We all have those, it isn’t about being nice, or being not so nice. They merely are and they are at times thrust upon us by outside influences. As such I had a few when I was told that ‘Federal judge allows 9/11 lawsuit against Saudi Arabia to proceed’ (at https://www.aa.com.tr/en/americas/federal-judge-allows-9-11-lawsuit-against-saudi-arabia-to-proceed/3672771) I was puzzled. Saudi Arabia was on the side of America as they hunt Al Qaeda, more over there has been more than one report that the CIA aided Osama Bin Laden in their needs in the time frame From 1979 to 1992, as part of CIA activities in Afghanistan, specifically Operation Cyclone. As such why aren’t these people suing the CIA? I am not saying that is the best course of action. I am merely saying that if justice is what you are seeking, that might be one way to go. Of course if it is money you seek, the CIA might not have as much. I got a lot from CBS as well.
They give me (at https://www.cbsnews.com/news/judge-families-911-victims-sue-saudi-arabia-over-hijackers/) ‘Judge allows families of 9/11 victims to sue Saudi Arabia for allegedly helping hijackers’ the setting becomes, what kind of assistance has been given? And lets not forget Osama Bin Laden as a CIA asset would have been able to thwart any ideology and assistance setting to make people pay for what they need. It is a CIA tactic, as such ‘what gives?’
That is the setting we need to look at. So whilst we are looking at “A federal judge in New York denied a motion by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to dismiss a lawsuit brought by families of 9/11 victims who are seeking to hold the Middle Eastern country responsible for potentially providing support to the hijackers, allowing the suit to proceed.” As well as “Saudi Arabia had the suit temporarily dismissed in 2015, before the dismissal was overturned by a federal appeals court. While the appeal was pending in 2016, Congress enacted a law known as the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act, which allowed victims of terror attacks to sue foreign governments and individuals if they provided material support to the attackers. It also gave U.S. courts jurisdiction over potential lawsuits filed over injuries and deaths in attacks on U.S. soil.” Here I get a laughing spell. You see when we consider “Congress enacted a law known as the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act” this little act would put the hairline on the CIA. As such the Saudi Government would be able to push the CIA to spill the beans on several projects running from 1979 through to 1992. And that will et the markers against the CIA for the largest extent. The question becomes does the Saudi Government have the events documented? If might give the Saudi Government the opportunity to get Saad bin Khalid Al Jabri to give evidence as he was a mainstay link between Saudi Arabia and western intelligence agencies, including the Five Eyes alliance, and was credited with helping Muhammad bin Nayef transform and modernise the Saudi security services and their counter-terrorism methods. As such he would be a person Saudi Government would like to ask a few questions of and in that same setting former-CIA Director John Brennan and both would have had ‘interactions’ with Osama Bin Laden. Yes, this case is really a good way to expose the dirty laundry of the CIA.
My interest? I don’t really have any, other than the ‘evidence’ that “Decades ago, investigators also found a notebook in Bayoumi’s home that seemed to show a drawing of a plane and a mathematical equation that could be used to calculate the rate of descent to a target.” I found that piece strange. You see the Microsoft Flight Simulator is an excellent simulator. As such why the ‘evidence’ when a top notch PC has the ability to set a lot more in motion and that is the figment I found missing. That evidence would not need to be in America. A place like Indonesia would be able to hide it, they could have a muslim vacation there and as such there would be a lot to be made available. The entire setting could be moved to a memory stick and kept on the person (or in a safe space) when pieces don’t fit I wonder about things. And this is a yummy exercise and it can go in all the wrong directions and this justice setting introduced by US District Judge George Daniels gives a new setting, one that puts the briefs of the CIA out to the open and the added delicacy is that they get to expose Saad bin Khalid Al Jabri allegedly yet again.
It is but a small cog in the wheels of justice, but in this case the people get their day in court. I merely wonder what court they get into and what Saudi Arabia could bring to the table.
We can focus on the setting that “Omar al-Bayoumi and Fahad al-Thumairy — assisted the hijackers while they were in California.” But the larger issue become, is there a direct link between Osama Bin Laden and these two nationals. Then we get to the setting what these two nationals actually did and did they have certain people allowing them the acts, or merely graced the misuse of Saudi officials. That second part is important, because that comes with a larger setting. There would be little evidence putting it to the front of the evidence pile and whilst that is happening, the Saudi Government will be able to call former-CIA Director John Brennan to the stand with the setting that now current exile Saad bin Khalid Al Jabri gets called into the court and the CIA was so adamant into ‘protecting’ him from exposing the billions he brought to the table.
Yes, this episode of comedy capers will get a few reruns over the entire globe. All whilst it is done in the name of Justice. As such what evidence will suddenly ‘find’ its way to the leaky press corp?
Just a few details to keep in mind here. Have a great day today, my Monday starts is 56 minutes.
That was my setting at the moment. I am not in a rage, there is optional speaking nothing wrong done. But the list has a setting that makes me unease. I al referring to the BBC list of safe places given to me (at https://www.bbc.com/travel/article/20250822-five-of-the-worlds-safest-countries-for-2025) In this list Lindsey Galloway gives us 10 players running for the safest place in the world. The ten contenders are:
1. Iceland 2. Ireland 3. New Zealand 4. Austria 5. Switzerland 6. Singapore 7. Portugal 8. Denmark 9. Slovenia 10. Finland
I don’t disagree, I don’t agree. It could be a valid list. In first Place there is Iceland. Very likely true and that list has three places I have seen and I felt perfectly safe in all of them, so I do not disagree with the list. My bewilderment is that the United Arab Nations are not there, both Dubai and Abu Dhabi are seen by a lot of people the safest places on earth. As such I personally see this list as a way to deter people to go to the UAE in 2025 and 2026. There is a personal setting that the top 25 should have been shown to give a more direct setting, but to give a top 10 and mention merely 5 of them is a way to play this game. And as I see it the BBC is playing a game. They are doing this in September? The year is pretty much over, that is when you consider to be UAE and Saudi Arabia out of bounds, as I see it we can haggle about how save Saudi Arabia is (I actually do not know this) but both these places have an absolute divine climate between October and April. As such I wonder why this list was produced. And with Singapore giving us
“While Singapore’s conservative stance on LGBT+ protections limits some freedoms, with same-sex marriage still prohibited, social progress is visible through events like the growing Pink Dot pride festival. Many reported feeling safer at the rally this year than in past decades as younger Singaporeans push for more widespread acceptance.” I merely wonder why the UAE didn’t make the list. I am not saying this list is wrong, I merely wonder why this list is given and why it is given in this way?
If we have to be neutral in this setting then the other story linked in this list is:
Top 10 most liveable cities for 2025:
1. Copenhagen, Denmark 2. Vienna, Austria (tie) 2. Zurich, Switzerland (tie) 4. Melbourne, Australia 5. Geneva, Switzerland 6. Sydney, Australia 7. Osaka, Japan (tie) 7. Auckland, New Zealand (tie) 9. Adelaide, Australia 10. Vancouver, Canada
This list has a few debatable sides. The fact that Sydney scores better than Auckland, Adelaide or Vancouver is a rather large setting. Housing in Sydney is off the charts, whilst Vancouver and Auckland can give a much better setting, but that is me and I wonder here too why Abu Dhabi didn’t make the list. If affordability is depending on the price if housing (as it needs to be) Zurich could not be in a tied second place either. So why are these lists created and who is wondering what the BBC is up to. Is it catering to political powers and as such to the people who have money to make out of these publications?
It might sound like trivial small ‘bickering’ but in light of the massive opportunity that the UAE hands us all in tourism, this list does not make much sense. Don’t get me wrong. I do not oppose the list as it is made, I oppose the thoughts behind the lists (as I speculatively see it). If the list was a top 25 and merely a top 5 is discussed, I get that, but at present I wonder why this list was even created now (at the end of summer) and personally I have a hard time believing Slovenia made that top 10. Not when the UAE didn’t make that top 10, but that is a personal feeling. I have never been to Slovenia and as such I am not judging, merely wondering out loud.
Well, that is the setting we are given however, it is time to give them some relief. It isn’t just Microsoft, Google and all other peddlers handing over AI like it is a decent brand are involved. So the BBC article (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c24zdel5j18o) giving us ‘Microsoft boss troubled by rise in reports of ‘AI psychosis’’ Is a little warped. First things first. What is Psychosis? Psychosis is a setting where we are given “Psychosis refers to a collection of symptoms that affect the mind, where there has been some loss of contact with reality. During an episode of psychosis, a person’s thoughts and perceptions are disrupted and they may have difficulty recognizing what is real and what is not.” Basically the settings most influencers like to live by. Many do this already for for the record. The media does this too.
As such people are losing grips with reality. So as we see the malleable setting that what we see is not real, we get the next setting. As people lived by the rule of “I’ll believe it when I see it” for decades, this is becomes a shifty setting. So whilst people want to ‘blame’ Microsoft for this, as I see it, the use of NIP (Near Intelligent Parsing) is getting a larger setting. Adobe, Google, Amazon. They are all equally guilty.
So as we wonder how far the media takes this?
I’ll say, this far.
But back to the article. The article also gives us “In a series of posts on X, he wrote that “seemingly conscious AI” – AI tools which give the appearance of being sentient – are keeping him “awake at night” and said they have societal impact even though the technology is not conscious in any human definition of the term.” I respond that giving any IT technology a level 8 question (user level) and it responds like it is casually true, it isn’t. It comes from my mindset that states if sarcasm bounces back, it becomes irony.
So whilst we see that setting in ““There’s zero evidence of AI consciousness today. But if people just perceive it as conscious, they will believe that perception as reality,” he wrote. Related to this is the rise of a new condition called “AI psychosis”: a non-clinical term describing incidents where people increasingly rely on AI chatbots such as ChatGPT, Claude and Grok and then become convinced that something imaginary has become real.” It is kinda true, but the most imaginative setting of the use of Grok tends to be
I reckon we are safe for a few more years. And whilst we pour over the essentials of TRUE AI, we tend to have at least two decades and even then only the really big players can offered it, as such there is a chance the first REAL AI will respond with “我們可以為您提供什麼協助？” As I see it, we are safe for the rest of my life.
So whilst we consider “Hugh, from Scotland, says he became convinced that he was about to become a multi-millionaire after turning to ChatGPT to help him prepare for what he felt was wrongful dismissal by a former employer.” Consider that law shops and most advocacies give initial free advice, they want to ascertain if it pays to go that way for them. So whilst we are given that it doesn’t pay, a real barrister will see that this is either lawless, trivial or too hard to prove. And he will give you that answer. And that is the reality of things. Considering that ChatGPT is any kind of solution makes you eligible for the Darwin award. It is harsh, but that is the setting we are now in. It is the reality of things that matter and that is not on any of these handlers of AI (as they call it). And I have written about AI several times, so it it didn’t stick, its on you.
Have a great day and don’t let the rain bother you, just fire whomever in media told you it was gonna rain and get a better result.
That is at the moment my setting. To get that feeling you need to see the settings. First there is SBS News (at https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/trump-tells-zelenskyy-that-putin-wants-more-of-ukraine-drops-ceasefire-demand-after-summit/wmasymz0g) which gave us on August 18th “US President Donald Trump says Ukraine should make a deal to end the war with Russia because “Russia is a very big power, and they’re not”, after a summit where Vladimir Putin reportedly demanded more Ukrainian land.” With the dead on perfect answer “Zelenskyy rejected the demand” and six hours ago, the BBC gives us ‘Russia launches biggest wave of strikes on Ukraine for weeks’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c62wj8yje2eo) with the sub-line “Russia has launched 574 drones and 40 missiles on Ukraine in one of the heaviest bombardments in weeks, Ukrainian officials say”, as well as “The attacks came as US President Donald Trump spearheads diplomatic moves to halt the war. Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha said the strikes highlighted why efforts to bring it to an end were “so critical”.” This was the setting all along, Russia was never interested in any seize fire, they have too much vested in this war and President Putin needs to show a face of victory. To arrange that, President Trump arranged for a culling of the CIA. The economist (at https://www.economist.com/united-states/2025/08/21/donald-trump-has-purged-one-of-the-cias-most-senior-russia-analysts) gives us “On August 19th her career came to an abrupt end, when Tulsi Gabbard, America’s director of national intelligence, revoked her security clearance, along with those of 36 other serving and former officials accused of “betray[ing] their oath to the Constitution”. Mr Trump’s administration has previously used its control over clearances as a political cudgel against retired officials”, as well as “In June Mr Trump also attacked leaked intelligence assessments by the Defence Intelligence Agency which contradicted his claim to have destroyed Iranian nuclear sites. The CIA has a long history of delivering unwelcome news to presidents—its dissenting analysis during the Vietnam war in the 1960s and the Iraq war in the 2000s resulted in repeated clashes between Langley and the White House—but this level of retribution is unprecedented. “It is hard to overstate the impact on morale,” says a former colleague of the CIA officer. “Everyone is so afraid and looking over their shoulder, asking am I next?”” So whilst we are given this, the BBC also gives us “Ukraine’s air force counted 614 drones and other missiles fired by Russia overnight into Thursday and said it had stopped 577 of them. It is the biggest air attack since July.” The timeline fits the setting. Russia’s losses are starting to mount up towards a ‘too heavy to continue’, Russia might be getting material support by several parties, but the price might soon be the total of their oil reserves and that was not what President Putin was after. Remember how this was a 72 hour run for the Ukraine? We are now in day 1275, we are approaching to the length of WW2, and as it seems Reuters reported on August 18th ““I think we’re pretty close to a deal,” President Trump said, adding: “Ukraine has to agree to it. Maybe they’ll say ‘no’.”” Well, you can bet your house that President Zelensky wasn’t going with that idea. The entire ’peace talks’ was a mere ruse for the largest bombardment to continue. As I see it, President Trump really earned the nick name that 2026 will bring us all President DumbAss. But the larger play is now also coming to light. With the EU (and NATO) busy setting the borders against Russia and Russia having lost too much, and no one will take America serious at this point. China can now sweep the planet, they never dd anything wrong and with the blisters of Huawei bright on the memories of the Chinese, they can sweep the planet. Join China or live in the mess they themselves made. That is the larger setting for China, the UK, Australia and India to join the Chinese collective. New Zealand will abstain, but they are a small nation and no harm to China, as such China will make large trade agreements with New Zealand. That is the reality that 2027 will bring.
China saw her three contenders fight, so he let them and as the EU weaken Russia and America no longer cares, it takes itself out of the equation. Three opposers to the Chinese setting they all dwindles themselves to nothing, China won by never firing a shot. And the CIA is about to crumble there too, with compliments by President DumbAss. It is about to become a whole new world. Oh, and Russia? China will take care of that the moment they makes one wrong move. Did you think that 3.2 million troops including their 660,000 paramilitary troops have been sitting on their hands? Russia wasted most of its 1.32 million active soldiers, 2 million reservists, and 250,000 paramilitary personnel on a war with the Ukraine they never needed to have. As such the losses makes China the only power to consider and BRICS gives them protection from the only army with enough manpower to slowdown China, namely India. The America Army is busy arranging the red carpet for a war criminal. As for the Russian losses at present
Have a great day, I recommend you brush up on your Chinese rather soon.
That is the setting I was given this morning. After I have been saying for a few weeks now that the pieces aren’t fitting in regards to a few things. The BBC now gives us (12 hours ago) ‘The US economy is a puzzle but the pieces aren’t fitting together’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cwypgx90243o) where we are being told “They say his tariffs and crackdown on immigrants risk a return of 1970s-esque “stagflation”, when a sudden oil shock prompted stagnant growth and spiraling prices, except this time the crisis would be self-inflicted. The White House has just as steadfastly dismissed those concerns, attacking the experts – and, in the case of the US Bureau of Labor Statistics commissioner, firing her”, as well as “A few days later, Moody’s Analytics economist Mark Zandi declared on social media that the economy was “on the precipice of a recession””
We then read “On Friday, the US government reported that spending at retailers and restaurants rose 0.5% from June to July – and that spending in June had been stronger than previously estimated. “Consumers are down but not out,” wrote Michael Pearce, deputy chief US economist at Oxford Economics, which is predicting a modest recovery in spending in the months ahead, as tax cuts and a stock market recovery boost confidence.” And as I see it, there is someone adhering to specialized requests, on the go at the setting of someone. The article then states the setting that is ‘perceived’ as “forecasters expect price increases to widen in the months ahead, as firms sell down pre-tariff stock and raise prices, now that they have more confidence about what the tariff policies might be. That’s why there was so much focus on the producer price index, which measures wholesale prices commanded by US producers before they hit consumers, offering a clue to what’s coming. It accelerated at the fastest pace in more than three years in July.” I saw this in a few ways. Consider the tourism industry. We see clear fall down issues. And would luck have it, the other are responding in a very similar way. Forbes gives us ‘New $250 Visa Integrity Fee Will Cost US $11 Billion, Say Tourism Officials’ the story goes repeated by MSN, and others. At the same time we see TTW (Travel and Tour world) release over a dozen articles in the last day on other places doing other things, like giving us ‘Vermont Unifies New Hampshire, Maine, New York, Wisconsin in Boosting Tourism Industry Attracting US and Canada Tourists During This Fall’ All whilst the larger picture is that “Canadian tourism to the US has declined due to tariffs and anti-Canadian rhetoric, with a 38% drop in road trips and 24% drop in air travel in May.” And the same numbers seems to apply for June, July and likely august too. So the picture is distorted and someone with larger fingers is juicing the numbers in different stages and states. All whilst TTW used to give us a limited number of views, someone is thrashing the typewriters there giving us a large amounts of ‘debatable’ data sources. Someone does not want us to see the setting that things are a lot worse for America than the media is willing to make us realize and that it merely part of it all.
All whilst NPR radio gives us ‘Trump is tightening the screws on corporate America — and CEOs are staying mum’ which comes (at https://www.npr.org/2025/08/14/nx-s1-5501591/trump-corporate-america-capitalism) with “Corporate America doesn’t want to fight with President Trump in public. But as a result, it’s ceding him an unprecedented amount of control over the shape — and future — of U.S. business. In the past week, the president has turned up the heat on big companies and their CEOs to an extent that is unprecedented even by Trump’s norms-shattering standards. He has publicly attacked companies and their executives throughout his political career — but now he’s demanding firings of executives who aren’t even household names, such as a corporate economist at Goldman Sachs.” Bad news is not allowed in America, not even a little. As I see it, the puzzle pieces don’t fit because the willing minority doesn’t want to give yo the goods, they want to get the jobs they aren’t qualified for or they don’t want to lose their jobs and that is because there are three more years of Trump and Elon Musk is likely the only one to be able to survive this setting, and because he is likely to be sitting on another trillion dollars of value. So why haven’t we heard from Jerome Powell? And CNN gave us (three days ago) ‘Trump is considering suing Jerome Powell, White House says’ (at https://edition.cnn.com/2025/08/12/economy/trump-lawsuit-fed-chair-powell) with the setting of ““Fortunately, the economy is so good that we’ve blown through Powell and the complacent Board. I am, though, considering allowing a major lawsuit against Powell to proceed because of the horrible, and grossly incompetent, job he has done in managing the construction of the Fed Buildings,” Trump wrote on his social media platform”, as well as “Firing Powell would be a legally complicated endeavor, given that Senate-confirmed members of the Fed’s board can only be fired “for cause.” However, Trump seems keen on homing in on the Fed’s multibillion-dollar building renovation as a possible reason that would merit a “for cause” firing. The president claimed the renovation should have been a “$50 Million Dollar fix up. Not good!”” A setting that could erupt in a messy situation. I ‘personally’ don’t like the guy, but as far as I can see, he’s done a really good job with the pawns and issues he could have played. He has been enormously good for America and that needs to be said. Whoever would replace him would not likely be able to do better and that would be another iron in the fire giving President Trump a heartache all over the financial setting. As I see it, Canada is lucky to get the Former British Bank governor as Prime minister of Canada. That man can slice and dice whatever America throws the way of Canada. At present Canada created new channels of income with Mexico and Europe whilst depriving America of these settings. There never will be be a 51st state for America.
Oh, and how is America’s economy good? China has been able to stranglehold (America’s way of putting it) on rare earths minerals. So how much of these rare earths come from China? The Pentagon gave us “The Department of Defense has made a substantial commitment to domestic rare earth production by acquiring $400 million in MP Materials preferred stock. This investment converts to common shares, giving the Pentagon a 15% ownership stake and positioning it as the company’s largest shareholder, surpassing previous major stakeholders including BlackRock Fund Advisors.” So where are these materials precisely coming from?
Small questions that have a larger impact on business. At Present China has opened new Channels to the UAE and (speculatively) Egypt as well. Egypt is looking forward to getting its fingers on the Chinese J-35A Stealth Fighter. I’ve been told that it is a cheaper version of the J20 mighty dragon that is at present not seen outside of China.
But these parts are all a setting of a larger debate, a debate that gives us that America is losing defense contracts all over the globe, and China is ready to give it a go. How accurate these ‘facts’ and numbers are are currently not on the minds of western media. Still defense is merely one angle that is sowing the trend of recession. As others are ‘silenced’ on the settings and it merely on the front of AI, we see debatable settings. Which in light of energy flaws is a super hilarious setting. These systems need electricity (and a lot of it), so how that plays out is anyones guess.
So it is nice of the BBC to wake up, but a lot more is required to give us the goods. So Auf Wiener Schnitzel everyone and have a great day, its 16:39 and as such I have mucho food on the brain at present. It is still Friday in Vancouver, so they have some time to wait until they can have this German delicacy themselves.
That is where we need to look, the small stuff. In the first there is the BBC, who gives us a story that seems nice in one setting, but in the other setting we need to ask ourselves serious questions. Now as a warning I need to give you a fair warning. I am a person of ‘decent’ taste. Yet in tis universe you have people that are ‘allowed’ to give fashion knowledge and I couldn’t be further away from that cluster anywhere else in this universe. So, when you seek fashion advice. I am not part of that cluster, so be aware. As I said the BBC has the first setting (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cp8zwdy98k8o) where we see ‘Claire’s falls into administration with 2,150 jobs at risk’ and the hidden gem is already there. You see when we see “Fashion accessories chain Claire’s has collapsed into administration in the UK and Ireland, putting 2,150 jobs at risk. The company has 278 shops in the UK and 28 in Ireland but has been struggling with falling sales and fierce competition.” Now consider a simple truth. 278 shops. Now it is seen as a little speciality, yet how many fashion accessory shops are there? Now consider that there was a setting that the quality of life would be dwindling down as it has been for around 20 years. So in what universe does it make sense to have a cluster of 278 shops? In a world where there are “Over 10,000 businesses in the broader Clothing Retailing sector. This includes everything from large chains to smaller boutiques and specialized stores.” So, this has been going on for the better part of a decade and Claire’s could have been dwindling down for half a decade, but they didn’t and now they collapsed into Administration and put 2150 jobs at risk. So, as we are now given “Caitlin, 21 (left) and Amy, 16 (right) from Oxfordshire were shopping at Claire’s in central London on Wednesday and said the news was “quite sad because people have been going there since they were little. It’s a part of my childhood personally, said Caitlin, said she used to go a lot when she was around 11 years old.”” So, how was that realistic? I get it, we all want our knick knacks and that cluster can be found on both side of the specter of genders, But as we see it this group largely caters to one gender. This is not an issue, but with the dwindling down of the quality of life you cannot hide behind “But it is only £5-£7” in an age where many people have to turn over every penny to make it through the month. Don’t think I am ‘heartless’ (I kinda am) and people should be able to afford that once a month, but that is a far stretch from ‘once a week’, as such the setting was already a decrease of 75%, as such steps had to be taken years ago, but the ego of the people behind Claire’s had to intervene years ago. So what gives people the idea to make a ‘terrible’ setting from this?
The (sort of) hilarious stage from “The move in the UK comes after it filed for bankruptcy in the US earlier this month, where the firm said it was suffering from people moving away from bricks-and-mortar shops. The firm has $690m (£508m) of debt.” What were these ego trippers hoping for Unicorns? The setting from a $690 million gives a straight setting to my point of view. So whilst it is nice to give two people a voice, the setting is that every woman from 15-21 should be handed £5 to spend at Claire’s and when you see that isn’t possible you can clearly see that the people behind Claire’s should have acted years ago and not hide behind the wish for unicorns. Not when you are a mere 2.78% of a group and you are $690 million in debt. Seems a little short sighted doesn’t it? So, when we get “Claire’s and Icing, and is owned by a group of firms, including investment giant Elliott Management.” We might consider the setting that investment giant Elliott Management had made a silly investment in an economic downturn of the people. Some win, some lose and they lost. It is as simple as that.
In that same setting the ending of the article is sort of hilarious when we consider ““A lot of that category is sourced from Asia, and any increase in import costs hits hard when your price points are low and margins are tight,” retail analyst Catherine Shuttleworth” It isn’t merely that, the setting is that there are less pennies for the cluster they were aiming for, for over a decade. I am willing to go one step further. This step could have been predicted since 2008. I am willing to lay a bet that people at Elliott Management would have ‘stated’ “This will turn around, the economy is expanding. Wait and you’ll see” That is my speculated view, and I am seemingly right, to wait until there was a debt of $690 million could be construed as evidence.
So this is the first story, the second one is given to us by CBC. I have written about this side for over two weeks and here I have a few issues. The story reads correctly and I have no issues with the story itself, but it also hits on a few sides that has ‘shortfalls’ (as I personally see it). The story (at https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/las-vegas-tourism-canadian-slump-1.7607707) gives us ‘Las Vegas is hurting as tourism drops. Are Canadians behind the Sin City slump?’ There is a larger setting and we love to take credit at times as it is the right of Canadians. So when we see “Las Vegas is in the midst of a slump, with the number of tourists down sharply as Canadians in particular avoid Sin City amid bilateral bad blood over trade. The total number of visitors is off more than 11 per cent year-over-year, according to data from the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority, one of the most dramatic declines in recent memory outside of the pandemic.” After which we are given the numbers of “Drop in Canadian air travelers to Las Vegas” and these numbers are swallowed whole. My issue is that there we see less than 100K visitors, that’s fair and it matter, but the other side of the equation is that we see a top of 11%, so at what point do we get to the point that these 11% are in no way to be seen as the ‘hardship’ given to us, unless the 11% is a lot bigger than anticipated I reckon that we might see an 11% loss as Canadians avoiding Las Vegas and they are merely a small group of a much larger issue. If we now see a $15,000 bond for tourists, which might give us that 80% of all foreign tourists are avoiding America. You see, 89% of tourist should support the larger setting of Las Vegas, unless someone was living under the assumption that Las Vegas could continue to support itself with 92% filled. Now we get the betting place long out on a mere 3% shortfall, not the best betting setting for ‘the’ house, is it?
So when we are given the stage by MGM Resorts president and CEO Bill Hornbuckle said the number of Canadian visitors started to fall earlier this year and they hold some of the city’s top properties, such as Aria, Bellagio and the Cosmopolitan and part of the NHL rink, T-Mobile Arena. A dire setting for a company relying on 92% filling and coming up short 3% of that number. I reckon that more than one person are on the betting stage of numbers and when you come up short over the whole range by 3%, you will toll the bells of panic.
Yet then we get the ‘goods’. You see, the numbers do not add up. We are given “As the director of the university’s business and economic research centre, he crunched the numbers and found Canadians contributed $3.6 billion US to the local economy last year. Canadian spending supported some 43,000 jobs in the region, more than those employed in the manufacturing sector, Miller said. That $3.6-billion figure comes close to the economic output of the local Nellis Air Force base — and that’s saying something, given it’s one of the largest and most important military installations in the U.S., with some 15,000 personnel.” In the first setting, some might find the ‘observation’ of “he crunched the numbers and found Canadians contributed $3.6 billion US to the local economy last year” I reckon they had to have these numbers clearly ahead of schedule as it sets the advertisement budgets (nearly everywhere) and if the loss of these numbers are set to 11%, the news is much worse than we get and the setting of Las Vegas is likely more dire than we are meant to believe. It implies that Asian and European visitors are connected to this and the losses are worse than given at present. And my view is warranted by other views. A source gives us that “Passenger volume at Harry Reid International Airport also declined 6.3%, from 5 million to 4.7 million” that number implies that the numbers are down from one source by over 300K visitors. I reckon that the bulk of tourists would come by plane. Another source gives us “Visitors to Las Vegas mainly come from Mexico (989,000 arrivals), Canada (886,000 arrivals), the United Kingdom (482,000 arrivals), Australia (152,000 arrivals), and Germany (125,000 arrivals).” That sounds nice, but the (as the expression goes) whales from Asia is the larger setting and when they stay away Las Vegas hurts a lot more. These 12 people represents millions of dollars and a decadent lifestyle. When that falls away the pressure isn’t merely 11%, it is a lot larger. The setting is a lot larger as we don’t have anything passed November 2024 yet and that is the larger setting as we get the larger stage of Visitor volume and convention attendance. I reckon that in Q4 2025 we are likely to get to see the larger downturn and when we get to losses of whales the larger truth of what Las Vegas is losing in income. As I see it, there is a larger truth behind the second part of the headline ‘Are Canadians behind the Sin City slump?’ I think they are part of it, but there is a larger truth hidden, America (basically its president) gave us all a headache and the fact that there are larger settings in play make it clear to me that it isn’t just Canada, there are more settings in play for Las Vegas and the news is a lot worse than anyone is willing to admit. The simpler setting (a highly speculative stage) that the loss of 100 Asian Moby Dicks represent almost the entire 11% loss that Las Vegas sees as represented, so the losses are a lot worse than given at present. When you consider that the ‘panic’ we see is more represented by 22% loss, a stage no one in Las Vegas wants to admit to is driving people like Bill Hornbuckle to near desperation, especially as his bonus is likely linked to ‘continuance’ of revenue.
So my speculation might be wrong but it seems to make sense. But I need to emphasize that my view is speculative.
Have a great day and don’t put it all on number 10 (it is crowded by labor).
During today’s pre-morning (last night) I was alerted to a story on the BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckglnk6yxlko). Now, I get the sentiment, but there is something off about it all.
It is about Bourbon and the headline gives us ‘How Kentucky bourbon went from boom to bust’ and we get a few issues in this article. But first (famous last words). I am not a great drinker. I have a sip every now and then and my personal favourite is Cognac XO. I am driven towards Martell or Hennessy. I had a Cognac booklet on Cognac Brands at some point and these two were set to 95.2 and 95.1 (I honestly forgot which got which) there was also a brand (forgot the name) that scored a little higher (around 97.4) and it was almost twice the price. I had one glass and I could not tell the difference and why pay twice as much when my tastebuds cannot differentiate? So I kept to these two and budget driven as I tend to be, the cheapest of the two. Beyond that I drink Rum, Glenfiddich single malt and the last bottle of Rum I bought was three years ago and I still haven’t finished the bottle. So, you can say I am not much for drinking, but I am not anti-alcohol (except when driving a car).
So what gives? We are given the quote “President Donald Trump’s global tariffs have been the final straw. The EU has announced retaliatory tariffs against US goods, including Kentucky bourbon and Californian wine, although implementation has been delayed for six months. Meanwhile, most provinces in Canada have stopped importing American alcoholic beverages in retaliation. The country accounts for about 10% of Kentucky’s $9bn (£6.7bn) whiskey and bourbon business.” And to this (in part) I say ‘Yay Canada’ but that is not the part that ‘bothers’ me. The response was nice to read, but it wasn’t it either ““That’s worse than a tariff, because it’s literally taking your sales away, completely removing our products from the shelves … that’s a very disproportionate response,” Lawson Whiting, the CEO of Brown-Forman, which produces Jack Daniels, Woodford Reserve and Old Forester, said back in March when Canadian provinces announced their plan to stop buying US booze.” (That will teach yanks not to mess with our Canadian brethren and the BS quote of “Canada would make a great 51st state”) The issue is seen down the article. It starts off with:
Liquor giant Diageo, reported that sales of Bulleit, a Kentucky distillery that makes bourbon, rye and whiskey, were down 7.3% this fiscal year.
Wild Turkey – a Kentucky bourbon owned by Campari – sales were down 8.1% over the past six months.
While big, international brands will likely be able to weather the storm, the sales hit has led to a growing list of casualties.
In July, LMD Holdings filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy – just one month after opening the Luca Mariano Distillery in Danville, Kentucky.
This spring, Garrard County Distilling went into receivership.
And in January, Jack Daniel’s parent company closed a barrel-making plant in Kentucky.
It is the setting I gave above. What business model is set to “The country accounts for about 10% of Kentucky’s $9bn (£6.7bn) whiskey and bourbon business.” To set the stage where one country is responsible for 10% of its revenue and we see businesses go into receivership. That part does not make sense. As I see it, there are more places where US drinks are starting to get banned, or the reason of bankruptcy is not what we read here. So where one country stops drinking and we see the setting of a ‘bust economy regarding Whiskey sours?’ Perhaps not the most eloquent setting, but the stage seems to be ‘rigged’ in some way.
So as we are focussing on the smell, I will ‘plagiarize’ Shakespeare and hide behind William’s quote “Something is rotten in the state of Kentucky” There is a chance that these distillers were barely making the revenues and that is fine. But for one nation (named Canada) to have this big an impact all while we see drops in revenue around 10% does not make sense to me. I reckon that America needs to ‘embrace’ its local product and not hide behind the sour grapes from France (ok, that’s funny).
I am not a drinker, but I know what I like and it is a distinct taste and it includes bourbon, which I haven’t drunk in years and at present I support my Canadian brethren (sisters too) and I stopped buying American Drinks (sorry Ryan Reynolds) for now. Fortunately for me Cognac is French and Glenfiddich is Scottish, so for the next few years I’m good.
Did anyone else pick up on the skewness of this setting? And if we are not given the right parts in this equation, what else in America’s economy is not sounding right to you?
Anyway, I am now 240 minutes from breakfast, but whose counting? Canada has its own versions of Whiskey, Rum and even a butter tart vodka. So look hard and you’ll find a reason to support Canada, so Commonwealthian’s unite.
Have a great day and consider Rum from Quebec (just learned about this, I never knew).
That happens to all of us and it happened to me today. The BBC informs us on a setting so infuriating that it boggled my mind. The BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c5yp9w5kyw7o) informs us that ‘BBC finds electrocuted, drowned and starved cats in online torture groups’ and this angered me beyond believe.
With the smaller byline “Kittens are being purchased to be tortured online, the BBC investigation has found” then we get the goods in a not so nice way and we are given “The 16-year-old girl, and boy, aged 17, who cannot be named for legal reasons, pleaded guilty after the kittens were found cut open and strung up. Knives, blowtorches and scissors were also found at the scene.” So not for legal reasons? I have one better. My mind was exploring my darker side and I came up with an alternative. We have a device (see below)
it comes from the movie A Clockwork Orange, a masterpiece by Stanley Kubrick. So these two degenerates get the device, so that they cannot close their eyes. Watching a really large screen of their parents. Its on their bodies several sandwiches drowning in honey. Then every 10 minutes we drop in a scorpion. And the fun begins, they might resist for a while, but when they twitch in any way they run the risk of getting stung by a scorpion, and whilst the toxin is driving them more and more mad with pain they get more stings until the parents die and the kids watched it all. So how long until these people scream about cruel and unusual punishment? How much of a lesson does it take for these degenerates require to learn their lesson? Don’t come crying to me about harsh. The kittens and cats they killed didn’t get too much of a chance either (read: none).
As such I feel perfectly vindicated here. And don’t worry, there are 8 billion people. I don’t think that the four lost parents will be an issue to anyone.
Sounds harsh? I don’t think so. As I am being told (by the BBC) “a new video showing the torture and execution of a kitten or cat was uploaded approximately every 14 hours.” As such there is a chance that this year alone 324 cats of kittens were killed and as such we can have a little fun. The second idea is to drop streams of honey on the parents and watch thousands of ants devour the honey, the salt of the parents and then the parents, all whilst their torturing children get to watch it all. We could also upload these video’s but as cats might not appreciate this we can forego that setting. So how do the legal reasons sound now?
I never minded killing for business, killing of an animal for food or pure defense is OK. I prefer to go out of the way off the animal, but that isn’t always optional. And I get why you in self defense need to kill a lion, cougar or a tiger, but I prefer out of its way whenever possible. And I definitely go into its domain to ‘test fate’ That is simply stupid. So I get that you might be repulsed of this idea and I do not hold it against you. Just make sure these children learn that people like me exist and for the most we tend to be invisible. Lets see if they enjoy their preferred hobby now. And that’s just me having fun. Although the idea of setting the nastiness of nature in the path of anyone intentionally harming a kitten is just my kind of fun. So many dangers that nature brings. Like a shoddy bridge two feet over a pool of quicksand. The idea is actually riveting.
Do you think that these two morons will take a larger lesson from here, or are they a lost cause?
Have a contemplating day today. There is nothing good in this story, I admit that. I just got so angry that anyone would torture a cat or kitten. Oh, dropping their parents in a tiger cage is also an idea. I have to film this and show these kids what happened when cats from up and go big. Oh, I forgot. Why the parents? They raised the morons and this is something that parents had to prevent from what I call zero moment. The moment the idea sprung into their heads.
That is what I see, the need of some. You see, as far as I can tell, we see all kinds of pretenders (especially around Gaza and Palestine) but for the most, these losers are all about the limelight and none of them are about resolving anything. They go on binges around anti-Israel events, they go on binges around Palestine, but in the end, they merely like the limelight. Yes, it is getting to me. For the most I am on the “Eradicate Hamas” train. But there is a setting that needs illumination. You see I have already done this 3-4 times over the last two years. Arab News gave us yesterday (at https://www.arabnews.com/node/2610380/saudi-arabia) ‘KSrelief extends support to 5 nations in need’ actual events that the west is oblivious about. KSrelief has done plenty in the Arabic settings and now we see that Yemen, Jordan, Syria, Pakistan and Lebanon are getting help and I reckon that some of this has been going on for some time.
We are getting that “In Yemen’s Aden governorates, the agency concluded a week-long general surgery project recently, during which 18 volunteers performed 26 operations.” It comes with the additional “KSrelief also launched the distribution of 6,000 cartons of dates in Yemen’s Al-Mahrah governorate, benefiting 42,000 displaced and vulnerable people — part of a broader plan to distribute 625,000 cartons across 12 governorates.” You can read the rest in the article. What I do want to give you is the end, which is “Since its launch in May 2015, KSrelief has implemented 3,612 projects worth more than $8.1 billion across 108 countries, in partnership with more than 325 organizations.” As I see it, KSrelief has achieved more in 10 years than the United Nations has in over 25 years. There is a chance that I am getting it wrong, but that is the political side of this that we are seen BS on many levels even though we get through AlJazeera (at https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/7/26/israel-says-its-distributing-aid-in-gaza-so-why-are-people-starving) where we get ‘Israel says it’s distributing aid in Gaza, so why are people starving?’ Where we are given “Israel claims that shortfalls are occurring because much of the aid lies “rotting in the sun” because the UN has not distributed it. Israel’s military radio, Kan, recently reported that the Israeli army has burned or buried some 1,000 trucks’ worth of aid that it deemed spoiled or expired.” I personally feel that it is a setting of she said versus she said and the media cannot be trusted to give us the truth. There are too many games played by the United Nations and by Hamas. This is a personal feeling, but there are too many factors and in earnest none of them can be trusted. I don’t trust the Israeli side, I do not trust the UN side, not the BBC side and certainly nothing that Hamas gives us.
Yet what is done and I feel that I can trust this is what Arab News gives us about KSrelief and I feel I can trust what I see on these fields. The assistance that KSRelief gives us in these last 10 years sits well with me. My problem is that I hope that the western media will give KSrelief that they deserve. I feel that I am about the only non-muslim that is paying attention to what they do.
I went through the first 5 pages of links searching for KSrelief and none of them are western media. It is basically despicable to see such non-caring and I personally blame the western need for digital dollars. We might ‘hide’ behind that things are more complex and that is fine, but at present Saudi Arabia is getting aid to 5 places that seemingly are ignored by western media. Mostly I stay away from Gaza issues as I was there in 1982 and I have had my fill of it, It is a drawn setting of something I do not understand. It is prolonged by politics I do not consider valid and politics that seems weird (optionally because I do not understand it) But I was there (44 years ago) and nowadays I still do not understand it and don’t try to convince me as most people are shouting what they read, but what you read is basically false, so there. Yet KSrelief is giving us the setting that matters and even as it seems trivial they are getting help to the people who need it, one package at a time and in this we see That in these 5 nations they brought relief and aided over 50,000 people. That is real assistance and it might not be enough, but it is a start and in the end they will have given “a broader plan to distribute 625,000 cartons across 12 governorates” in Yemen, a setting that is working, and as I see it more was achieved than the United Nations, now my thought might be off here, it is fair to say that, but at present we see all these political settings and we do not see any actual results in Yemen. That is what the thoughts get to when we see the media. There is a larger need other instances to show us what is done, the media is not giving them to us, so who can? Perhaps Arab News could follow through with an expose as to what the United Nations achieve and what KSrelief gets done. The issue is that at present KSrelief has implemented 3,612 projects worth more than $8.1 billion across 108 countries. Whilst on the side of the UN (regarding the UN) we are given “From 2014 to 2020, U.N. agencies spent nearly $4.5 billion in Gaza, including $600 million in 2020 alone” seemingly it isn’t working in Gaza, so what did they achieve in Yemen? These question are important, because as I see it the UN is merely a political beast and no one knows what funds are used and what makes it to these people out there. We might get images of rotting food at Rafah, yet what is true remains to be seen and too many media is a political tool for the ones that care of self, not of the victims.
And that needs to be addressed and it needs to be addressed soon. I personally believe that any media guilty of spreading disinformation needs to be held to account and with that the media guilty needs to be blocked from transmitting and other needs to give voice to these media players to be cut short from transmitting. I know it is a tall order and I have no idea how to do that (verification of data) but something needs to be done. For the same setting is the question of I am a source of information or a source of disinformation. It will be a fair question, because I no longer know and my visit to rafah in 1982 is no guarantee that I am giving information regarding Gaza. I feel that Arab News is correctly informing me regarding KSrelief, but that is all.
We need to see where aid is required and the media needs to illuminate this, not illuminate the path that it is giving regarding what the media stakeholders what us to know and how much we are told. That is all.
So I apologise is this writing is a little all over the place, but there are issues with this setting. I hope I made at least that clear. So have a great day and try to find some joy this Sunday.
That is at times the issue, I would add to this “especially when we consider corporations the size of Microsoft” but this is nothing directly on Microsoft (I emphasize this as I have been dead set against some ‘issues’ Microsoft dealt us to). This is different and I have two articles that (to some aspect) overlap, but they are not the same and overlap should be subjectively seen.
The first one is BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4gdnz1nlgyo) where we see ‘Microsoft servers hacked by Chinese groups, says tech giant’ where the first thought that overwhelmed me was “Didn’t you get Azure support arranged through China?” But that is in the back of my mind. We are given “Chinese “threat actors” have hacked some Microsoft SharePoint servers and targeted the data of the businesses using them, the firm has said. China state-backed Linen Typhoon and Violet Typhoon as well as China-based Storm-2603 were said to have “exploited vulnerabilities” in on-premises SharePoint servers, the kind used by firms, but not in its cloud-based service.” I am wondering about the quote “not in its cloud-based service” I have questions, but I am not doubting the quote. To doubt it, one needs to have in-depth knowledge and be deeply versed in Azure and I am not one of these people. As I personally see it, if one is transgressed upon, the opportunity rises to ‘infect’ both, but that might be my wrong look on this. So as we are given ““China firmly opposes and combats all forms of cyber attacks and cyber crime,” China’s US embassy spokesman said in a statement. “At the same time, we also firmly oppose smearing others without solid evidence,” continued Liu Pengyu in the statement posted on X. Microsoft said it had “high confidence” the hackers would continue to target systems which have not installed its security updates.” This makes me think about the UN/USA attack on Saudi Arabia regarding that columnist no one cares about, giving us the ‘high confidence’ from the CIA. It sounds like the start of a smear campaign. If you have evidence, present the evidence. If not, be quiet (to some extent).
We then get someone who knows what he in talking about “Charles Carmakal, chief technology officer at Mandiant Consulting firm, a division of Google Cloud, told BBC News it was “aware of several victims in several different sectors across a number of global geographies”. Carmakal said it appeared that governments and businesses that use SharePoint on their sites were the primary target.” This is where I got to thinking, what is the problem with Sharepoint? And when we consider the quote “Microsoft said Linen Typhoon had “focused on stealing intellectual property, primarily targeting organizations related to government, defence, strategic planning, and human rights” for 13 years. It added that Violet Typhoon had been “dedicated to espionage”, primarily targeting former government and military staff, non-governmental organizations, think tanks, higher education, the media, the financial sector and the health sector in the US, Europe, and East Asia.”
It sounds ‘nice’ but it flows towards the thoughts like “related to government, defence, strategic planning, and human rights” for 13 years”, so were was the diligence to preventing issues with Sharepoint and cyber crime prevention? So consider that we are given “SharePoint hosts OneDrive for Business, which allows storage and synchronization of an individual’s personal work documents, as well as public/private file sharing of those documents.” That quote alone should have driven the need for much higher Cyberchecks. And perhaps they were done, but as I see it, it has been an unsuccessful result. It made me (perhaps incorrectly) think so many programs covering Desktops, Laptops, tablets and mobiles over different systems a lot more cyber requirements should have been in place and perhaps they are, but it is not working and as I see, it as this solution has been in place for close to 2 decades, the stage of 13 years of attempted transgression, the solution does not seem to be safe.
And the end quote “Meanwhile, Storm-2603 was “assessed with medium confidence to be a China-based threat actor””, as such, we stopped away from ‘high confidence’ making this setting a larger issue. And my largest issue is when you look to find “Linen Typhoon” you get loads of links, most of them no older than 5 days. If they have been active for 13 years. I should have found a collection of articles close to a decade old, but I never found them. Not in over a dozen of pages of links. Weird, isn’t it?
The next part is one that comes from TechCrunch (at https://techcrunch.com/2025/07/22/google-microsoft-say-chinese-hackers-are-exploiting-sharepoint-zero-day/) where we are given ‘Google, Microsoft say Chinese hackers are exploiting SharePoint zero-day’ and this is important as a zero-day, which means “The term “zero-day” originally referred to the number of days since a new piece of software was released to the public, so “zero-day software” was obtained by hacking into a developer’s computer before release. Eventually the term was applied to the vulnerabilities that allowed this hacking, and to the number of days that the vendor has had to fix them.” This implies that this issue has been in circulation for 23 years. And as this implies that there is a much larger issue as the software solution os set over iOS, Android and Windows Server. Microsoft was eager to divulge that this solution is ‘available’ to over 200 million users as of December 2020. As I see it, the danger and damage might be spread by a much larger population.
Part of the issues is that there is no clear path of the vulnerability. When you consider the image below (based on a few speculations on how the interactions go)
I get at least 5 danger points and if there a multiple servers involved, there will be more and as we are given “According to Microsoft, the three hacking groups were observed exploiting the zero-day vulnerability to break into vulnerable SharePoint servers as far back as July 7. Charles Carmakal, the chief technology officer at Google’s incident response unit Mandiant, told TechCrunch in an email that “at least one of the actors responsible” was a China-nexus hacking group, but noted that “multiple actors are now actively exploiting this vulnerability.”” I am left with questions. You see, when was this ‘zero day’ exploit introduced? If it was ‘seen’ as per July 7, when was the danger in this system solution? There is also a lack in the BBC article as to properly informing people. You cannot hit Microsoft with a limited information setting when the stakes are this high. Then there is the setting of what makes Typhoon sheets (linen) and the purple storm (Violet Typhoon) guilty as charged (charged might be the wrong word) and what makes the March 26th heavy weather guilty?
I am not saying they cannot be guilty, I am seeing a lack of evidence. I am not saying that the people connecting should ‘divulge’ all, but more details might not be the worst idea. And I am not blaming Microsoft here. I get that there is (a lot) more than meets the eye (making Microsoft a Constructicon) But the lack of information makes the setting one of misinformation and that needs to be said. The optional zero day bug is one that is riddles of missing information.
So then we get to the second article which also comes from the BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/czdv68gejm7o) given us ‘OpenAI and UK sign deal to use AI in public services’ where we get “OpenAI, the firm behind ChatGPT, has signed a deal to use artificial intelligence (AI) to increase productivity in the UK’s public services, the government has announced. The agreement signed by the firm and the science department could give OpenAI access to government data and see its software used in education, defence, security, and the justice system.” Microsoft put billions into this and this is a connected setting. How long until the personal data of millions of people will be out in the open for all kinds of settings?
So as we are given “But digital privacy campaigners said the partnership showed “this government’s credulous approach to big tech’s increasingly dodgy sales pitch”. The agreement says the UK and OpenAI may develop an “information sharing programme” and will “develop safeguards that protect the public and uphold democratic values”.” So, data sharing? Why not get another sever setting and the software solution is also set to the government server? When you see some sales person give you that there will be ‘additional safeties installed’ know that you are getting bullshitted. Microsoft made similar promises in 2001 (code red) and even today the systems are still getting traversed on and those are merely the hackers. The NSA and other America governments get near clean access to all of it and that is a problem with American based servers and still here, there is only so much that the GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation) allows for and I reckon that there are loopholes for training data and as such I reckon that the people in the UK will have to set a name and shame setting with mandatory prosecution for anyone involved with this caper going all the way up to Prime Minister Keir Starmer. So when you see mentions like ““treasure trove of public data” the government holds “would be of enormous commercial value to OpenAI in helping to train the next incarnation of ChatGPT”” I would be mindful to hand or give access to this data and not let it out of your hands.
This link between the two is now clear. Data and transgressions have been going on since before 2001 and the two settings when data gets ‘trained’ we are likely to see more issues and when Prime Minister Keir Starmer goes “were sorry”, you better believe that the time has come to close the tap and throw Microsoft out of the windows in every governmental building in the Commonwealth. I doubt this will be done as some sales person will heel over like a little bitch and your personal data will become the data of everyone who is mentionable and they will then select the population that has value for commercial corporations and the rest? The rest will become redundant by natural selection according to value base of corporations.
I get that you think this is now becoming ‘conspiracy based’ settings and you resent them. I get that, I honestly do. But do you really trust UK Labor after they wasted 23 billion pounds on an NHS system that went awry (several years ago). I have a lot of problems showing trust in any of this. I do not blame Microsoft, but the overlap is concerning, because at some point it will involve servers and transfers of data. And it is clear there are conflicting settings and when some one learns to aggregate data and connect it to a mobile number, your value will be determined. And as these systems interconnect more and more, you will find out that you face identity threat not in amount of times, but in identity theft and value assessment in once per X amount of days and as X decreases, you pretty much can rely on the fact that your value becomes debatable and I reckon this setting is showing the larger danger, where one sees your data as a treasure trove and the other claims “deliver prosperity for all”. That and the diminished setting of “really be done transparently and ethically, with minimal data drawn from the public” is the setting that is a foundation of nightmares mainly as the setting of “minimal data drawn from the public” tends to have a larger stage. It is set to what is needed to aggregate to other sources which lacks protection of the larger and and when we consider that any actor could get these two connected (and sell on) should be considered a new kind of national security risk. America (and UK) are already facing this as these people left for the Emirates with their billions. Do you really think that this was the setting? It will get worse as America needs to hang on to any capital leaving America, do you think that this is different for the UK? Now, you need to consider what makes a person wealthy. This is not a simple question as it is not the bank balance, but it is an overlap of factors. Consider that you have 2000 people who enjoy life and 2000 who are health nuts. Who do you think is set to a higher value? The Insurance person states the health nut (insurance without claims) or the retailer the people who spend and life live. And the (so called) AI system has to filter in 3000 people. So, who gets to be disregarded from the equation? And this cannot be done until you have more data and that is the issue. And the quotation is never this simple, it will be set to thousands of elements and these firms should not have access, as such I fear for the data making it to the outer UK grounds.
A setting coming from overlaps and none of this is the fault of Microsoft but they will be connected (and optionally) blamed for all this, but as I personally see it the two elements that matter in this case are “Digital rights campaign group Foxglove called the agreement “hopelessly vague”” and “Co-executive Director Martha Dark said the “treasure trove of public data” the government holds” will be of significance danger to public data, because greed driven people tend to lose their heads over words like ‘treasure trove’ and that is where ‘errors are made’ and I reckon it will not take long before the BBC or other media station will trip up over the settings making the optional claim that ‘glitches were found in the current system’ and no one was to blame. Yet that will not be the whole truth will it?
So have a great day and consider the porky pies you are told and who is telling them to you, should you consider that it is me. Make sure that you realise that I am merely telling you what is out in the open and what you need to consider. Have a great day.
Lawrence van Rijn - Law Lord to be 