Tag Archives: BBC

July 1, 2020 · 16:36

The enemy is us

It is not a new setting, yet thee setting is more complete. We are being duped and misinformed by a player who has no evidence, it merely is in a stage where it has become Oliver Twist stating ‘Please Sir, can I have some more’ (as I made mention to yesterday. Yet so far they have never produced ANY evidence that their statements hold any value, any facts or any truths. The best we can get are speculations and even as we will not dismiss speculations, the evidence is not on their side, their side is a collapse of economic prowess and a complete shutdown of the dollar, their greed got them that way. So when we we see the BBC give us ‘Ministers signal switch in policy over 5G policy’ we see nothing immediately wrong until we see: “He added he wanted Samsung and NEC to become 5G network kit providers”. So Digital Secretary Oliver Dowden, a person that has now firmly set his personal intent towards American confirmations by giving the handle to two providers, one with close to zero 5G IP powers? 

Lets look at the state of things, in the first, I am a capitalist, there is nothing wrong with being a capitalist, yet I have never stepped away from accountability, and I will demand that we all demand complete accountability for those making these steps, including the warrants for treason against people like Oliver Dowden for betraying the economic station of the commonwealth. The UK and other nations needed the Huawei goods for that, but the corrupt republic of the United States is stopping this because it would end their greed driven needs that will not be stopped until we are all under the foot of Wall Street and no one is waking up.

Now, if the US (that place with stupid people) has actually presented factual and direct evidence of Huawei equipment being and actual danger, the situations would be different, but that has not happened has it? To see this we can point to the Verge (at https://www.theverge.com/2019/3/17/18264283/huawei-security-threat-experts-china-spying-5g) and a few other sources. They give us “Is Huawei a security threat? There is no hard evidence to support this notion, and some of the reasons put forward for this notion are weak. For example, the background of the chairmen of Huawei. Huawei founder Mr. Ren Zhengfei once served in the People’s Liberation Army. As we know, serving in the army was one way of getting out of poverty for people in the countryside, which is where Mr. Ren is from. His time in the army was a short one and he was not in any important position.” There was no hiding these facts and as far as I can tell, they never did, yet the US has hidden the flaws of Cisco equipment for well over a year, even as these devices gave criminals access to global networks, so who is at fault? Then there is the point of view of Senator Warner (Democrat from Virginia) “There is ample evidence to suggest that no major Chinese company is independent of the Chinese government and Communist Party — and Huawei, which China’s government and military tout as a “national champion,” is no exception. Allowing Huawei’s inclusion in our 5G infrastructure could seriously jeopardize our national security and put critical supply chains at risk. It could also undermine U.S. competitiveness at a time when China is already attempting to surpass the U.S. technologically and economically through the use of state-directed and state-supported technology transfers.” This is quite. Clearly a point of view and he is allowed to have it, more importantly he should be allowed to have it to influence AMERICAN positions, no one denies this, yet take consideration of ‘at a time when China is already attempting to surpass the U.S. technologically and economically’, which is an issue for them, especially when you realise that Huawei is 3-5 years ahead of America, the patents are pretty precise about that, Huawei focused on 5G when almost no one else did and now that 5G is here, the US is blatantly backwards to that side of the equation, hiding behind marketing like 5G evolution, which is at best 4G with a different label, the press gave light to that small part. We can go on about this, but I feel it is important to give light to Francis Dinha, CEO OF OpenVPN. He gives us “The US is right to treat Huawei as a security threat, but I don’t believe any ban on any equipment is the right solution. No matter what equipment we use for 5G, there will be security risks. With such an exponentially higher amount of data, there will inherently be an exponentially higher risk. But taking a competitor out of the market could lead other companies to get complacent, which would mean US innovation and development could be slowed — which presents an even more severe security risk overall. Rather than relying on our network to be secure, we ought to seriously consider building an overlay secure virtual network across the 5G infrastructure that could provide end-to-end security, controlled and managed by the 5G network operators. We need guidelines to improve network security, and we need to push to make software for this equipment open-source. Open-source means transparency and security, which is exactly what we need as we move to 5G. Huawei is a risk, certainly — but there are other ways besides a ban to mitigate that risk. No matter who is making our 5G equipment, we need to be proactive about cybersecurity.” I do not completely agree with him, yet he states that the US should be allowed to see Huawei, a Chinese producer as a threat, I cannot deny them that right. What is important is ‘could lead other companies to get complacent’ I believe that he intentionally omitted the word ‘American’ from that part and this is exactly how Huawei got to get ahead in the game in the first place, so let’s call that a checked item, shall we? And then he gives the diamond in the rough, with ‘Open-source means transparency and security, which is exactly what we need as we move to 5G.’ We see the larger frame, Huawei offered 1-2 months ago, to sell their technology allowing others to catch up, but it was basically rejected out of hand, why? I personally see it as the fact that Huawei would still have ended up with a massive chunk of cash (off course) and that is where the so called American bankrupt state is in danger, it needs all the cash it can get and it needs to set the stage where Chinese corporations ends with close to none, their stage of equilibrium is what Wall Street dictates and the 25 trillion market its only viable when the US gets 75%, not 25% and China with 75%, that is the larger issue and the US (Europe too) are too far behind Huawei at present, if the 5G war is decided between 2022-2024, Huawei has basically won and the US has nothing, that is the stage we are aligning to. So as the BBC gave us “Ministers approved Huawei’s involvement in January, but some senior Tories want to prevent that because of concerns over security” we would love to know which senior politicians and what EVIDENCE they have,. But we will not get an answer to either part there will we? And as we are given “In principle, controlling the tech at the heart of these networks could give Huawei the capacity to spy or disrupt communications during any future dispute. This is important, as more things – from self-driving cars to fridges, baby monitors and fire alarms become connected to the internet.” There is the issue of evidence and the fact that America has that same ability, and let’s not deny the fact that we have seen that America will lie to everyone else when it serves THEIR purpose, so how is this any different? The maker of the BBC text did go all out to mention ‘baby monitors’, so far there is a much larger concern when they are connected to the internet, the fact that the CISCO equipment there is making it already an option, so we do not need to wait for either China or Huawei, and the BBC article does not bear that out, does it? 

At what point did we disregard the need for evidence? I meed it because I am not writing some pro China article, if there is ACTUAL evidence it needs to be out in the open so that we can make an informed decision, the decision makers seemingly do not want that to happen as there is no evidence, there is only the emotional stage, or as Mark Rubio Republican for Florida voiced it “Huawei is a Chinese state-directed telecom company with a singular goal: undermine foreign competition by stealing trade secrets and intellectual property, and through artificially low prices backed by the Chinese government”, which is interesting as there is all kind of evidence that opposes ‘a Chinese state-directed telecom company’, as well as ‘stealing trade secrets and intellectual property’, the second one is interesting as that is not the function of Huawei and moreover, Huawei is 5 years ahead of any American competition and well over 3 years ahead of the mainstream competition, so why steal the IP of someone who is intellectually backwards? I fail to see the point, do you?

By adhering to greed driven agenda’s we have become our own worst enemy and I will be around to see this explode in our faces and for the most, I will get to ridicule the media for adhering to the need for misinformation and to let those who championed false information get away with a fat wallet whilst destroying the Commonwealth economy, because that is still up for debate, there is no alternative, these people can emigrate to America and never be allowed back into the Commonwealth until they are prosecuted in open court with no allowance to hide behind ‘national security interests’, I reckon it would be their greatest fear, to be held to account for their actions, it usually is.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics, Science

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

June 29, 2020 · 19:58

The inferring line

We all see the news, we see what is implied and we wonder on what it means, at least that is what some of us do and the news is always sided to the part they want to illuminate, there is no evil or bad intentions there, it is the way the writer thinks, or the view that the writer has. We might agree, we might disagree, but the writer is entitled to the view they have, at least that is what I think, so when I see ‘Technology of Business’ in the BBC, I wonder about the ‘Business of Technology’, it is not merely the reversal of a phrase, behind it lingers the fact that a formula and solution are reversible, or in Market Research there is the unwritten law (well, perhaps, seemingly unwritten), that it cannot be reversed, as such when the factorial analyses goes in one direction, the opposite would be a discriminant analyses, if the factor is proven, the discriminant analyses should always fail, no exclusions to that, if both make it there is a connecting factor in play, not really a covariant. When you realise this, there is a much larger truth to be seen. SO in this I do not oppose ‘Have we become too reliant on Big Tech firms?’,
I merely wonder about the elements behind this. When I was working in the 90’s in IT, on the edge of IT, there was an unwritten law to steer clear of one another in Big tech, so to not get in each others fairway and maximise profits, as such we see the advantage that players like Google and Amazon have. They researched their part and they went their own way. I am merely looking at these two because Microsoft, IBM, Sun and a few others were overlapping and they had their own way of setting the stage. So there might be truth in “Big Tech firms have been getting even bigger during the pandemic and their success means they have plenty of funds to snap up other businesses”, yet the involved stage is a little larger than projected. So I do not disagree with people like Sandeep Vaheesan when they give us “All of them will be in the M&A [mergers and acquisitions] game if they’re not already. Start-ups are more likely to sell out during the pandemic when they might struggle to meet their obligations and the buyout looks especially attractive – the pandemic is speeding up the buyout date in some cases”, I am merely seeing that this stage was in play for much longer and now we might focus on what the larger players are gobbling up, yet this is not any difference from what has been going on for 20 years.

It is the way business works, the larger fish eats the smaller one. Adobe ate Macromedia (I still believe it is the other way round), Novel got wordperfect, Microsoft ate entire shoals of software makers and so on. And yes, the pandemic has an impact that is much larger and that is not on the buyer, also not on the seller.  Some were surprised to see Microsoft acquire the game Minecraft for $2,500,000,000. The seller was mostly not unhappy, he went from mama basement software developer, to nerd to multi billionaire.   It is the game developers dream to get that done and his game was addictive as hell (I know, because I have it on every console). Microsoft grew it even further with the direct ear of over 200,000,000 ears of needy gamers. It is marketing heaven for Microsoft, and that is before you realise just how much money is linked to the optional micro transactions.

At some point these firms need to rely on merging and acquisition to grow, it is merely the way it is, and sometimes nature hands these players a windfall (like the pandemic). I believe that we are not too reliant on big tech, I believe that we are in a holding pattern due to a lack of innovation, the innovators are out there yet they are not getting the visibility they need to push it along and that is a larger stage than we realise. You merely need to search ‘innovation’ on Google to realise that it is marketed and it is labelled, yet true innovation is the one element that defies labels and marketing, because I saw and learned that what a firm does not understand (in 1997) cannot be marketed, it cannot be sold, because its leaders are drawn to memo’s with bullet points and that is when you see firsthand how true innovation defies labels. It is a conclusion we have seen too often and lately a lot more often than we considered it.

Even when we see some brands giving a platform to the real innovators, it relies on someone recognising it and I agree that it is not a bad idea, but I also realise that if I do not see everything, then someone else is likely not to see it either. It is not a good thing, not a bad thing, it merely is and there big tech has its first problem, how to recognise it soon enough. Not everyone is a Steve Jobs, who was able to recognise 9innovation when it walked through its doors, Jeff Bezos et al is a different stock, a different breed, they made THEIR innovation, it does not mean that they can recognise it when it hits and there the true innovators have the challenge, on how to set their IP in a safe space where it can be recognised without them needing to set the stage of losing a lot of money hoping others will see it. It is the inferring line that they face and all innovators must face it, for the most they will rely on big tech who can afford to squander a purse of coins and not worry on how it hits them, it makes the game harder for innovators, but not impossible, they have options and on a global stage it does imply that these players will seek the largest beneficiary. When we see Huawei against Nokia and Ericsson we see that the two Scandinavian players have to set a wager holding a dead man’s hand, When we see Amazon, who is seen against its competitors Google Play, Apple play and so on, yet is it not interesting on how Alibaba and Ozone are not mentioned in plenty of places? Ozone particularly is not as big, but it is still a contender and in the stage of IP, where that patent is more important than most think it is. In this Alibaba has a larger benefit as it also delivers into Russia. The inferred line is thinner than we realise and there are more players, even as some ‘market’ them away into obscurity, you see when these players get the IP, they grow on a global scale and that is what is feared in the west and also by a player like Amazon, you see, they are the largest player and will remain so, but what happens when the dollar collapses? The way that this US administration goes about it, that setting is a lot more realistic than some are willing to admit and when the dollar goes, the Euro and the Yen will take massive hits, losses of 35% would be a good day.

Should you out that consider that the Financial Times (at https://www.ft.com/content/dbe16ce4-f154-4985-a210-279fa1f53e24, and them alone) gave almost 5 hour ago “Millions of digital banking customers unable to access their money after German group falls into insolvency”, consider that an impact like this should make the front page on pretty much EVERY paper in the west, yet the Guardian has NOTHING, and others are like that, something that hits millions is left unreported. So when we see a repetition of the Sony 2012 events (the Guardian was the reporter there), how much on innovation and how much innovation impact will not be reported on when it ends up in the hands of Alibaba and/or Ozone? How much marketing shielding will Amazon receive? The inferred line is something else as well, it shows where we are told not to look, when does true innovation actually do that? 

A line that is ignored by plenty of players is a line that might show actual danger, especially when its impacts our lives.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

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

June 28, 2020 · 14:42

Where are we at?

That is the question I am throwing out there and as I am sitting in a mall enjoying a large cappuccino, I see the phrase “your safety is our concern” pass by, yet is that so? I am not opposing it, yet in the same stage the phrase “Our safety is your concern” is equally valid. We might ignore it, we might oppose it and for the most, the pussies in the field are all about ignoring the safety of others, their ego’s are all about setting the stage of what THEY need, whilst disregarding the simplest safety. I get it, it is not. Normal flu, but the realisation needs to be on the foreground of EVERY person around, and it is not, it there is one certainty, then it was seen in the scenes I personally witnessed yesterday. Th world moves on and whilst we see another clambake article on the hardships of Yemen, we need to realise that the Coronavirus will hit there a lot harder, it is not merely the stage of “5 yeas of hunger, 5 years of war” that the BBC gives us (they make no false claims there), we see that Saudi Arabia is trying to raise $2.41 billion in aid. In all this we see that the European support is dwindling down, support after support project is shutting down, the money is gone and pleads from the UN is seemingly falling on deaf ears. And the noise the people like Andrew Smith are making does not help anyone, even less the Yemeni people. So whilst we are given partial parts on Scotland by the Campaign Against Arms Trade, we simply ignore the massive support that the Houthis are giving by Iran. Do you think that this was was going on if Iran was not involved? If anything we could give out the considerations that the Yemeni war is going on because of Andrew Smith and his band of rascals. We see the accusations on both sides and we can draw a parallel to our own Corona issues, the  entire matter is in a stage of imbalance and the Yemeni people are paying the price. And it is important to see that this was not due to the Saudi intervention, they were asked by the rightfully elected government, a small titbit that is set not mentioned often enough, and now that the Houthis after 3 years are getting better in shooting their missiles, the mess will escalate faster and larger. The problem is not whether the Saudi government gets the support they need, it becomes the question on why full support was not given 3 years ago, now that the Yemeni children are dying left, right and centre, we are all in a stage of “Awwww!”, yet this has been going on for years and for the longest time no one cared, there is merely the presented concerns on these ‘dastardly Saudi’s and their guns’, whilst our concern should have been on ending the blatant disregard fo lives that Iran was ensuing (and ensuring). As I see it, the Saudi coalition had the high ground and even as the media is now calling it the Saudi Arabian led intervention, the Saudi coalition does include Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Sudan, and it also used to include Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, Egypt, Jordan, and Morocco. This thing was always a lot bigger then we thought it was whilst the sources are clear to ignore the Iranian involvement and setting the stage of opposition to a revolutionary committee, the Houthi forces and the pro Sales Houthi. Did you think that this stage would still exist without Iran? We ignore the larger stage and we help it coming of age, killing thousands of children, we have due to our inactions blood on our hands and we are in a stage of ignoring that part.

Just like the corona virus, we seemingly push the responsibility onto others, whilst our actions did matter all along, but feel free to ignore that part and when you see more people die in Yemen. On TV tonight, feel free to switch to Big Brother, hoping to see one of the girls taking a shower, your life almost seem perfect, so enjoy the nightmares you have from prolonging a war that could have ended in 90 days, and consider that someone is feeding the houthi forces ballistic missiles, especially in light that thee isn’t a building left standing to produce these bad boys in the first place. Materials that the Houthi forces could not own or afford, they have them by the dozen (cheaper that way), in a stage where they have no economy, they have spend more on weapons, missiles and drones than a nation like Sweden could afford, did no one realise that part of the equation? A setting of imbalance that players like the CAAT is fuelling and no one takes notice.

When the children of Yemen start chanting “Our safety is your concern”, which excuse will a person like Andrew Smith offer? He’ll probably know someone to blame, but the fault is in us all. Iran should have been dealt with well over 10 years ago, but we were all fooled by a mediocre puppet all whilst the battle hardened IRGC was ignored, in that regard our inaction should pave an interesting highway to hell.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Military, Politics

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

June 27, 2020 · 23:32

When it is about something else

We all have those moments, we see one thing, yet when we look at the news, it was seemingly about something else. This of course goes both ways, what we see is not always what we think it is and in this case I might well be wrong, yet I am willing to yet you decide.

It all started 10.3 minutes ago (roughly), I was munching down on a bag of ‘veggie straws’ I never had those before and they were on special (50% off) so I decided to take a walk on the Wilde side, so there I was munching on savoury goods whilst listening to Jordi Savall playing Matrimonio di Francesca Borgia, I remember the procession (I saw the Blu-ray on the Borgias), it was a lovely wedding and she copulated in public, the good old days where a wedding was only valid when they did it on the wedding day, all that before there was VHS and we got the best porn in the city. Ah well, as we see one thing we see another, so when the BBC showed me ‘Coca-cola suspends social media advertising despite Facebook changes’ I feel that we are shown something else. At present it sucks to be Coca Cola, let’s face it, when I was in the supermarket I got myself 2 bottles of Vanilla Coke, yet no advertisement would have spurned me, I know the stuff, it is 20% off and for a lot of people it is that way. Coca Cola has sent a truckload of cash in the right directions (Olympics, Sport events, public events, but Covid-19 is stopping it all from happening, so for players like Coca Cola there is no benefit, if there were pubic events, oh no, these are cancelled as well, apparently only a chosen few can have sex at 1.5 metres apart (names redacted for national security reasons). So, I understand the setting where all these firms are blaming Marky Mark of the Zuckerberg clan, yet that is so short sighted. We want to blame the for everything, yet this problem is a lot larger, it is drenched in fear and drenched in opposition to things we cannot control. We cannot control the flu, so when we get some slick politician making claims that big tech is to blame, whilst their own records cannot be properly vetted (the paying dead people issue) all whilst their internal systems are dodgy as hell, I wonder how large the issue is. It is not merely America, the failings in Europe are not small either and it is laced in technology. As these slick individuals took the cheap options, we now see how cheap is letting all kinds of people shout whatever they want, it brings fear to all.

So whilst we see brand after brand relabel their products as to avoid the backlashes, we see that there is a larger issue in play and the media is doing whatever it can to avoid them as to not anger their advertisers, they need all the advertisers they can as you can see.

It is even more dastardly than you think. The BBC also reported on shaadi.com, an Asian dating site that they were removing skin tone filters. Consider that this was done, do you think that they inserted the skin filter automatically, or was it done to appease their members? Do you think that a dating site, or any site will auto filter the look of a member without permission? How liable would they be? Consider the fact that the filter was created, do you think it was to make the programmer happy? He might not have cared, I reckon that if w get actual statistics on the site on who used it (numbers that optionally would suddenly be accidentally deleted), how many women (or men) used it? They would have started their optional relationship based on a lie. So when we see in the article “Priya (name has been changed) found her husband on the site after being rejected by others for her skin colour. “I am dark-skinned and saw the skin colour question on there (shaadi.com) and answered it the best I could,” she tells BBC Asian Network.

“I remember selecting ‘wheat-ish’ – whatever that means.””, so this person hid behind ‘whatever it means’, and I do not care, but we see two versions of deception and I get that she girl made a choice, hoping it would work out, but lets not deceive each other. There is a larger stage and it is founded on racism, you get better breaks (so they say) when you are caucasian and I will not fault anyone to get the better deal, yet the advertisement issue is a lot larger and is drenched in lost revenue due to ineffective advertisements (a Covid cancelled Olympics event for example) and it seems that it could go on for another 60 days and as such the people involved will stop advertising, especially if you already have visibility going up the kazoo (like Coca Cola, HP, IBM, Microsoft, Netflix, Google, and a few Unilever brands), I get the idea that these people are watching the dimes they spend, but lets not call it #StopHateForProfit when it is about margins of profit, it is actually that simple as I see it.

We can push all we can, but it is the fellow man and woman next to us that needs to change, to stop giving in to hate and fear, we get it, it is overwhelming, and when you are African American in the good old KKK of SA, there are larger concerns and it is a lot more serious there, even as the Business Insider gave (two weeks ago) a list with 25 charts that show that racism is serious in the US, lets think about that, so in 2020 we see clear numbers on racism, so why is the US not acting? Do you still think it is that simple? (at https://www.businessinsider.com.au/us-systemic-racism-in-charts-graphs-data-2020-6?r=US&IR=T), so when we are in a stage of #BlackLivesMatter and #AllLivesMatter, consider that corporate America has not acted for well over a decade, the numbers give that much, even as the situation is seemingly going better, there is too much that needs to be done and government does seemingly not care, only 10% is non-caucasian there, look at the Business Insider for that part, so it is about something else and we need to consider that part, we need to consider that a lot faster then we think, because if this explodes, we see a much larger issue, especially when you consider that the pay gap is supposedly between 59% and 62%, and take in consideration the Fair Employment Act 1941, Civil Rights At 1991, Equal Pay Act 1963, and 4 amendments to the Constitution of the United States, so where was corporate America all these years? Let’s call the issue by its name, and let’s take a look at the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act 2009, which directly impacts the case Ledbetter v Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company (2007). So when you are done with all that, consider that Coca Cola issue again and consider how many companies are in a shady place at present. None of it has anything to do with Marky Mark of the Facebook tribe, and a lot more with the bottom dollar as Wall Street needs it to be for at least another 30 years (at present).

 

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Law, Media, Politics

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

June 26, 2020 · 16:12

Changing my name

So, I have found a new way to get rich fast (and I mean really fast), I am changing my name from Lawrence to Laurent more precisely to Laurent Rothschild. At that point the people at Bilderberg will take my call, Google’s own Papa Smurf will meet with me (Sergey Brin’s nickname) and so on, names make a difference (or so they say) the was the first thing that went through my head when I saw the BBC article on how ‘US Country band Dixie Chicks drop the Dixie from their name’. There I was slightly (only slightly) puzzled. Why would that one word matter? You see, the Dixie Chicks have earned their name, they have earned their reputation as a good band with great music and they have their own identity. 

I personally see nothing negative ab out dixie, I truly do not. If we actually want to dig we will see that the Oxford dictionary calls the references ons cure, well there was nothing obscure about the Dixie chicks, There is also a derivation from Jeremiah Dixon, the person who surveyed the Mason – /Dixon line, it is the separating border between Maryland and Pennsylvania (something I did not know).

There are of course more references and still there is nothing negative in the name Dixie chicks, and there is nothing negative about their music, if anything they are optionally a driving force for other woman to make it on their own. In this US civil war towards black lives matter, there is now a growing concern that the war is turning into a marketing clambake of quick sale towards people to steer away from negativity all whilst the implied negativity is between their ears.

The actions by the Dixie chicks does nothing to racial inequality (as I personally see it), fighting racial inequality does and to forget that there ever was racial inequality is one way to lie to yourself and lie to the world around you. There are large stages of racial inequality, in the US, seemingly in Canada, in Australia, in large parts of Europe, Africa and the Middle East. Inequality comes from considering yourself above all others and certainly certain people. Its not like we are discriminating against Xbox Users, every Playstation user knows that they are less and that is where we forget that it was never about the system, it was about the joy of playing a game, whether your skin is Xbox green, Playstation blue of Nintendo red, it is not about the silicon brain in your head of the screen that makes your eyes, it is about the acceptance of difference and to be honest, I personally fail to see the change of the name of a band, more likely I forget to buy their music because the Dixie Chicks are no longer under the ‘D’ of Duh!

Yet, if the powers in the US can be marketed in this way, I can look forward to a decent amount of work stress and an income that is close to a hundred times better (than what I am currently making) by being Laurent Rothschild.

So if you learn next week that I was not eating all over New York like a cast member of Billions in Katz’s, Sushi Nakazawa, or Vaucluse at that point you might consider that my solution was not really a working one, so here’s hoping the I will enjoy a Pastrami sandwich at Katz’s really really soon.

This is the view I have and until someone proves to me that these Dixie chicks chose their name in a wave of racism, I refuse to consider that they did so and it is just a lovely southern name and I will enjoy and tap my feet to the music of ‘Sin Wagon’, and I will not be waiting time on the views that some people might have on the reference to Dixie. Consider that the great Satchmo (Louis Armstrong) played Dixieland, I enjoyed his music and still do, why would I think negatively on the reference to Dixie? And let’s be honest can a person be blamed for thinking naughty thoughts whilst listening to ‘Sin Wagon’ seeing Emily Robinson? Many thoughts come to mind, not one of them is racial. 

It is time to solve issues, not losing too much time by trying to marketing them away in name changes. Too bad, I think that Laurent Rothschild could be a great change and I do like the idea of  a large Pastrami sandwich like only Katz can make it.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Media

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

June 26, 2020 · 01:00

Good thoughts and less so

It all started so nice, the morning was nice and sunny (its winter and my laptop was fixed), so as I was enjoying a laptop with a good space bar, my youth came calling through a knocker like a sledgehammer. After 84 years Olympus is stopping. My second camera was an Olympus, an OM-10, which was followed 2 years later with the OM-2, a camera I never stopped worshipping. Olympus was on the tip of all tongues, on the edge of what was possible and they were giving Nikon a fight, Cannon was not that big (but in an impressive stage) and Minolta was there as well. It is in that age that photography started to become affordable. And in this age they have faltered. It is a shame, but there were indicators that they were lagging more and more and the mobile phones with their less is merely one factor. Age is there to distinguish of what is in the now and what will no longer be, a playing field the forever in turmoil. 

And it is that turmoil that matters, even as Olympus went under in an honourable way, some competitors in other fields were not that lucky. That can be said of Wirecard, a company that had apparently $2,000,000,000 on the books that did not exist and is now in a state where they owe $4,000,000,000 and have no way to pay it, alas Wirecard, out you go! So can anyone explain to me how one person did this? 

I believe it a lot more and as we see Reuters giving us “Wirecard is the first member of Germany’s prestigious DAX stock index to go bust, barely two years after winning a spot among the country’s biggest 30 listed companies with a market valuation of $28 billion.” I wonder how the $28,000,000,000 was achieved, in a stage where 7% did not exist, there is every chance that the damage is larger and spread in a larger stage, and we merely see on what was NOT signed off on. Is that such a weird consideration? Whilst some make calls for reforms, which is a call for change, yet the need to identify the things not being OK will also be less likely to be found, that is the nature of things. You se, I see more, it is seen in the quote “once one of the hottest financial technology companies in Europe, dwarfs other German corporate failures. It has shaken the country’s financial establishment”, if it was the hottest Financial technology company, the technology is still there, the question was was it abused and more important, how can something this so called hot, be this flawed? How do you show $2,000,000,000 you do not have?

Then there is “German law firm Schirp & Partner said that with Wirecard now effectively sidelined, it would file class actions against EY on behalf of both shareholders and bondholders”, so EY does not sign off on the books and they get to be in the dock? Questions rise to the sirface, do they not? I would reckon that in that stage the UK would need a much better setting towards the economy, especially as the banking sector will be in the rough until the end of the year, so the UJK gets to be lucky as we see ‘China’s Huawei to build $1.2 billion research facility in England’, it gives the light towards a growth inn 5G options for the UK as Huawei is trying to be nice to the EU (they need to) and as the US is in a stage of collapse, it makes sense for Huawei to set the stage to a larger field. The step makes sense win a few levels, even as some will state that the mainland of the EU would be better, appeasing the UK will also have its influence in Australia and Canada. Two much larger players and as such Huawei is going to be moving forward. It is therefor weird that 6 minutes later everyone’s favourite Labour puppet Tony Blair gives us ‘Britain should side with U.S. over Huawei, former PM Blair says’, Well one could argue that he is deep in American pockets, can we not? So when we mull over ““I think we do need to make a call and I think it has got to be pro-U.S. in the end,” Blair said when asked about Huawei at a Reuters Newsmaker event. “It is very hard for us not to be with the U.S. on anything that touches U.S. security.””, so why? America has not now, not ever produced any evidence that gives rise to the imaginative danger of China via Huawei. In addition, where was the US when Wirecard had created the imaginative $2,000,000,000, none had seemingly a clue and now that the pied piper is piping they have no issues making a move on EY being the optional culprit in this. 

We need to change the way we do business and as we see how valid makers like Olympics go under without doing anything wrong, we need to set much larger question marks on evidence and demanding it sooner from people on every level of government administration, even former elected officials making claims and especially when they are willing to to rely on evidence, so when we look at Wirecard, take in mind that we need to demand the clear setting on how $2,000,000,000 could be created out of thin air (my bank account needs a bit of that too).

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Politics, Science

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

June 24, 2020 · 20:51

As the population moves to 0

Yes, we all have that glorious moment, that mansion you always dreamt of is now available, there is not that much competition as the population is close to zero, now you feel like a champ, you are breathing a little less easy, you feel like you are sweating and it is a relatively cool day, and we see the health issues are merely imaginative as we see “Mr Trump told a weekend rally in Oklahoma that he had asked his team to do less testing to help keep official case counts down”, yes there was a difference between not testing for disease and not having a disease, but I reckon that at some point the White House will see that difference, it might be when there is no one around to do the work, but there you have it. 

So whilst we see one claim (according to the BBC, we see more claims from the same source. The next one that has the option of making us giggle is “Mr Trump told a campaign event in Phoenix, Arizona, later in the day that the coronavirus “plague” was “going away””, as such the stage we see at present that the US has 2.2 million cases, in a stage where 121,000 have died, with almost 2000 new cases of a terminal nature, but that is the symptom of ‘going away’ when they are dead, the 2,000 flu cases went away. So if you have dreams of (for example) that house on 10701 Bellagio road could optionally be yours, with a small reduction from $65,000,000 to around $65,000 we see the reduction as the people wit money sought safer shores and it could be yours. Yes, that is the American dream and when you feel wheezy, don’t worry, you were not tested, so it is probably not some flu that requires a corona, and it is as they said, the disease is going away.

Which leaves me to the accusation of “The president once again referred to the virus as the “kung flu””, whether it is potato or tomato is on anyones mind. Lets just make sure it is not Iai-flu (the ability to quickly dispense the flu), there is Ai-flu-do (dispensing flu whist protecting the attacker from injury), and so on (I have a dozen more examples),  in all this we were given the Chinese edition, no matter where it came from, there is a much larger issue and even as we see that there is a larger issue in China, the fact remains that the other parties have been obscuring the numbers in their own way. So whilst we contemplate “Dr Fauci warned of “a disturbing surge of infection” and “increased community spread” in many southern and western states.” We see other sources show that the number of new cases is making a massive jump compared to a few days ago. In the last 24 hours we see that some sources give us that there are 53,255 new cases, that is merely the reported side, so the amount of new cases is likely a lot higher. In all this we see a version of ignoring facts and presentations that do not reflect the current status on a few sides and the media merely reports and we see a larger failure of the media in general.

Yes some are going out and trying to fact check whilst reporting the news, yet that group is disgustingly small. So whilst Fox News reports ‘Summer rays can inactivate coronavirus in 34 minutes, study says’ (at https://www.foxnews.com/health/summer-rays-inactivate-coronavirus-in-34-minutes-study-says), I wonder where the data comes from. The article further gives us “Further, they found only Miami and Houston get enough solar radiation to inactivate 99 percent of the virus in the spring. During winter, most cities will not receive enough solar radiation to produce 90 percent viral inactivation during midday exposure, they wrote.” (at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7300806/pdf/PHP-9999-na.pdf)

So whilst I need to be as neutral as possible, can anyone tell me where Jose-Luis Sagripanti and C. David Lytle, both retired from the US Army and Food and Drug Administration got access to the data to test for all this? In light that there are a lot more clued in people, they noticed nothing? And in light of the quote “they found only Miami and Houston get enough solar radiation to inactivate 99 percent of the virus in the spring”, how was the data acquired? And that is merely the topline data I am asking about, in all I see (on the surface) close to half a dozen other issues and Fox just reported it like it was the bingo of the decade. In all this, the article ends with ‘Kayla Rivas is a Health reporter and joined Fox News in April 2020’, as I personally see it, when I look at the publication, where we see “This article has been accepted for publication and undergone full peer review”, or where we are told that the abstracts given (in part) is “Using a model developed for estimating solar inactivation of viruses of biodefense concerns, we calculated the expected inactivation of SARS-CoV-2 virus, cause of COVID-19 pandemic, by artificial UVC and by solar ultraviolet radiation in several cities of the world during different times of the year. The UV sensitivity estimated here for SARS-CoV-2 is compared with those reported for other ssRNA viruses, including influenza A virus. The results indicate that SARS-CoV-2 aerosolized from infected patients and deposited on surfaces could remain infectious outdoors for considerable time during the winter in many temperate-zone cities, with continued risk for re-aerosolization and human infection”, we might pause at ‘estimating solar inactivation of viruses of biodefense concerns’, yet I find the issue to be a little weird, it is about estimation, and Fox gave us “If sunlight plays a possible destructive role of the virus, authors theorized stay-at-home orders forcing people to remain indoors might have increased contagion among members of the same households”

As such, as the article gives us “the presented data indicate that SARS-CoV-2 should be inactivated relatively fast”, we need to consider on how the presented data was collected, the authors reflect through ‘should be’ and the inserted part of ‘indicate’ gives a rather large moment to pause. You see, if that added up (like the sunlight bit) can anyone explain the massive amount of people no longer being alive in Italy? Spain lost 28,000 people (a sunny place even in winter), there are more concerns, yet the issue in the EU is data quality, so we have little to go on, yet the data needs to be scrutinised and calculations will not make a difference until it is tested, which would be nice if that happened. All this, whilst the BBC reported that the surge of new cases was in the South and West of the US, clearly it is not merely about the sunlight and even in this situation, getting groceries will get. Person out in the sunlight for at least the 34 minutes that Fox relies on. Clearly there is more going on, so whose whistle is Fox blowing? Not the people, the people should realise that part, preferably before they are less alive than their GP can rectify for. 

We are all given all kinds of new resolutions, now solutions and so called vaccines, all whilst there is more and more debate on the validity of it all. It is shown to some degree in Forms when we see ‘Indian Billionaire Claims His New Herbal Concoction Is A ‘100% Cure’ For Covid-19, But Experts Disagree’ (at https://www.forbes.com/sites/meghabahree/2020/06/23/indian-billionaire-claims-his-new-herbal-concoction-is-a-100-cure-for-covid-19/#48c889b638ba), it seems to me that as we see all those claims by large firms and fake news, there is a much larger issue, yet the claim off cures that are optionally not are not hindered, or perhaps not hindered enough. In all this, the stage of claims made needs to be addressed much harder and that is not done, not by any government, as such too many people will get to collect their crumbs of a cake that relies on the fear of others. As such we can only watch as the population dwindles down to close to zero per nation, I like the idea because I have been eye-balling a house that would normally be unaffordable, yet now that people are hyping the disease to a much deadlier version, there is every chance that there won’t be enough people left to bid on the property. 

This is all becoming a liveable version of profit comes to those who wait in the simplest form possible. 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Politics, Science

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

June 23, 2020 · 22:59

Speak through deafening silence

We all tend to be in a motion to listen to the right person, sometimes we know that person and sometimes we do not. In this age and as we see tidal movements towards black lives matter (I personally believe that nearly all life matters), we look at the cacophony of chaos and we are trying to make sense of what is real, what is sincere and what is different. So, whilst I modernised the idea towards the idea of renewed IP in video gaming, I started to look in different directions, I do that at times. I do it because it tends to remove tunnel vision from creativity. As such I get a new lease on balance, it is part of my own process. And in light that the new IP would be best suited for Ubisoft as they already have parts in their archives, my mind ended up not being very happy. The idea that their process is the better choice does not bode too well. So as I was looking at the change, I overlooked something different as well. 

As such was my mind when the BBC gives us ‘‘Speak and be heard’: Why black media matters’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-canada-53142308/speak-and-be-heard-why-black-media-matters), added to that is “Sara Lomax-Reese owns WURD, one of a handful of black-owned and operated radio stations in the US. Her father, Dr Walter P Lomax Jr, was a respected physician, entrepreneur and philanthropist. He originally acquired the station in 2003 in an effort to amplify and empower the voices of Philadelphia’s black community.” with a less than 3 minute video. That is all!

So one might deduce that black lives do not really matter that much at all. And now I give that proof.

The Evidence?

The video is really good, it gave me a lot more than I bargained for. It starts with a link to the 1996 Telecommunications Act where according to the video individual voices were eliminated. The Wiki page (at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WURD) gives some information, but I am baffled by the amount of information that we do not see. We get the gist, poison and speculations (facts too) of nearly every reality TV station on the planet. Most of them in great detail, in case of WURD it ends with “The new owners reinstituted the WURD call sign. After a period of apparent indecision during which the station aired various types of music and CNN Headline News, management settled on the current talk format.”

So even if I wanted to slap the BBC around, I would be partially unable to do so, there is not much, as such I wonder how trained are the ‘all black lives matter’ in the stage of digital media. Even now as I listen to WURD Radio (streaming) I wonder what more they can do in light of the stage that they are on. 

I hear a lot of references towards Facebook, they give all kinds of Coronavirus information and a lot of Philadelphia news. There is nothing bad about WURD, I am just amazed at how little information on WURD is out there. If we see the digital media, I feared a tidal wave of information drowning me, that is not the case. So as I listen to Solomon Jones, I wonder just  how much more could be done, let’s face it, if black lives truly matter, then they need a voice box that is a lot larger than we are now seeing. Not the people screaming ‘black lives matter’, but voices that inform all others that they matter and that part is not out there. WURD is merely one station in a stage where there would be at least one station per state. And there are a lot more, via Google using “black radio stations US” I find 31 stations, so there is a lot more and whilst I get the news on a young man who gets a whole clip (14 bullets) in his body, I get it that they are talking about it. From my personal experience I know that 1 bullet stops a person, the second shot kills that person. In keeping a community safe we need to see that a lot of questions need to be asked, but at present the mood is too hot and too emotional to see any progress, but questions need to be asked. I personally believe that a clear voice needs to be available. In all this the voice of Solomon Jones comes across clearly. So why does the BBC article have merely 34 words with a less than 3 minute video? This is what I see as evidence. 

In all this it did not need to be merely about WURD, although I must admit that they bring it nicely. And it is here that I notice the first improvement. When you seek a station and you find it, Google gives the low down on the right side, yet if EVERY station found would have a stream button right there, it would optionally become a first step in improving and increasing the visibility of every station. In this stage of globalisation, being able to listen to a local station is actually more important than you could ever imagine. And it is at this point that the video shows the gem it has at the near end: “Media Institutions are in some way cultural institutions”, when we realise that and we wonder how big business has gotten a grasp of strangling budgets to kill of cultural aspects we see a much larger failure, if the Gates Foundation is so close to bringing good, then the idea of them bringing a million dollars a year for every State in advertisement money to these stations, is not a big request, let’s face it paying for advertisements makes sense, and before it is dwindled down to the presentation that digital media is cheaper, wonder how much print advertisement is used, is it such a leap to give these rural and local media stations some of these dollars? Oh, and it is not merely Microsoft or the Gates Foundation, I reckon that it is in the interest of the entire FAANG group to dwindle some dollars in that direction. 

We might believe that it is all cultural and we get it, but culture needs fuel, if it is not fed, it dies, the formula is that simple and as we see the results in the US, we see what anger does when it lacks culture to give wisdom to those in anger, a person who has nothing to live for is the most dangerous man in the game, perhaps that is why a young boy got 14 bullets, it makes us wonder how desperate and how uncertain the person was that was shooting the young black man.

Even as the BBC gave light to WURD, I see that a lot more should have been done.If it was up to me, the video (the entirety) would be part of a 10-20 minute video on local news and how it could optionally temper and improve lives, not merely black lives, but all lives. We all want to see the a better world where all people have a place and optionally a place where they can voice concerns, it is (my personal believe) that larger business enterprises see that as a hindrance to their bottom line and that is the biggest evil, that is why the FAANG group needs to be involved, if the biggest firms become a shield the others will stop their game and we see will over time see a better answer to the one that the 1996 Telecommunications Act seemingly brought.

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Law, Media, Politics, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,

June 22, 2020 · 04:00

The start of a joke

We all have these moments, it all starts with a joke, and 15 months later the joke can walk. There is within us all an innate ability to rely on the absence of proper decorum. It is nothing serious so to say, one might remember the story on how Peter Dinklage broke his neck on a ladder whilst climbing a Bonsai tree. The so-called joke is lost on us, that is until we know what a Bonsai tree is. No matter how we feel, the side of what is called inappropriate jokes is within us all, and the funny part of it is that for the most there is no malice attached to it. That is actually an important part. So as we became part of the Politically Correct humour brigade we threw away a side of us, we actually became less. 

That sense of humour is actually an important side, not because it matters, but because it does not. It is in that flair that we see ‘America trying to ‘rule the world’, says Russian spy chief’, the man is incorrect (ofcourse), yet the feeling has been brought and we need to see the American failing to a much larger degree. We might consider the quote “Russia doesn’t trust what the British government says about the Salisbury poisonings” and Sergei Naryshkin would want us to believe that this is what it is, but it is not all and by no means the focus of what needs to be. You see, even as we know that greed driven America is on its last legs, we have no real idea on how far along Russia, China and India are on that track. They are far along, just the ‘how far’ is not a given and it matters, it matters a great deal. You see the interview on the BBC gives us an interesting quote: “Using weapons like cyber attacks and disinformation, the European Union only recently accused Russia of a campaign of disinformation over the Coronavirus. Why is Russia doing this?” This in a light of massive misreporting by the EU members themselves? And the part where he basically accuses Russia is another matter. I actually do not know whether it is correct or incorrect, what I do know is that I have not seen the evidence, as such I do not trust any of it. Evidence is key and the BBC knows this, as such the question as asked is giving us a stage that is not about Russia, but on the non-reliability of the BBC, does that make sense? 

Now, as for the misreporting, if the EU is setting itself so high above others, it seems only fair that Russia would have every issue of IT and data collection that is in equal if not on greater measure than the EU (or America for that part). I am not stating that their technology is flawed, but they have less resources committed to technology and data collection, that much can be seen on any tourist trip to the good old CCCP. And in that same setting when we see Russian hospitals, we might notice a lack of computer driven states, as such data collection is all a bust. 

It is a choice Russia made by America letting them not be able to buy any American computers, or so the story goes. Even as we see one side, we forget about the other side. I am not claiming that Russia is innocent, I am claiming that we do not see the whole picture and the BBC interviewer reminds me on a conversation I once had with a protestant Pastor, And I stated: “We both serve the lord, you in your way, I in the way he wanted it to happen”, it is nice to claim thesis of real truth, but that side tends to be undetermined. And it also sets the tone that god needs to be served, by what standard, on whose call? Where did he say that this was so?

From the cold war I would see Sergei Naryshkin as my opponent, yet this is not the cold war, and that does not mean that Sergei is no longer my opponent, but there is a larger issue over the last weeks where we have to wonder who the BBC serves, as I see it, they serve the people a lot less, so who are their stakeholders and shareholders? So in that matter, who took a long hard look at the BBC Bitesize GCSE Business Studies? I am merely asking. Or we might look at the fact that Freud could not get into the nightclub because he forgot his ID, or perhaps what does Freud says comes between fear and sex? Funf! That last joke made no sense unless you know German. And that is where we are, it is not lost in translation, it is that some media is intentionally depriving us of the translation that needs to be.

And we actually have to be aware. It is easier if we turn to Russia (as less speak it), and we will be offered pancakes whenever we set that stage (it is a ‘blin’ joke) and here we need to see that translation software could not see the difference. That is the story, the sources state that Russia at present has a debt that is only 0.04% of the American debt and that is a gamechanger. In all honesty, I personally do not believe it, but the truth of the matter is that I actually do not know, Russia does not hand its budget choices to the media and the ones they do give are debatable on a few sides. And in that stage is America, it is on its final legs and they have no plan to take care of the 25 trillion they owe. So in that approach we would see that ‘America trying to ‘rule the world’’, is incorrect, they merely are trying to bleed others to the same degree, or find a way to dampen the economic bleeding that they are facing and that is a tall order, in that it seems that larger companies are setting pressure on governments to let them continue the financial bleeding, yet when we realising that the US government gets (at best) 10 cents on the dollar, these board members are setting pretty for the next 3-4 generations, so where was the BBC to this level of disinformation?

I am (in part) grasping at straws, there are sides that I cannot prove, as such it is to be seen as speculation and I am not telling you different. I am speculating and it matters, but ask yourself, how much digging has the media done lately? It does not prove me right, but it should give you a few questions. And that is all before China is added to the equation. Yes, for the most we are focussing on Huawei, but China is to some degree an actual danger to the west. Focussing on Huawei is stupid, but the risk of China actually exists. There is in part the stage where American business are colouring Huawei black which opposes black lives matter (a joke, I could not resist), but the colour of fear is there, and those in fear are losing their mind with the American economy skating so close to the abyss and that part is ignored by too large a population. All this especially in a stage where this holiday could end up being one of the darkest in American history, and that is before people realise that the US is facing the fear of trainloads of evictions right as we see new spikes in the Coronaviral population. And this part is not small, the US is looking at no less than 3% of its population becoming homeless if rents are not protected, a stage no nation has ever faced in history to this degree. 

As such the General owing rent is not a general, he is a left tenant. Yes another joke but if we consider who are in the hot zones for rent, my view is not that far off. So why the jokes? Jokes are a form of creativity, wordplay and sometimes out of the box thinking and to evade the traps we are given in 2020 we need all three to stay standing. We can blame so many people, but in the end blame does not get us anywhere, and lets face it, the Russians will at most send us pancakes. Consider that I am on average an average person (misplaced humility), in the stage of 2 years I came up with new 5G IP, a stage of optionally setting the work environment towards 3 videogames and one expansion and I came up with the theoretical stage of a new weapon that takes care of the Iranian fleet. I am merely one person, so what else is out there and how much IP and ideas are floating around whilst some players are servicing their needs through the speculated approach of misinforming others?

So if we continue on that same track we need to get the joke legs and see how it solves it for us. Yet expecting others to solve dilemma’s is a two edged sword and we need to be aware of those dangers. On the grand scheme of things, the Coronaviru is not the danger, I am not worried about the 10% dying, I am worried of the 90% that has nowhere to go, as such we need the economie on a much better schale and in that we need to stop greed, we need to halt it completely, we cannot afford the stage it leaves the others. I am capitalist enough to not diminish it completely, because greed is a forward momentum force as well, yet the idea that Apple is now a 1.5 trillion dollar business, whilst their stores are nothing more than glorified display cases and I have been waiting for my laptop for 6 week, because it all gets made in the US, and the stores merely point (for the most) towards setting up an online sale should have been raising questions with over half a dozen governments, the stage is too weird and they get tax returns that no company has ever dreamed of, we need to change and the politicians are staging this through levels of inactivity that are unheard of.

And now as the economy collapses, we see protests, yet they go nowhere, because the tax laws remain untouched to the largest degree. So these politicians might be deductible, but they remain taxing on their best days.

In this I feel it is appropriate to end the story with a da dum dum.

Happy monday everyone and remember that if you wake up today before 17:00 you did something wrong.

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics, Science

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

June 16, 2020 · 11:55

Murdering innovation

It started with the BBC about 30 minutes ago, 30 minutes after they released ‘Amazon v EU: Has the online giant met his match’, the title intrigued me and anyone who wants to go after Bezos and his haircut is allowed to do so, yet the EU tends to not care about anyone’s haircut, so I decided to have a calm read of it. 

Certain things made sense, yet a much larger part does not anto illustrate it, I start with a quote on the article: “The EU now looks set to charge Amazon for anti-competitive behaviour. This could cost Amazon a lot of money and could alter the shopping experience it offers customers.” To understand this I need to take you on a little time trip, my initial stage of Amazon was seen in 1994, I heard of it in its beginning and to me Amazon made no sense. You see, I grew up in the Netherlands, and for the most, any shop, in any retail area was never more than a hour away, optionally up to 2 hours if it was an exotic item (weapons, drugs) I had access to most items ever needed, as such Amazon made no sense at all. In 1997 I visited the US for the first time and Amazon started making sense. You see there are massive differences between the US and EU in certain ways and most people in the EU might not have gotten it. Amazon was an innovative player and came up and matured a retail direction. So when we get  EU’s competition enforcer Margrethe Vestager stating “We never accept in a football match that one team was also judging the game”, I merely wonder what her game is. And the setting of anti-competition law makes no sense. It makes no sense, because for close to 25 years others refused to go into the Amazon direction, as they remained in denial of what could happen. They remained in denial because they were iterative and small minded, they want the technology of others to come to them for free. And that is a thought that murders innovation. We see it in almost every area of technology. I worked for a company that stopped Facebook innovation 4 years before Facebook was created. Bullet point spreadsheet users who rely on the mission statement and the bottom dollar. They are left on the sidelines guarding iterative traffic. They feel that their option grants them more personal wealth. Now, anyone who has read my blog knows that I am no Jeff Bezos fan, but this he got right and the entire Covid-19 issue worked for him and now the champions of iteration (like EU’s competition enforcer Margrethe Vestager) are setting up shop to murder innovation a little more. You see the others now want the Amazon system for free, they want to enjoy the decades they were not working on innovation and merely (optionally) fucking their mistress whilst they claimed they were hard at work guiding their commision like it was a taxi meter. 

When I gave the stage of setting tax laws properly in 1998, people accused me that it was too complex and nothing was done, now that these firms are raking in the billions, those same people are staring at the sky stating that there was nothing they could do, but they merely ignore their own inactions.

Yet the larger concern is the stage that erupts when we see “It runs an online store and also sells its own products on that platform. The criticism is, that it’s both the player and the referee.” Yes, Google and Amazon innovated retail traffic, after the Netscape issues Microsoft hid in the IE cloud they created and IBM never showed interest, they merely did their own less profitable thing and now they want to push in on a market that had evolved for well over a decade and does fine without them. Microsoft came up with Bing a decade after Google and still has no proper way to set the algorithm for ranking, and misses out on a decade of data, which is how I see it. IBM has its own innovation (Quantum computing) and is still 2-5 years away from innovating that field, the rest of them are innovation candle holders at best. 

Yet I cannot completely ignore that the EU has optionally a case to bring, yet their own inadequacies regarding the mapping of the other players that never showed any interest in innovating the field Amazon is in is also food for thought. Those iterative players that will only step in on the second tier after the innovator has proven their case, how is there any level of fairness to give them the playing field? 

So when we see: “is the company using that data to give Amazon’s own products an unfair advantage?” I cannot completely disagree, yet the larger issue is that Amazon created a level of data collection that other data dogs refused to bark at. Now we all can agree that not every retail shop can wield such data and they should not get hit, yet this stage that Amazon has was in the UK going on for a long time via Dunnhumby did for Tesco and in The Netherlands it was Albert Heijn (et al) and their Air Miles. If you go after one, you need to go after all and that is not happening is it? Yet there is a size difference, but none of them came with an overlay of algorithm and made sense of it, they all wanted their own little corner, the innovation of Amazon was larger than that and everyone was in that selfish stage until they all learned (the hard way) that their way was the losing one. 

In all this Amazon is not completely innocent, yet that does not mean that they are guilty. The question we see: “But does Amazon unfairly promote its own products at the expense of third parties?” is woefully incomplete. The issue (just like with Google) is not on what is offered, but what EXACTLY did the searcher ask for? It is a huge part in all this and it is left on the sidelines, optionally intentionally and that hurts, because in all this the central side is not the sellers, or the implied sellers, what did the buyer exactly ask for and that matters, especially in the case of Amazon. The buyer did not ask for “A western where we see Talulah Riley naked with loads of added violence in the highest resolution”, they asked for “Westworld season 2 bluray”, and those two searches are not the same. We can come up with a lot more examples, but I hope that the point comes across. We forget that the largest issue is what the buyer seeks and the bulk want the latest products, they want the ones that ship immediately and can we honestly say that the founding setting of the product sought has all the elements in place (like shipping and overnight shipping options) are these elements properly set to those other sellers? You see, the backwash on what is optionally possible is one thing, the fact that these shops set up the parameters of what can be done in comparison of what is done are two different universes. 

For example, I cannot get to ‘there’ from ‘here’ in Google maps. These two locations are not defined, so when someone is looking at the Sombrero galaxy, it does not mean that there is a path getting there. 

It is the innuendo and the missing elements that make some strike out, optionally murdering innovation. Whilst we see: “The general defence is that there are plenty of companies that act as both a shop and supplier. Tesco and Sainsbury’s both sell their own labelled products in their stores, for example.” a setting duplicated in NEARLY EVERY OTHER country. Pretty much every supermarket chain has that setting, and it is ignored, because they are ‘too small’. I believe that the stage is different, as I stated, the others refused to adhere to the needs of the seeker, the consumer. As such they are out of the online game and that part is surprisingly overlooked. It is not the business of Amazon (or Google for that matter) to fill in the blanks, if Bing does that, perhaps it might have a future to some. 

It is our task to protect innovation, there is too little of it (not what a marketing manager claims is innovation, but actual innovation) if we do not, we merely end up fuelling the EU gravy train and those people need to focus on actual issues, not their gravy train. In this I am not stating that Amazon is completely innocent, I am merely stating that there are a few sides that some people left in the dark. To illustrate this I entered “buy arkham knight ps4”, the results in Bing and Google are very different, bing seems to be all about ebay, that same search in Google and Amazon give a much better result, they gave me what I was looking for. I personally was not looking for ebay options, yet was that part of the equation given? 

The buyer is the larger part in all this and most screamers forgot about that part.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Science

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