It almost sounds like a joke doesn’t it. Three colours were walking down the road claiming that they were the most blood red there was. Almost like the massive amount of idiots that keep on claiming that you have to tax the rich, especially now around the wedding of the most illustrious creator of Amazon. Let me help you remember that he went on Jimmy Kimmel and others whilst correctly claiming that he made little to no money. He didn’t and we all laughed (including me). I knew that there was more to that story, but he played his role perfectly. He adhered to the law and through that he became untouchable. So keep on shouting tax the rich and wear yourself out.
So here we see the intense lie. You see, these are two different matters and not even remotely related. The wealth of Bezos (at present) is said to be 237,000 million. Do you think he will do anything illegal? This caper of 50 million is nothing compared to what he has. It is expected that he will make 23,500 million this year. He doesn’t need to do anything but keep it all legal. He is not attacking anything, or anyone. Trump is not cutting medicare for him in any way. It has always what I said, the issue were the lawmakers and they pathed a way for the Bezos minded people (like Sergei Brin, Andy Jesse and Satya Nadella) they are relying on the laws to be followed like nice black lettered people (their accountants and lawyers) should. The law enabled them and this has been going on since President Clinton. This is the first president to change the color of accounting ink to black. This had not happened since 1970 (President Richard Nixon) and even in this moment the tax laws had to be rewritten, but I would give him a pass as he got the books in the black. No president since has been ale to do this. And for over 15 years I gave the saying that an overhaul was needed, but the lawmakers never thought this through. Even more, those economic media people ignored it too. It is them the people should be targeting. But no one seemingly is listening, because the ‘tax the rich’ claims go on and on and on. The lawmakers have been the issue all along (OK, the financial stakeholders have likely more guilt) and nearly all fell for for that trap, mainly because the media (read: News) isn’t educating people. They all hide watching the entertaining morning shows where the news can be filtered to what gives the most entertainment.
So as we now consider that there are bills that are hurting healthcare not because of Bezos and like minded people. It is because America is broke, some say bankrupt and that starts the entertaining setting that a country cannot be bankrupt, they have too many resources and Canada has even more and as such President Trump wants it as a 51st state. But the drop dead point has now been passed. The ink of the books have turned sanguine red, blood red and it is the blood of American taxpayers that are now bleeding. It is not because of Jeff Bezos, his ship is done (apparently he has one that is massive and called Koru), no the lawmakers are now trying to please the thousands of millionaires that have less than 100,000,000 and they need to fill their pockets as much as they can before the tap is turned off, because they fear that this will not keep them and their children safe. They are now the drivers to get as much wealth as they can, so that they can evade to a none tax haven like Monaco, the Bahamas or the UAE (there are a few more) and these people do not need to rely on non-extradition as they never broke any laws, because the lawmakers made it legal from the very start.
This is why the Democratic noise is laughable and going nowhere. So as we take notice of ‘Jennifer Get In Good Trouble’ and she is raising the right alarm, because there is a massive loss of these rural settings coming to their front door. But the truth of the matter is that this is (as I personally see it) one of the final hurdles that sets the collapse of America, it can no longer continue and only if the laws had been properly adjusted America could have continued for at least a decade longer. Now the cuts start and whilst many see Bezos, Brin and Nadella as the ‘evil’ people, they are not. They adhered to the tax laws in America and in all that time no one considered adjusting the tax laws to become more fair and this is on ALL politicians, not merely the republican because since president Clinton there were two democrats in office. You will need to ask them for an explanation.
The final straws of America are stretched beyond snapping point and that is where everything turns to a brown goo (yes, it is shit). And it could have been largely avoided by properly taxing corporations. Didn’t you consider that when Apple and Microsoft became multi trillion dollar entities? Even with all the failed setting Microsoft went through? It has a market capitalisation of 3.66 trillion, And they had a tax bill of $19.651 billion. So a company now worth 3660 billion merely pays less then 20 billion? That is 0.54% and that setting is not raising questions?
So, why not? And I merely use them as an example because as I see it, they entire FAANG group is equally ‘guilty’ and the lawmakers of America tax laws are blind to that? So be cool, leave Jeff Bezos alone and direct your anger at the IRS who is in charge of that near dead carcass. That is the setting of tax laws and tax loopholes and the law allowed people to use them and the American administrations have had decades to do something about it. It is the bed Americans made for themselves.
So you might want to blame Trump for it all, but the damage is a lot larger and it is seen on both sides of the political isle.
That is the setting as I see it. It is not a nice setting, but it is a setting that is about to overwhelm the American people. You see MSNBC gives us (at https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/social-security-funding-shortfall-trump-rcna214505) less then 4 hours ago ‘Social Security’s crisis is a year closer — and Trump’s approach will make it worse’. Now before I go any further, this is an opinion piece. Not something that MSNBS journalists have ‘figured’ out. It does come from By James Downie, MSNBC Opinion Editor. As such it does seemingly been considered safe and true (whatever that means nowadays). I always saw this coming well over 5 years ago. But now we get “The Social Security Board of Trustees said last week that the program’s combined trust funds will run out of money in 2034 — one year earlier than was projected in 2024” I’ll be in my 70’s at that point and likely in a similar state. But the setting that this is coming is clear. I reckon that in 2-3 years it will be set to an end of funds mark of 2032. This is not presumption. It is mere speculation as tourism in America is taking a nosedive to losses in excess of 21 billion. Consider how many small businesses will be hurting around 2027 and these people will draining the social security finds even further. So, as we are given “Though Social Security counts over 73 million people as beneficiaries, the news went largely unremarked in Washington. And to be fair, there’s been a lot going on. But soon enough, Social Security will face a funding crisis — and President Donald Trump’s approach will only make matters worse.” You see, no matter what the turnaround will be. People in the Commonwealth and EU have had enough of American ego tripping as it comes without value for their travel tickets and they are now (read: next year and 2027) opting for Paris (Disney), Abu Dhabi (WB and Disney), Tokyo (Disney, WB) and a few other places. All theme parks in America will feel that impact, so staying in denial will not help. And it isn’t merely theme parks in this China is also making waves, as we are given “Yabuli’s ski tourism resort received over 1 million tourists by February 11, an 18% increase compared to 2024” 18% is a lot and it is getting stronger for China as many of the tourists shunning America will try Yabuli, China. In this even Canada will feel that pinch as the most common complain for Whistler has been long lines. People love British Columbia and they love the Canadians. It is just those massive waiting lines and that will need fixing (merely my view on the matter). I cannot say how good Yabuli is as I never been to China, but the food at the Chinese restaurants are delicious, as such I reckon they might be in China too.
And as we are given “When Trump and his allies do talk about Social Security, they say they’re going after “waste, fraud and abuse.” In his address to Congress this year, Trump repeated claims about Social Security going to “millions and millions of dead people” — claims debunked by his own Social Security Administration. The SSA’s acting inspector general reported in February that overpayment of benefits averaged $3.4 billion per year for the last four years. For context, the cost of the entire program in 2024 was nearly $1.5 trillion.” As such there is a lot wrong in this caper. As such we might see overspending in the wrong items, but the larger setting could be seen as “First, a bit of a background: Social Security is (primarily) a pay-as-you-go system — payroll taxes on today’s workers fund benefits for today’s retirees. From 1983 — the last time the program’s finances were overhauled — until 2021, Social Security took in more than it paid out.” This is as I see it in part due to the lack of overhauling the tax laws. Taxing the rich will not help here (it never did) but the tax systems needed an overhaul and that wasn’t done and as we see that this system is paying out more than it is bringing in shows that essential need. I predicted this (on other facts) close to twi decades ago and this was an element I never drilled into. So how were the lawmakers and the administrations that were active between 2001 and 2020 looking at? How did they miss this and gave the tax cuts to all the FAANG members and more? Because that is the essential coins that are missing at present. These lawmakers drove the American systems to bankruptcy (as I personally see it) and that is merely the start of a massive wave of mismanagement. It is nice to blame President Trump, but he is merely a factor, I agree a non-helping factor, but the people behind these laws have a rather nasty large responsibility here and as I wrote before. They were not doing the job they seemingly signed up for.
As such a lot needs to be done and we might think it will be the border patrol barring people from entry as they have a Vance meme picture (a case of a Norwegian tourist) but that one tourist is making all of the Norwegian tourists resetting their vacation and that amounts to a lot. We might not have exact numbers, but the last setting was that 58% travel abroad, at least once a year and a massive amount of them will not be going to America. This might just be 3 million of them, but these millions affect millions of other Europeans and as the Swedes and Danes look at their Norwegian brethren it suddenly amounts to an additional 10 million seeking other destinations. And as such I reckon that before November we will be given a number that will look disastrous against the $21,000,000,000 predicted now. And these people will all tweet, X or tickets tock it all on social media and that amounts to a lot more than America will be comfortable with and as the ‘rigorous’ seeking social media of the arriving tourists continues, more nations will drop America for a better deal. As such as we see that still happen in Q4 2025 America will lose whatever tourists they thought they had and this is undeniable. As the media loses more and more credibility, the fake news spreaders will keep the American arrival halls even more empty. A setting that hasn’t ever happened. The dream location that used to be America will become another place. These two are connected. It isn’t merely what funds the SSA will be missing out on, the setting becomes that “More than four million people will turn 65 in 2025. It’s a phenomenon known as Peak 65. It also means a lot more people are getting ready to retire. Financial advisors said that makes saving for retirement an even bigger conversation.” And at present there is every indication that a lot of them will not be bringing in funds to the SSA, as such the shortfall for the SSA increases and that is only looking at tourism. All connected businesses will suffer. Theme parks, B&B, small businesses who rely on tourists and that list goes on. So, consider that 11% less tourists are taking taxi’s or public transport. How much will these two suffer? This isn’t merely a ripple effect, it is ripple upon ripple upon ripple. And that is showing to be waves of damage. It is a vicious circle that impacts all businesses in America.
So as some might realise that the impact is a lot worse than expected, consider al the downfall it will bring to the SSA (Social Security Administration) and that might give you the show that the telling that the Sea runs out of money in 2034 might seem optimistic and that gets us to the loss of additional years. As such 2032 might still seem optimistic, and I could agree, but there are other factors. You see, whomever replaces him in 2028, might have other numbers but there is every chance that at that point it will be too late. For the simple reason that you cannot fuels the SSA in three years and that gets us to the prediction I made around 2015. I am not an economist, but I saw this happen at that point and that was before I knew what a dangerous situation the SSA was in. So, do you still think I saw it wrong? It’s OK if you do and if you do not agree with my assessment, that is fine too. You shouldn’t just trust me (or anyone else for that matter) as such you need to ‘rely’ on whomever you trust. I am merely telling you what I saw and when I reported it and that is a timeline you can use to rely on me, or to debunk me. Both are equally valid as I see it and I don’t make any claim of having the better truth. I can be show the wrong facts and I tend to use the media with links, so you can make up your own mind. I merely see (in this case) that MSNBC is giving me a similar setting that I predicted using very different facts. As such I feel validated, but the term validation is a stretch, I know that. So make up your own mind and as these facts are shown to be true and America could go from bad to worse, consider where you and your family are and where you might end up.
Have a great day and consider having a lovely time today. As I personally see it, good days are seemingly becoming harder and harder to come by.
That is the setting and I could be wrong, let’s start with that. I could be wrong. But yesterday I saw YouTubers hash up the large issues in tourism in America and in that same timeframe an article by Yahoo finance passed my by hashing up the same yada yada we see everywhere and at some point the idea flashed by “What if President Trump is actually a genius?” I know, you will call me mad and you will curse me into a dozen boxes, but what if this is a truth as the left is so upon the idiocy of Trump, but what if these people are merely howling the settings of ‘their’ stake holders?
What if there is a deeper setting? Too many parts in this equation don’t make sense. You see, tourism is out in the open, yet the astute actions of the people behind it are not. And I am referring to the largest players Disney, Warner Brothers, Universal et al. What if the Trump administration sees the debt strangling the American administrations (as I saw it close to 12 years ago) and now acts are essential for America to survive at all. This requires a dangerous new mindset because the left does not want to fess up to the hardship that 340,000,000 Americans face. Admitted they did this to themselves but only in part. There is no way someone worth billions cannot see that. And there is a setting that we decently ignore. What if this is a mere deeper case of Apophenia? Seeing patterns in chaos? The cogs are clicking together in my setting and I reckon that Elon Musk was aware of this some time ago, at least he has the inside track to the American industry and to President Trump.
So what happens when this track is set to a much larger game? Lets consider that Japan and China have really intelligent people and they see the weights they are holding, together almost 2 trillion dollars in US treasury bonds. As such I foresaw that they would dump their bonds unless there is a larger play around that sets America to skate away from the abyss and America has been on that edge slightly too long. So what would Trump be doing? The first step is to push tourism to the edge of whatever they think that they can survive and the inactions of the tour operators (Disney and others) could spell the actions of trump. In one instance he gets all the little people around these settings on his side as the operators suddenly would be seen as uncaring, caring merely for their own dimes. It is a dangerous play, but as I see it America doesn’t have that many moves left and this (mostly) radical move might be the one golden coin that sets the stage for America. As I see it, it is in line to America first and President Trump is allowed to make it, in that same instance he is dialing down immigration and showing Americans that this is what it is. He can repair fences later on, but he needs to get the debt down and taxing certain parties is nearly the only way to do this.
Feel free to call me mad and perhaps I am, but as certain patterns are evolving we should be able to see that those shouting ‘idiot, idiot’ are suddenly thrown into the limelight. They are shown to be the bitches of the stakeholders. They are what is wrong with the media and the only way President Trump can make that case is for these stakeholders to be thrust into the limelight.
I reckon that this play is closing in on the maturity date of actions and the play is slowly becoming a noose around the necks of the opportunity seekers in America. And some are feeling the pinch that they could accept a simple 1% setting for themselves whist the 19% will go straight into the pockets of America and its debt reduction.
If this is the case, then the simple truth is that President Trump is a true genius and the steps make sense in several ways. But I could be wrong and I know that this is a realistic setting that I face. Don’t think I have the call of valor towards the Yin and Yang, to see order in chaos and chaos in the order of things. Others much more clever than me can make that claim, but not me. I merely saw an evolving set of orders and knowing what I know it makes sense, but that also requires the acceptance that President Trump might have been doing the right thing all along and that is what the media left doesn’t want you to think. They are actually the problem by filtering the news towards us. I have sad so several times over the last 13 years that the media considers the importance of the following
Share holders
Stakeholder
Advertisers
As such the people are a distant fourth, I saw this for over a decade and as people agree or disagree is fine. The larger question is who are the stakeholders? Who do they really represent? The first setting are the greed driven in the second whatever it is that gives them coins. To some extent I pushed them in the Microsoft spin piles and not always the correct pile. It doesn’t matter if they support Microsoft or Apple. It stops the lawmakers from passing proper tax laws and that was the first setting that was required, almost for 20 years it was needed, but these stakeholders stoped that progress and lately they are on the ‘tax the rich’ scheme which is delusionally wrong as tax laws needed to be overhauled. A simple setting I saw to decades ago and I wrote about it frequently enough. As I see it stakeholders stopped this progress and now America is out of moves to make and these stakeholders and the people they represented will move too any tax haven outside of America. I reckon that President Trump is trying to stop these events from becoming ‘a truth seen to late’ and this is how he goes about it. The tariffs are setting the exploiters out of the gaming field and it might not reduce the heartache for too long, it is what comes next that President Trump is trying to prevent. The larger setting is not me, it is the media at large that failed to see this. Why couldn’t they see this? Ponder that question and the Stakeholders come into view and soon the media will have no option but to mention their stakeholders with name and nationality and at that point the coin will drop in the minds of hundreds of millions of Americans and that is what President Trump needs. The two hundred stakeholders and to push them out of the game. That is the first setting to push for better tax laws and that is what the media and larger businesses fear. To be held to account and for them to pay there fair share of taxation. Apple and Microsoft might seem the culprits and likely they are, but any of the FAANG members are, as I personally see it equally guilty and they are merely the beginning. The larger culprit is the media and they shouldn’t be ignored in this. How many people will accept that news media and entertainment media masking as news channels should be acceptable when the audience, the audience that they claim was first, is a mere distant fourth?
As I see it that is the larger question. So feel free to mull over that data and multiple over who has been trying to tell you the truth, all whilst the ‘entertainment news’ had been holding you at bay from the truth from the very beginning.
Have a great day, I still have 9 hours to go until Monday.
It makes sense, it really does and it all started this morning when I was confronted with an article (at https://www.cbc.ca/radio/spark/search-engines-try-to-rival-google-by-offering-fewer-ads-more-privacy-1.6286925), the CBC is giving you all ‘Search engines try to rival Google by offering fewer ads, more privacy’, yes that is one approach, but that is the iterative approach, it comes from ‘What else can we do with this?’ And that leads nowhere, it will not lead to true innovation. True innovation is different, it goes where no one has gone before. To give you 5 examples lets take you on a little trip this morning.
F is for Facebook Yes, there is Facebook muddying right along, having a new setting soon enough coming from Mark the Meta man Zuckerberg, it is a natural station forward and as others are all about dangers and all about warnings, the story behind them is fear, they never saw that this was coming (which is fair enough) and they are afraid to miss out twice in the digital environment. I for one saw the massive potential that TRUE Social Media could have. There is Cocoon (at https://techcrunch.com/2019/11/26/cocoons-social-app-for-close-friends-gets-vc-backing-to-chase-paths-dream/) which refers to a private social media, for your friends and family. They can take it a whole level further, but it seems that the people at Amazon (Luna) and Google (Stadia) are just not catching on. But now I do see wannabe’s making a chat and message version of that. Fair enough, yet the stage could grow further, will the see it? I cannot tell and I actually do not care. It is up to them, but the stage of ‘There is more’ is missed by too many. Whether it is from a ‘How do I get rich fast?’ delimitation, whether they cannot see it, I do not care, not my battle, but options are missed all over the place.
A is for Apple There is not too much that we can say on Apple. I can see a novel iteration that they are missing (Not the same as true innovation) but it is out there and it is larger than anyone thinks. I wrote about it almost a year ago and I will push the image below, perhaps someone will catch on, perhaps they will not.
A station where an Apple/Nintendo partnership might appeal to both, but Apple does have what it takes to go it alone, in all this the setting is not what more is there, it becomes (to some degree) where else can we take this and there is a much larger station that is missed, because the wrong people are in charge. It reminds me of a thought I had for the longest time. You see Steve Jobs was clever, was bright yet was not the greatest innovative thinker, Steve Wozniak was but Steve Jobs (unlike some overpriced CEO’s) did recognise true innovation and that brought Apple where it is now. Still there is more that Apple can do, will it? I do not know.
A is for Amazon Amazon is perhaps the largest power player with growth potential. I saw a potential to grown the Amazon Luna by 50,000,000 consoles (a conservative cautious number), I saw the potential of them becoming a 5G powerhouse. They have the potential to equal if not surpass Apple not merely because they started as an online book shop. They are set in a station where they could become the one powerhouse in Neom City (Saudi Arabia). Amazon has the ability to grow a lot more because they have an interesting balance of Manufacturing, retail and services. Microsoft wanted to focus and get rich fast, they there for hired people who were clueless on several matters. They lost the console world (from Sony and Nintendo) and optionally Amazon Luna if I have my way. To be honest, I fantasise on handing Phil Spencer (who is not to blame) a wooden spoon with engraved (in gold no less) Microsoft 2023. The year that Microsoft ended DEAD LAST in the console world. Their people will spin that, but consider the strongest, most powerful console in the world is behind Sony (PS5), Nintendo (Switch) already and when surpassed by Amazon (Luna), perhaps the people at Microsoft will start thinking instead of boasting Azure (blue) and their hardware when they were for the longest time clueless and there needs to be a penalty for that. Buying Bethesda for $8,500,000,000 might dull the pain and leave the people with the imagination that some good comes from it, yet the station of loss will increase and increase and If I have my way (and fantasy) Phil Spencer gets a wooden spoon in 2023 showing the board of directors at Microsoft that Amazon beat them there too. And that is before the people realise that the decision makers at plenty of places merely had a BS (not BU) presentation and that is when they realise that some made a bet on the wrong horse so whilst Amazon takes the lead, Microsoft becomes a ‘Horse no show’.
N is for Netflix Netflix is the hardest case, they started being first, being true innovation, but over time they resorted to invest heavily in more and more scripts. Yet is that enough? Will that take the cake? It is hard to tell, you see we can all make claims, yet Netflix gave the people Love Hard (Nina Dobrev and Jimmy O. Yang) a hilarious approach to a Christmas movie and to be honest, it has been a while since I had that much fun watching a movie, then they also took the cake with Red Notice (Dwayne Johnson, Gal Gadot and Ryan Reynolds) a funny movie that is filled with fight scenes and clever situations. To be honest watching a youthful 98 pound young lady (Gal Gadot) slapping Deadpool and the Rock silly will never go out of style and that is merely the tip of an iceberg of fun and excitement. With these two titles alone Netflix rules 2021. I am not judging of making claims against Apple+, Disney+ or Amazon Prime. It is how things go at times. But more is needed and there we see that the Netflix IP division needs to diversify. I for one saw that a place like Netflix could be a great place for the comic books of François Craenhals (de Koene Ridder).
The intro from Comic books is one thing, yet the transfer as they get to the second book (Les Loups de Rougecogne) the stage could be set for a new legendary franchise.
I read these comics when I was young, but these comic books can be read at almost every age and the larger stage is there where plenty could be spend on the production and not all on IP to get forward. The comic books have almost everything any successful series need to have and there is more out there. Will Netflix take a leap into the untrodden places? I cannot tell, I do not work there, but there is potential.
G is for Google There is not a lot of criticism on Google, they have pushed innovation again and again and they are the party to show others how good it can get when you are the innovative player. They are also the one innovative player that a power player like Huawei fears. I reckon that Huawei has the one essential directive stamped in their minds. ‘Get there before Google’, and they are happy that American politicians are so stupid, those politicians are doing the work of delaying the stage of Google again and again, so there is every chance that Huawei will get to a few stages (not all stages) before Google gets there. Can they do more? That is hard to say, Google is too big, too many parties playing and there are larger settings. I believe that not developing software on the Google Stadia (by Google) is not the greatest idea. Relying on Ubisoft will bite and that is where Amazon has the inside track, but there is more in play, so my thoughts make sense but could be wrong for Google. Consoles is not where their strength is and the idea that is in the Apple part could equally apply to Google, but not as wide as Apple can hand it. And all this relies on a free hand to play, all whilst these players are committed to moves, moves that also needs to take Microsoft, IBM and Oracle into consideration. There is no way that me ( or most people) are in the know on all those elements and there is a stage that states that Google is too big. I said it but I do not totally believe it, I believe that Google is too widespread. Apple is too much hardware, Google is too many services and Amazon has seemingly a much better balance, making growth easier (for now). And in this Google needs to consider where Apple and Amazon are going so they can avoid some tug of war in the field that many occupy. It is a rather nasty stage and there is no clear answer.
So here is my view on the FAANG group and my response to the article that gives us “He bills Neeva as an ad-free, private search engine. Results won’t include advertisements, and the company says any information it does collect from users isn’t shared with third parties.” This is fair enough, but that is not the stage, the stage is: ‘What does the consumer need?’ The larger stage that too many avoid because it leads to elements that these players do not want to entertain at present. So you can either make claims that they (might) need it, or you can sail unsailed waters offering something entirely new that was never considered and the consumer suddenly realised that he or she never considered needing that (which I did a few times) and that is where TRUE innovation starts, the stage where a person states ‘That is so logical’ a stage that Microsoft had with releasing Windows 95, but it was forgotten soon thereafter. The idea is not to be complex, but to be simple and let the ship steer its course from there, and when it sails in the right direction without you interfering all the time, at that point you own the IP of an innovate game-changer.
This is not an accusation, it is merely a setting we need to accept. This all started half an hour Aho when the BBC gave us ‘Protesters hit Amazon buildings on Black Friday’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-59419572), with the setting “An international coalition of unions, equality and environmental groups called “Make Amazon Pay” is staging a day of action, demanding concessions”, it is like the approach of a hurricane, and making the one person who left a window open giving him (or her) a bill for the draft damage. People just do not get it, and I am at a loss why that is. It is not hidden information, it is not secret information, it merely is information out in the open for anyone to read.
The setting is not “Amazon takes too much and gives back too little”, the setting is that governments would not overhaul tax laws for the longest of times. I first make a case for overhauling tax laws in 1998, now 24 year later none of it EVER happened. Amazon did not take too much, it took what Amazon was entitled to take. Amazon (only) gives what it is mandated to give. There are las out there and Amazon, Netflix, Apple, Facebook and Google adhere to these laws. All the rest is merely discriminatory bullshit. So when I see “Worldwide, nearly 50 organisations have signed up to a list of “common demands”, published by the Make Amazon Pay coalition”, so I wonder who they are. And it does not really matter as they cross over from one into the other. Consider “A global union federation representing 50 million workers in 140 countries in a range of sectors”, this implies less then 350.000 per nation, which includes the US, which imply that they basically amount to nothing. Then we get “A global union federation of journalists’ trade unions, representing more than 600.000 media workers from 187 organisations in 146 countries” I merely wonder whether they include the same essay writers that grace the ICIJ, a fair question, because journalists are supposed to be smarter than this. All the flames, the bullshit and the need for click bitches that spike digital revenue, all to have a go at a company that struck it big by being actually innovative. 2 years ago Amazon would not be on the mind of console gaming. Now the Amazon Luna overtakes what Google and Microsoft have and that is just for starters. They equal Apple in a few ways and there is no end to Amazon at present. All that and they adhere to laws, or lets just states that they adhere to what their legal department states that they need to adhere to. And no one is putting actual and factual pressure on the politicians that need to get shit done (like overhauling tax laws) but then people get quotes like “It is a really complex situation”, so complex that in 24 years nothing was done, so the utter nonsense of 50 organisations that have call signs making them close to ludicrously useless. If they were not useless, they would put pressure on politicians overhauling tax laws.
The lesson has been out there for almost 25 years, the facts were out there for almost 25 years and still the people will not learn, the politicians do not want them to learn, because they will have to do something and over time it might amount to something pissing of the rich friends they have. In all this, the setting is much larger then the FAANG group. It includes people like the Walton Family, the Green family, the Koch family, the Yuan family and as such several dozens more. All billionaires, all doing what the law allowed them to do. The feigned anger against Amazon is just pointless bullshit and we need to wake up. Flames and emotions will not get us anywhere and that is the problem with Grassroots people, all about anger and emotion and when the anger subsides, when they realise (if ever) that the law was adhered to we see the pointlessness of the situation and stupid people never do so, in this, how come the journalists are part of this? Who do they serve? Because in the end they serve the shareholders and advertisers. But what of their stakeholders? Who are they and why are they embracing pointless actions? Did you ever consider that part of the equation?
As such will you learn, or will you just pointlessly embrace a coalition that wastes another two decades going nowhere? It is up to you, you can chose and making the choice that goes somewhere is always better, even if the destination is not better, sometimes things get worse before they get better, that is the outcome of change, the changing process is never better, the outcome can be, it is up to us to make that so, and it is not an easy fight, that much is an absolute given.
We all have this. We make choices and that is not against anyone (or anything for that matter). So I was a bit on the fence when I saw ‘Frances Haugen takes on Facebook: the making of a modern US hero’ (at https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/oct/10/frances-haugen-takes-on-facebook-the-making-of-a-modern-us-hero). First off, let’s start by saying I have nothing against Frances Haugen or her point of view. I do find the setting ‘the making of a modern US hero’ debatable. I feel certain that it was not her setting to become a hero or to see heroism. It is the paint stage that the massively less than credible media is taking. If big tech was not under attack the media would most likely have been more moderate in their colours of painting brushes.
We get told “The 37-year-old logged out of Facebook’s company network for the last time in May and last week was being publicly lauded a “21st-century American hero” on Washington’s Capitol Hill” yet where was the media these last three years? Collecting Facebook advertising money I reckon. So when we are given “I believe Facebook’s products harm children, stoke division and weaken our democracy” I do not disagree, I have no data to disagree, but the media had that, they have had a clear picture for years, but for the media flaming creates emotion, it create click bitches and it generates digital advertisement income. But Facebook was an eager tool for a long time and you do not bite the hand that feeds you and the media has shown itself very protective of ANY hand that feeds them. If there is one part I disagree with (to some extent) then it is “She repeatedly referred to the company choosing growth and profit over safety and warned that Facebook and Instagram’s algorithms – which tailor the content that a user sees – were causing harm”, it is the “which tailor the content that a user sees – were causing harm” part I cannot completely agree with. I do believe that Frances Haugen is sincere in her approach, but ‘causing harm’ requires evidence, evidence that is a lot harder to obtain. Perhaps that was given, and I did not look at all the documents, but there is a stage, optionally two. The first is “choosing growth and profit over safety”, that seems clear, the entire emotional flames might be part of that, yet there is a stage of “choosing growth and profit over increased safety”, it seems like a small step, yet the stage is proving that it was all against “profit over decreased safety” that matters. We create safety, or we stop increased safety, none of that is on Facebook, only if a clear view of “profit over decreased safety” is shown Facebook will have a larger problem. You see, no matter how we point the fingers on ‘flaming’ in the end it is the view of the less than articulate person lacking a decent education and the US is so protective of its First Amendment, that nothing goes anywhere. The Media has been using that stick to slap donkeys, horses, dogs and people for decades. In this I have some issues with Democrat Senator Ed Markey (D-MA), when we are given “Facebook is like big tobacco, enticing young kids with that first cigarette,” said Senator Markey at the hearing. “Congress will be taking action. We will not allow your company to harm our children and our families and our democracy, any longer.” I cannot completely disagree, yet in the 70’s and 80’s there was clear evidence on Big Tobacco, but the US government and corporations had no issues taxing and grabbing marketing dollars wherever they could. (Example at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Vg_QVAEJtg) If Facebook is just as bad, you should have had years of evidence and I believe you had it but these political big wigs were unwilling to act. A model based on selling advertisements that brought in billions, what was there not to love and for the most the media loved it too. So I am not arguing with the views that Frances Haugen is bringing, it is the views of those heralding her now. And too many of them should be seriously afraid. When hackers and others start looking into data and the timeline of decisions a few people in the Senate, Congress and a few other players will sweat drops of death.
And my view? Well CNBC did that work with ‘Facebook spent more on lobbying than any other Big Tech company in 2020’ (at https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/22/facebook-spent-more-on-lobbying-than-any-other-big-tech-company-in-2020.html) at the beginning of the year. So when someone grabs an abacus and digs on where the $19 million plus went, some politicians might not like the answers the people are given, and that is the part that is out in the open, the setting of Stakeholders and media for Facebook might optionally double or triple that amount. It is the highest of all the FAANG group and almost twice as much as Microsoft, so what do you think will happen next?
It took 20 years for big tobacco to get into real trouble, as such if there is a parallel there is every chance that something is done by 2040, as such Facebook has plenty of time. But in all this, there is a part missing, which is not on anyone (and not on CNBC either). The stage where the people get to know the names the lobbyists and how these politicians voted on Facebook and other first amendment issues. That is the part no one gets to see and I very much doubt that this will change any day soon.
And my point of view is seen with Christopher Wylie when we get “Wylie said he had relived his own experience as a whistleblower by watching Haugen. But he also found the flashbacks frustrating – because nothing has changed.” The Cambridge Analytica is out there and even as the New York Times gives us 2 days ago “We’re Smarter About Facebook Now”, I personally am considering that they are full of it. They needed to be smarter about it close to 2 years ago, so weren’t they? Isn’t that equally a decent question to ask? So as Wylie gives us “The fact that we are still having a conversation about what is happening, not what are we going to do about it, I find slightly exasperating,” shows us clearly the inaction of politics, of policies and the lack of actions by the law, global law no less. Fir we look at the US, but the laws and the actions by the EU and the Commonwealth is equally lacking, so why is that? It is due to the choices some make and the consequences we all have to face and in a stage where every coffer is empty and every nation has a credit card that has a maximised debt, acting against a company bringing in millions in taxable dollars is often not considered.
We all make choices, that is not a sin, but after the Catholics, a second deal where the choosing parties are giving sanctum to those endangering kids is debatable on several levels, that being said, those opposing Facebook will need to prove it and that is not an easy matter to do, because as I state, it is not about “choosing growth and profit over safety”, it will be about “profit versus decreased safety” and that is a very different data stage and the evidence will not be easy to obtain, mainly because the users are often the problem too. Facebook gives us “Facebook’s policy is to delete accounts if there is proof that the account holder is under 13 – they won’t be able to take action if they can’t be sure of the child’s age.” And they try to adhere to that, yet there have been plenty of indications that some were younger, but the stage of “if there is proof that the account holder is under 13”, as such the account stays in place. And when we see several sources give us (unverified for honesty) “A friend has a 9-year-old son and they have allowed him to create his own Facebook account” how can Facebook be blamed and that setting will taint the evidence as well, as such it will take a long time for actual action to start, it is not a setting that Frances Haugen might have seen coming, but in a land of laws, evidence is key (unless political issues take precedence).
There is a lot more on the Facebook front and it will take months for it all to surface and when it does there is more than likely several months of contemplation and inaction, all because those who could act would not. Who is to blame there? I will let you work that one out.
Yes, we all have that and I am no exclusion, ‘what is’ is the first part of a question that is dangerous. The answer that follows tends to be subjective and personal, as such it is loaded with bias, not that all bias is bad, but it defers from what actually is. This was the first stage when I saw ‘Lina Khan: The 32-year-old taking on Big Tech’. Then we get “when it comes to unfair competition, there is one sector that has been singled out by Democrats and Republicans alike: Big Tech”, this is the beginning of a discriminatory setting. There are two sides in this and let me begin that Big Tech is not innocent, so what is this about? Lets add ““What became clear is there had been a systemic trend across the US… markets had come to be controlled by a very small number of companies,” she said”, now we need to realise that there are two parts here too, in the first she is not lying and for the most, she is correct.
So why do I oppose?
The US, most of the Commonwealth and the EU all have a massive failing, they have no clue what they are doing. I have seen that side for over 30 years and it is the beginning of a larger stage. You see the big tech part needs to be split in two elements big tech and those who ‘use’ (or abuse) the elements of big tech. Big tech was more than the FAANG group (Facebook, Apple, Amazon, Netflix, Google), in the beginning there was Microsoft, IBM and Sun as well (there were a few more players but they were gobbled up or ended up being forgotten. When we see charts of technology and market capitalisation we see Microsoft in second place, so why is Microsoft left outside of the targeting of these people? Microsoft is many things, but it was never innocent or some goody two shoes, the same can be argued for IBM, IBM have been gobbling up all kinds of corporations in the last 20 years, so why is IBM disregarded so often? It it nice to target the companies with visibility towards consumers, but that puts Microsoft with more than one issue in the crosshairs, but they are ignored, why is that?
Then we get back to the BBC article (at https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-57501579) where we see “Her general criticism is that Big Tech is simply too big – that a handful of large US tech firms dominate the sector, at the expense of competition”, she is not incorrect, but there are more sides to that story. In 1997 I gave an idea to bosses (in a software firm) on consumers messaging each other and for a firm to be in the middle of that. Being a gateway and a director of messages and giving visibility to people of other matters (I never used the word advertising). It was founded on a missing part when Warner Brothers created (in partnership with Angelfire) a website hub. So fans of Babylon 5, Gilmore Girls and a few other series could Create their own webpage, they got 20MB for free and an address, like in Babylon 5 I was something like Section Red number 23 (I forgot, it was 25 years ago), the bosses stated that there would never be a use for that, it was not their business and there was no business need for something like that and 4 years later someone else created Facebook. Now I am no Facebook creator, what I had was in no way anywhere near that, but that is a side a lot of people forget, the IT people had no clue on what the digital era was bringing and what it looked like, so as they were unaware, politicians had even less of a clue. So when Google had its day (search and email) no one knew what was going on, they merely saw a free email account with 1GB of storage and everyone got on the freebee train, that is all well and good, but nothing is for free, it never ever is.
As such a lot of companies remained inactive for close to half a decade, Google had created something unique and they are one of the founding fathers of the Digital age. Consider that Microsoft was clueless for close to a decade and when they started they were behind by a lot and there inaccurate overreaction of Bing, is merely laughable. Microsoft makes all these claims yet it was the creators of Google who came up with the search system and they got Stanford to make this for them, just look it up, a patent that is the foundation of Google and Microsoft was in the wind and blind to what would be coming. By the time they figured it out they were merely second tier junkyard vendors. And (as I personally see it) the bigger players in that time (IBM and Microsoft) were all ready to get rich whilst sleeping, they were looking into the SaaS world (diminishing cost to the larger degree), outsourcing as a cost saving and so on, as I see it players like Microsoft and IBM were about reducing cost and pocketing that difference, so as Google grew these players were close to a no-show and do not take my word for that, look at the history line of what was out there. In retrospect Apple saw what would be possible and got on the digital channel as fast as possible. Yet IBM and Microsoft were Big Tech, yet they are ignored in a lot of cases, why is that? When you ignore 2 out of 6 (I am not making Netflix part of this) we get the 2 out of part and that comes down to more than 30%, this is discrimination, it grows as Adobe has its own (well deserved) niche market, yet are they not big tech too? One source gives us “As of June 2021 Adobe has a market cap of $263.55 B. This makes Adobe the world’s 32th most valuable company by market cap according to our data”, which in theory makes them larger than IBM, really? Consider that part, for some reason Adobe is according to some a lot larger than IBM (they are 112th), so when we consider that, can we optionally argue that the setting is tainted? In a stage where there are multiple issues with the numbers and the descriptions we are given, the entire setting of Big Tech is needing a massive amount of scrutiny, and when I see Lina Khan giving us “markets had come to be controlled by a very small number of companies” I start to get issues. Especially when we see “there is one sector that has been singled out by Democrats and Republicans alike: Big Tech”. You see singling out is a form of discrimination, it is bias and that is where we are, a setting of bias and to some extent, we are all to blame, most of us are to blame because of what we were told and what was presented to us, yet no one is looking to close to the presenters themselves and it is there that I see the problem, This is about large firms being too large and the people who do not like these large firms are the people who for the most do not understand the markets they are facing. Just like the stage of media crying like little bitches because they lose revenue to Google (whilst ignoring Bing as it has less than 3% marketshare).
The who? The what? Why?
This part is a little more complex, to try to give my point, I need to go back to some Google page that gives me “What is Google’s position on this new law? We are not against being regulated by a Code and we are willing to pay to support journalism—we are doing that around the world through News Showcase. But several aspects of the current version of this law are just unworkable for the services you use and our business in Australia. The Code, as it’s written, would break the way Google Search works and the fundamental principle of the internet, by forcing us to pay to provide links to news businesses’ sites. There are two other serious problems remaining with the law, but at the heart of it, it comes down to this: the Code’s rules would undermine a free and open service that’s been built to serve everyone, and replace it with one where a law would give a handful of news businesses an advantage over everybody else.”
This is about that News bargaining setting. Here we get ‘by forcing us to pay to provide links to news businesses’ sites’, and I go ‘Why?’ A lot of them do not give us news, they give us filtered information, on addition to this is that if I am unwilling to buy a newspaper, why should I pay for their information? If they want to put it online it is up to them, they can just decide not to put it online, that I their right. In addition some sources for years pretty much EVERY article by the Courier Mail get me a sales page (see below), this is their choice and they are entitled to do so.
Yet this sales pitch is brought to us in the form of a link to a news article. It still happens today and it is not merely the Courier Mail, there are who list of newspapers that use the digital highway to connect to optional new customers. So why should they get paid to be online? In the digital stage the media has become second best, the stage that the politicians are eager to ignore is that a lot of the ‘news bringers’ are degraded to filtered information bringers. In the first why should I ever pay for that and in the second, why would I care whether they live or die? Do not think this is a harsh position, Consider the Daily Mail giving us two days ago ‘Police station is branded the ‘most sexist in Britain’ after investigations find officers moonlighted as prostitutes, shared pornography with the public and conducted affairs with each other on duty’, so how did they get to ‘most sexist in Britain’? What data do they have and hw many police stations did they investigate? There is nothing of that anywhere in the article, then we get to ‘after a series of scandals’, how many is a series of scandals? Over what time frame? Then we get to ‘Whatsapp and Facebook groups used to exchange explicit sexual messages and images have been shut down’, as such were the identities of the people there confirmed? How many were there? What evidence was there? All issues that the Daily Mail seems to skate around and ‘In the latest scandal, PC Steve Lodge, 39’ completes the picture. Who else was hauled to court and is ‘hauled’ a procedural setting in an arrest? When one rites to emphasise to capture the interest of the audience it becomes filtered information, it becomes inaccurate and therefor a lot of it becomes debatable. Well over a dozen additional questions come to mind of a half baked article on the internet, and they get paid for that? And as we consider ‘He was alleged to have’ we get the ‘alleged’ part so that the newspaper cannot be held liable, but how accurate was the article? That same setting transfers to Lina Khan.
The article gives us ‘or rather a perceived lack of competition’ as well as ‘markets had come to be controlled by a very small number of companies’, they are generalising statements, statements lacking direct focal point and specifications. In the first ‘perceived’ is a form of perception, biased and personal, ones perception is not another ones view of the matter. It is not wrong to state it like that, but when you go after people it is all about the specifics and all about data and evidence, as I see it evidence has been lacking all over the board. And when we consider ‘markets had come to be controlled by a very small number of companies’ I could add “PetSmart has 1650 shops in the US, they could set the price for tabby’s on a national level, is that not a cartel foundation?” Yet these politicians are not interested in a price agreement of pets are they, it is about limiting the stage of certain people, but by doing so they will hurt themselves a lot more than they think. On November 14th 2020 I wrote the article ‘Tik..Tik..Tik..’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2020/11/14/tik-tik-tik/), where I wrote “if HarmonyOS catches on, Google will have a much larger problem for a much longer time. If it is about data Google will lose a lot, if it is about branding Google will lose a little, yet Huawei will gain a lot on the global stage and Apple? Apple can only lose to some extent, there is no way that they break even”, and a lot ignored the premise, but now as HarmonyOS has launched (a little late), the stage is here. When it is accepted as a real solution, Google stands to lose the Asian market to a much larger degree and all because a few utterly stupid politicians did not know what they were doing, more important Huawei still has options in the Middle East and in Europe. So the damage will add and add and increase to a much larger degree, especially if India goes that way, for Google a market that could shrink up to 20%, close to 2,000,000,000 consumers are per July 1st ill have an alternative that is not Apple or Google, that is what stupidity gets them. My IP will connect to HarmonyOS, so I am not worried, yet as I see it the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) better start getting its ships properly aligned, because if HarmonyOS is indeed a decent version from version 2 onwards the US tech market could shrink by a little over 22.4%, the US economy is in no way ready for such a hit, all because politicians decided to shout without evidence and knowhow of what they were doing, a nice mess, isn’t it?
The stage of ‘What is’ depends on reflection and comprehension and both were lacking in the US, I wonder what they will lose next.
Yup, I woke up giddy (a good meal will do that) and I have been thinking about new IP when the BBC made me giggle with ‘One of Europe’s biggest brothels goes bust’, now this is bound to happen, yet the situation reminded me of an old slogan: ‘Due to a death, the cemetery will be closed for 3 days’. Now I have nothing against the ladies of the night and the business people counting on the mattresses being used day and night, yes they will have a larger issues with a pandemic lockdown. It is nice to see “Some 120 prostitutes usually work at Pascha. It employs around 60 staff including cooks and hairdressers. Mr Lobscheid criticised the German authorities’ handling of the pandemic – particularly their ability to be clear when the business would be allowed to resume. He said officials would tell them every two weeks that they would not be able to reopen”, I am not judging mind you, but the effects of a lockdown implies that you cannot work, not even on your back and when your clients are in lockdown, so will you be. That is the low down on the issue and to see “We can’t plan like that. We might have been able to avert bankruptcy with the help of the banks if we had been promised that things could start again at the beginning of next year”, OK, that is fair, when a brothel is run like any business, that includes paying tax, it is fair to say that it should be allowed governmental protection, and lets face it, if the governments protects its politicians, why not its hookers, there are plenty of situations when most people cannot distinguish one from the other, as such the humour is increasing. Yet the other side is also in discussion, we see this with “Mr Lobscheid criticised the German authorities’ handling of the pandemic – particularly their ability to be clear when the business would be allowed to resume”, I wonder if Mr Lobscheid has all his ducks in a row, you see this pandemic is unique, we haven’t faced anything like this in 100 years and the last time we did it there was a little picnic called World War 1 which had just ended, as such nations were largely in disarray. We have been lucky so far and if governments had taken a longer look at their infrastructure the mess might (i emphasise might) we smaller, but optionally not by a lot. So in all this, as businesses are in lockdown, are in a stage where larger businesses cannot run, we see a brothel, but we also see Airlines, hotels and a whole range of companies losing out of revenue, so in part a business that is properly set up and is paying tax, should be entitled to some form of protection, yet the statement ‘their ability to be clear when the business would be allowed to resume’ is a bit of a stretch. It is almost like the hooker who goes to the doctor because of a symptom and the doctor tells her to stay out of bed for three weeks. yes, it is unfair that businesses like airlines and the one mile high club needs to stop functioning, but I wonder if people have any clue what the impact of a pandemic is. The Spanish flu set the need for 20 million to 50 million tombstones, at present that need is a little below 874,000, so we are only at 5% of the previous caper, now we can toss and turn, or we can adjust. I am in favour of the second, but that too comes with a risk. You see as long as we lockdown the disease remains a risk and the steps make sense, because the more time we have, the more time will be set towards finding a vaccine, and optionally a cure. We are given all these options, but the short, sweet truth is ‘There is no cure or treatment to prevent COVID-19’, as such until there is a treatment, lockdown is what there is and that is it. In this, I accept that the BBC gave us the article (at https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-54016791) that there is more to life then awaiting death and the setting of Pascha is what it is (as a priest once told others), but the setting that we see with ‘criticised the German authorities’, is to be honest a little insane with the larger stage of unknown variables and minimum distance of 2 meters. I know that some call it a long john, but it’s not that long, not by a long shot. Yet I am still pondering “We might have been able to avert bankruptcy with the help of the banks if we had been promised that things could start again at the beginning of next year”, I know that over religious types go into a banter, but at least it is a business that pays taxation, and if rumours are correct a lot more than a speculated member of FAANG does, so there!
So when we consider the face carrying the egg, we can point at Lobscheid, or we can look at ‘‘The venues are packed’: Labor Day parties cause concern for another COVID-19 spike’ (at https://www.11alive.com/article/news/health/coronavirus/labor-day-weekend-covid-19-worries/85-e320d391-da34-49e7-b8c0-1ebb35061367), with the added quote “Georgia health experts are concerned Labor Day weekend could usher in a new wave of COVID-19 infections just as the state’s cases have started to slow down. Despite the warning, large parties are scheduled over the next few days in metro-Atlanta, as state and local officials are doing little to stop it”, so whilst we see one person in denial of clarity, we see a whole group of people in denial of the actual situation. For the unemployed it is good news, as 874,000 move towards 2,000,000, we see that jobs become available, houses become cheaper and it will be all over the US, the EU and a few other places as well. For governments there is another upside, as people get jobs, the cost of governing goes down and as such it starts the end of a recession, positive news all around.
I do agree that the lack of clarity breaths confusion and aggravation, but there is no real solution; until the people realise and clearly realise that the last pandemic took well over 20 million lives, only then will they realise that there is a larger setting and they are taking risks with their lives, the clever people will not. The situation is that at present, new cases are set around 290K a day and that has been the case since July 24th, so well over a month, and since July 17th the number of non living increases by 5,000 a day. These two numbers are not a given, and things will get better, but do you think it gets better when hundreds are together in a bar celebrating labour day? It gets to be a lot worse when we see ‘CDC’s autumn vaccine hint fuels fears of pressure from Trump’ (source: the Guardian), there we see “the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) had instructed states to prepare to distribute a coronavirus vaccine to healthcare workers and vulnerable populations – just in time for the 3 November election”, but at present there is no reliable news that there is an actual vaccine, several sources give us that there is one coming, but when we look at the Sydney Morning Herald (at https://www.smh.com.au/national/how-is-the-new-covid-vaccine-designed-to-work-20200819-p55n33.html) we see “That letter of intent is contingent on the vaccine working – and, scientists have emphasised, we don’t yet know if it will” and that is not all, that was on August 19th, so far we do not see a daily update that there is an actual confirmed vaccine and when we consider “among the more than 165 COVID-19 vaccines under development around the world”, so everyone is racing to fill their pockets with a working vaccine, but so far none is in existence. I do accept the setting “ChAdOx1, the vaccine Australia’s government has signed up to buy, is one of the leaders”, and I know it will take time to confirm, but in all, the stage we are about to see is one that is a dangerous one and too many people have decided not to sit still and ponder the impact of ignoring what is in front of them, time will tell, but the setting is a lot more dangerous than before, the Guardian gives us that with “critics of the Trump administration have worried that the White House would pressure the Federal Drug Administration (FDA), the CDC and other agencies to rush a hasty coronavirus vaccine to market before the election” and that is merely the larger stage, the idea that a place like the CDC could be pressured implies that the lives of the people that they are supposed to protect are not protected at all. This is seen with “a key agency in the process, the FDA, which would have to grant emergency use approval for any vaccine candidate to be distributed before the full completion of trials, has shown itself vulnerable to political pressure”, and it is ‘distributed before the full completion of trials’, is the part that should hit you. If that happened, people could be confronted with a vaccine that is optionally worse than Covid-19. I need to be careful, because I will not speak out against vaccines, but we need to realise that proper testing is needed and that requires time. And in this time is the one element that the people are not willing to give, and those on that train will be wearing egg, and a lot of it.
Time will tell us what was the proper course of action, time will tell us what the effects are of lockdown, because that can only be seen afterwards. I am merely nervous that in the end a lot more people will die of the Coronavirus than was needed, merely because governments were too lazy (or too late) to act. And it is not all their fault, that is seen in the Australian Financial Review with ‘Masks are pointless, says Sweden’s maverick chief medic’ (at https://www.afr.com/world/europe/masks-are-pointless-says-sweden-s-maverick-chief-medic-20200730-p55gre). Here we see “With numbers diminishing very quickly in Sweden, we see no point in wearing a face mask in Sweden, not even on public transport”, and we are surprised that people follow this, he is an MD, he should know and all whilst we see hundreds of medics all over the world give us all kinds of images, but a lot give us something like the image seen here. So when we see that and we see the statement by Sweden’s chief epidemiologist Anders Tegnell. So when was ‘better be safe than sorry’ not a golden rule in an age of Pandemics?
We still have ways to go, but in all this, I predict that a lot more people will be the careers of egg on face than we think there are and when we learn that lesson it will already be too late.
Yes, we leap left, we leap right and as we see options for choice, we also see options for neglect. In Reuters we see “Google’s parent company Alphabet agreed a $2.1bn (£1.6bn) takeover of the wearable tech firm last year. However, the deal has yet to be completed”, we see that at https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-53647570, and as we see the BBC article, we wonder about a lot more. Yes we acknowledge “While the European Commission has said its main concern is the “data advantage” Google will gain to serve increasingly personalised ads via its search page”, and in the matter of investigations we see:
The effects of the merger on Europe’s nascent digital healthcare sector
Whether Google would have the means and ability to make it more difficult for rival wearables to work with its Android operating system.
From there there are two paths, for me personally the first one is Competition Commissioner Margrethe Vestager, to be honest, I do not trust her. I will admit right off the bat that this is personal, but her deal relying on what was requires her to get a win, any win. The setting is founded on “officials acknowledge that the EU’s competition enforcer faces hard choices after judges moved to quash her order for the US tech company to pay back €14.3bn in taxes to Ireland”, which was a juridical choice, but in all this she needs a win and I reckon she will do whatever er she can to get any of the FAANG group. For the most I would be on her side in the tax case, but on the other side the entire sweep of the Google Fitbit leaves me with questions.
The first point is on ‘effects of the merger’, so how is this in regards to the Apple Smart Watch, the Huawei smart watch (android), and a few other versions, how much investigation did Apple get? How much concern is there for Huawei? Then we see the second part ‘Whether Google would have the means and ability’, it is not a wrong position for Margrethe Vestager to take, but as he does it upfront, in light of the EU inactions regarding IBM and Microsoft, it seems weird that this happens upfront now (well to me it does). And as we see ‘difficult for rival wearables to work with its Android operating system’ I see Huawei and the solutions they have, Android solutions no less, so why is Google the problem?
Then there are two other parts. The first one is “Analysts suggested part of the attraction for Google was the fact that Fitbit had formed partnerships with several insurers in addition to a government health programme in Singapore”, the second one is “Google has explicitly denied its motivation is to control more data”, in all this there is less investigation in regards to what data goes to Singapore, or better stated the article makes no mention towards it, and as I see it, there is no mention on it from the office of Margrethe Vestager either. The second part is how Google explicitly denies its part, yet that denial does not give us anything towards the speculated “its motivation is to have access to more data”, and when you decide on a smart watch, data will end up somewhere and the statements are precise (something that worries me), I have no issue with Google having access, but the larger issue is not Google, it is ‘partnerships with several insurers’, the idea of privacy is not seen remarked upon by Margrethe Vestager and her posse of goose feather and ink-jar wielders, the focus is Google and is seemingly absent from investigations into Fitbit pre-Google in an age where the GDPR is set to be gospel, so who are the insurers and where are they based? Issues we are unlikely to get answers on. Yet when we consider “John Hancock, the U.S. division of Canadian insurance giant Manulife, requires customers to use activity trackers for life insurance policies in their Vitality program if they want to get discounts on their premiums and other perks”, so what happens when that data can be accessed? Is the larger stage not merely ‘What we consent to’, but a stage where the insurer has a lessened risk, but we see that our insurance is not becoming cheaper, there is the second stage that those not taking that path get insurance surcharge. So what has the EU done about that? We can accept that this is not on the plate of Margrethe Vestager, but it is on someones plate and only now, when Google steps in do we see action?
So whilst the old farts at the EU are taking a gander at what they can get, I wonder what happens to all the other parts they are not looking at. Should Google acquire my IP, with access to 440,000,000 retailers and well over 1,500,000,000 consumers, will they cry murder? Will they shout unfair? Perhaps thinking out of the box was an essential first requirement and Fitbit is merely a stage to a much larger pool that 5G gives, but as they listened to the US, they can’t tell, not until 2022, at that point it is too late for the EU, I reckon that they get to catch on in 2021 when they realise that they are losing ground to all the others, all whilst they could have been ahead of the game, lets say a Hail Mary to those too smitten by ego.
That is the question, this is not about gaming, but Microsoft is about to get a black eye. This one is not one I saw coming for a few reasons, but the stage is set in very different ways at present.
It all starts with European Court of Justice and their Schrems II case (C-311/18), in this case we see that the Privacy shield, as US Department of Commerce concoction to appease Europe and the European Commission has fallen, like Humpty Dumpty the setting got pushed by the judges, and it cannot be superglued, it is dead. The term is ‘invalid under European Law’, So all the American contractors and subtractors of personal data in Europe (mainly Microsoft, Google, Facebook and AWS) now have a much larger issue to content with, it is the stage that President Tump cannot use, it will be another mail in his election coffin. The source Aigine also gives us “It is close to impossible that the rules of GDPR will be enforced, as US-Companies have given capabilities to US Intelligence authorities (example the No Such Agency)” The implied seizing of transfer of data to US-controlled companies will be a much harsher reality than ever seen before. Basically it works for me, but there is a larger station where data pools will have a national setting. If players like Google want to stay ahead, they will need data and hardware specialists in a much larger region of the world, happy me! And this will follow in other nations as well, the GDPR will have larger considerations in the Commonwealth as well, and as I see it the US has set the stage to open a can of worms I always saw coming, yet I believed that the EU gravy train and US Wall Street people would be more aligned, in the end it now seems that they were not and the data field will change in a much more refined way than I thought was possible. As a data cleaner my options open up, yet Google will set a new parameter of systems as they already have, however they will have a much broader need and as this war continues, we will see these players overreact to make sure that their data is lacking gaps, again, happy me.
So as we see that there is an assessment on what an how things are transferred, we will se. Much larger shift internationally. There is still a lacking state. The text “if possible, personal data should be stored within the EU, and on servers controlled by EU companies” whereas we see questions on ‘if possible’, I see options and opportunities, and the stage for legal interpretations will open up on the larger stage as older (90’s) solutions are revisited on the method of storing personal data. As such there is a new data war coming, and in this there is an open field who will grow, pretty much all European data vendors can, because there is a whole shipment of US companies who cannot rely on the FAANG group, and that is where the commercial opportunities are staged. To be honest, Microsoft has an actual opportunity now that it did not have in the past. Even as Aigine gives no consideration in this, but the Azure systems have a greater ability to decentralise, it is something that they had in place for other options, but Google did not (not to that degree is more correct), and that is the stage that pushes Sunday into the IT gathering of the week. I reckon that the news will be about the PDPR and the impact that US systems will face over the next week, but this impact is too large, I reckon that there will be a larger impact on a larger scale, yet I will agree that my view lacks the clarity of certain players and what they put in the field over the last 3-4 years. No matter how we see the EC Judgment, there were enough voices around to see a downplaying of the verdict, a verdict that is now a much larger stage than in the last 5 years.
Lawrence van Rijn - Law Lord to be 