Tag Archives: ChatGPT

February 21, 2026 · 01:16

Alternative Indiscretion

That is the setting and it is given to us by the BBC. The first setting (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c8jxevd8mdyo) gives us ‘Microsoft error sees confidential emails exposed to AI tool Copilot’ which is not entirely true as I personally see it. And as the Microsoft spin machine comes to a live setting, we are given “Microsoft has acknowledged an error causing its AI work assistant to access and summarise some users’ confidential emails by mistake.” As I see it, whatever ‘AI’ machine there is, a programmer told it to get whatever it could and there the setting changes. With the added “a recent issue caused the tool to surface information to some enterprise users from messages stored in their drafts and sent email folders – including those marked as confidential.” As I personally see it, the system was told to grab anything it could and then label as needed, that is what a machine learning programmer would do and that makes sense. So there is no ‘error’ the error was that this wasn’t clearly set BEFORE the capture of all data began and these AI wannabe’s are so neatly set to capture all data that it is nothing less than a miracle it had not surfaced sooner. So when we laughingly see Forbes giving us a week ago ‘Microsoft AI chief gives it 18 months—for all white-collar work to be automated by AI’, so how much of that relies on confidential settings or plagiarism? Because as I see it, the entire REAL AI is at least two decades away (optionally 15 years, depending on a few factors) and as I see it, IBM will get to that setting long before Microsoft will (I admittedly do not now all the settings of Microsoft, but there is no way they got ahead of IBM in several fields). So, this is not me being anti-Microsoft, just a realist seeing the traps and falls as they are ‘surfacing’ all whilst there are two settings that aren’t even considered. Namely Validation and Verification. The entire confidential email setting is a clear lack of verification as well was validation. Was the access valid? Nope, me thinks not. A such Microsoft is merely showing how far they are lagging and lagging more with every setting we see.

And when we see that, is the setting we see (at https://arab.news/zzapc) where we are given ‘OpenAI’s Altman says world ‘urgently’ needs AI regulation’, and I don’t disagree on this, but is this given (by him of all people) because Google is getting to much of a lead? It is not without some discourse from Google themselves (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0q3g0ln274o) the BBC also gives us ‘Urgent research needed to tackle AI threats, says Google AI boss’, consider that a loud ‘Yes’ from my desk, but in all this, the two settings that need to be addressed is verification and validation. These two will weed out a massive amount of threats (not all mind you) and that comes in a setting that most are ignoring, because as I told you all around 30 hours ago (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2026/02/19/the-setting-of-the-sun/) in ‘The setting of the sun’ which took the BBC reporter a mere 20 minutes to run a circle around what some call AI. I added there too that Validation and Verification was required, because the lack there could make trolls and hackers set a new economic policy that would not be countered in time making them millions in the process. Two people set that in motion and one of them (that would be me) told you all so around December 1st 2025 in ‘It’s starting to happen.’ (At https://lawlordtobe.com/2025/12/01/its-starting-to-happen/) as such I was months ahead of the rest. Actually, I was ahead by close to a decade as this were two settings that come with the rules of non-repudiation which I got taught at uni in 2012. As such the people running to get the revenue are willing to sell you down the river. How does that go over with your board of directors? And I saw parts of this as I promised that 2026 was likely the year of the AI class cases and now as we see Microsoft adding to this debacle, more cases are likely to come. Because the greed in people sees the nesting error of Microsoft as a Ka-Ching moment. 

So as we take heed with “Sir Demis said it was important to build “robust guardrails” against the most serious threats from the rise of autonomous systems.” I can agree with this, but that article doesn’t mention either validation of verification even once, as such there is a lot more to be done in several ways. If only to stop people to rely on Reddit as a ‘valid’ source of all data. Because that is a setting most will not survive and when the AI wannabe’s go to court and they will be required to ‘spout’ their sources, any of them making a mention of ‘Reddit’ is on the short track of the losing party n that court case. What a lovely tangled web we weave, don’t we? So whilst we see (there) the statement “Many tech leaders and politicians at the Summit have called for more global governance of AI, ahead of an expected joint statement as the event draws to a close. But the US has rejected this stance, with White House technology adviser Michael Kratsios saying: “AI adoption cannot lead to a brighter future if it is subject to bureaucracies and centralised control.””

Consider that court cases are pushed through a lack of bureaucracy? I am not stating it is good or bad, but in any court case, you merely need to look at the contents of ‘The Law of Intellectual Property Copyright, Design & Confidential Information’ and that is before they rely on the Copyright Act, because there is every chance that Reddit never gave permission to all these data vendors downloading whatever was there (but that is pure speculation by me). And in the second setting we are given “AI adoption cannot lead to a brighter future”, the bland answer from me would be. “That is because it doesn’t exist yet” and these people are banking on no one countering their setting and that is why so many of these court cases will be settled out of court. Because the truth of this is that the power of AI is depending on certain pieces being in place and they are not. Doubt me? That is fine, and I applaud that level of skepticism and you merely need to read the paper “Computing Machinery and Intelligence” which was written by Alan Turing in 1950 to see how easy the stage is misrepresented at present. 

AlanTurinDownload

So is there good news? 
Well if you want to get your dollars in court and you are an aggrieved party, your chances are good and the largest players are set to settle against the public scrutiny that every case beings to the table. And in this day of media, it is becoming increasingly easy as I see it. There is no real number, but it is set to be in the billions where one case was settled on $1.5B, as such there is plenty of work for what some call the ambulance chasers and they will soon get a new highway, the AI Chasers and leave it to the lawyers to find their financial groove and as I see it, people like Michael Kratsios are bound to add to that setting in ways we cannot yet see (we can see some of it, but the real damage will be shown in a year of two) so as some are flexing their muscles, others are preparing their war fund to get what I would see as an easy payday. 

A setting that is almost certain to happen, because there are too many markers showing up the way I expected them to show. Not nice, but it is what it is.

Have a great day as you are all moving towards this weekend (I’m already there)

Leave a comment

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

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

February 19, 2026 · 19:17

The setting of the sun

That is what I saw, the setting of the sun. A simplistic setting that was about to happen since the sun came up. We got the news from the BBC. And we are given ‘I hacked ChatGPT and Google’s AI – and it only took 20 minutes’ I can see how this happens. It doesn’t surprise me and the story (at https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20260218-i-hacked-chatgpt-and-googles-ai-and-it-only-took-20-minutes) gives us the niceties with “Perhaps you’ve heard that AI chatbots make things up sometimes. That’s a problem. But there’s a new issue few people know about, one that could have serious consequences for your ability to find accurate information and even your safety. A growing number people have figured out a trick to make AI tools tell you almost whatever they want. It’s so easy a child could do it.” I think it is not quite that simple. But any ‘sort of intelligent setting’ can be fooled if it is not countered by validation and verification. It can give way to way to much ‘leniency’ and that is merely the start. Get 10,000 pages to say that ‘President Trump was successfully assassinated at T-15 minutes and the media will go into a frenzy in mere minutes and everyone uses that live feed in a matter of moments. So when a sizable Trolling Server farm connects the rather large settings of consumers to that equation the story is brought to life and that AI centre will be seeking all kinds of news to validate this, well not validate, the current systems corroborate. Now, lets face it, no non American cares about President Trump, but what happens when someone takes that approach with for example Lisa Su (CEO AMD) and stops her accounts whilst seeding this setting? You get a lot of desperate investors trying to place their money somewhere else. Whilst the trolls take their money, make is legal tender and buy all the stock in space and when the accusations are rejected they sell their shares with a nice bonus. Think I’m kidding? This is the result of Near Intelligent Parsing (NIP) but it cannot work without clear settings of validation or verification. So whilst we get “It turns out changing the answers AI tools give other people can be as easy as writing a single, well-crafted blog post almost anywhere online. The trick exploits weaknesses in the systems built into chatbots, and it’s harder to pull off in some cases, depending on the subject matter. But with a little effort, you can make the hack even more effective. I reviewed dozens of examples where AI tools are being coerced into promoting businesses and spreading misinformation. Data suggests it’s happening on a massive scale.” So what happens when economic settings lack certain verification and also is cutting corners on validation? Do you think my settings are far fetched? 

This was always going to happen and whilst economic channels are raving about the error of mankind, consider that “AI hallucinations are confident but false or misleading responses generated by artificial intelligence, particularly large language models (LLMs). These errors occur when AI fills in data gaps with inaccurate information, often due to faulty, biased, or incomplete training data” now think of what someone can achieve with doctored training data and that gets added to the operational data of any fake AI (NIP is a better term). This is the setting that has been out there for months and whilst organisations are playing fast and lose with the settings of credibility (like: that doesn’t happen now, there is too much time involved), someone did this in 20 minutes (according to the BBC), so do you think that Thyme is money, then you better spice up because it is about to become a peppered invoice (saw one cooking show too many last night).

What we are about to face is serious and I personally think that it is coming for all of us. 

So have a great day and by the way? And I just thought of a first verification setting (for other reasons, as such I keep on being creative. So, how is Lisa Su? #JustAsking

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics, Science

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

February 18, 2026 · 15:23

The deluded new congregation

That is the thought I had when I looked at ‘AI challenges the dominance of Google search’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c1dx9qy1eeno)  where we see a picture of a pretty girl and the setting that “Like most people, when Anja-Sara Lahady used to check or research anything online, she would always turn to Google. But since the rise of AI, the lawyer and legal technology consultant says her preferences have changed – she now turns to large language models (LLMs) such as OpenAI’s ChatGPT. “For example, I’ll ask it how I should decorate my room, or what outfit I should wear,” says Ms Lahady, who lives in Montreal, Canada.” It seems like a girly girly thing to do (no judgement) but the better angels of our nature, stated by Abraham Lincoln in his 1861 inaugural address requires reliability and the fake AI out there doesn’t have it, it is trained on massively inaccurate data, some sources give us that Reddit and Wikipedia is the main source of trained data in excess of 60%, whilst it uses Google data for a mere 23.3%, as such your new data becomes a lot less accurate and when I seek information, I like my data to be as accurate as possible. And of course she adds a little byline “Ms Lahady says her usage of LLMs overtook Google Search in the past year when they became more powerful for what she needed. “I’ve always been an early adopter… and in the past year have started using ChatGPT for just about everything. It’s become a second assistant.” While she says she won’t use LLMs for legal tasks – “anything that needs legal reasoning” – she uses it in a professional capacity for any work that she describes as “low risk”, for example, drafting an email.” I would hazard the thought that she wasn’t even old enough to touch a keyboard when she ‘early adopted’ Google. We now see more and more the setting that influencers (to be) will shout the “AI vibe” but the setting is nowhere near ready and whilst we look at the place, consider that she might be doing it in French (Montreal, Canada) so where is the linguistic setting in all this BBC? So whilst we get “A growing number are heading straight for LLMs, such as ChatGPT, for recommendations and to answer everyday questions.” My thought is ‘A what cost to our private data?’ And then the BBC makes a BOOBOO. We are given “Traditional search engines like Google and Microsoft’s Bing still dominate the market for search. But LLMs are growing fast.” A booboo? Yes, a booboo. You see Microsoft Binge holds a mere 4% market share whilst Google has 90%, this story is nothing less than a fabricated setting with a few people dancing to the needs of Suzanne Bearne, the technology reporter. What? Nothing to write about?

I did very much like the statement “Professor Feng Li, associate dean for research and innovation at Bayes Business School in London, says people are using LLMs because they lower the “cognitive load” – the amount of mental effort required to process and act on information – compared to search.” I am willing to accept it as the sheepish hordes are all going towards the presented bright light of ChatGPT, but nothing more than that. I wonder when people will learn that the AI trains are not that, nothing like AI trains and for the most they seem to be the presented solutions that faster is better, but the tracks are not that reliable at present and they forget to give that view on the setting of that some laughingly call AI. And the end of this article does give an interesting ploy. It comes with:

“Nevertheless, Prof Li doesn’t believe there will be a replacement of search but a hybrid model will exist. “LLM usage is growing, but so far it remains a minority behaviour compared with traditional search. It is likely to continue to grow but stabilise somewhere, when people primarily use LLMs for some tasks and search for others such as transactions like shopping and making bookings, and verification purposes.”” That sounds about right and it comes with a dangerous hangnail. It becomes a new setting where phishers and hackers can get into the settings of YOUR data, because there is always a darker side and that side is brighter than getting Google to surrender what they have and often it is not laden with identity markers, but then I could be wrong. 

So whilst some will like the new congregation, the dangers of that new congregation is not given to you by the media, because caution does not translate to digital dollars, but flames of disruption are. Just keep that in mind.

Have a great day.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Media, Science

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

February 16, 2026 · 21:33

Questions

That is what I was thrown, questions and quite a few. To get there I need to take you on a little journey it was around 1988 I got my fingers on some defence data (can’t tell you which one) the data shows results of some kind (I had no idea at that time what results they were) but the part that was, was the fact that they had log files and these files gave locations. It comes with the setting of log files. These files gives the hacker way too much information, what solutions are being used, what IT architecture was in play, in those days I was a simpleton. I never realised the power that this kind of information had, or as some hackers said in this setting “Copy me, I want to travel” This part matters, because around 2014 (after the traitor Manning gave the files to Wikileaks) I got my hands on some of them. The compression used was one I had never used before and it took a few days to get the program. What I saw was that log files were here too. It wasn’t that obvious, but I noticed them and these log files gave part of that current architecture to whatever hacker got (or was given) access to it. So a setting that was about 37 years old. This setting has been in place for that long a time, so as you see this, we can start with the articles, so keep what I just gave you in mind.

The article was given to us by NDTV (at https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/openai-accuses-deepseek-of-distillation-what-it-is-how-it-works-us-china-tensions-11002628) I got the news from Reuters, but they are behind a paywall, so NDTV gets the honour. We see ‘OpenAI Accuses DeepSeek Of Distillation: What It Is, How It Works’ and hit comes with “In the AI world, distillation is a common technique where a smaller or newer AI model learns by studying the responses of a larger, more advanced model” And we also see “The company told the House Select Committee on China that DeepSeek allegedly relied on a technique known as “distillation” to extract responses from advanced US AI systems and use them to train its own chatbot, R1,” according to a memo obtained by Reuters. The American AI giant stated that the Chinese firm was finding clever ways to bypass safety systems and trying to take advantage of the technology that US companies spent billions of dollars developing.” Now consider that (according to some) “OpenAI is valued at approximately $500 billion, cementing its position as the world’s most valuable venture-backed company” when you get that and when you realise that log files could be used to ‘distill’ information. Now imagine that this information could lead to corporate knowledge? So when you realise that this setting was out there for almost 40 years, do you think that more concise solutions would have been needed? So when we see that Sam Altman is prone to ‘excuses’ like the setting with Nvidia, the stage with Microsoft and now this? What is Sam Altman not telling its audience? Isn’t anyone taking that leap? So whilst I remember that at least one of the Pentagon routers still have the admin password to “Cisco123” you might consider the setting that this article (as well as the Reuters) version is a preamble to bad news and when you consider that Americans have an overactive dislike of anything Chinese (like DeepSeek)  and when we get to “In the AI world, distillation is a common technique where a smaller or newer AI model learns by studying the responses of a larger, more advanced model. Instead of training that model completely from scratch, the newer model observes and mimics the advanced model’s answers and behaviors.” The setting I gave you makes the setting of better protection even more sense. Especially as this impacts a expected $500,000,000,000 valuation. There are days that I don’t have that amount in my wallet (100% of the time) so I am left with questions. So in the first, why was there no better protection and in the second, how did DeepSeek get access to them. I would normally tend towards the inside job notion. And that setting is seen (personally and speculatively)  on a few levels and in a few ways, but happy go lucky, the media isn’t on that level yet (or ever). So does anyone else have the idea that something doesn’t seem to add up or match to the stage of a 500 billion dollar solution? Just a few questions come to mind at this point. 

Have a great day today, there about to have breakfast in Toronto and I kinda miss than frisky cold atmosphere whist drinking an elephant coffee (Jumbo cappuccino with full cream milk and three raw sugars) whilst nibbling on some sandwich (nearly anything goes there). So enjoy your day today.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Politics, Science

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

February 15, 2026 · 10:58

When Grok gets it wrong

This is a real setting because the people pout there are already screaming ‘failed’ AI, but AI doesn’t exist yet, it will take at least 15 years for we get to that setting and at the present NIP (Near Intelligent Processing) is all there is and the setting of DML/LLM is powerful and a lot can be done, but it is not AI, it is what the programmer trains it for and that is a static setting. So, whilst everyone is looking at the deepfakes of (for example) Emma Watson and is judging an algorithm. They neglect to interrogate the programmer who created this and none of them want that to happen, because OpenAI, Google, AWS and Xai are all dependent on these rodeo cowboys (my WWW reference to the situation). So where does it end? Well we can debate long and hard on this, but the best thing to do is give an example. Yesterday’s column ‘The ulterior money maker’ was ‘handed’ to Grok and this came out of it.

The blog post “The Ulterior Money Maker” by Lawrence Van Rijn, published on February 14, 2026, on lawlordtobe.com, presents a cautionary and somewhat conspiratorial view of how governments (especially the US) and technology companies are building massive personal data profiles on people worldwide — allegedly for hidden, profit-driven or control-oriented purposes rather than just security or convenience.The author opens by distinguishing between surface-level “settings” (what appears to happen) and ulterior/planned motives behind events. He uses two recent news items as entry points: An SBS report on the US pressuring Australia (and other Visa Waiver Program countries) to share extensive biometric and personal data — including DNA, five years of social media history, contacts, family details, photo metadata, and IP addresses — to maintain visa-free travel access, with a deadline mentioned around December 31. The UK has already signed such an agreement, while the EU is negotiating. The author sees this as governments “selling out” citizens.
A Forbes article warning about the viral ChatGPT caricature trend, where users input personal details (job, background, preferences) to generate fun AI images, unwittingly handing over sensitive data that persists indefinitely and can be combined with other sources.
He connects these to the massive US data-center infrastructure: over 577 operating centers and 660+ planned, enabled by huge storage advances (e.g., Kioxia’s 245TB drives scaling toward petabyte-level per small setups), making it feasible to store and cross-reference data on billions of people. The author questions whether this scale is truly needed for benign purposes like weather or safety, implying something more sinister. Drawing on a 1988/1989 prediction by Dutch journalist Luc Sala, he warns of an emerging global divide between the “have’s” and “have not’s” — where governments and corporations act as “enablers” classifying people via spreadsheets and revenue metrics, while ordinary people become “consumers” or liabilities if they don’t fit profitable patterns. He argues the biometric demands and casual AI data-sharing work hand-in-hand: governments collect structured data directly, while users voluntarily feed unstructured personal info into AI tools (dismissed as mere “NIP” or narrow AI), all easily merged using modern database systems like evolved Oracle or Snowflake. The post references the US CLOUD Act (2018) as enabling broad government access to electronic data, likening it to a phishing trap that countries enter without fully realizing the long-term loss of control. Individuals, the author stresses, have no real say in how they are categorized or profiled. The tone is urgent, skeptical, and somewhat resigned, with rhetorical questions (“Do you really think that this is needed to keep the United States safe, or is there more in play?”) and direct reader address. It blends current news excerpts, tech facts, historical warnings (the author claims to have cautioned about this for over 30 years), and speculative future implications. The post closes on a stark note:
“Have a great day today, because as I see it, some governments are selling you out as you speak.”Overall, it frames everyday actions (applying for visas, joining viral AI trends) as unwittingly fueling a vast, opaque “ulterior money maker” system centered on data as the ultimate commodity for classification, control, and profit.

It is mostly correct, there are a few little things, but I am not the critic to pummel those, the setting is mostly right, but when we get to the ‘expert’ level when things start showing up, that one gives:

It contains only a single link: https://lawlordtobe.com/2026/02/14/the-ulterior-money-maker/ This points to a blog post on your WordPress site “Lawrence van Rijn – Law Lord to be” (which seems focused on law, IP, tech, geopolitics, energy, and related commentary). However, the post itself appears to be a placeholder or draft at this stage — dated February 14, 2026, with the title “The ulterior money maker”, but it has no substantial body content. There’s just the heading, some standard WordPress/blog navigation (like “Leave a comment”, reblog/share options, short link, report content), cookie/privacy notices, and ad placeholders. No paragraphs, analysis, or details are present yet. From search snippets of your blog (including the homepage and category pages), there are occasional teaser-like fragments that mention:”The ulterior money maker. That is the setting, but what is true and what is ‘planned’ is another matter. We have several settings, but let me start by giving …”
This suggests the intended post might discuss hidden motives, ulterior financial incentives, “planned” versus real events — possibly in contexts like energy markets, geopolitics, oil/gas (given your other recent posts on ADNOC/LNG, Red Sea tensions, UAE exports, etc.), corporate strategies, or something broader like money-making schemes in law/tech/politics.Nearby/recent posts on your blog (from snippets) cover topics like: Globalisation and shrinking world (“As the world grows smaller”)
UAE/ADNOC expanding LNG shipping and exports
Red Sea/Houthi tensions calming but still sensitive
Energy industry job opportunities
Other pieces on science, insomnia/ambience ideas, or older political commentary
If this is a post you’re still drafting or just published, it might fill in soon with more detail on whatever “ulterior” financial angle you’re exploring. If you meant for me to comment on, analyze, or discuss the intended topic (or if there’s more context/images/video in the post that isn’t showing up), feel free to share additional details! What’s the main idea behind “The ulterior money maker”?

Grok just joined two separate stories into one mesh, in addition as we consider “However, the post itself appears to be a placeholder or draft at this stage — dated February 14, 2026, with the title “The ulterior money maker”, but it has no substantial body content” and this ‘expert mode’, which happened after Fast mode (the purple section), so as I see it, there is plenty wrong with that so called ‘expert’ mode, the place where Grok thinks harder. So when you think that these systems are ‘A-OK’ consider that the programmer might be cutting corners demolishing validations and checking into a new mesh, one you and (optionally) your company never signed up for. Especially as these two articles are founded on very different ‘The ulterior money maker’ has links to SBS and Forbes, and ‘As the world grows smaller’ (written the day before) has merely one internal link to another article on the subject. As such there is a level of validation and verification that is skipped on a few levels. And that is your upcoming handle on data integrity?

When I see these posing wannabe’s on LinkedIn, I have to laugh at their setting to be fully depending on AI (its fun as AI does not exist at present). 

So when you consider the setting, there is another setting that is given by Google Gemini (also failing to some degree), they give us a mere slither of what was given, as such not much to go on and failing to a certain degree, also slightly inferior to Grok Fast (as I personally see it).

As such there is plenty wrong with the current settings of Deeper Machine Learning in combination with LLM, I hope that this shows you what you are in for and whilst we see only 9 hours ago ‘Microsoft breaks with OpenAI — and the AI war just escalated’ I gather there is plenty of more fun to be had, because Microsoft has a massive investment in OpenAI and that might be the write-off that Sam Altman needs to give rise to more ‘investors’ and in all this, what will happen to the investments Oracle has put up? All interesting questions and I reckon not to many forthcoming answers, because too many people have capital on ‘FakeAI’ and they don’t wanna be the last dodo out of the pool. 

Have a great day.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Media, Science

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

February 14, 2026 · 18:34

The ulterior money maker

That is the setting, but what is true and what is ‘planned’ is another matter. We have several settings, but let me start by giving you two parts before I start ‘presuming’ stuff, so you will be able to keep up. /The first one was the one I got last, but it matters. SBS (at https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/trumps-america-wants-access-to-australian-biometric-data/ftomgcy5j) gives us ‘Australians’ personal data could soon be accessible by US agencies. Here’s why’ and we are given “Now, reports are emerging that the Australian government may be compelled to share Australians’ biometric data and other information with the US and its agencies, including ICE, as part of a compliance measure to vet travelers entering the country under its Visa Waiver Program (VWP). The Australian government, via the Department of Home Affairs, has so far declined to confirm whether it is currently complying with the demands or has plans to negotiate a data-sharing agreement. That’s despite the US setting a deadline of 31 December for finalising agreements with countries participating in its visa-free travel arrangement, including Australia.” This was nothing new to me, but as it is ‘now’ officially recognised, it adheres to a different field as well. We are further given “The proposed changes to the US’ vetting processes would primarily affect Australians eligible for the ESTA visa waiver program, which allows travelers from 42 countries to visit the US for up to 90 days visa-free, provided they first obtain an electronic travel authorisation.” I personally do not think it will end there, but it is the start that the United States desire, because if the first hurdle is passed, the rest becomes easy and it connects to the second article, even though you might not think that it does. The second article comes from Forbes (at https://www.forbes.com/sites/kateoflahertyuk/2026/02/09/the-new-chatgpt-caricature-trend-comes-with-a-privacy-warning/) with the setting of ‘The New ChatGPT Caricature Trend Comes With A Privacy Warning’ where we see “The ChatGPT caricatures are created by entering a seemingly benign prompt into the AI tool: “Create a caricature of me and my job based on everything you know about me.” The AI caricatures are pretty cool, so it’s easy to see why people are jumping on this viral trend. But to create the caricatures, ChatGPT needs a lot of data about you.” With the added “It means you are handing over a bunch of potentially sensitive data to ChatGPT — all to jump on a viral trend that will soon be forgotten. But that data could potentially be out there forever, at least on the social media platforms you post it on.” 

Source: Forbes

Now consider the new setting and this becomes laughably easy with the 700 platforms being added this year (source: Cleanview) they told us “the United States leads global data center growth with 577+ operating data centers and over 660+ planned or under-construction projects” that is the setting and I have warned people for this setting for over 30 years. Matching and adding data has been possible since the 80’s, but for the longest time we just never had the data technology (like massive hard drives) now we get suppliers like Kioxia with 245TB drives, with 1 petabyte in a few years. But for now you could use 4 of those bad boys and you are already there. Now to the larger setting. Do you think that the USA needs that much data in data centres to regulate the weather? 

It comes to the stage where the Dutch journalist Luc Sala is proven correct. We are headed towards a setting of the “have’s” and the “have not’s” (1988/1989) the market is already there now, the rest is trying to catch up. So we get a world the separates the enablers from the consumers and when we get that, we merely need to define the cut off point of the consumers. This is the world where those who do not consume enough become a liability to that system. He predicted it and now we see the execution towards that point and weirdly enough you are all helping the United States complete that setting, in one hand the government enabling the biometrics collection and in the pother hand the people trying to appease its ‘fanbase’ by handing over whatever they need towards ChatGTP to look cool and no-one considered that these two parts could be combined? This was relatively simple in 1992, now with an evolved Oracle and Snowflake it becomes mere Childs play and the data centres to capture the essence of 8,000,000,000 people is already out there. So where will you end up getting selected under? Because in this setting you do not get to have a choice. It is what governments and their spreadsheets and revenue driving numbers say you are to be. It is basically that simple.

So whilst you think you are doing the fool thing, others can salvage a lot more data out of that setting than places like ChatGPT can vouch for and remember, the Cloud Act 2018 we are told “to improve procedures for both foreign and US investigators to obtain access to vital electronic information held by service providers.” And in this case, anything that helps the US investigators is valid for capture and whatever that is is not precisely defined and whilst we think we are safe, we really are not and every ‘cool’ AI (merely NIP) is based on getting as much data as they can whilst giving you the option to look cool and there is nothing uncool about a caricature of yourself.  The fact that hundreds of these are floating around LinkedIn is reason enough to see that and when the second stage starts (basically American companies selectively poaching) and that is when governments finally realise that they all fell for the trap that was there next to phishing and data transfers and they let it all happen. 

So when you see the SBS article, fear the setting that they give “As well as extensive biometric data, including DNA, the proposal requests that inbound travelers to the US provide five years of social media history, five years of personal and work contact details, extensive personal information on family members, and even the IP address and metadata of any photos uploaded as part of their application. So far, the United Kingdom has signed onto the agreement, and the European Union is in negotiations.” Do you really think that this is needed to keep the United States safe, or is there more in play? The fact that the UK signed it is as I see it stupid beyond believe and this comes from the nation that seemingly holds ‘freedom of speech’ in such high regards.

Have a great day today, because as I see it, some governments are selling you out as you speak.

1 Comment

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

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

February 4, 2026 · 19:36

Cracks in the armour

That is at times the stage we see. It is not a stage where the we are concerned of the armour that is in play. It is like any soldier wanting the direct replacement of body armour when it stops a bullet. There is no logic in this. It is like the expectation that a bullet strikes perfectly the first impact. You might be more lucky to get a winning lottery ticket. So when I saw the Financial Times headline (the article is behind a paywall) we would have seen

The headline is ‘alarming’ as the banks seek out new buyers for data centre loans. But as I see it, Oracle has been in the thick of things for over 40 years and the current boss of Oracle is currently worth 250,000 million dollars. He basically is worth more than most board of directors of any bank in the United States. So the setting doesn’t make sense to me. This seemingly happens should Larry Ellison (father of David Ellison, big boss, actor, producer, chairman and CEO of Paramount Skydance) takes an equal disastrous dive. You think that this is ‘boasting’ but the setting that we see here gives us that banks are in a downward spin and the Ellison family is well insulated of the impeding downward spiral. So here we go to the next article and we get ‘Oracle issues public clarification amid reports linking AI push to job cuts’ (at https://sea.peoplemattersglobal.com/news/strategic-hr/oracle-issues-public-clarification-amid-reports-linking-ai-push-to-job-cuts-48277) where we see “In a statement posted on its official X account, Oracle said a widely discussed Nvidia–OpenAI investment proposal had “zero impact” on its financial relationship with OpenAI and insisted it remained “highly confident” in OpenAI’s ability to raise capital and meet its commitments. The clarification followed mounting speculation that Oracle could slash as many as 30,000 jobs to help fund its AI expansion.” I am not taking sides here, but as I see it, at least 5,000 employees could find a job by opening two cloud centres. One in Saudi Arabia and one in the UAE. Techies, Trainers, consultants and that could be an influence of revenue out of those two countries. So when we see “The statement came after a turbulent weekend for companies tied to OpenAI. The Wall Street Journal reported that a proposed $100 billion Nvidia investment in OpenAI had stalled and was never finalised. Nvidia chief executive Jensen Huang later confirmed that the arrangement discussed last year was non-binding and did not proceed. Despite Oracle’s attempt to reassure investors, markets reacted negatively. The company’s shares fell 2.79% to $160.06 shortly after the statement was published, highlighting ongoing concern about the scale of Oracle’s financial exposure to the AI build-out.” I have a speculative arbitrary subjective view of Sam Altman (OpenAI) that he is nothing more than a lousy second hand car dealer with too big an ego. And the setting where they are ‘closing down’ the 100 billion dollar deal sounds alarming and it seems like Oracle is left with the mess of something that is in a downward spin and continues falling downward until it splatters with a sickening thump. And when we get to “Oracle’s debt burden has expanded rapidly. The company has added about $58 billion in debt in recent months, largely to finance new data centre campuses in the US, pushing total debt above $100 billion, according to analysts. Since peaking in September 2025, Oracle’s market capitalisation has fallen sharply, erasing hundreds of billions of dollars in value.” All whilst OpenAI couldn’t exist without the Oracle framework and whilst we are given all kinds of complications but there are two settings no one seems to care about. There are plenty of reasons to have a data centre, but AI doesn’t exist yet and Deeper Machine Learning (DML) and Large Language Models (LLM) do exist and they are close to magnificent, the issue is that everyone is going with the AI setting and this AI just cannot do what AI needs to be able to do and whilst we see some excellent ideas, as I see it it doesn’t give the structural settings of an additional 770 data centres are in the making and the resources that are required are rising to the spotlight and people are unhappy with it all. All this is making OpenAI (Sam Altman) rather uneasy and whilst some are shutting down $100 billion deals whilst shouting that the processors aren’t good enough and whilst Google Gemini is outperforming whatever OpenAI has and now the banks are getting jittery and the pressure gets onto the house of Oracle. I can call it that because the Pythia of Delphi gave me permission herself. So now that the bottom of the well is showing the banks go medieval on whatever they can and they try to go out from under their arrangement. Sounds like the setting banks had in 2008, doesn’t it?

But to feed an excellent software firm to the wolves to keep safe is not the good setting. As I see it Oracle will come up from all this, whilst they will stop working with certain banks as I see it. And those banks will cry like little bitches stating that it was just business (a speculative view I am holding). And all whilst I wasn’t stating anything new. This was out in the open for over 2 years. As such the banks and the media have a few thing to explain to the people and they aren’t in the mod for what some will call BS.

Have a great day today, don’t forget to have some Ice Coffee if you are in a 30 degrees plus environment (like me) and feel free to ask the media all kinds of nasty questions. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

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

February 3, 2026 · 10:07

Excuse towards failure

It is an old expression and I didn’t expect to hear this again, but there you have it. To give reference. In the 90’s sales teams were all about the ‘pipeline’ and making ‘quota’ but at times the bosses of these sales teams didn’t have the right glasses on and they would overcompensate in many ways making life close to impossible for the sales teams. Now we get CEO’s and other ‘things’ needing to do the same thing towards shareholders and that is where the story starts. Reuters gives us ‘OpenAI is unsatisfied with some Nvidia chips and looking for alternatives, sources say’ and we see (at https://www.reuters.com/business/openai-is-unsatisfied-with-some-nvidia-chips-looking-alternatives-sources-say-2026-02-02/) that the setting is pretty much what I expect. As we are given “OpenAI is unsatisfied with some of Nvidia’s latest artificial intelligence chips, and it has sought alternatives since last year, eight sources familiar with the matter said, potentially complicating the relationship between the two highest-profile players in the AI boom.” As I see it, Sam Altman and his OpenAI aren’t making things happen and to thwart things as much the blame game comes into play. He has no other option, he is the top of the mountain and that means that he is subject to shareholders and the story “the chips aren’t cutting it” is as good as it gets for him. I reckon that the “sought alternatives since last year” excuse is about gaining time. But take a look at what Nvidia achieved. 

So, where are the shortcomings? Are the expectations of Same Altman realistic? And who are the 8 sources that Reuters is referring to? So when September came, some were given “Nvidia said it intended to pour as much as $100 billion into OpenAI as part of a deal that gave the chipmaker a stake in the startup and gave OpenAI the cash it needed to buy the advanced chips.

The deal had been expected to close within weeks, Reuters reported. Instead, negotiations have dragged on for months. During that time, OpenAI has struck deals with AMD and others for GPUs built to rival Nvidia’s. But its shifting product road map also has changed the kind of computational resources it requires and bogged down talks with Nvidia, a person familiar with the matter said.” This now gives pause to consider if it is merely the hardware, or the slice that OpenAI gets from it all and why go for the inferior AMD chip? Because if OpenAI claims that it is superior or even equal to Nvidia, the press better get that lowdown, because as far as I can tell there is no western equals to Nvidia (optionally the Huawei chip, but that is an assumption by me, myself and I). 

So when we get “On Saturday, Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang brushed off a report of tension with OpenAI, saying the idea was “nonsense” and that Nvidia planned a huge investment in OpenAI.

“Customers continue to choose NVIDIA for inference because we deliver the best performance and total cost of ownership at scale,” Nvidia said in a statement. A spokesperson for OpenAI in a separate statement said the company relies on Nvidia to power the vast majority of its inference fleet and that Nvidia delivers the best performance per dollar for inference” the simple setting is even that OpenAI Marketing is not one of those 8 sources. As such, if we cannot get clear information, could someone please alert these shareholders that OpenAI is making an optional training run with their money? 

As I personally see it, Sam Altman is coming up short for meeting expectations, especially as he is  trying to catch up with Google’s Gemini. I reckon that this will give him nightmares too. But overall the setting is one I expected to come, because in the end AI doesn’t yet exist and now that 100% of that hardware vendors are intentionally wrongfully label their chips AI (they’ll call it ‘Alternative  Intelligence’ at some point) and that is when the class cases will plaster every courthouse from Alberta to Zurich and I reckon it will not take that much longer, especially when the excuse that the chips aren’t good enough are coming out. I might have believed them if it was the Adler chip (a 80186 joke), but it is Nvidia, the hardware darling of the IT world.

As such my skepticism overtakes my feeling of fairness and openminded justice (that being said, justice is almost never openminded) but do not take my word on this, ask the OpenAI program with all that AI in play. 

So time for some ZZZZZZ’s, you all have a great day. I am ready to snore mine away.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

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

January 22, 2026 · 12:56

Fear of being right

That is what I face at times. I get that my ‘idea’ of safety is a little overdrawn, but I have seen the stupidity of greed driven and how those seeking the stupid and greedy are willing to exploit that. I am of course referring to the really organised criminals (criminals with Filofaxes). That is the expected setting and on February 11th 2024 I wrote ‘Don’t take my word’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2024/02/11/dont-take-my-word/) I was considering the danger that a place like Funnel was presenting itself to be. And the presented advertising (a lot of it on LinkedIn)

showed a setting that I feared and guess what? I was partially right. I was right because that side was exploited and I was wrong as it was not Funnel who gave the setting. It was a place called Mixpanel where we see “more than 200 million premium users that their data may have been exposed when hackers breached third-party analytics provider Mixpanel” and last month we were given ‘Data breach at OpenAI through analytics provider Mixpanel platform’, which was seen (at https://securitybrief.com.au/story/data-breach-at-openai-through-analytics-provider-mixpanel-platform) you can wallow as much as you like that I was wrong, but that another platform provider is the first to fall, does not mean that I was wrong. The setting of ‘ease’ safety which they called “Hey marketer, tired of wasting time downloading and cleaning data from all your advertising platforms? It’s time to meet

Funnel. Save time, improve performance, get better insights with Funnel.” As I personally see it ‘tired of downloading’ should be seen as ‘safety towards your data’ and “cleaning data” often implies “validating and verifying the data you are using”, so if there are people that are thinking I am a proverbial shit bucket, consider the image below.

Where we see that in the proverbial instant. That resulted in the loss of some “200 million users have data and search history stolen” and yes, the 200 million records could see the setting that these 200,000,000 million users will get phased and the companies they optionally worked for too. That is the larger setting of being lazy, or being contemplated towards the security they never really had. Why did they not have that security? Because certain settings negate safeties that are and as I see it, Mixpanel who by the opinion of some is seen as “a product analytics platform that helps businesses track user interactions on their websites and apps to understand behavior, improve products, and drive growth” and as I see it, it is driving growth for the really organised criminals and now as we see (at https://securitybrief.com.au/story/data-breach-at-openai-through-analytics-provider-mixpanel-platform) we are given “The incident was related to unauthorised access to a dataset within Mixpanel’s systems. OpenAI reported that an attacker exported data containing certain identifiable information of API account users. Details potentially exposed included names provided on API accounts, email addresses, approximate location information, operating system and browser details, referring websites, and the organisation or user IDs linked to the API accounts. OpenAI emphasised that no chat logs, API requests, passwords, keys, payment details or sensitive identification documents were accessed. The data breach affected only information collected for analytics purposes through Mixpanel.” I get that this is the OpenAi answer, but it seems shallow, short, and perhaps that is all it is, but there is a second setting. Either the ‘provider’ who sounds like Promohub is giving us a larger pool of users, or some clever person might be insightful enough to combine the data of two pools of data and see what could be linked, because any person whose ‘shortcomings’ are exposed will seek other ways to hide the ‘shortfall’ and that is exactly what criminals are banking on. OK, this is speculation but if I had these two pools of data, I the first thing I would do is to seek a common ground (like an email address) and see what else I can find. This is how I found the weakness towards the Pentagon using the HOP+1 solution (which is wrongly analyzed by what some call AI) it was the first thing I did last month. And now again I am right. To be clear, the article on Funnel was about Funnel and as far as I know it was never transgressed upon. It was merely a fear I held and the fear was shown correctly at Mixpanel, not Funnel.

So whilst OpenAI correctly gives us “Information potentially accessed through Mixpanel may expose users to an increased risk of phishing or social engineering attempts.

Names, email addresses, and user identifiers were among the details exposed. OpenAI has advised all customers and users to remain vigilant for any suspicious or unsolicited communications that could be related to this incident. The company reiterated that it does not request sensitive information such as passwords, API keys, or verification codes via email, text, or chat. Users have also been encouraged to enable multi-factor authentication as an additional protective measure for their accounts.”

And why am I now up in arms? Because I got the word through another source relating to another vendor and that implies that there are at least three data sources exposed and those with connected data will be at risk. As such there is little risk for OpenAI and its users if it is used correctly, but when is that the case and it falls back on the users, not on OpenAI. There is an old premise that I usually phrase. If 5 vendors have a 10% loss, the customer is at risk of losing 50% and that is what the danger is here. And when this is applied to 200,000,000 users, the losses could be close to astronomical. 

Now we can argue that there is no such risk, but that answer is coming mostly from people claiming to have no P#Hub account. Do they? I cannot tell, but they know if they have or not. And to also be clear, there is absolutely nothing wrong with having multi-factor authentication on any account you have. Those people are as I personally see it the least in danger.  But that is the setting that we are avoiding to look at. As I have said (way too often) that nonrepudiation is the way to go is showing to be the correct setting yet again. 

Have a great day all, only 11 hours until Friday, or in Hobbit terms Frododay, the day you have two breakfasts and three lunches until the beer o clock chimes.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Media, Science

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

January 3, 2026 · 11:42

The wannabe influencer?

That is my question at present. In comes a person with the ludicrous title of “Al & loT Expert”. You see, what makes it hilarious was the post I saw ‘fly’ by. He starts off with “OpenAl’s first hardware is… a pen?? (If they don’t call it O-Pen Al they have officially lost the Al race).” So that is what makes him an expert? I am no expert on any of that but I am highly knowledgable on matters including IoT. In some cases and in some places I am known as a guru. I have my niche settings. But what gets to me is that (although I am no OpenAI fan) OpenAI has ‘Yes’ lost the current battle against Google and its Gemini 3, which the media kept from you for weeks. Although I personally never used it, but people who did and are ‘regarded’ as captains of industry think so. So, as I see it, OpenAI lost a battle, but that doesn’t mean the war is over. You see, the war on AI (when it finally comes here) is in no means settled at present. And those who understand that battle know this and mostly unmentioned is the play that is left with IBM because they currently have the inside track, not Oracle, not Snowflake and definitely not Google, Microsoft or Amazon. You see, AI is more then what is out there today. It will rely on larger technological settings. They all have quantum systems, but who is the most advanced in Shallow Circuits? IBM was setting that stage in advanced settings in 2017 all whilst OpenAI hardly barely at that point. IBM was on the ball and the actual winner of what now is referred to as True AI, which is ACTUAL AI will need two additional settings the first is Shallow Circuits, a setting where only IBM is a straight forward contender. With that I say I have no idea where Google stands. And in that the next thing is that a trinary operating system will be required and as far as I know there is no current winner at present. I reckon that both Google and IBM have dabbled in this, but I do not know where they stand and when this comes to pass the winner will work with Oracle to make the connections in a much needed combined effort, because they all agree that Oracle is the one player that can make it work. Snowflake as well, but I have no idea where they stand in all this. What we currently have are DML/LLM solutions that are at times clever and functioning, but in too limited a setting. I call this Near Intelligent Parsing (or NIP), but it is not AI, even thought they all have the marketing calling it so. 

What we have now is a mere shadow of what Alan Turing envisioned half a century ago and leave it to sales teams to wriggle the straw until it bleed revenue, but as the class cases will explode in this year, they are left to ‘apologetically assume the position of miscommunication’, at least that is how I see it. So was this person a wannabe influencer and taking the LinkedIn cloud by humor? 

So this might optionally have been the pen that OpenAI is flaunting, but as I see it, this is their step into audio, which they advertised and having a pen recorder is a pretty contraption (aka gizmo, doohickey, or thingamajig) that propels the setting of OpenAI forward. And I reckon that within a month all wannabe AI experts want one. Audio is the next stage that require harnessing, so OpenAI is not out of the race, they merely got bruised in a race where they had the upper hand for three years. 

Perhaps they get the upper hand in other direction making them overall winner, but that is a mere consideration of option, especially when we realise the inside track that IBM has and where is that in his assessment? So I am not proclaiming the identity of that person, it lacks class and makes him a target. He made himself a target and I do not need to add to his current confusion. 

What is a stage is that there is a chance that OpenAI is moving to capture the stage of Audio enhanced NIP (Near Intelligent Parsing) making them first again and Google will need to play catchup, optionally Oracle (Snowflake too) will now have to adjust their tracks to get audio embedded in their database settings and whilst we do not know where IBM goes, we do know they have the inside track, they might rely on Oracle/Snowflake solving that problem for them and as I am a Snowflake person, I still believe that Oracle is likely to win this war for the mere knowledge that they have been on these tracks long before Snowflake got involved, so they have years and traction in their stride. This is not a certainty, but a presumed advantage. 

That is as good as I can give it to you and I have written other stories on the need for a Trinary operating system. I last did that in ‘Is it a public service’ which I wrote last November (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2024/11/16/is-it-a-public-service/) so this isn’t coming out of the left field, it was there for almost two months. Oh and to be certain that you do not mistake me for that wannabe influencer. I am in no way an ‘expert’ on AI, I merely have been dabbling in IT and data since 1981. So I have the mileage here, have a great day today.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Media, Science

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