Tag Archives: German

A Shakespeare saying

That is on the table and it started 3 days when I wrote ‘The changing of games’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2025/06/13/the-changing-of-games/) Here I showed the setting that Microsoft opened itself to and Denmark is not the only one. There is a larger setting that America is no longer the go-to guy for European business. It is not a setting President Trump was looking for, but then he never anticipated that Microsoft would back a solution (builder.ai) with at the core a stated 700 engineers. Trust me, it matters (trusting me is always up in the air). You see, Europe and other places are now suddenly reminded how Microsoft got to the top and innovation is not the first ‘setting’ that comes to mind. Netscape and the Wordperfect corporation comes to mind in the first instance. You see, I never got to the top of anything. In part because I never heralded the limelight, in part because the people who got there feared me. I don’t back down (ever) from the setting of supporting solutions for good instead of what was politically convenient. And I am not alone., thousands of tech support and customer care people are n my side and they can now dish up the past and hit certain players where it hurts. 

So now we get to TechRadar and its slightly taste adjusted setting. The story (at https://www.techradar.com/pro/denmark-wants-to-replace-windows-and-office-with-linux-and-libreoffice-as-it-seeks-to-embrace-digital-sovereignty) gives us ‘Denmark wants to replace Windows and Office with Linux and LibreOffice as it seeks to embrace digital sovereignty’ a mere 18 hours ago. It has the byline “Denmark bets big on open source revolution and control”. You see, I don’t think it is a big bet. Since the end of the 90’s when times and budgets were good, the IT setting (not merely Microsoft) was to instigate an IT armistice race and those times are gone. So whist certain players went to the ‘safety’ on IT armistice, the governments merely accepted the setting that this is how it was supposed to be, never realising they had other chances. And as I personally see it Microsoft turned that tap off towards others and redirected it to themselves. This is basically how multi-trillion companies are made. Yet the underlying setting is that there was always a larger field and Microsoft was not it. Or better stated Microsoft was not alone here, they merely tempered the setting for themselves, as this setting was never anticipated. A President that shallowed expenses and a larger premise to self. So whilst Denmark was being treated that America wants Greenland as allegedly houses a wealth of minerals, Denmark decided to look what could be done and so they did and in the process woke up Dutch politicians as well. So here we are seeing “Denmark is embarking on an ambitious effort to reduce its reliance on proprietary software from foreign tech giants by transitioning its government systems away from Microsoft offerings Windows and Office 365. The Danish Ministry of Digitalization reportedly plans a phased migration to Linux operating systems and LibreOffice for office productivity.” And as I personally see it, TechRadar is adding the ‘ambitious part’ for non-sentimental reasons. This setting was thwarted by Microsoft in the late 90’s and now they are less likely to succeed as the political field has changed. As I remember open Office is still a direction that is open. As Microsoft closes sluices they couldn’t close them all and now these sluices are the key to lose dependency to Microsoft. And here we see “The core objective, according to Minister Caroline Stage, is strategic: to safeguard Denmark’s digital infrastructure from the uncertainties of geopolitical tensions and the risk of disrupted access to US-based services.” Which is massively bad news for Microsoft because this is the one instance where they never had to protect their home guard before and here those tech support and customer care people will side with Denmark. The people Microsoft cut loose and away as it they didn’t see eye to eye to the larger need of Microsoft, those people will laugh out loud to the lacking needs of Microsoft minded people. In retrospect I saw this coming, but not in this form and not to the degree it will be hitting US-shored businesses. As such we get a few more settings, they all sound bad for Microsoft and it will enhance the needs of IBM and Oracle as they seek European sides to their business. And as we read in, we see the third player to this event. It is shown with “Denmark’s initiative is not without precedent. More than a decade ago, Germany, most notably the city of Munich, attempted to replace Microsoft products with Linux and LibreOffice.” And in that same setting, I remember that a France location had a similar idea, which is likely to have connections to Monaco and Luxembourg. As such Europe goes from 1 to 5 players and the impact on America will not be without consequences. And where TechRadar gives us, without sources “The Danish government, however, appears to be proceeding with greater caution. The rollout will be gradual, and the ministry has stated that it will temporarily revert to Microsoft tools if serious disruptions arise.” This part actually reads like a ‘divert or lose’ situation and Microsoft needs to take heed as this comes with a larger setting. You see, there is an upside for the Netherlands and out reflects back to the Wordperfect Corporation. America made Wordperfect a solution from Utah and it reflected that it was to be put down, but the Dutch had reasons for this solution. It was the first serious solution that perfectly converted syntax’s into Dutch and they had reasons to be proud as the ‘older’ reason is set to the proverbial English setting of 40,000 words and 800 exceptions to the Dutch setting of 800 words and 40,000 exceptions. You see, that was the larger conundrum and that small company in Utah figured the solutions out and that is the larger setting. Getting from Dutch to German, French and English is a breeze (as the depression goes) and after all these years. Did Microsoft protect that IP by paying for these fees year after year? I doubt it, Microsoft is at best a greedy user and it had cut off these fees after at least a decade setting them short by a decade at the very least and that is where these techies come in. They still have the bad feelings of getting cut short with the little retirement fees they were handed and they will massively support any anti-Microsoft feelings they see. So, when your birds come home to roost, they really will have a party.

I feel that TechRadar was ‘spicing’ it up with “Compatibility with Microsoft Office documents and user adaptation to a new interface may pose significant challenges.” I doubt it will be very hard. Open Office had things brewing in 2012 when they were the number one challenge and these files have not been upgraded much. The larger setting is in newer files that has solutions in place that old ones didn’t, but as far as I can tell aside from Excel files, most files can be ‘altered’ to another solution. Consider that Google Docs, Apple Pages and a few others have little to no problems to read word files. Google Sheets and Apple Numbers can for the most read Excel files and I will give Microsoft the benefit of the doubt that Excel is way advanced to those two solutions, but with the gathered intel from them and OpenOffice there are little snags to be expected. When you see that and the joke that PowerPoint has basically become that most of this setting is close to academic. There is a chance that SAP will have to ‘shed’ its neutrality by claiming it is important for its SAP Dashboard to stay with Excel as it is ‘important’ (I merely think that XCelcius was the go to solution with Excel ad that is basically what SAP Dashboard is) and they will shed that when they see the damage they will do to themselves. As I personally see it Google Sheets could step in there. So as Microsoft will be losing 50% of their solutions, the larger demise will start. 

Whilst Wiki is not really a dependable source as it has no real academic value, it does serve its purpose and (at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WordPerfect) we get to see “In November 2004, Novell filed an antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft for alleged anti-competitive behavior (such as tying Word to sales of Windows and withdrawal of support for APIs) that Novell claims led to loss of WordPerfect market share.That lawsuit, after several delays, was dismissed in July 2012. Novell filed an appeal from the judgment in November 2012, but the Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed. Novell sought review in the US Supreme Court, but in 2014 that court declined to hear the case, ending the legal action almost a decade after it had begun.” It isn’t what it states, it shows that the Novell vs Microsoft antitrust lawsuit gives Denmark the blanket it needs. I remember the massive setting the WP6 for Windows had and Microsoft used that to push its own solution (Word) and when we see this, we see that Microsoft has a government wheelbarrow (if that expression is still used) and as such Denmark has another handle to shed Microsoft (as have the other four). As I see it, in a decade the laws were meant to protect America solutions, and now we get the Canadian setting of Alludo. A Canadian firm no less and as Wordperfect is still under in France, another side opens up. And it doesn’t look good for Microsoft as the niches they created unite as one bubble against Microsoft and America. There is every chance that we will get to see new innovation but no longer in the hands of Microsoft and whilst this happens Microsoft loses market share after market share.

And as Windows support ends, the people considering shift will merely increase. As such after this I wonder if there is any case left for Azure. It makes you feel blue (and not in a good way) leaving larger gaps for players like Oracle and AWS to step in. Yes they are American, but they at least have had the good of any corporation in view of the needs of their solutions and that is where Denmark might make choices as long as these two have European clouds in mind. As fast as as I see it, they do and as Europe shift, the Arabian peninsula does to.

As this happens in my lifetime gives me a tear of joy. They say pride cometh before the fall and as I see it Microsoft will have a long way to fall down (the boom of impact might be the first boom that is globally felt and heard) as such there is a lot to be seen and soon as Satya Nadella gives ‘us’ the need for ‘friendly cooperation’ will be the first setting that is laughed away by some, but when the company is seen as ‘in danger’ it will be the first massive hit to any American operation and that will set a larger scene (what that scene is, I have no idea. As I see it, this has never happened before) and as Microsoft goes, Apple will shortly follow. It quite literally will be left without option.

So have a great day and if you are in Abu Dhabi, enjoy the Chicken Shawarma as it is lunch time there now. Have a fun day

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics

Gapping data

I did take notice of the story, but there were other considerations. So what is the issue with a two week old story? Actually there is nothing wrong with the time gap, it actually works out nicely. Yet before we go anywhere, lets take a look at ‘A data ‘black hole’: Europol ordered to delete vast store of personal data’ (at https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jan/10/a-data-black-hole-europol-ordered-to-delete-vast-store-of-personal-data) there we are given “The EU’s police agency, Europol, will be forced to delete much of a vast store of personal data that it has been found to have amassed unlawfully by the bloc’s data protection watchdog.” Here I have an issue with the stage of “amassed unlawfully”, then we get “The unprecedented finding from the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) targets what privacy experts are calling a “big data ark” containing billions of points of information. Sensitive data in the ark has been drawn from crime reports, hacked from encrypted phone services and sampled from asylum seekers never involved in any crime.” There we get “hacked from encrypted phone services and sampled from asylum seekers never involved in any crime” You see, the biggest problem in any data set are the data gaps. MISSING VALUE analyses will not get you anywhere and data cannot be analysed on data that is not there. As I see it, the commercial world amasses worlds of data and the EDPS (European Data Protection Supervisor) does next to nothing. We could start an argument that the EDPS is catering to organised crime, but that might be a stretch. I know my data has been collected by CIA, FBI, GCHQ, Mossad, DGSE and at least two other organisations. You think I care? I live my life and keep doing what I am legally allowed to do. The data merely reinforces this. So why is there such a rush to maim the mobility of Europol? I have nothing against laws, I believe that laws are important, but how stupid is it to set up the laws to hinder the law? When our data is all over Microsoft, Google, Amazon, GTCOM and whatever Russia has. The 4,000 TB that is to be deleted will serve organised crime and criminals, no one else. And more importantly it will not protect refugees, if anything, the data shows them to be innocent. Did no one make that leap? You see I oppose “Europol had worked with the EDPS “to find a balance between keeping the EU secure and its citizens safe while adhering to the highest standards of data protection”, the agency said.” I oppose it because data does not protect or endanger lives, it is the one wielding all that data does and whilst commercial enterprises are given a wide berth avoiding their ‘legal’ teams, the EDPS has to prove its existence by having a go at Interpol.

Yes, it is their job, but in what job do you hand opportunity to criminals, organised crime and terrorists? 

And the Guardian is appeasing the stage buy giving the simplest of examples, the example that makes you go ‘awww’. But the example “The political activist, whose only serious run-ins with police amount to breaking a window to gain entrance to a building and create a squat for homeless people, was removed from the Dutch watch-list by authorities in 2019. But a year prior to this removal he had moved to Berlin, which unknown to Van der Linde at the time prompted Dutch police to share his data with German counterparts and Europol. The activist discovered his entanglement with Europol only when he saw a partially declassified file at Amsterdam city hall.” So a criminal, guilty of breaking and entering, that is the simple truth. But we are not supposed to see that, are we? And when the next assault is not in London, but Amsterdam and the gapped data will show to have been an option to stop this, what will the EU give as a response? 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Media, Military, Politics, Science

Seeking security whilst growing anarchy

We all want national security; it does not matter whether you are American, Australian, British, Dutch, French, German or Swedish. National security is a matter that is not just set in laws; it is set in morality, in justice and in perception. Most of us are set in a stage where we are willing to give out many perks so that national security can be maintained. Many liberals grasp back at Benjamin Franklin who once said: “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety“, I would have agreed when he allegedly wrote it in 1755. In those days the biggest fear they had was England, the Dutch trade wars (the VOC) and apparently the French to the north. It was a very different age, in a setting where a naval was not done in minutes, but hours, battle settings took a while and there was clarity on who the enemy actually was (usually the one speaking your language and not firing on you, wearing the same uniform was also a nice indicator).

In this day and age it is not given, nowadays all the wolves have onesies looking like Shaun the sheep and often we cannot tell them apart. This is the setting where oversight, surveillance, data gathering and analyses can help, in equal setting there are a few players that still cannot get their algorithms correct and they are making the same mistake that I caught a few players on in the late 80’s.

There is however a new setting, a line that has been crossed and the Washington Post gives us that setting (at https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/there-have-to-be-limits-lawyers-for-guantanamo-inmates-challenge-lifetime-imprisonment-without-charge/2018/07/11/f3933faa-8533-11e8-9e80-403a221946a7_story.html). the title ‘‘There have to be limits’: Lawyers for Guantanamo inmates challenge lifetime imprisonment without charge‘ gives us that part and it is one that cannot be ignored, with ‘lifetime imprisonment without charge‘, we see not the first step, but an early setting that the law is changing into ‘Guilty until proven innocent‘ and I am not sure if that is merely a wrongful step, or a desire step for large corporations to give the setting a new life in other directions as well. There can be a setting where it is easier for the courts to work on that level. You see, when a corporation has failed their SLA’s, there will not be the documentation where they can prove it, yet when we see the application to ‘lifetime imprisonment without charge‘ the setting is very much inverted from what we find acceptable. We see the Post giving us “A handful of commission cases have inched along in pre-trial proceedings for years, many of them plagued by irregularities” and it is the ‘irregularities’ where we need to seek first, you see an abused system will rely on irregularities to remain in the shadows and active, whilst it almost never has bearing on National security and it will have even less a bearing on justice or lawful settings. The question becomes where it failed. There is a second side to the Post when we realise that the quote “Justice Department lawyer Ronald Wiltsie said authorities had a responsibility to detain suspects who could pose a future threat, even if it wasn’t clear they would actually take any action against the United States” is incomplete. The fact that we are faced with ‘it wasn’t clear they would actually take any intentional action against the United States‘. You see it comes with the setting that there is no proof that they had actually taken any action against the US, if so there would be a charge and that failure falls not merely on the FBI, it falls on the CIA, the NSA (data gathering agency) and most of all the investigator looking into the matter. We can illustrate this with the weirdest of examples.

In a spreadsheet we can use a random number, so we create 5 groups, each in one column, and each having 100 random observations. Now we will test for them stating that “IF(A2<0.2,1,0)“, I am setting the stage where 80% was guilty (so basically 20% was innocent). If the number is smaller then 0.2, they are presumed innocent. We do this for the 5 groups. Then we count the groups, in the initial test no one was innocent overall, but 3 were innocent on 3 counts and 20 were innocent on two counts. Now remember, this is merely 100 ‘persons’ tested on 5 elements. When we change the setting to “IF(A2<0.25,1,0)” (a joke on the premise that 3 out of 4 all people are guilty of something) we get a different setting. Now we see that two were innocent on 4 counts, yet 10 are innocent on 3 counts and 23 are innocent on 2 counts. Intelligence software works on facts not on random numbers, but the principle is partially the same, how many flags were raised by that one person, yet now not on 5 tests, but on dozens of tests, against people, places, actions and locations at specific times and as we consider that thousands are tested, in the random setting when the number of people are large enough we will get respectfully get a group that was innocent (less than 0.2 or 0.25) on all counts, that is the impact of random.

Yet on the flags raised in real live, we either have them guilty of something, which means that there can be a trial and a charge can be made, when you see the examples next to one another and we realise that the group of all people where no flags is raised did not occur (it will with a larger test group), we need to consider the flaws we are faced with and more importantly, the setting that we open ourselves to in legislation and in law when we allow for ‘lifetime imprisonment without charge‘. So in this setting, no matter how much we want actual national security Missy Ryan makes an interesting case. We get to see the larger issue when we look at Baher Azmy, legal director for the Center for Constitutional Rights, a group representing some of the detainees. With “Baher said the government had distorted a 2001 law authorizing U.S. military operations against al-Qaeda and affiliated forces by using it as a basis for indefinite imprisonment. He said insurgent wars, waged against small, clandestine and evolving bands of militants, could go on forever. But laws governing wars were devised with conflicts between states in mind, he said“, we are treated to the setting that we face in the upcoming decades. We are not waging was on nations, we are waging war on groups and tools. As Hezbollah is still the tool of Iran, the setting of a larger problem becomes apparent. In the first source (at https://www.terrorism-info.org.il/en/hezbollah-iran-handled-shiite-militias-integrated-syrian-army-campaign-take-control-south-syria/) we see “Shi’ite forces, handled by Iran, are being integrated into the campaign currently waged by the Syrian army in south Syria. There are at least two Iraqi-Shi’ite forces (the Dhu al-Fiqar Brigade and the Abu F–al-Abbas Brigade). There are also Afghan Shi’ite fighters in the Fatemiyoun Brigade. In addition, it was reported that Hezbollah operatives also participate in the fighting, including operatives from its elite al-Radwan unit, who were sent from Lebanon“, yet when we see “According to ITIC information, Hezbollah and the Shi’ite militias (some or all) have been integrated into the various Syrian army units and do not operate as independent forces. Pictures show Shi’ite militiamen wearing Syrian army uniforms, and it is difficult to distinguish them from Syrian soldiers“, we get the danger with ‘Pictures show Shi’ite militiamen wearing Syrian army uniforms‘. So now we get the setting of ‘who is exactly waging war on who’, or is that whom?

Not being able to identify the setting gives rise that Baher Azmy has a larger issue to deal with, because any denial from the Syrian army that these people were army units, and they get identified as militia who dressed ‘wrongly’, sets the stage that the defence ‘laws governing wars were devised with conflicts between states in mind‘ can no longer be upheld and that escalates the need for a much larger Guantanamo and indeed it continues and even fortifies the setting of ‘guilty until proven innocent‘.

the second source is a week old and gives us ““Hezbollah is a fundamental participant in planning and directing this battle,” a commander in the regional alliance that backs Damascus told Reuters. “Everyone knows this – the Israeli enemy, friends, and even the Russians.”“, it is given to us by Reuters (at https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-iran/hezbollah-role-in-syrian-south-exposes-limits-of-us-policy-idUSKBN1JV19U), so as the enemy changes its onesie (yup that was funny) we see a whole league of Shaun the sheep and we have no idea how to deal with them in life (the other alternative is solved through hiring people with the actual ability to aim).

Now change that setting away from the current ‘debacles’ in Yemen and Syria and consider the impact when we look at the Indian view of Pakistan (at http://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-terrorism-is-pak-s-business-2627746), it is not a hollow part, and there have been accusations from India and Afghanistan for the longest of times. In this setting we are given the quote: “India and Pakistan are not caught in some existential Punjabiyat love-hate relationship. Pakistan is a state sponsor of terrorism. No other nation has used terror so ruthlessly as an instrument of state policy as Pakistan has done for decades — principally against India but also against Afghanistan” is only the beginning. There are other headlines, even as they should be seen as no more than to illustrate that the issue exist, we cannot tell to what extent. So when we consider “The Islamic State’s flag emerges in Pakistan’s capital. How serious is the threat?” Is there a threat or is it merely a freedom of expression? So when we see the second headline ‘The terrorist group is increasingly present in Pakistan’s southern province‘, we are confronted with how to proceed, yet Reuters gives us 3 months ago “Islamic State claims attack on Christian family in Pakistan“, we see that the game changes. If state sponsored terrorism is the new ‘Letter of marque and reprisal‘, how can we proceed? Is there an actual option other than guilty until proven innocent?

What is clear is that the data crunchers will have their hands full because none of these algorithms and data gathering systems are ready for this leap. And it is not a small setting as Pakistan is a nuclear power who for the most is happy to push the button on India if need be, so the game is not merely changing, the players (Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic State et al) are aware that hiding under the roof of any government gives them options and they accept being the tool for those governments, yet the systems and our mandates are less equipped to act. Yemen has so far been an excellent example on how to not act and it will escalate beyond this. Now consider that I do agree that ‘lifetime imprisonment without charge‘ is wrong, but what options do we have? Until 2016 I believe that the data and the evidence was the weak link. Now we are in a situation where we need to wage war on three fronts, an overt one, a covert one, and a data intelligence war and we need to find a way to intertwine them and use them to find the right checks and balances. We need to evolve what we can do so that we can determine how to do things correctly, or perhaps better stated efficiently to the right opponent.

You might think that this is ludicrous, yet have you considered the actions in Yemen? They were firing missiles into Saudi Arabia, on civilian targets, yet the only thing we see is messages like ‘Yemeni security officials claimed that cluster bombs were dropped in a civilian area of the Western suburbs of the Yemeni capital Sanaa‘, whilst we see ‘after Houthi rebels fired a missile at Riyadh‘ any justification reduced to an 8 word response. The media at large does not give us: ‘Houthi rebels fired a missile on Riyadh, the Saudi Capital with over 5 million people, the fired missile could have caused the death of hundreds of people if struck correctly, Saudi Arabia reacted in the attack against its citizens‘, we do not get that do we? Yet that is the game that is the danger some face. In light of the missiles getting fired under the noses of Yemeni security officials, they need to realise that not stopping the missiles does have repercussions and innocent people will always be caught in the middle.

The change of conflict is large and it will be growing over the next decade. I am on the side of Missy Ryan in this, lifetime imprisonment without charge must be challenged and everyone needs to know about the setting we have here, but when it comes to the defence of that setting, I wonder if we have any actual option to oppose it, those who are send to that place are willing to (allegedly) support people who hide in other uniforms knowingly firing methods of termination on civilians merely because they can and because it makes them continue the fight that they believe is just for much longer. It is a dangerous setting that strips the veneer of civilisation in nearly all nations, look at France and Germany, they went through this several times. We need to set a different stage and we need to do this before we set a legal lawful setting of targeted killing and the wrong people are shot, because that will be the point of no return for all of us.

You see ‘Guilty until proven innocent‘ (forced or not) is merely a first step, when that setting is entered in stone we get the second danger, when cyber-attacks removes the option to prove innocence, what do you think happens next? It is what I personally believe to be the setting stage for chaos leading to anarchy and there the game changes again, because most governments have cut on so many parts in infrastructure that most cannot overcome anarchy for a much longer time forcing the hands of many governments, especially in Europe and I feel certain that some of the players behind the screens realise that too and they might just be banking on it.

 

1 Comment

Filed under IT, Media, Military, Politics, Science