Tag Archives: China

July 31, 2020 · 22:49

Innuendo on the aftermath

The BBC is giving us more, and more, and more. Now they give us “The coronavirus crisis might be causing widespread economic upheaval around the world, but the world’s biggest tech firms are thriving.” And why is that? Consider the simple truth, Apple, even though not completely innovative, does give us something lovely. A lot of people got access to their Super early because of the Coronavirus, we do not want to splash and splurge, but when you are in lockdown, you cannot escape yourself, you can stare down the walls, go insane, or do something else. Surf the web using a Apple iPhone, or a Google Pixar, read a book, play a game or watch a DVD that is ordered via Amazon, then there is the surfing and 2 billion visit Facebook, so yes ‘the world’s biggest tech firms are thriving’, shops would not have been a great offer, lockdowns do that, but the people can order things and some get the hardware to do this. When you have one day to live, the option to see in brilliance and astounding quality matters a great deal to that person. And in all this, the digital highway will be travelled a lot more than usual, people working from home, people being denied high resolution Netflix because the internet if congested, but the advertisements go through, and we all see them. Then we get “At a hearing in Washington on Wednesday, lawmakers grilled the companies about whether they were abusing their dominance to quash rivals, noting the sharp contrast between their fortunes and many other firms”, as I personally see it, they aren’t quashing rivals, they are using their expertise to gain faster and more. 

Beyond that there is “Republican congressman Jim Sensenbrenner asked Mark Zuckerberg why Twitter had removed a post by the US president’s son, Donald Trump Jr, discussing the efficacy of the drug hydroxychloroquine. Twitter is not owned by Facebook. “I think what you might be referring to happened on Twitter, so it’s hard for me to speak to that,” said Mr Zuckerberg.””it gives my earlier view on the stupidity of politicians, as Jim Sensenbrenner cannot tell who owns what and addresses the wrong person on the matter, we see the Cowboy show I expected to see, a waste of time, and poor entertainment at that. 

It becomes a larger issues when we see “Democratic congresswoman Pramila Jayapal asked Jeff Bezos for a “yes or no” answer: Did Amazon ever use seller data to make its own business decisions? This was a reference to reports that Amazon has used data gathered from businesses selling products via its site to design and price its own rival first-party goods – something the firm has previously suggested had been limited to a group of rogue employees. Mr Bezos responded that he couldn’t give an answer in such simple terms” That is part of the problem, the lack of knowledge, when we look at “Did Amazon ever use seller data to make its own business decisions?” What exactly is ‘seller data?’, is it a cookie that the users has agreed on, was it sales data from the application that was used, as such, what application data is in play? Was it a customer review? Three questions that rip out the threads of the conversation. As such, as we saw Democratic congresswoman Pramila Jayapal rip Attorney General William Barr to shreds, she should have known better from the start, and we go from cowboy act to dog and pony show. In all this there is also debate on ‘to make its own business decisions’, especially as APN partners have options to make choices and decisions, it was a poorly phrased question and a wrongly lit situation from the get go. And last but not least we see “Republican congressman Matt Gaetz claimed that Google collaborates with Chinese universities that take “millions upon millions of dollars from the Chinese military” and noted that tech investor Peter Thiel had previously accused the company of “treason””, so how stupid is Matt Gaetz and where does he have ANY evidence that Google was taking money from the ‘Chinese military’? It is these levels of stupidity that gets no results, mere innuendo, yet they ALL seems to agree that overhauling Tax laws and competition laws would be a larger need, especially that in light of 5G and optionally 5G plus (a new IP I am working out) the need to both would be essential in keeping the playing field level, but these politicians, but their own account they sealed their own lives. Even as we see: “But Cicilline goes on: “This is the tip of the iceberg. It’s not just about Covid. Facebook gets away with it because there is no competitor. It’s the only game in town.”” I still remember the setting in 1997, I saw so called bullet point executives having no clue on the digital highway, dismissing it of hand as some paths had no business purpose, the setting did not change before 5 years AFTER Facebook was created by people lacking innovative vision and trying to bleed off Facebook settings, and history is about to repeat itself in the 5G environment, the back-fall is that big and US Congress, seemingly ignorant of the digital dimension are making things worse by stopping the only 4 resources in the US who have a chance of c countering what comes next. So well done djotto’s! And it does not end there. Considering the lacking intelligence by these democrats, when the people realise just how far it lacked, we get to see that the upcoming election is not a given, not by a long shot. I keep on wondering what the hearing was about, when will we get to see these documents and so called evidence that they rely on? I wonder how many holes I get to shoot into that part of the equation. I talk about innuendo and here it is, proudly brought to you by the BBC. It was Republican Greg Steube who sets that in motion with the question “Do you believe the Chinese government is stealing technology from US companies?”, mind you that he tried to push for a yes-or-no answer in light of the simplistic minds that these members of Congress have. Yet consider that the most powerful tech bosses and owners of the IP stated “I don’t know of specific cases where we have been stolen from by the government” (Tim Cook), and that is the first part where we see the issue. Then there was “no first-hand knowledge of any information stolen from Google in this regard” (Sundar Pichai), “I haven’t seen that personally but I’ve heard many reports of it” (Jeff Bezos), in this we only have Mark Zuckerberg who gives us “I think it’s well documented that the Chinese government steals technology from US companies”, this issue here is in the first that it was narrow-minded to set a shallow question on a closed answer, all whilst Tim Cook gives us that he does not know the the Chinese government is stealing, but cheap knock off’s, especially when it is promoted by Kylie and Kendall Jenner (at https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-53596192) are getting promoted by people of no mind and a clever approach on what they can get away with, I think they are called criminals. Sundar supports the view, or basically leads in his own fairway that Google was not a victim of that approach. We get Jeff giving us that he has seen many reports, yet I wonder who wrote them, I hope he is not relying on FTI Consulting for more than one reason. Only Marky Mark remains, I cannot fault his view and perhaps he is right, but in light of the Bezos hacking view and the issue on Sony and North Korea, there are too many questions on who does what and so far too many issues have left us with too many questions on how short the comings of come of the US cyber divisions really are, and that is not all. The hand that could be feeding them is the hand they are biting whilst not adjusting for the laws to make a proper job, that is the setting that we are left with in the aftermath and the innuendo around us leaves us with questions on politicians seeking the limelight. And why was Microsoft not there?

It is a weird setting and it will get a lot weirder in 2021. 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Law, Media, Politics, Science

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

July 30, 2020 · 03:05

When Congress becomes something more

So as I stated in ‘The Fantastic Four and the Bully’, the four getting grilled are not the bad guys. Well, there is some debate, but the foundation is that these four tech entrepreneurs are getting grilled by people who are clueless on tech matters. So as some read the BBC part “At issue is the fact that Apple doesn’t allow apps to be installed onto iOS devices from alternative marketplaces, and that it enforces tough rules over the way subscriptions and other digital items can be sold.” The issue soon becomes, will congress be responsible for any bad app and data gathering app that Congress would want to allow for? Even as an android user, I see that there are very few bad apples around, as such most apps are safe. There are a lot more dangerous apps on Android. This is not the fault of Google, there are several ways that a personal device gets to be the victim, there are a lot less issues on Apple, as such and as Congress might demand third party options, will they not be responsible for the damage that they put on Apple and its users? There is another side, a these tech giants come under fire, the chances of Chinese hardware makers making it bigger only increases by 35%-55%, how is that of use to congress? We might see Fitbit mentions and other mentions, but these products are closely followed by Asian alternatives, the entire setting does not add up. Then we get the advertisements, until Google Ads was here, we had DoubleClick, there were versions that equal Epom, with price tags that started at $250 a month, then $1000 a month, $2500 a month and higher. So, can the US Congress give us a list of all the small business and small startups that had that kind of cash? Google Ads was one of the first AFFORDABLE solutions for small business units, the fact that the bulk all switched should be a larger consideration, in addition, Google Ads was one of the first to truly die a larger rise to localisation and languages. Usually one or the other was missing, as such, is the growth of Goole Ads to be blamed on Google, or on all the others who could not be bothered? Not everything is perfect at Google, we all know that, but we also know that the ignorance in congress is a little too large to wonder who they are serving, they claim the people, but in reality? I am actually wondering who they are setting the stage for, I see it as a different stage that the one they tell us we are on.

And even as we accept Sundar’s optional defence of “Today’s competitive landscape looks nothing like it did five years ago, let alone 21 years ago, when Google launched its first product, Google Search”, we need to see that this landscape is largely influenced on the upcoming 5G and as it is now, especially as well over 50% of all searches are done via mobile, the only thing I see coming is that China gets a much larger share of it all and Congress intervening on matters that they do not comprehend is a much larger danger to that happening. I have always been favour of Huawei technology, that does not mean that I want China to have the bulk of all the business. The White House wants us to think it is the same, but it is not. They have set the stage that unites Huawei in a political tool for China to set a much larger field, they were pushed by US stupidity, not Huawei needs. The US took it away and now we see a very different stage, one where Huawei is still independent, but taking the customers that China is pointing at. The stage is changing and Congress is adding fuel to that fire by chastising the big four tech makers, each entrepreneurs. Each understanding the digital landscape. I had no clue in the early 90’s when Amazon started, I thought it was mad to continue when the losses were so great, now the owner has is worth in excess of $35,000,000,000, a personal value that exceeds a lot of nations. I am not saying that all is kind and kosher with each of the four, I am stating that when we are getting told changes, we are properly getting told by people who understand that business and in Congress, I doubt that they can rub together 2 one dollar coins on the subject on digital advertising. The more ‘diplomatic’ answer comes from Facebook’s own Zuckerberg. With “Our story would not have been possible without US laws that encourage competition and innovation. I believe that strong and consistent competition policy is vital because it ensures that the playing field is level for all. At Facebook, we compete hard, because we’re up against other smart and innovative companies that are determined to win” and some of them are Chinese. Some are Russian and others are all over the place, yet Facebook has other problems too, privacy and marketing do not go hand in hand, not in their granular market and that is where part of the problem lies. We could decide that from the four, they are the bad apple in this, but that would be wrong. I worked for people who had no idea how to dress a Facebook market when it was offered to them, their bullet point presentations could not deal with that unknown side of business, that was the strength for growth for Facebook, it was so new, there were no defining borders and there is where we see part of that problem, a lot never caught on, not to the degree that Facebook represents and there I see the dangers of the US Congress, they are not that clued in (as I personally see it). So as we get to one of the topics ‘One of the matters concerning the committee is the degree to which three of the tech companies now control the market for online adverts’ we need to recognise that these players made it affordable for a lot of businesses, the old way was dictatorial and something only rich companies could afford, they refused to give way and when Google, Facebook, Apple and Amazon gobbled up the small fry, the large fry moved positions because their provider was no longer the bee’s knees. Three never ruled it, the grew it changing the rulers and the old stage should never return. And finally, according to numbers one in three uses Bing and Microsoft search and are therefor exposed to Bing Ads, so why is Microsoft not in that stage? There are 4 players and one has well over 20%, so why is Microsoft not in the meeting? Is that asking for too much?

Those who have read my articles over the year have seen that I have chastised each and every one of these four (5 if you include Microsoft), but here I see no blame, not from any of the 5, the stage was set, the rules were followed and when the opportunity was there 20 years ago, most would not wonder there, I was a personal witness when some stated that there was no future for a business form of Facebook in 1997, as such what is the US Congress bitching about? And as we look at the article (at https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-us-canada-53582909) we see the graph by eMarketer, yet Microsoft and their Bing is absent, why is that? So whilst they claim it is merely about the smaller rivals, it is about something more and something different, I wonder if we will ever be told the truth. As I personally see it, the members of congress have a different set of needs and I wonder what they are.

 

Leave a comment

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

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

July 28, 2020 · 20:01

As it all unfolds

Yes, events unfold, at times fast, at times slowly bit by bit, the pieces fall together. So whilst the Commonwealth and Europe are in a state where they wonder how to start their economy, China is ahead by a lot,. And in all this American stupidity is driving it forwards. U gave rise to a much tighter coalition between China and Saudi Arabia in march, in my article ‘Who is Miss Calculation?’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2020/03/11/who-is-miss-calculation/) I gave that premise and it was not limited to defence spending. That and my December 2018 article ‘Tic Toc Ruination’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2018/12/06/tic-toc-ruination/) should have given the clear premise of what might be, and no US BS speakers will be given any foothold, so when I see that China gives us ‘China welcomed in Arab world, respected for internal affairs: Saudi Ambassador’ (at https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1195823.shtml) I am not at all surprised. This is the first step of a stage where Saudi Arabia, via China mind you could surprises most of the EU and the US on 5G, so whilst most of you are all about the marketing of ‘we have 5G, all whilst several tech tests give a massive lack of speed, these two players can set a very different example. And anyone deciding that I ‘have to’ hand my IP to America is getting to see a very different perspective, a perspective the was always going to come because the US resources were dwindling dow, but because of the act of this administration it might happen in the next two years. This is going to be the consequence on trusting a man who was famous for ‘You’re fired’, real life is nothing like TV and the Americans are getting a dozen of it in a very surreal way. 

To fall behind Arab nations in technology matters has got to be their feeling of utter humiliation. So whilst some still believe in the old term ‘good business is where you find it’, America has embraced ‘Bullshit talks and money walks’, who would have thought it?

Consider the evidence, as of yet NONE in America has given any evidence that Huawei is a shown danger, other than emotional outbursts on Huawei being a Chinese company. This is not just me, dozens of qualified cyber experts have asked for this evidence to be brought forth. So whilst the UK became the latest bitch of the US (and showing no evidence of an actual threat), we see that the hid fall in 5G for these nations is only increasing, with unclear rulings 7 years forwards, all whilst we know that the next phase is a mere three years away, so in all this these people are betting on the next generation whilst those players cannot stay on par with the current generation of telecom hardware. 

Huawei has the playing field and now China is seeking local representation in another way and the Arab world, seeing what it can gain is taking the forefront from turncoat styled politicians in the US and in Europe, this will not end, as the Arab world sets forth, we will see Pakistan on board and India following soon thereafter, it fear the advantage Pakistan could gain, at that point we are already well into 2023, but the advantages booked will have a return on investment in commercial enterprises that will nibble on the niche markets in Europe and America, and we tend to forget that a global market does not matter where it functions, as long as it functions.

And these advantages will bite into the reserves of Europe and America more and more, where does it leave them? It will most likely leave them out of pocket and in need of ‘special treatment’ wherever they go. Yet, who needs to facilitate? We are all about a consumer economy, but it was based more and more on exploitative stages, these stages are not in Europe, or in America. Most forgot about that, didn’t they? 

So whilst some wonder about “Chinese State Councilor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi expressed China’s appreciation during a phone call with Saudi Foreign Minister Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud earlier in July, noting that China highly appreciates Saudi Arabia’s support for China’s legitimate position on issues related to Hong Kong and Xinjiang”, you don’t have to, it was merely the icebreaker towards 5G and military goods (and other goods too) ad in this we see the beginning of a new stage, one where the US is no longer considered a superpower. They are in denial and the UK is is hoping it will not happen, but it did and it has, now will be the stage where the new players are carving the economic pie into the pieces they prefer to have and after that it becomes the question who gets that next piece, America, Russia or India, because that is the part they all forgot about, the consumers, and India has a billion of them. So as the napkins unfold, we will see a lot more on ‘sudden revelations’, but in the end, the players who are setting the stage are calling the shots, not those with sudden media revelations. America played that card when it wasn’t needed, it showed its useless hand whilst dealing (or not dealing) with Wall Street and now they are trying to play poker when they only have aces and eights left, not a good position to be in.

And whilst we see more and more 5G news like ‘EU countries must urgently diversify 5G suppliers, Commission says’, but the real part is that they are saying ‘EU countries must urgently select any non-Chinese 5G supplier’ and in all this, we are all awaiting EVIDENCE on the actual and factual danger that Huawei hardware has, so far none have showed any. So whilst these captains of industry are selecting non local cheap labour, when that falls away, they end up with close to nothing. America ends up being as big a superpower as Poland is. 

So when that stage happens, how will new innovation come their way? As I personally see it, they are playing the biggest bluff in history and the result will drag the UK and the EU to their level, as such, what do you think the chances are that you can retire at 67? 

Things are unfolding faster and louder, for those in charge have mere weeks left and as the tables turn and damage is undone, some damage can not be undone and in that regard we will see that the dance card of the EU gets to be worthless in most dance halls; so when we realise the unfolding matters and we see that the crashing into the cliffs is actually a best scenario situation, what are the options and alternatives open to many of us? Who else will surpass the EU in the next year? Have you given that any thought?

Oh, and before I forget, none of this was needed if a clear comprehensible presentation of EVIDENCE was given to us all, implying that they never had any, you did get that part, did you? 

 

1 Comment

Filed under IT, Media, Military, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

July 6, 2020 · 20:44

Presenting facts towards oblivion

There is a saying, if you shout it often enough, people will start to believe. The BBC gives us two headlines in this regard. The first is ‘Coronavirus: FDA chief refuses to back Trump’s vaccine prediction’ and the second one is ‘Indian scientists say the August vaccine deadline – set by the country’s medical council – is unrealistic’ all this, whilst a clear message was given in January 2020, a vaccine could take up to 18 months (and that if we get lucky), as such we see the unrealistic side that governments are bombastically advertising. We understand that the IQ of the man in the White House is nothing to be proud of, yet the Indian government should know better, their country has even higher problems than the US is faced with, as such they should know better and the news of an early vaccine ANYWHERE on the planet is a stretch, as such, can we even trust any government to be on par with its population? 

And this is not all, we get the following via Reuters ‘Hundreds of scientists say coronavirus is airborne, ask WHO to revise recommendations: NYT’, the article (at https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-airborne/hundreds-of-scientists-say-coronavirus-is-airborne-ask-who-to-revise-recommendations-nyt-idUSKBN2460O7) also gives us “Hundreds of scientists say there is evidence that the novel coronavirus in smaller particles in the air can infect people and are calling for the World Health Organization to revise recommendations, the New York Times reported on Saturday” this is huge, it also gives rise to my predictions months ago (not weeks but months) should leave us wondering what the governments are about, other than the creation of discourse. I stated in ‘Vindication is like Maple Syrup’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2020/06/18/vindication-is-like-maple-syrup/) that the numbers did not add up, I saw that part as early as February 2020, yet the numbers became more defined in June. The setting was direct, the numbers could not be correct, there was more in play. I was not making a claim that I had the answers, but what was presented to us did not make sense and I have to admit that the part of ‘coronavirus is airborne’ is a scary part, but could be part of the explanation. As such the problems we face are a lot larger and if the airborne is proven, at that point these right-wing nuts we see in the US could optionally be prosecuted for manslaughter. So these people without masks infecting others could be seen as “the crime of killing a human being without malice aforethought, or in circumstances not amounting to murder.” yes, in this case “without malice aforethought” and “stupid ignorance” could be seen as one and the same. There is every chance that the light of vaccine time and the White House claim “We are unleashing our nation’s scientific brilliance and we’ll likely have a therapeutic and/or vaccine solution long before the end of the year.” Might be seen as damaging as those with the lack of foresight and deleting the need of a face mask. Consider the fact that an airborne and a non airborne vaccine might require a different track (an assumption on my side) adds to all this and now that we are given ‘China bubonic plague: Inner Mongolia takes precautions after case’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-53303457) adds to all this. A deadly flue and the black death in one and the same stage? That has got to be new and certainly is news. I am not blaming anyone, I am setting the stage that we need real answers and not positively charged speculations to make the financial people happy. We seemingly have a massive problem and in all this, the evolution of our systems will take a massive hit, it is no longer about, will the economy survive, it will be will internal government systems survive what is thrown at them? Whilst some hide behind ‘German healthcare market rich with potential for app developers’ others give us ‘How Covid-19 exposed cracks in France’s cherished healthcare system’, it is not a stage of who is right and who is wrong, they are both right, but until there is an ACTUAL solution on treating patients on a global stage, every ‘potential’ stage is merely a stage that stops people from getting treatment and to be quite honest, there is no way to predict what healthcare needs in 2021 and 2022, there might not be enough people alive to consider an app, or a quick solution. At that point it will be about the quality of care, and anyone disagreeing with me on that is allowed to do so, but the facts are out and about. Even as some swallowed the corona news as it was a vitamin drink, we have now seen several examples that a larger amount of news never added up and those entering carefully phrased denials will be receiving public questions and will be demanded to answer, when they give us ‘we were wrongly informed’ they can either be punished themselves or be required to give their sources of information. 

For some it will be a whole new day in the field of accountability. We have not choice, the people have been led astray from the facts for far too long, the media will hide behind the ‘facilitation’ option, but the people can demand that the stake holders seek another path and that the share holders dump the shares at that point the advertisers will seek safer shores. It will be a brand new day soon enough. Of course that is before we realise that the mortality rate is optionally a lot above 5%, when that becomes fact, the people will see another path and violence through stress and loss will be the handling powers. It has happened before and it will happen again. 

We can present the facts into oblivion, but at some point the people will demand straight answers,  for them loss is a massive motivator to get them and governments hiding facts will see another danger heading their way. I will let them figure that one out.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Politics, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,

July 2, 2020 · 04:49

Here come the drums

We all see them, at times awe merely hear them, the rattles of sabres, the sound of the drums. Politicians in a stage of ‘Them be fighting words’, and for a moment it seems that they have balls, not sure where they keep them, but that could optionally be the topic of a very different conversation. As I see it, it all started with ABC giving us ‘The hundreds of billions being poured into Defence shows Morrison’s done with the old world order’ (at https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-07-01/defence-spending-scott-morrison-miliatry-strategy-jennett/12410464), yet the quote “Morrison’s blunt language about the abrupt disappearance of the “benign security environment” is calculated to jolt the public into accepting the military escalation the PM’s ordering and it is paying for. At $270 billion over a decade, the money is considerable, but dollars alone do not explain what’s happened in defence, diplomatic and national security thinking since the last Defence White Paper was handed down by Malcolm Turnbull in 2016” implies something different and something more. We might think that it is about China, but the rhetoric does not quite work, so when I see “Who else could the White Paper be referring to when it inserts the words “coerce” or “coercion” a dozen times in a document only 12 pages in length. He is not freelancing, but accurately reflecting the wider shift in thinking and disposition that the boundary riders have adopted. In their view, there’s no point in a prime minister banging on about defending the international “rules-based order” anymore — China’s not playing by those rules and Trump is rewriting them on the fly, as he sees fit, on any given day.” I see a different horse, but I will update you soon, There is another article linked to this. The article I am referring to is the one given to us on June 19th by news.com.au, the article starts with ‘Australian Government and businesses hit by massive cyber attack from ‘sophisticated, state-based actor’’ (at https://www.news.com.au/technology/online/hacking/australian-government-and-private-sector-reportedly-hit-by-massive-cyber-attack/news-story/b570a8ab68574f42f553fc901fa7d1e9), I see it differently, but lets put that aside for now. The quote gives us “In an urgent press conference called this morning in Canberra, Mr Morrison said the ongoing, “large-scale” hack was being executed by a “sophisticated, state-based cyber actor”. “This activity is targeting Australian organisations across a range of sectors, including all levels of government, industry, political organisations, education, health, essential service providers and operators of other critical infrastructure,” Mr Morrison told reporters.” Now, I am not stating that it is wrong or inaccurate, but the game is actually a little different from my point of view. You see, for the last few weeks Australians have been under attack, being it from the Department of Housing, the Justice department as a few criminal cases are coming to light and these calls are coming from a so called ‘automated voice’, yet they seemingly come from numbers like 08-92166959, 08-92100644, 08-71603541 and when you call them, these numbers are disconnected, calls over a month from multiple numbers all scam based and it was going on for a month, so we can argue that as these scammers are not stopped, how does Scott Morrison have any foundation to stop so called state-based actors? It is simple math, when the cyber sleuths can stop scammers, we can argue they might be ready for the real deal, but the real deal has superior hardware, all whilst the hunt for scammers is not really in a stage of being successful at present, I actually wonder whether they can identify these so called ‘sophisticated, state based cyber actors’, is that a foundation we can get behind? Oh and by the way, there is no evidence that these scams are Chinese, at least I saw no evidence of any kind, so I cannot make such an assumption. We can argue all we like on the need for $1-$1.3 billion on that stuff, but there is (as I personally see it) a lack of how to deal with the problem, you know, the odd execution, the simple stage of evicting these criminals (if they are not Australians), or perhaps long term eviction to a dark prison in Darwin (presumably a black site), the law stops to a larger degree the persecution as evidence is key here and so far the collection of evidence is pretty much a bust. That is not the fault of the police or the AFP, it is the lack of hardware and the lack of expertise. That is where things tend to go wrong and if these players lack the resources to find scammers, the other group remains untouchable. That is how I see it. The second stage that I see is that the Australian PM is how shall I put it, the bitch of the US president? Yup, not elegant but pretty spot on, the US is setting the stage where we can only be friends with the US if China is our enemy, a way of thinking that is massively shortsighted and the Commonwealth will pay for that acceptance dearly in several ways down the road. Now, if China was an actual enemy and danger it would be one thing, but the US has yet to deliver any substantial evidence on that effect. Yup, there is every chance it can towards the Chinese government, but not in regards to Huawei and as the US sees both as one and the same, the evidence tends to be tainted and can we afford that approach? That is the situation and as I see it the Commonwealth is being pulled down a maelstrom of bad situations that can only get worse over time. That is seen when we look at the talking points a mere two days ago when we saw ‘It is understood Australian officials believe China is responsible for recent cyber hacking activity’ in this case I am not going to hammer on evidence, there is such a thing as ‘national security’ and one can validly argue that I need not be in the know. Yet the underlying situation remains, if the scammers can continue unopposed, what chance do we have stopping any optional state funded cyber actor and why bother, we could argue that the billions will not make too big a dent, not until the expertise is in the house and the Australian house is seemingly lacking expertise, it is not stupid, it has skills, but it needs a lot more and if that billion also provides training, then it is one thing, but I wonder how much training makes up for the shortages. My view is only one view, but some share that view and even as consultants from all over the place are happy to help, we see a larger stage where defence funds are swallowed by over priced consultants, the US fell into that trap in the last 10 years and the Commonwealth needs to avoid that very same trap. 

The problem is that there is no clear cut solution, there is no bandaid fixing the situation, but it needs fixing, no one denies this, I merely hope that we go about that stage in a clearcut manner, and I do hope that we are not merely targeting the enemy of the US without proper evidence. If there is evidence that China is marking us then that is one thing, yet we need to keep the Chinese government issues and the Huawei issues separate, the US does not think that this is possible, I am not convinced it is so, but if proper evidence is presented, I would change my mind, wouldn’t you? The issue there is that the US no longer has any credibility, so we need to rely on third parties to inform us and that is not the greatest place to be in. So we can hear the drums, but who is directing the drums is one thing, in what direction they are playing is another, a cyber stage with two unknown variables, also (as I personally see it) a stage that we are not familiar with, actually three when you consider the non-reliability of an ally. 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Law, Politics, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

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 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 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 13, 2020 · 16:57

To knowingly intentionally ignore

There is a state in any person’s mind to ignore anything that does not fit the need of the receiver. This is not a bad thing (at times), and we can ignore all we can, yet to deceive ourselves that it does not exist is another matter. 

To look at the station we need to look at the consideration of two settings. The first is ‘an organized effort to gather information about targer markets or customers’ this is the foundation of market research. After this we consider the second part, which is ‘the process or set of processes that links the producers, customers, and end users to the marketer through information used to identify and define marketing opportunities and problems’, as I personally see it, some do not see the difference (or ignore that there is one), or as I would imply, to knowingly use one as the other. The first difference is the population. In market research we investigate a population and we set our hypothesis based on the station of it. We dabble, we slice and dice this population, and we draw conclusions. The problem is that some hide behind the slicing and dicing, calling it the arbitrary process. For the most I have no issues with it, or better stated I do not care one hoot about some of these analysts. Yet lately I see the impact of decisions and business processes and I wonder if the people accepting the marketing stories whether they are in the dark, they do not care or if they are clueless. 

It started with Microsoft, then Ubisoft, after that there was a stage at Apple as well as a stint in the US administration. All acts based on what some would call ‘a market research into the people and the impact of view’ yet it seems like the marketing research of passing a bitter pill to the extent of surviving the action. That is clearly how it feels and the first act on my side was remembering a previous conversation, a conversation I had roughly 20 years ago. The premise was that a board was cutting expenses and setting the stage of having the environment where they stopped getting a 90% approval on their product and settling on an 80% approval. It is a dangerous and slippery slide. Yes it seems cheaper and it might in the beginning be cheaper, yet the station as we see it is dangerous as the degrees of freedom diminish (intended pun). As a product drills down in different areas, the 10% shift implies that on three fields the danger grows that the overall approval rate is optionally down to 60%, especially if the 20% missed rate hits any consumer 3 times. This is where Ubisot is at present and that is where Microsoft was in the last few years. In that stage we see “to develop technology that will enable them to stream games to whatever piece of tech a person is holding – be that a smartphone, console, or something yet to be invented”. It is the Ubisoft statement and that is fine, yet with the testing and inadequate versions over the last two years alone gives the consumer (the player) a much larger lag, especially when these players are only relatively happy and get hit again and again with downloads that tend to exceed 20 GB, how long until the player has had enough?

It is nice to drill down unto a group of satisfied players, yet the larger issue is that the non players are too often disregarded making the story told one that is largely built onto a shallow base of shifty sands. My view is supported by one small detail, as the PS5 was viewed, we saw an absence of Ubisoft games, the station of that 20% is now growing is it not? One of the largest software makers in history had no business not being present at this Sony show, whether they are going forward on both systems or not. It seems to me that this is not a small part, this is a much larger part and it seems to me that the predictions that I gave last year is slowly coming to fruition. 

Could I be wrong?

Absolutely! I cannot state that there is certainty, that would be short sighted on my side, but the symptoms are there, the lack of excellent gaming, dozens of updates that are several GB in size, there is a lack of testing there is a lack of listening to the gamers and the ones setting the stage of listening are rolling the dice which they optionally loaded themselves. They look better that way, yet the consequences for Ubisoft seem better, until the gamers move away, when you set the stage of a non-assassins creed game to call it that, something they did once before, the stage changes. Even as we were given last year “Ubisoft didn’t provide numbers, but said that it had made a “sharp downward revision” in the revenues expected from both games, which it blamed on a failure to differentiate Breakpoint from its predecessor, an overall lack of interest in sequels to live games, and excess bugs for the game’s failure.” (source: PC Gamer) There are two parts in this, the first is that the game sucks, the basic failures seen only yesterday by myself give a larger rise to that Ubisoft has much larger issues at present. The fact that I ended up with the game at 20% of the full price only 6 months ago, and the fact that to start the game I needed a 38GB patch shows that the issues are close to massive. It is not ‘to differentiate’, but to ‘properly code’ a game that is at the core of it all. The difference of Market research where Ubisoft investigates their game against ALL gamers, to a stage of Marketing research where Ubisoft merely investigates the Ubisoft players is part of that optional setting. When anyone hides behind the message and not behind the quality of product, we have a much larger issue and in the next console war, it would optionally set the deck to a very different stage. 

This is not about Ubisoft, Apple and Microsoft have shown similar failings for too long, and the stage where the US administration is in shows similar flaws, even as it is not a product, trust is, and it is faltering on several levels in the US. We can blame several stages in this, but it is not the blame, it is the investigation into the analysts and the conclusions drawn seems to be a much larger stage of marketing research, not market research. One optional stage is the way evidence is rejected and optionally completely ignored. We might look at the Coronavirus, it is not the point, that element merely brought it to the surface faster. Huawei is the first one that matters, no evidence was ever brought to light, it shows a stgs where the US is close to economic collapse, at that stage we see the greed driven marketing research where the actions are at disposal to the US assets, not the US citizens. This matters because it shows that the slicing and dicing of data is not getting the attention it is due, it is happening on corporate and political levels and elements like ‘How Austin Tech Is Democratizing Data’ might seem nice in theory, yet the larger issue is that some views are now seemingly solely supported by the topline makers, not actual academics with the education required to make some conclusions based on data, not the presented views that those in charge of governments and corporations would like it to be. So when we learn that “Imagine business analysts, marketing teams and even the C-suite having the power to interpret data without the help of the entire IT department”,consider that we are now in a phase where those who have are about to decide the fate of those who have not and those people are in for a massive rough ride, or so they believe. When we see the corporate players like Ubisoft and Microsoft folding on strategies as they lose larger and larger market shares, we will see destabilisation of a much larger degree and there the game is up for grabs. Even as some resorted to terms like data democratization, it is a much older principle, it is the discrimination between those who matter to some, against those who do not. Corporations will find out the hard way what their choice brings them, in politics it is a different story and the impact there is nowhere to be seen. We cannot predict it until it is too late and there I expect (or is it dare I expect?), is the stage larger, even as places like YouTube is flooded in some positive light, the negative impact is much larger. The US riots are merely a consequence to part of what happens in data, it is not the cause but there will be much larger and much more defining then we ever expected, the problem there is that after the fact, repairing damage is close to impossible. You see it is not ownership of data, it is the fact that decisions are made on a level where too much data is disregarded. Hiding behind entrepreneurial action is close to a farce. The largest danger of misinterpretation and as the sources are less and less trustworthy and that is disregarding any ethical consideration, or to make it slightly more simple, as data democratization moves forward, the essential part of comprehensive information will be filtered and optionally disregarded too often, a such a full view is not available, implying that the decision makers are merely looking at a limited scope and consider that action when it is done by a billion Euro company. 

We are only seeing this because the surrounding scope was pushed to the forefront, as such those reacting are doing it too late having to disregard increasingly larger consumer markets. When was the last time that such an action was an actual benefit to that company?

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Politics, Science

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