and considering that Amazon was originally a ‘bookshop’, so they went against the larger techies like IBM and Microsoft and they got 31% of the global market share. Not bad for a bookshop. And the equation gets worse for Microsoft, these two events could cost them up to 10% market share. In which direction these 10% go is another matter. AWS is not alone here. 

I was serious about not letting Microsoft near my IP. I had hoped that Amazon would take it (they have the Amazon Luna) but it seems that Andy Jesse is not hungry for an additional 5 billion annually (in the first stage). 

And as Microsoft adds more and more to their arsenal these problems will become more frequent and inflicts damage on more of their customers. Do I have evidence? No, but it wasn’t hard and my example might give you the consideration to ponder where you could/should go next. 

2. Microsoft Earnings: Stock Tanks As AI Business Growth Worse Than Expected
In the second story we see (at https://www.forbes.com/sites/dereksaul/2024/07/30/microsoft-earnings-stock-tanks-as-ai-business-growth-worse-than-expected/) that Forbes is giving us “shares of Microsoft cratered about 7% following the earnings announcement, already nursing a more than 8% decline over the last three weeks” with the added “Microsoft’s crucial AI businesses was worse than expected, as its 29% growth in its Azure cloud computing unit fell short of projections of 31%, and sales in its AI-heavy intelligent cloud division was $28.5 billion, below estimates of $28.7 billion” As stated by me (as well as plenty of others) there is no AI. You see AI would give the program thinking skills, they do not have any. They kind of speculate and they have lots of scenario to give you the conditional feeling that they are talking “in your street” but that is not the case. For this simple illustration we get Wired (at https://www.wired.com/story/microsoft-ai-copilot-chatbot-election-conspiracy/) giving us ‘Microsoft’s AI Chatbot Replies to Election Questions With Conspiracies, Fake Scandals, and Lies’, so how does this work? You see the program (LLM) looks at what ‘we’ search for, yet in this the setting is smudged by conspiracy theorists, troll farms and influencers. The first two push the models out of synch. Wired gives us “Research shared exclusively with WIRED shows that Copilot, Microsoft’s AI chatbot, often responds to questions about elections with lies and conspiracy theories.” Now consider that this is pushed onto all the other systems. Then we are treated to “Microsoft’s AI chatbot is responding with out-of-date or incorrect information”, so not only is the data wrong, it is out of date, as I see it what they call ‘training data’ is as I see it incorrect, out of data and unverified. How AI is that? A actual real AI is set on a Quantum computer (IBM has that, although in its infancy) a more robust version of shallow circuits (not sure if we are there yet) and is driven not by binary systems but framed on an Ypsilon particle system, which was proven by a Dutch physicist around 2020 (I forgot the name). This particle has another option. We currently have NULL, Zero and One. The Ypsilon particle has NULL, Zero, One and BOTH. A setting that changes everything.

But the implementation into servers is to be expected around 2037 (a speculation by me) then we get to the thinking programs and an actual AI. So when we see AI, we need to see that is a program that can course through data and give you the most likely outcome. I will admit that for a lot of people it will fit, but not for all and there we get the problem. You see Microsoft will blame all sources and all kind of people, but in the end it will be up to the programmer to show their algorithm is correct and as I am telling you now that it comes down to unverified data. How does that come over to you? 

When you consider that Wired also gave us “it listed numerous GOP candidates who have already pulled out of the race.” The issue of how out of date data is becomes clear. We see all these clever options that others give us, but when some LLM (labeled AI) is un-updated and unreliable, how secure remains your position when you base decision making streams on the wrong data? And that is merely a sales track. 

The last teaspoon is given to us by The Guardian. The Guardian (at https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2024/mar/06/microsoft-ai-explicit-image-safety) gave us on March 7th 2024:

3. Microsoft ignored safety problems with AI image generator, engineer complains
So when you consider the previous parts (especially CrowdStrike) “Shane Jones said he warned management about the lack of safeguards several times, but it didn’t result in any action” Microsoft will state that this is another issue. But I spoke about wrong data, out of date data and unverified data. And now we see that the lack of safeguards and inaction would make things worse and a lot faster than you think. You see as long as there is no real AI, all data needs to be verified and that does not seem to be the case in too many setting. I spoke about policy issues and procedural issues. Well here we get the gist “it didn’t result in any action” and we keep on seeing issues with Microsoft. So how many times will you face this? And that is before people realise that their IP are on Azure servers. So how many procedural flaws will your research we driven into until it is all on a Russian or Chinese or North Korean enabled server (most likely by Russia or China, which is a speculation by me).

As such, it was never rocket science, look at any corporation and in their divisions there will always be one person who thinks of number one (himself) and in that setting how safe are you? 

There is a reason that I do not want Microsoft near my IP. I can only hope that someone waked up and give me a nice retirement present ($30M post taxation would be nice).

Enjoy the day.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Science

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

July 8, 2024 · 16:51

Two issues caught my attention.

The first issue is given to us by the BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx002795738o) The article starts with ‘‘I had to downgrade my life’ – US workers in debt to buy groceries’. In this I have a few speculations. You see Groceries are also set by ‘Permanent Price Adjustment’. This is what the producers of milk, bread and pretty much all items do. You see as they have costs and increased costs for whatever reasons. They pass on these cost to the shop, which in turn passes it onto you, the consumer. In the last 3 years things got to be more expensive and as such you feel that brunt. Per nation this varies. In Australia meat went up in total by 20% (over the last 3 years). Milk less so, but plenty of goods did go up and many have not seen an increase in income for years. So as we see “But after four years of rising prices, her support has worn thin – and every time she shops at the supermarket, she is reminded how things have changed for the worse. Ms Ellis works full-time as a nurse’s assistant and has a second part-time job” So in this case (as a republican minded person) I say that this is not on President Biden, not even on former president Trump. You see this is the consequence of having a $34,000,000,000,000 debt. As such businesses are taxed and as I see it, annually any administration will have to come up with $680,000,000,000 in interest alone. In 2023 the USA received (or allegedly received) $4,440,000,000,000. This implies that 15% of all taxed income goes towards interest on the outstanding debt and I have merely set that to 2%, Now consider that all costs that the government pays for is now down graded by 15% (more likely a higher percentage as the interest is also higher than 2%). Now consider that dairy, bread, meat and other options do not get incentives anymore (or at least a lot less). So there two items alone will be a lot more expensive. Then there is the operations of shops. It goes around again and again and that sets the price in many ways. There are more elements, but I am not privy to them. I warned on this several times over the last 8 years. There was going to be a problem and now people are seeing this happen and that is the beginning of draconian changes. So as Stacey Ellis and others see this happen, they go into ‘blame mode’ but they are blaming the wrong people. This is a failing of the entire administration and it started with former president George W. Bush in 2001. Former president Bill Clinton was the last president where green ink was gracing the US books of accounting. In 24 years all presidents have been pushing the debt forward. There was no exit strategy, just the wishful thinking that ‘tomorrow would be a better day’ and now after 24 years it is close to over. Not just in the USA, Europe is in a near similar place. That is what China had been hoping for so as they set the pressure even higher by getting the better deals, the west and others see the unfolding of economic disasters. And I am no economist! So there is the setting that plenty of others (real economics) should have known this and should have pushed for changes and taxing the rich was never an option. When government overreach with their Credit Card for 10%-20% more annually, at some point the card decline point is reached and that is where we are now. The USA, EU nations and others are getting their cards declined. Banks aren’t able to extent loans and whilst some are creative to pass credits via other nations. The banks are realising that the game is almost over. They might have a few options left but that will depend on how creative they can get. For this (also my speculative view) I point at Silicon Valley Bank (SVB), Silvergate Bank and Signature Bank. Three banks in 2023 with failures. Yet the media never looked at the abundant government loans they had in their books, it was my speculative view that their bonds were an overreach. So else did Janet Yellen keep a close view? At this point we were given ‘US prosecutors probing collapse of Silicon Valley Bank’ which was March 2023 and after that? Nothing as I can tell, as such spokespeople for the SEC, SVB and the Justice Department declined to comment. That was more than a year ago. So why isn’t the media doing their job? These are all elements of a nation that is running out of money and they are afraid to give out the real deal. I get it, it makes sense but it also means that life in the USA will be getting more and more expensive and when small farmers are breaking with the usual trend and start merely supplying their villages and their ‘friends’ the game changes even further. The big players cannot make claims they downgraded small farmers too often so that will have increased pressures to life in the city. And before you classify that this does not matter, be aware that 90% are small farms in the US. So when they hold back 10% of their farmed good for personal settings prices will be driven up even further. There is a setting where the old times could come back. I remember in the 60’s that I went to the potato farmer in a small shop in the street. That time could be back and it will implode most supermarkets. The stage is almost there that the supermarkets will be too expensive for potatoes, vegetables, fruit, dairy products and meat. When that happens the implosion that it sets off will be seen all over the US, especially in the metropolitan regions. Europe will not be far behind that. 

They are all intertwined so the first one to go will push the others over the edge. And when super markets go, where will you get your shopping? I reckon that California will hold out the longest, but in the end they too will have a problem. For the EU nations, France and Germany will hold out the longest. The UK will hold out, but how they will fare is anyones guess. I reckon that London will be the larger problem. The other cities are closer to rural regions, but for them I cannot say how it will evolve. 

So whilst the BBC gives us the partial goods. We need to see that the Stacey Ellis is but an element of a much larger problem and the media had the information for the longest of times. So why did they not inform you? Which stakeholders were part of the problem? All questions that too many are afraid to ask about. 

Have a great day (Second issue in next story).

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

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

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 , , , , , , , ,