Tag Archives: Fujitsu

The other path

It started in the early morning (around 03:30) my mind was racing and I suddenly remembered an idea I had two years ago to solve some NHS issues. I kept in the middle on the name whether it would be the Apple iTome, or the Google Tome, the idea was laced with a different approach towards solving some of the NHS issues. That kept slapping the back of my brain when I suddenly remembered something else. It was from my early years, it was a Sharp PC-7000.

Sharp PC-7000

You might think it is too old to be useful, but you would be wrong. You see, Sharp tried something different and even as some surpassed them, we need to consider the impact that VHS had, yes, it did beat Sony Betamax, yet technologically speaking Betamax was superior, it was one of the few cases where marketing decided future paths and now that we are at crossroads, it is time to look back to some old ideas. It got me thinking about a new kind of display, a setting for displaying RAW graphics and using RAW as a standard format , not merely in software, but in hardware too. It got my mind racing on a new display that is the thickness and size of 10 A-4 pages, but laminated. In addition, there is a different approach when we start doing this to displays that are A6, optionally A5. A different approach to how and what we display, and more important how we go about its use, because that too is under scrutiny. We tend to follow a pack of greed driven wolves hoping to get a share and we forgot to look at the innovations of the past and how we can redirect them in today’s markets. 

In this there are options that can be captured now with innovation patents and even as that time is a lot shorter, it allows some to get ahead of the curve. The second part is how displays get their information, we go about the same route as everyone else, but we forget that there is a reason why a player like Hasselblad is pretty much the only player with a medium format video option in 4K, why do you think that is? Because they followed Canon, Nikon, Fujitsu and Minolta, or is that because they had a really good idea and stuck to their guns? It brought them more than anyone ever bargained for and they are about to cash in.

When technology and not marketing decides the future, you end up with better solutions, not pronounced innovations, but actual innovations. A lot of people forgot about that side of the equation. I decided to remember that part and set up a stage (this blog) where I can make some of these idea’s public domain and let the thinking innovators become real winners, not merely winners through the eyes of their presenting marketing pack.

1 Comment

Filed under IT, Science

You were expecting good news?

We all love the moment that we get to say ‘I told you so!’, it is like a confirmation on the silliness (stupidity is too strong a word) of certain people. Basically, I stated 5 days ago: “So as the UK is basically throwing away the economic advantage it might have all for the grace of a bully who stops mattering in the political field soon enough. We see a larger stage, the new economy in Europe will be largely in the hands of the Huawei wielders, and not for governmental reasons, but for the simple reason that their equipment is 3-5 years more advanced than whatever is out now and those making claims that they will equal it, will already be behind the new Huawei devices”, I stated this in ‘Light at the end of the economy’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2020/07/15/light-at-the-end-of-the-economy/) it was only time that was the one factor proving me correctly, so it was a small surprise that this evidence is given 5 days later (at https://news.cgtn.com/news/2020-07-19/UK-asks-Japan-for-Huawei-alternatives-in-5G-networks-SfpqYScBxK/index.html) where we see ‘UK asks Japan for Huawei alternatives in 5G networks’ and that is not all, we see “The British government asked Japan to help build its 5G wireless networks without Chinese tech giant Huawei Technologies, citing NEC Corp and Fujitsu Ltd as potential alternative suppliers, Nikkei reported on Sunday”, as well as “British officials met with their counterparts in Tokyo on Thursday, according to Nikkei, noting the move reflects Britain’s effort to bring in new equipment suppliers to foster competition and help reduce costs for the country’s wireless carriers”, and the two are actually a lot more important, not only is this about making the 5G equipment, but it also becomes about ‘help reduce costs for the country’s wireless carriers’, now consider the design path that will take up to 180 days, then we get the setting of financial stages and ‘cheaper’ chips and cheaper assembly, so we are looking at 200+ days, implying that the first workable designs will not be here before late 2021, the UK will then be a year behind others that embraced Huawei, all because of a stupid bully in the White House who refuses to show evidence. When did we ll accept that part of the equation? Now consider assembly and mass production and after that software flaws and other design flaws. The UK will now be around mid 2022 and no configurable 5G situation, it will give a first large testable pilot not before the end of 2022, at this point the UK will be staggeringly behind all other players and they will be wielding the latest Huawei options at the end of 2022. This implies (implies, which is not the same as proven) that the Huawei wielders are 1-2 years ahead of the latest that the UK installed. Or perhaps I should diplomatically state: ‘Good luck starting a new economy at that point!’ And that is merely the top of the iceberg. If Japan remains on the same track, we should see the dangers of a statement a mere 4 hours ago: “Japan’s exports suffered a double-digit decline for the fourth month in a row in June as the coronavirus pandemic took a heavy toll on global demand, reinforcing expectations that the economy has sunk into its deepest recession in decades”, I personally see (speculatively so) it getting worse, you see their economy has not reset the numbers and expected income of the delayed Olympics yet (which is officially not on the date of expectations), so we can expect a lot bad news coming from Tokyo in the next 8 weeks. That is the stage where the UK is going to whilst the players are in a state of turmoil, as such there will be a lot of debate between now and 2022, as such more delays and more ‘compromises’ and they will all be altered by certain voices so that they look good, but the people awaiting the hardware will get to pay the price of non-delivery. That is the larger stage I saw coming from a few angles (apart from the unexpected Japanese move), and this sets a much larger stage, if the UK moves towards Japan, what is now already not optionally coming in any Ericsson or Nokia solution? Did anyone expect that question?

And as Reuters gives us “The Bank of Japan has signalled confidence the economy will emerge from the slump and has ruled out the risk of deflation, suggesting the central bank has paused monetary easing after it deployed stimulus twice so far this year” I merely wonder what numbers that these ‘believes’ are founded on, I wonder how much bad news Japan will give us at the end of September when the Olympics losses will need to be on the books and then the large tamale of  bad news is given to us all. 

As I see it, those who did embrace Huawei will have a larger part of 2022 to stomp out their economic advantage, and as that becomes clearer, consider the US impact as GDPR is failing and Europe becomes a larger data pool location, at that point certain players will get a much larger advantage, and those screaming that I was ‘betraying’ my identity by offering my IP to Huawei will see that I opted for evidence and as I get to be proven correct again and again, y IP will merely boost in value beyond what I ever expected to make, which will work out lovely for me.


Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Politics, Science

Waking up 5 years late

I have had something like this, I swear it’s true. It was after I came back from the Middle East, I was more of a ‘party person’ in those days and I would party all weekend non-stop. It would start on Friday evening and I would get home Sunday afternoon. So one weekend, I had gone through the nightclub, day club, bars and Shoarma pit stops after which I went home. I went to bed and I get woken up by the telephone. It is my boss, asking me whether I would be coming to work that day. I noticed it was 09:30, I had overslept. I apologised and rushed to the office. I told him I was sorry that I had overslept and I did not expect too much nose as it was the first time that I had overslept. So the follow up question became “and where were you yesterday?” My puzzled look from my eyes told him something was wrong. It was Tuesday! I had actually slept from Sunday afternoon until Tuesday morning. It would be the weirdest week in a lifetime. I had lost an entire day and I had no idea how I lost a day. I still think back to that moment every now and then, the sensation of the perception of a week being different, I never got over it, now 31 years ago, and it still gets to me every now and then.

A similar sensation is optionally hitting Christine Lagarde I reckon, although if she is still hitting the party scene, my initial response will be “You go girl!

You see with “Market power wielded by US tech giants concerns IMF chief” (at https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/apr/19/market-power-wielded-by-us-tech-giants-concerns-imf-chief-christine-lagarde) we see the issues on a very different level. So even as we all accept “Christine Lagarde, has expressed concern about the market power wielded by the US technology giants and called for more competition to protect economies and individuals”, we see not the message, but the exclusion. So as we consider “Pressure has been building in the US for antitrust laws to be used to break up some of the biggest companies, with Google, Facebook and Amazon all targeted by critics“, I see a very different landscape. You see as we see Microsoft, IBM and Apple missing in that group, it is my personal consideration that this is about something else. You see Microsoft, IBM and Apple have one thing in common. They are Patent Powerhouses and no one messes with those. This is about power consolidation and the fact that Christine Lagarde is speaking out in such a way is an absolute hypocrite setting for the IMF to have.

You see, to get that you need to be aware of two elements. The first is the American economy. Now in my personal (highly opposed) vision, the US has been bankrupt; it has been for some time and just like the entire Moody debacle in 2008. People might have seen in in ‘the Big Short‘, a movie that showed part of it and whilst the Guardian reported ““Moody’s failed to adhere to its own credit-rating standards and fell short on its pledge of transparency in the run-up to the ‘great recession’,” principal deputy associate attorney general Bill Baer said in the statement“, it is merely one version of betrayal to the people of the US by giving protection to special people in excess of billions and they merely had to pay a $864m penalty. I am certain that those billionaires have split that penalty amongst them. So, as I stated, the US should be seen as bankrupt. It is not the only part in this. The Sydney Morning Herald (at https://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/how-trump-s-hair-raising-level-of-debt-could-bring-us-all-crashing-down-20180420-p4zank.html) gives us “Twin reports by the International Monetary Fund sketch a chain reaction of dangerous consequences for world finance. The policy – if you can call it that – puts the US on an untenable debt trajectory. It smacks of Latin American caudillo populism, a Peronist contagion that threatens to destroy the moral foundations of the Great Republic. The IMF’s Fiscal Monitor estimates that the US budget deficit will spike to 5.3 per cent of GDP this year and 5.9 per cent in 2019. This is happening at a stage of the economic cycle when swelling tax revenues should be reducing net borrowing to zero“. I am actually decently certain that this will happen. Now we need to look back to my earlier statement.

You see, if the US borrowing power is nullified, the US is left without any options, unless (you saw that coming didn’t you). The underwriting power of debt becomes patent power. Patents have been set to IP support. I attended a few of those events (being a Master of Intellectual Property Law) and even as my heart is in Trademarks, I do have a fine appreciation of Patents. In this the econometrics of the world are seeing the national values and the value of any GDP supported by the economic value of patents.

In this, in 2016 we got “Innovation and creative endeavors are indispensable elements that drive economic growth and sustain the competitive edge of the U.S. economy. The last century recorded unprecedented improvements in the health, economic well-being, and overall quality of life for the entire U.S. population. As the world leader in innovation, U.S. companies have relied on intellectual property (IP) as one of the leading tools with which such advances were promoted and realized. Patents, trademarks, and copyrights are the principal means for establishing ownership rights to the creations, inventions, and brands that can be used to generate tangible economic benefits to their owner“, as such the cookie has crumbled into where the value is set (see attached), one of the key findings is “IP-intensive industries continue to be a major, integral and growing part of the U.S. economy“, as such we see the tech giants that I mentioned as missing and not being mentioned by Christine Lagarde. It is merely one setting and there are optionally a lot more, but in light of certain elements I believe that patents are a driving force and those three have a bundle, Apple has so many that it can use those patents too buy several European nations. IBM with their (what I personally believe to be) an overvalued Watson, we have seen the entire mess moving forward, presenting itself and pushing ‘boundaries’ as we are set into a stage of ‘look what’s coming’! It is all about research, MIT and Think 2018. It is almost like Think 2018 is about the point of concept, the moment of awareness and the professional use of AI. In that IBM, in its own blog accidently gave away the goods as I see it with: “As we get closer to Think, we’re looking forward to unveiling more sessions, speakers and demos“, I think they are close, they are getting to certain levels, but they are not there yet. In my personal view they need to keep the momentum going, even if they need to throw in three more high exposed events, free plane tickets and all kinds of swag to flim flam the audience. I think that they are prepping for the events that will not be complete in an alpha stage until 2020. Yet that momentum is growing, and it needs to remain growing. Two quotes give us that essential ‘need’.

  1. The US Army signed a 33-month, $135 million contract with IBM for cloud services including Watson IoT, predictive analytics and AI for better visibility into equipment readiness.
  2. In 2017, IBM inventors received more than 1,900 patents for new cloud technologies to help solve critical business challenges.

The second is the money shot. An early estimate is outside of the realm of most, you see the IP Watchdog gave us: “IBM Inventors received a record 9043 US patents in 2017, patenting in such areas as AI, Cloud, Blockchain, Cybersecurity and Quantum Computing technology“, the low estimate is a value of $11.8 trillion dollars. That is what IBM is sitting on. That is the power of just ONE tech giant, and how come that Christine Lagarde missed out on mentioning IBM? I’ll let you decide, or perhaps it was Larry Elliott from the Guardian who missed out? I doubt it, because Larry Elliott is many things, stupid ain’t one. I might not agree with him, or at times with his point of view, but he is the clever one and his views are valid ones.

So in all this we see that there is a push, but is it the one the IMF is giving or is there another play? The fact that banks have a much larger influence in what happens is not mentioned, yet that is not the play and I accept that, it is not what is at stake. There is a push on many levels and even as we agree that some tech giants have a larger piece of the cake (Facebook, Google and Amazon), a lot could have been prevented by proper corporate taxation, but that gets to most of the EU and the American Donald Duck, or was that Trump are all about not walking that road? The fact that Christine has failed (one amongst many) to introduce proper tax accountability on tech giants is a much larger issue and it is not all on her plate in all honesty, so there are a few issues with all this and the supporting views on all this is not given with “Lagarde expressed concern at the growing threat of a trade war between the US and China, saying that protectionism posed a threat to the upswing in the global economy and to an international system that had served countries well“, it is seen in several fields, one field, was given by The Hill, in an opinion piece. The information is accurate it is merely important to see that it has the views of the writer (just like any blog).

So with “Last December, the United States and 76 other WTO members agreed at the Buenos Aires WTO Ministerial to start exploring WTO negotiations on trade-related aspects of e-commerce. Those WTO members are now beginning their work by identifying the objectives of such an agreement. The U.S. paper is an important contribution because it comprehensively addresses the digital trade barriers faced by many companies“, which now underlines “A recent United States paper submitted to the World Trade Organization (WTO) is a notable step toward establishing rules to remove digital trade barriers. The paper is significant for identifying the objectives of an international agreement on digital trade“. This now directly gives rise to “the American Bar Association Section of Intellectual Property Law also requested that the new NAFTA require increased protections in trade secrets, trademarks, copyrights, and patents“, which we get from ‘Ambassador Lighthizer Urged to Include Intellectual Property Protections in New NAFTA‘ (at https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/ambassador-lighthizer-urged-to-include-52674/) less than 10 hours ago. So when we link that to the quote “The proposals included: that Canada and Mexico establish criminal penalties for trade secrets violations similar to those in the U.S. Economic Espionage Act, an agreement that Mexico eliminate its requirement that trademarks be visible, a prohibition on the lowering of minimum standards of patent protection“. So when we now look back towards the statement of Christine Lagarde and her exclusion of IBM, Microsoft and Apple, how is she not directly being a protectionist of some tech giants?

I think that the IMF is also feeling the waters what happens when the US economy takes a dip, because at the current debt levels that impact is a hell of a lot more intense and the games like Moody’s have been played and cannot be played again. Getting caught on that level means that the US would have to be removed from several world economic executive decisions, not a place anyone in Wall Street is willing to accept, so that that point Pandora’s Box gets opened and no one will be able to close it at that point. So after waking up 5 years late we see that the plays have been again and again about keeping the status quo and as such the digital rights is the one card left to play, which gives the three tech giants an amount of power they have never had before, so as everyone’s favourite slapping donkey (Facebook) is mentioned next to a few others, it is the issue of those not mentioned that will be having the cake and quality venison that we all desire. In this we are in a dangerous place, even more the small developers who come up with the interesting IP’s they envisioned. As their value becomes overstated from day one, they will be pushed to sell their IP way too early, more important, that point comes before their value comes to fruition and as such those tech giants (Apple, IBM, and Microsoft) will get an even more overbearing value. Let’s be clear they are not alone, the larger players like Samsung, Canon, Qualcomm, LG Electronics, Sony and Fujitsu are also on that list. The list of top players has around 300 members, including 6 universities (all American). So that part of the entire economy is massively in American hands and we see no clear second place, not for a long time. Even as the singled out tech giants are on that list, it is the value that they have that sets them a little more apart. Perhaps when you consider having a go at three of them, whilst one is already under heavy emotional scrutiny is perhaps a small price to pay.

How nice for them to wake up, I merely lost one day once, they have been playing the sleeping game for years and we will get that invoice at the expense of the futures we were not allowed to have, if you wonder how weird that statement is, then take a look at the current retirees, the devaluation they face, the amount they are still about to lose and wonder what you will be left with when you consider that the social jar will be empty long before you retire. The one part we hoped to have at the very least is the one we will never have because governments decided that budgeting was just too hard a task, so they preferred to squander it all away. The gap of those who have and those who have not will become a lot wider over the next 5 years, so those who retire before 2028 will see hardships they never bargained for. So how exactly are you served with addressing “‘too much concentration in hands of the few’ does not help economy“, they aren’t and you weren’t. It is merely the setting for what comes next, because in all this it was never about that. It is the first fear of America that counts. With ‘US ponders how it can stem China’s technology march‘ (at http://www.afr.com/news/world/us-ponders-how-it-can-stem-chinas-technology-march-20180418-h0yyaw), we start seeing that shift, so as we see “The New York Times reported on April 7 that “at the heart” of the trade dispute is a contest over which country plays “a leading role in high-tech industries”. The Wall Street Journal reported on April 12 that the US was preparing rules to block Chinese technology investment in the US, while continuing to negotiate over trade penalties“, we see the shifted theatre of trade war. It will be about the national economic value with the weight of patents smack in the middle. In that regard, the more you depreciate other parts, the more important the value of patents becomes. It is not a simple or easy picture, but we will see loads of econometrics giving their view on all that within the next 2-3 weeks.

Have a great weekend and please do not bother to wake up, it seems that Christine Lagarde didn’t bother waking up for years.


Leave a comment

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