Yes, I have said that on several occasions, there is no AI and whatever there is has verification issues. Today I illustrate this YET again and here in this case Google is as much to blame as many others.
So we have two images, the first one gives us
That there are risks. I was taken a little back, The UAE is one of the safest places on the planet. So I decided to ask the same question a little different and I added the term “in 2025” so as we see the second setting
We see the initial feeling I had about the country. And there are an abundance of articles showing the safety of the UAE (and Abu Dhabi), as such I want to kindly wake Sergey Bring the fuck up and I am wondering whether he needs to address his Gemini settings a little. Perhaps American tourism decline settings is altering the verification settings?
As such there is one little situation, the setting that whatever bigtech calls AI cannot be trusted (which I already knew). The setting of verification that is up and about and that is the major handle in whatever that (AI) is. We need to realise that there is no AI. There is DML (Deeper Machine Learning) and there is LLM (Large Language Models) and they are awesome, but they are depending on the programmers you throw at them and it is not foolproof, there are issues (as you can see).
This is not a large article. I have said it before and now within 5 minutes I had the setting I needed. I reckon that all of you want to make a separate ‘judgment’ on whatever these people call AI and whether it might show your local environment in a limelight you could check. And just for fun (I tend to be a whacky person) I am adding the ‘American Tourism decline’ here too.
Just to set the premise, consider that this was given 4 weeks ago: “In June, Canadian residents returned from 2.1 million trips to the United States, representing a 28.7% decrease from the same month in 2024 and accounting for 70.8% of all trips abroad taken by Canadian residents in June 2025.” And the story here becomes verification. You see, who (or what) is feeding the AI models? When the data cannot be verified, how is the data conceived? Because this data is fed, by whom becomes the story and the media (as a whole) becomes less and less reliable.
Have a great day, almost time for me to take a walk towards my brekky.
That was the secondary view I was given. The first was a quote by that (me giggling) astrophysical Neil deGrasse Tyson. No disrespect, he states settings well and with massive clarity. But the one quote he gave us was “knowing enough about a subject to think you’re right, but not enough about the subject to know you’re wrong”. That took me, not by surprise, but it had impact. I reported on America tourism through media clues given. Tourism is something that I know little about (my last vacation was 2002). My main reaction was indolence of Canada, as such as they are shunning America, I stand with them. That will teach most of these 51st State Theologians (they are always praying to god for places they can’t have) a lesson and as a Commonwealthian (aka Australian) I have to stand with my Canadian brethren (sisters too).
So I reported on these fall backs. Then I noticed a few items and my setting slightly changed. There is a rumbling of adjusted data and it doesn’t spell good news. As I see it Google is involved and I for one have massively supported their points of view. As such the quote from that space expressionist (nothing negative) comes to mind. “knowing enough about a subject to think you’re right, but not enough about the subject to know you’re wrong” it is important. Is this me? It could be, I know am not a expert on tourism, I think I still know how to be one and that is it. But data, data is my rap and I have worked with data for decades. So I am spouting here the setting of what I see and perhaps you will also see the issue that arises. Because it is not merely the subject, it is the knowing that the facts do not add up. Even if you accept that the media tends to slice and dice data to give the view they need to have to power the view they want to instill on the readers. Yet, here is the hidden clue. When you look at the slices, the picture feels wrong. The part cannot be seen as the whole. That is the hidden feature of media, that is seemingly their strength. Yet when you have enough slices and partial view, the whole picture tends to make sense. Here it does not, and to illuminate these settings I put several of them here, you can see for yourself what you can make of it. I still think something is off. Lets start off by quoting everyones favourite delusional view (AI) and in this case Googles.
You can see the setting it ‘gives’ us.
The first is given to us (at https://www.ctol.digital/news/us-tourism-slump-retail-impact-july-24/) by ctol digital solutions with ‘Tourism Downturn Threatens $20 Billion US Retail Spending Crisis’ now, we can rant about this but the overall downturn for 2025 is set to $29 billion. And this is now set to a larger premise of $20 billion (retail), there is no reason to fight the numbers, yet as I see it, the ‘gemini’ view is that this merely constitutes $2600 billion, raking in $585 billion in tax dollars. As I see it, this merely constitutes slightly less then 1%, is that a crises, or an overreaction? I could see it as panic writing.
Then we get the New York Post giving us 6 hours ago ‘Foreign tourism to NYC expected to see ‘devastating’ $4B drop this year according to industry experts’ (at https://nypost.com/2025/07/25/us-news/foreign-tourism-to-nyc-expected-to-see-devastating-4b-drop-this-year-according-to-industry-experts/) where we see “The drop — which could be as much as 14% — will have a brutal effect on the New York economy, as foreign tourists usually spend big, according to NYC Tourism + Conventions, which did the study. “Although international visitors make up 20% of total visitation, they account for approximately 50% of all visitor spending, making them essential to New York City’s economy,” group CEO Julie Coker said in a statement.” Really? As I see it $4B is merely 0.25%, but we are looking at the whole picture, for New York 14% and the international visitations being up to 20% is a lot, but when you see it against the ‘Gemini’ (aka Google) numbers, something is starting not to add up.
Then we shift focus to Travel And Tour World (TTW), who gave us a mere 20 hours ago ‘Retailers in Major US Cities Like New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago Face Twenty Billion USD Decline in Sales as International Tourist Spending Slows’ (at https://www.travelandtourworld.com/news/article/retailers-in-major-us-cities-like-new-york-los-angeles-and-chicago-face-twenty-billion-usd-decline-in-sales-as-international-tourist-spending-slows/) where we see “Retailers in major US cities like New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago are feeling the impact of a significant shift in consumer behaviour as foreign tourist spending decline, twenty billion USD. These iconic cities have long depended on the influx of international visitors, who often contribute substantially to retail sales, especially in luxury goods and high-end fashion. However, as travel patterns change and tourists adjust their spending habits, many retailers are seeing fewer footfalls in their stores, directly affecting their bottom lines.” From this we can take two settings. The first is the setting that we are getting closer to the $29 billion and that Los Angeles and Chicago represent 75% of the loss. I have an issue with that. I get that New York is losing money, but to see this as a mere 25% of what Los Angeles and Chicago represent? That doesn’t make sense. I get that Los Angeles is big, as would California as a whole but the percentages are off, especially against the numbers that Google AI gives us. It seems to be a mere storm in a cup of water. And I can recite a whole range of additional articles, but the point should be coming across now. So, is there a bigger picture? Yes, there is and I have stated this again and again. Verification is essential for any data to be set and here I am getting to the stage that Google has altered numbers, or at least limitations of what their (so called) AI is spouting at us. The sources of these data stages are debatable. It is like the old market research settings we can (at times) see that the opposition of any stance might be 69%, but it is the ’N’ that makes the cake and if it is 256 people it is seen as trivial, only if we have 8,263,000 (estimated population of New York) will it become an actual crises issue and these articles give us percentages, but the ’N’ is absent, making the whole setting debatable at best.
To complete the setting I have one additional source. It is the Travel (at https://www.thetravel.com/american-airlines-passengers-concerned-hundreds-of-us-domestic-flights-cancelled-august/) giving us ‘American Airlines Has Passengers Concerned With Hundreds Of U.S. Domestic Flights Cancelled As Of August’ where we see “AA’s domestic U.S. flights. It appears that American Airlines is scaling back significantly, with hundreds of cancellations scheduled to take place as of August. AA has made these changes for several reasons. One of them involves current trends” Now, this might be fine as we are also given “while the other is due to an ongoing dispute with a specific U.S. airport” is that reason to cancel hundreds of flights? It might be, I just don’t know. But the overall news as we saw it in the last few weeks implies that passengers are seemingly absent and that makes the setting of the Google AI debatable at best. The numbers do not add up in several directions and personally I have an issue with that. I am not stating that I am above the quote that Neil deGrasse Tyson gave us all. I am saying that I merely know enough about data that there are issues and most likely in several settings. Personally I am with the setting that Canadian are shunning America (mostly due to the 51st state notion) and we have seen several settings towards view. And even as Canada is merely one nation, the tourism setting seems wrong. Especially as the media is allegedly creating a perfect storm in a teacup, because that is what is implied and the numbers do not bear out that view.
Am I right, am I wrong? I let you consider that for yourself but when you see the ‘AI’ view, it doesn’t add up to the views that the media are giving us. So few free to disagree, feel free to adjust your views too, but something is off. Have a great day today.
Yup that is the setting and it is a conundrum to say the least. Before I go into the explaining setting. I might need to refresh a few minds. There is no AI, Artificial doesn’t exist (yet). As I see it three components are missing and that is fine. We are making headway in this and some have one element in place. The other two are missing. So I have been speaking out against those AI ‘losers’ and it seems that no one else is listening. That’s fair. Why would you believe me over dozens of greed driven sales people. Then this morning (way too early) I saw something pass by on LinkedIn. It was brilliant, I never thought of this (I do miss parts at times) and the image below
Gives you the goods. Consider the ‘constraints’ of and actual AI. Consider the constraints of 5 AI’s. Now I take the assumption that this was all on the up and up. It is a leap, I know this. For all concerned, the poster was yanking all our chains, so you can test this yourself. Take a room with 5 strangers, ask them the simple question to pick a random number between 1 and 50 and write this on a pice of paper. Then all show them at the same time. Now if they are different people (I am referring to the old joke that all teenage boys will come up with 69 dude (and this was averted with the range 1-50) but seriously. Take 5 random people and optionally 2 might have the same answer, but for all 5 ‘proclaimed’ AI systems to give the same number is utterly impossible.
Is it? Well, that is the question. If they are founded on the same algorithm, there are optional gaps, then there is the setting that the data is founded on exactly the same amounts, as such I say impossible. A computer (any computer) has logics, hardware, algorithms and data. If they are all identical (which does not seem the case) the answers should be the same. But to get 5 identical answers is a drastic setting after all big tech is shedding jobs due to AI. If the image was true, the larger truth that companies need to shed jobs as they foresee a much larger economic clash. I was already on that page, but now more can do this to. Consider that this so called AI is being pushed onto support and customer care. Now consider that they all have the same flakes and errors. How many support and customer care jobs will set companies to collapse? It is an honest question. Where do you go when the company you are giving your money to is merely walking the beat towards average? A place where populism (aka the statistically most viable answer) is given?
A setting where we are merely the crunched number and not given the excellent quality support we are entitled to? I am not kidding, but this is the setting all the big tech companies are going for. All to look good on paper and that is what I see evolving. You can bitch all you like on Microsoft and Builder.ai where seemingly the AI work was done by 700 engineers. Microsoft backed the solution all whilst there was nothing to be seen on how 700 engineers were supported by hardware and software. Then we get to all systems with verifications and these elements should reveal that if AI was the real deal these systems could never have given all the same random number.
So, all is not over. For the simple reason that if this happens, these companies need to find 61,000 people and this gives me the setting that dataconomy.com gives with “Microsoft’s Chief Commercial Officer, Judson Althoff, stated this week that the company saved over $500 million in its call center last year through the use of AI tools. This announcement follows a series of internal remarks concerning productivity gains across sales, customer service, and software engineering, as reported by Bloomberg during a recent presentation.” When these tools start bungling their job as the data becomes an issue (I see the 5 random numbers as ‘evidence’). You see, you cannot have on and not the other. I am mentioning Microsoft in this case as the quote was there, but as I see it, IBM, Amazon and Google will all have the same issue soon enough. And the first one that realizes this will get the first grasp in the 61,000 people and the last one gets the least impressive people of the bunch. And at what point will someone figure out what the price tag is on the $500 million in savings?
It is a setting without any good end. And in the end, if the setting was faked, my conclusions are equally debatable. I will disagree as I came to this point through different means and this example was merely the icing on the cake. And I love it, because I never thought of this setting. We all miss things and I am no different. So I laugh as I saw the article as the example given was nothing short of ‘quite excellent’. As such I start the day with a smile as I enjoy being pointed at overlooking an element. That’s the person I am.
So, you all have a great day as I am starting fish day today (from young I was told Friday is fish day). Did the AI you are all embracing give you that translation and the reason why? It is a mere jab at the setting as this reenforces the verification of data. A setting I saw to be the achilles heel of that StarGate project. It is a mere $500,000,000,000 project, but that will not stop me from illustrating the situation and whilst other say that I don’t have the power to do anything. I merely counter it that these centers are unlikely to have the power to keep it going, you see power is more than an element, it becomes the biggest evil of the lot.
Well, it is good news of a sort. The Guardian reported yesterday (at https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/sep/23/violent-crime-murder-rate-fbi-2023) that ‘FBI confirms US murders declined in 2023, contrary to Republican claims’, it is here we get “Murder dropped by more than 11% in largest single-year decline in decades while rape and other crimes also fell”, as plenty of us consider the one nation that is mostly in decline (due to the Karen’s) it is nice that we see an article like this. We also get “Meanwhile, the broader category of violent crime nationwide decreased about 3%, said the data, which is audited and confirms earlier reporting from unaudited statistics”, as well as “the FBI said rape decreased by an estimated 9.4%, property crime dropped 2.4% and burglary fell by an estimated 7.6%”. Some say that it is nothing to write home about. The larger setting is that in a country as overloaded with 343,477,335 people both good and less so. These drops are nothing to be sneered at. I say hurrah to the police and FBI department on a national scale. I am still of the mind that criminals tend to find other ‘activities’ to fuel their need for greed and violence. What it is is anyone’s guess. In certain fields I tend to be a gloomy source of skepticism. And it is here that Jonathan Greenblatt, CEO of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), said: “Data drives policy, and without having a complete understanding of the problem, we cannot effectively address this significant surge in hate violence” OK, I will agree with that. Data tends to be the driving instigator in understanding certain crimes. It is also a little weird that hate violence would be the driving power against sexual assaults and burglaries. One does not optionally fuel the other side and as such I feel uncertain what to think. That is the other side of data. The lack of numbers does not fuel the understanding into another side. It is not that we can state with any kind of ‘comprehension’ that (2022) 16 sexual assaults + 84 burglaries = 14 sexual assaults + 58 burglaries + 28 hate crimes (2023) it just presumptuously does not work that way. But in the end crime went down to some extent and for that we can say ‘hurray ye police departments’ and ‘hurray ye FBI’. We then get ““Our administration has improved and expanded background checks, announced the single largest investment in youth mental health in history, and been an unprecedented resource to states, cities, and local communities,” said Kamala Harris” I am less convinced here. I am not debating the soul and spirit of the thought, there is a larger stage to consider. I wrote a few years ago that the ATF is staggeringly underfunded and for the longest time there was no head at the organisation. There was a lack of IT funds and all kinds of settings that sets the ATF with decades of lack of innovations at their disposal. In addition, last year the WBUR (in 2023) gave its audience ‘Does the man enforcing the country’s gun laws have the tools to do the job?’ I had raised that amendment issue a few years earlier. They gave us “ATF protects the public from crimes involving firearms, explosives, arson, and the diversion of alcohol and tobacco products. Regulates lawful commerce in firearms and explosives, and provides worldwide support to law enforcement, public safety, and industry partners.” All whilst the gun lobby does everything to make things harder for the ATF. And all whilst all the Tech biggies (Amazon with AWS, Microsoft with Azure and Google with Gemini) have lacked in assisting the ATF in ways that work. I am not placing blame in any of those three, but the lack of innovation in IT power in the ATF is staggering. And in that setting the FBI and the local police forces need to do their work. Weird is it not? Then in 2020 we see ‘Rethinking ATF’s Budget To Prioritise Effective Gun Violence Prevention’ apart from the fact that the ATF was without a permanent director for seven years the wondering setting by Kamala Harris with “Our administration has improved and expanded background checks” but I have issues with the statement. I will fully agree with the statement that it was true, but consider a car in 2022 when it was going at a speed of 23 mph, the fact that it now does 43 mph makes the statement true, but when we consider that the fact that the ATF is to be seen as The Tiger Brigades (1974) where the officers relied on something not dissimilar of the Ford model T, the improvements would be impressive all whilst the criminals out there relied on their Lamborghini Countach LP400 (179 mph), you do see that the police has absolutely no way of winning. When we realise this a lot more could be done, but political players relying on the gun lobby donations are o so willing to throw a clog in the wheels (the origin of the expression saboteur) and the larger issue is not that America needs to stop crime. It is important that they are gaining access to the tools that allows them to do their job.
So I am not attacking the good news we were given, but the fact that the truth is that certain organisations were supposed to do their job with one hand on their back. The lacking funds for infrastructure does not help I reckon.
All reasons for applauding the local police departments and the FBI for getting some of the work done. So to all involved: “Well Done!”
I am now pondering a thought I had yesterday and a larger premise. Not sure yet what to do, but it is a consideration to behold. And now, with my eyes on the Scotia bank on Yonge street (Toronto) I will sign off and enjoy a glass of ice tea.
There are always two sides on any technology. The question is whether they are aligned or not. The first story is found at (at https://www.edgemiddleeast.com/ai/tsmc-and-samsung-consider-100-billion-uae-chip-projects) where the Edge Middle East gives us ‘TSMC and Samsung Consider $100 Billion UAE Chip Projects’, it all comes across as straight forward. We are given “Semiconductor giants TSMC and Samsung are in early talks to establish massive chip-making facilities in the UAE, potentially marking a significant expansion in global production.” It seems to me that this is a straight forward option, especially for the UAE. We are also given “develop potential chip projects in the United Arab Emirates, with investments that could exceed $100 billion. The discussions, which are still in the early stages, were first reported by The Wall Street Journal on Sunday” and this article ends with “Should these plans move forward, they would mark a significant milestone in the UAE’s efforts to position itself as a global technology hub.” The second article was initially from the Financial Times (but they are behind a paywall), as such I I cannot give the link, but the headline reads ‘UAE president meets Joe Biden in push for more US AI technology’ where we are given “Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed al-Nahyan seeks to formalise fledgling partnership between both countries” as well as “The United Arab Emirates’ leader met US President Joe Biden in Washington on Monday to advance artificial intelligence co-operation as the Gulf nation tries to secure easier access to US-made technology” and “The UAE is one of the US’s most important allies in the Middle East, but relations have been strained at times in recent years. Talks for a formal security pact with Washington have stalled, and Abu Dhabi was infuriated by what it saw as a lukewarm US response to attacks on the UAE’s capital by Houthi rebels from Yemen in 2022.” This is a dangerous time for America. The trivialisation of the Houthi terrorists will cost America dearly, it has before and it will cost America more than they imagined. You see, as I personally see it. There is a bigger fish. The option that China will play nice with Taiwan when there is a larger part of the $100,000,000,000 could give China the edge they need. And in this setting China will have several bonus options that would fall away from American. That alone would entice China to play nice with Taiwan to a whole larger degree. Is it viable? I honestly cannot say as the media is massively anti-China. Ask Huawei is you doubt my view on this issue.
How could this happen? There are several options, but if I were a betting man China would offer Taiwan independence UNDER China. Would Taiwan accept this? I don’t know, but if China would enable a diplomatic solution via the United Arab Emirates it could happen. China is more interested in the collapse of America sooner and will hand an independence ‘option’ to Taiwan. And the setting with Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed al-Nahyan gives China a larger option to manouver. It is my believe that the Biden administration is driven to not make my speculation happen and for that it needs a slice of the UAE AI business and America will offer whatever it has to to make their entrance a done deal. On the positive side if Microsoft gets involved there is every chance that their affinity to mediocrity will blow up in their faces and the American stance becomes a whole lot weaker. This is not ‘fear mongering’, this is merely the view I have on Microsoft and the blunders they have made in the recent past. The UAE embraces perfection, as such Amazon (AWS) or Google would be a much better fit. But this is not about bashing Microsoft (it is fun though). The AI investments that could be coming the way of the UAE, there is a larger field. We hear all about ‘AI’ and the developers (Amazon, Apple, Google, et al) but most forget that Huawei has its own system. The FusionMind AI platform. I don’t know how good it is. Whatever the media tells us, once Huawei gets to demonstrate their system. No matter what others think, if the UAE considers it good enough, the American race for revenues goes in the wrong direction (for America that is). Don’t ask me how good or how bad the Huawei system is, because I have never seen it, but I know about it and the media is doing its best to ignore Huawei, but I am not convinced that this is a good move to make. The IT people (like me) want to assist people with solutions that WORK. I do not think it is a good idea to ignore the Huawei system. And I believe that neither Saudi Arabia or the United Arab Emirates are ignoring the Huawei technology side of it all. For me the larger setting isn’t merely what works, but it is the dim witted view of accusing Huawei whilst not offering ANY clear evidence. That is the larger stage and if Huawei, or the Chinese government can convince Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed al-Nahyan to allow Huawei to present their case, American will have additional worries to deal with. I personally think that Google AI with Mandiant would be personally the better option. That is merely because I have have limited exposure to AWS and no exposure to Amazon security solutions. So my view is slightly biased. In all this, Google needs to convince the UAE that they have what the UAE needs. After that Saudi Arabia should be shown these solutions too (likely they have already seen them).
When we see these sides, one side is the technology, the other side is the software and when we optionally see these chip solutions the bigger winner becomes whomever sets the premise of their software to the hardware provided. I personally hope for Google (I am biased here), but the end game is nowhere near concluded at present. I reckon the Biden administration is hoping for a memorandum of intent, but that is something we might see on Wednesday. So keep looking.
It is almost Wednesday here and Vancouver is following in 18 hours. So anything is possible. Have a great day.
Lawrence van Rijn - Law Lord to be 