Tag Archives: Jack Dorsey

The anger within

We all have it, something sets us off. It is not always fair and just, but to some extent, the buttons pushed are getting to us all, and I am no different. It all started (again) this morning with 

Here we see a retweeted Tweet. We get to see dozens a day and we cannot verify the truth on most of them, people with hatred of Elon Musk whilst no one is asking that procrastinating wanker (Jack Dorsey) to properly explain himself. If Musk has a case to fire thousands, then the previous custodians fucked up, they screwed it all up royally and it is all about floating the value of the company, but the media (with less credibility than a crack pusher) refused to set the stage of asking serious questions and it is the bulk of all media, the little who asked seemingly critical questions asked too little of them and they never followed up on them or reported on the simple fact that Jack Dorsey did not elaborate. His feigned apology was all we got and the media helped him massively. We still have no clear stage of the bots, a clear stage of fake accounts and hen this comes to light it will be too late, Dorsey took the billions and ran, with massive help from the media. Media is now slapping Elon Musk every chance he gets and he is waiting time on answering whilst setting the stage for a trimmed and optionally more profitable Twitter. This sinking ship came with a $45,000,000,000 cost. Did you think that it was a hand off to get Dorsey to buy a more luxurious coffin for himself? 

Then we get the Financial Times with the claim that Twitter use went up. OK, fair and also a lot seemingly (what I saw) based on people spouting negativity regarding Elon Musk and no one asking clear questions on the changes that came AFTER Dorsey left. Some things do not add up. Several accounts losing hundreds and some claim to have lost thousands. Why would changing the guards have such a setting? Yes, a few hundred might have bailed to an alternative, but when the alternative does not deliver, they will come back. Their ego’s will make them come back and then we will see the excuses of ‘Lets give him a chance’ all whilst that should have been the starting position. I get that some might create a Mastodon (or was that a Megaladon, sorry Jason Statham) account. Makes perfect sense, especially if that person is an influencer, they will go where the masses are, but the right influencer would have a Mastodon already. The stage of one person having a dozen accounts to butter the conversation are in a stage that they do not know where their ‘powers’ are going. That makes sense too, but I would need clear data to identify that part. I do know someone who has that but he is too busy looking after other things. 

I do not get the stupidity of the attacks on Elon Musk, even the clearly presented lies and misrepresentation. It goes nowhere, in the end we merely cut ourselves. It is clear that Twitter needs time to get itself on  a new path and the media seems very driven to not let this happen. Especially when you consider how much leeway they gave Jack Dorsey, months of reporting constitutes that evidence. You merely need to Google search ‘Twitter’ and see how much critical questions were asked of Jack Dorsey and how much non-accusation based questions were asked of Elon Musk, the numbers should scare you and most people  with their attack on Elon Musk are part of that trend. I? Well I do not know what will happen, so I will await until the dust settles and see what happens next. I will fall several steps as I see no need to buy a blue checkmark and more important will be reduced in the seek algorithm. I will not care, I will see the people I follow and I should see their tweets. Only if that fails will I consider moving. We need to take care who we follow with their loud mouths and their needs for attention with failing evidence. Yes there are parody accounts, but we either follow them or we might not care. The anger within is fuelled by the loud making statements that evidence does not support and why is that? It is their ego, or their need for attention as they try to become influencers. There is of course the singular person seeking the limelight for self, but they are seemingly a huge minority. Happy to see them go into the dusk of yesterday. Oh and that statement of government making statements regarding Twitter. I think we should seek these people and their links to Jack Dorsey. Because the loudness of that equation does not make sense, it only makes sense when we consider who they cater to, especially in the beginning of a new equation, they never did that in the age of smoking or anything else, only two hours past the 11th hour did we see the government react to smoking dangers. They had filled their pockets s much as they could and that is a dangerous stage, I get that. But to filter Elon Musk in hour 1 seems adversarial actions that seemingly have no foundation, especially as they never bothered asking Jack Dorsey several serious questions, but that is merely my speculative view on the matter. 

Advertisement

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media

MHW anyone?

Yes, it seems puzzling, but it is not. I have seen in the last 48 hours more than anyones share of hatred, the Musk Hatred Wave and I absolutely have had enough of this collaborated pile of bullshit. It is time to set the record straight. The first guilty party is the Media, these cocksucking stakeholder appeasing bunch of wannabe journo’s. Almost no one is asking serious questions towards Jack Dorsey and the hidden accounts of fake followers. Can someone please nail this joker to a bloody cross please? It is getting close to Christmas, so that solves one part. The Guardian goes on (t https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/nov/05/twitter-elon-musk-jack-dorsey-apology) by catering to all this with “I own the responsibility for why everyone is in this situation – I grew the company too quickly” as I personally see it when Elon Musk is forced to deal with “apologise for the state of the site, which has laid off thousands of workers” when the new person has to lay off thousands of people, you weren’t growing the company to quickly, you were orchestrating a stage and still the media is not asking the questions they should have asked for months. So when we get to see “At least one class-action lawsuit has been filed against Twitter on behalf of former employees who say they were not given adequate notice of their termination.” I need to wonder if this is actually the case, Elon Musk stated on Titter that these people were given TWICE the redundancy that a person is eligible for. I cannot state if that was indeed true, but the media gives us “Elon Musk has a history of violating California’s labor law” loading the stage against Elon Musk yet again. And true, a little later we see “Musk has defended the layoffs, tweeting that fired employees are receiving three months of severance as the company reportedly loses over $4m a day.” Another clear stage that gives us that someone needs to ask Jack Dorsey serious questions, but he is off with billions, so he will not care about any of this. It merely shows how useless the media has become. 

Then we see more and more hatred on Twitter with quotes like Justice giving us that Free Speech should not cost $8 month. 

My answer would be:

No Moron he is not charging $8 for free speech, he is planning to charge the blue checkmark. The sign that you are a real account. A sort of elite status that too many people enjoyed for the longest of times. The new owner states that this elite status comes at a price and most of them will do the math $96 a year or lose the mark. Plenty of those can hand that invoice as an expense to their TAX LAWYER.” 

Then we get loads of people stating they lost hundreds or thousands of followers. I am merely adding one example but there are legions out there. 

The question becomes were they really followers or are certain bots vacating the space in fear of exposure? In one week Musk cannot push for such larger changes to a working system with all these people losing their jobs. We could argue that some Twitter employees had scripts that fattened the accounts of their idols. I am not stating this happened, I am wondering if this could have been the case. And yes there are plenty of people whose hatred made them leave Twitter, that is their choice, but those followers stopped being followers too. There are many options, but we need data to prove or disprove some of these assumptions (read: presumptions).

The largest issue is the mass firing. The issues is not whether this is happening, but if proper procession is used. That is a case for California labour laws, I know too little about these, but considering the Jack Dorsey ‘apology’, I am willing to speculate that everything was done to give Elon Musk a stacked hand against him and with the media being as biased as it seems to be, when it comes to discrimination and a few other elements the media is every bit as guilty here. That is how I see it. When you get over the feigned anger, what are your thoughts? 

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Law, Media, Politics

No one wonders?

It all starts with a BBC article (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-63207771) where we are given ‘Chinese technology poses major risk – GCHQ Chief’, there are two settings here. The first one was the BS approach by the Yanks (that place between the Pacific and the Atlantic river, South of Canada) and the UK issues. The Americans basically called Huawei (China) evil and refused to hand over any evidence. The UK stated that no foreign nation should be in charge to a major infrastructure. The UK is setting the centre stage to policy and that is fair and decent. In the Netherlands that same policy was used by founders Rob Romein and Franz Hetzenauer to create Tulip computers and they got rich real quick. You say Potato, I say Tomato. But policy is a real issue and that is fair in any government. So today I get to see “China has deliberately and patiently set out to gain “strategic advantage by shaping the world’s technology ecosystem”, the head of the intelligence agency told an audience at the Royal United Service Institute for its annual security lecture. Sir Jeremy argued the Chinese Communist Party was aiming to manipulate the technology that underpins people’s lives to embed its influence at home and abroad and provide opportunities for surveillance”, OK that is a decent accusation and it will not be easy to prove that, or basically it will be a stretch to prove it. We then get “China’s development of the BeiDou satellite system – a rival to the established GPS network which he said had been built into exports to more than 120 countries. He claimed it could be used to track individuals or combined with plans to knock out other countries’ satellites in the event of a conflict”, which is one approach, but could the Chinese government not claim that GPS could do exactly the same thing? In addition we get “the intelligence chief said he would not stop children using TikTok – which is owned by Chinese firm ByteDance – although he said young people should be more aware of their personal data and how it could be shared”, OK fair point and awareness of personal data is a good thing, but doesn’t Facebook (and Meta) do he same things? I have seen advertisements on Facebook that should never have appeared, as such too many players are doing exactly the same thing, but for us China is red and evil, would they not claim the same thing regarding Facebook and YouTube? We are then given “He said the UK should continue to welcome students from China but “be really clear on the areas of technology where we will require additional safeguards”. Areas like artificial intelligence and quantum computing were particularly important, he told the audience”, which is a fair point. Although it is not out of the question that this should be a marker between commonwealth countries and any other country. In that regard places like Canada, Australia and New Zealand have to agree on similar settings. In this Sir Jeremy Fleming (a more dashing lookalike of Michael Andrew Gove) has a few issues on the table that make sense and although we wonder why the Americans are so easily accepted, they issues all make sense. It reflected for me how I am happy that I offered my IP to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and not to China, although the new partnership between China (Tencent Technologies) and Microsoft is not making any waves at all, funny ain’t it? I wonder if we are hitting a critical point of nationalism at this point, and where should the inventors sit? The fact that Google and Amazon are decently clueless on where I found the grounds of 50 million subscriptions will also hit Facebook at some point and I accidentally stumbled on this, the invention had a different foundation and direction, but as I aw where it could take me, I left it to these two titans to slug it out and Google dropping the Google Stadia implies that they are losing more than they reckoned on and that leaves Amazon (who is seemingly still in the dark), so now my hopes are that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia accepts my offer. But the underlying stage also exists. I still have my 5G hardware, a stage I saw two years ago and no one else is seeing this, they are all hoping that Facebook makes good on their Meta and they are all in some wait state that it comes for them, I designed my hardware with the view on Neom, as well as the changing stage of marketing, a stage that ill be very different from 2024 onwards (OK, it might be 2025). But those in a “wait-state” will lose out if they cannot adjust their course and I will (extremely hopefully) retire with a nicely filled bank account to sing out my retirement with good food and seeing nice places, I worked 40 years, so I feel entitled to my decently whistling wish. Yet between the lines there are battlefronts. The issue for the Commonwealth to find the right allies, to align with the proper parties and be decently neutral against the others. Yes, we all oppose Russia in the Ukraine stage and that is fine, but do not for one second believe that America is our ally, our friend. Their friendship changes election after election and in the end they are merely their own ally, so when America implodes, and it will, we should be aware and we should be willing to continue with true allies, one that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia could be, if we could for one minute stop listening to stakeholders, whose alliance is their wallets and their wallets alone. I tried to warn people for 3-5 years that stakeholders are corporate tools that releases the media as their goals see fit, I showed years of data in that direction and soon there will be no choice, if they get their wish, they fill their wallets, they say ‘Oops!’ And they walk away, and where we will we all be at that point? The larger issue is not why we were unaware, but where the media was when the elements were in view. The missing Iran reports regarding Yemen, the list of Pi Phone articles that are only now showing up, the serious questions that the media should have lobbed at Jack Dorsey and Twitter over the last few months and the list goes on, filtered information is not news, it is news founded on discrimination and that is the stage we face, but what else are we not given? Who knew on the partnerships between Chinese Tencent and Microsoft? Who asked the serious questions? I will let you seek and search that part yourself. 

So many question and no one wonders how a simple guy like me has the inside track on 50 million optional customers, you think Google would have dropped their Stadia if they could gain 50,000,000 optional customers? Figure it out and yes, some will consider the main point that I might be spreading that stuff that grows the grass in Texas, but I asked myself questions and also doubted myself. Stakeholders will not do that, they will merely proclaim that the other side does not exist (or is irrelevant). 

It is time for you to wonder what else they are missing and that is aimed at my 5G IP. A side of 5G none of them have. 

Enjoy the day, you should, preferably before the Russian decide to make all the Ukrainians glow in the dark.

 

Leave a comment

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

Weasels in the limelight

Yes, this is about some weasels, others call them members of media. As such, I am only handing you the Arab News link, the western media DOES NOT DESERVE any consideration at present. The article (at https://www.arabnews.com/node/2158496/media) giving us ‘Disney found ‘substantial portion’ of Twitter users fake in 2016: former CEO’ is the larger setting. So as I have given you all my point of view in several articles in the past months, even accusing the media to be nothing more than creators of click bitches. We now get the fact that the evidence that Elon Musk was right all along in this article (and several in Western Media). They are now at the end of what they can exploit, so NOW we get the real deal? The fact that the Disney setting was that a situation existed since 2016 gives us the true setting of western media. For a large extent they have less credibility than a crack whore high on cocaine. Filtered information that meets with the approval of their stakeholders. That is what we have been exposed to. So now as we get to see “Iger did not specify what he meant by “substantial.” Twitter has consistently reported that fewer than 5 percent of its “monetizable” daily users are bot or spam accounts. Iger’s comments come amid a legal battle between billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk and Twitter over Musk’s deal to buy the social media company for $44 billion. Musk, who is trying to walk away from the deal, has claimed that Twitter has misrepresented the prevalence of spam or bot accounts on the platform.” And the media was aware since 2016 and now when we look back to the articles in western media, we see no mention of the Disney deal whatsoever, the media is THAT corrupt towards digital dollars and stakeholders. And you wonder why I do not trust the media? Well, this is about to get a lot more interesting over the next few weeks when I give notice of a much larger setting. The stage we see now is one where the media is sucking up to whomever they can to not be disregarded as obsolete. They did this to themselves and I have no pity or mercy for them.

And now as we see “In his memoir, “The Ride of a Lifetime,” Iger wrote that he had second thoughts about a deal with Twitter because of the “nastiness” of the discourse on Twitter that he feared would become a distraction.” So the media (and their book sections) and many other parts have had the information for years and we got to see nothing of it, now it does not matter. I had my evidence, Trollrensics had evidence and Elon Musk had evidence. The media is now obsolete, a voice for stakeholders. They no longer deserve their 0% tax group as they are mere digital dollar marketeers. But the politicians are unwilling to hold the media to any level of accountability. 

As I see it, I hope that Elon Musk gets whatever he wants and should he be forced to buy Twitter, it should be no more than a maximum of 6 cents to the dollar. As such Jack Dorsey ends up with a 2.7 billion dollar payday and that is overvaluing Twitter by a lot. And after that, when the media is thrown OFF Twitter, I wonder how long they can hold on. It would irritate me that Elon Musk might lose 2.7 billion, but I reckon he could afford that and more important, when Twitter goes the way of the Dodo (just like the media) I get to introduce a new part of social media to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, just like the initial part I offered to the Consulate General of Saudi Arabia in Sydney this week. If that goes right a new market will open and now the media will have no say over the matter, they are as obsolete as possible and not welcome at what comes next. They clearly cannot police themselves, that much is shown all over the field. Even if I only get 3%, that over $17,000,000,000 is a lot more than I ever made before. The game is set, the orchestra engaged and now we see if the media (as well as their political and stakeholder friends) can dance. Out there in the limelight. Like weasels trying to hide away from the light beams, not realising that the grass is flat, the lights are high and every bit of grass is exposed. We all get to see the weasels jump and run in every direction hoping to find shade to vanish in, but not this time. This time they really went to far (as I personally see it).

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics

Famous last words

The title is not a conundrum. I am listening to all the albums of Supertramp, Famous last words is one of their albums. I cannot say if the album pushed for the events coming, or the events that I am planning to take gave me the idea to listen to all the Supertramp albums. You tell me. But over the next month I will do something I never expected to do and as such I will not tell you this now. It would be like the butterfingered man telling the crowd ‘Watch this’ and there he drops the mine that he was going to use to give a presentation. The results were ugly to begin with and the man did not survive it. I have nothing this weird planned, but it could lead to social suicide. You see the actor John Barrowman (most likely) and his lack of understanding nuance (as well as basic knowledge of Game of Thrones)  gave me the idea, or at least the insight that at times being intelligent will not matter, people will think what they think no matter hoe the clear facts are pressed into their faces. We can argue that Jack Dorsey and his Twitter are the second part in this act. But about that more later (decently later). 

It all came to blows (within my mind) when I was contemplating ‘famous last words’, the album, not the act. One of their songs is C’est Le Bon, a song I loved for the longest times. In the song you get:

I’m watching the movie go down
Around, about me
I’m watching the merry-go-round
Go down about me. 

You see, when is enough enough? This is a question with a larger stage attached to it. This thought came to me as I was considering the sense of a GoPro Hero 11. Yes it will have some additions, new modes and new resolutions, but it is so stepwise. It matters even more as the GoPro Hero 10 is as close as perfect as anything any competitor could hope to offer. A merry-go-round of products to appease a consumer that does not know what it wants. To appease a consumer that uses 10% of what this product offers (at best) and whilst they all want to make the video’s like GoPro releases with themselves in the starring role. The truth of the matter is that these films are made and enhanced by people with close to a decade of film school experience. It feels like it is it own version of ‘Watch this’ without any dread, a presentation hammered and perfected over 4-7 years with all the previous models in the mind-cast of the consumers. Now, let be clear GoPro did nothing wrong, they are not deceiving you and they are not making you shell out your money, you are doing that yourself. Why go for the new model when the current one is so close to perfect? Why get another version of more modes and more resolutions? The current model gives you 5.3K at 60fps and 4K up to 120fps for slow-motion. A rumoured ‘improvement’ is 480fps 1080p slo-mo capture. And that is also the problem, we still see all these rumours of a camera that is released this month, it would be shipping at present, so the rumours are optionally correct, but why is the whole range of new stuff not out in the open at present? The edge of seat marketing is over, or so I believe it is and this implies that the Hero 11 has little new to offer, and that is OK. The Hero 10 is as close to perfect as a camera this size could ever hope to be. So, why not release the Hero 11 in 2023? It is a fair enough question. Only the Hero fetish people want something like this now. I would support it to some degree if the additions were released by GoPro ahead of schedule, is it? 

The consumer merry-go-round is a dangerous toy to rely on, consumers are fickle and the stronger anti Hero YouTubers could hammer down sales quickly enough and they reach hundreds of thousands close to free of charge. As such the ‘Watch this’ marketing approach should be dead, but it is not, and it is not for all the wrong reasons. 

As I personally see it there are two waves. The “Watch This” marketing and its anti group doing the opposite and the second team has a field day when the first team does not have enough innovations to show and at present GoPro has close to none. I do not mean this negatively, over the last few years GoPro showed so much more and such a large bundle of innovative action filming that it boggles the mind, it really does. And now? Now we see all these elements melt together and in the end the consumer loses, or it merely loses its mind. I am not sure which of the two is worse.

So whilst GoPro is about to release a new flavour of the same, I am about to launch a stage that has never been done before, a stage that hopefully changes everything, but to be honest I have no idea how it plays out, but I do know that plenty of wannabe’s and power-players will not like what I am about to do. But it has become essential to change the game-play so that some are flushed into the limelight. It to some degree reflects Know who you are another song from that very same album. There we hear:

Know who you are…
There’s a world deep inside you,
Trust if you can…
There’s a friend the to guide you.

I reckon I will learn who my friends are soon enough, I know the two I have, I have known that for decades, it is the wannabe’s who will make an interesting jump, they are about to put into the limelight and they will not be able to answer any critical questions. What a lovely day that day will be.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Politics, Science

Two issues on an increasing scale

That is what I see, a scale that increases in size, all whilst the credibility of the media decreases. This is best seen with the issues regarding Musk v Twitter. It was early as July 25th when I wrote ‘Let’s dance’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2022/07/25/lets-dance/) where I gave the reader “That is important information, especially if well over 60,000,000 accounts were deleted in 2022. I believe that this shift is large enough for Elon Musk to start the case, when he gets the data from places like Trollrensics he might have enough to bust the Twitter deal. The setting is and always was that Twitter claims that at most 5% of the accounts are fake, I believe it too be a lot higher. I never speculated the numbers that Trollrensics have, but it is my speculation versus THEIR data, as such they win.” Later I gave the readers more and the media was all up in arms on poor poor Twitter against the fiend Musk. Now that we start seeing articles like ‘Twitter whistleblower raises security concerns’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-62633191) we start seeing certain people parade in place, all whilst we are still given quotes like “Peiter Zatko also claimed that Twitter underestimated how many fake and spam accounts are on its platform. The accusations could affect a legal battle between Twitter and billionaire Elon Musk, who is trying to cancel his $44bn (£37bn) deal to buy the company. Twitter says Mr Zatko’s allegations are inaccurate and inconsistent.” And this is not merely him, I myself as well as players like Trollrensics have made similar conclusions. Yes, mine were more speculative in nature, but the media had a clear path FOR MONTHS to contest it with their own research and guess what, no one wants to touch it. Why not? Now that we are given “In Mr Zatko’s damning revelations, first revealed by CNN and The Washington Post, he accused Twitter of failing to maintain stringent security practices and “lying about bots to Elon Musk”.” As well as “He filed his complaint with the Securities and Exchange Commission in July. The BBC has seen a redacted copy of the complaint shared via CBS news. In it, Mr Zatko also criticised the way in which Twitter handled sensitive information and claimed that it has failed to accurately report some of these matters to US regulators.” That was in July, no wonder we are given “It says he was sacked in January for ineffective leadership and poor performance.” And consider that if he was sacked in January and his numbers hold up, his claims hold up. We end up with a situation where Twitter has been aware of its mismanagement of fake accounts for a very long time. As I see it, it nullifies the buy claim that Twitter has towards Elon Musk, should they proceed, they need to lower their price by well over 60%-78%. Not a stage Twitter wants to push for, no matter how that plays out, I reckon the value of Twitter will be found in Basement 5 soon enough and with that the fortune of people like Jack Dorsey. So as the Washington Post rears its head with “However in the view of The Washington Post, he “provides little hard evidence” to back up these assertions. Nevertheless, Elon Musk’s lawyers have jumped on the comments. His legal team are currently trying to get the Tesla boss out of the deal, by arguing that Twitter has no way of verifying how many of its 229 million daily active users were actually human.” It is funny, because with that columnist no one gives a fuck about they went all in with speculations. More important, the fact that I had come up with a number around 20% of fake accounts (which could be calculated with an abacus) and Trollrensics stating that the number of fake accounts is much closer to 50% (they have data), which gives a rather large rise to the Washington Post not doing its job and that is saying something. 

The BBC does give a more complete picture with Peiter Zatko who also held senior positions with Google and the US government’s research and development agency, DARPA. As such we need to see the failing of media all over the place as a larger failing and in this the BBC gives us a first stage where Elon Musk needs to be given s little more leeway when it comes to his point of view, something the media to the largest extent has been willing to avoid to every degree.

And in the next article we get issue two (about to publish that one)

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

Is it intentional ignorance?

I saw an article yesterday. It was ‘Doubts cast over Elon Musk’s Twitter bot claims’. The article (at https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-62571733) was seemingly eager to attack Elon Musk’s side, but the same media has not now or ever asked serious and critical questions on the Twitter side. But lets start here, those who read my articles know I have had a larger issue with Twitter for a long time. Don’t get me wrong, I like Twitter. I like it a lot more than Facebook. As such I have issues. If it isn’t with their new bully tactics of suggestion topics, without switching that nuisance off in the profile setting, then it would be with the attitude they take on fake accounts, as well as the delusional stage that it does not go beyond 5%. People I have been in contact with and THEY have data shows it to be well over 40%. I personally found 40% high, but they have data and they have data on Russian trolls and fake accounts pushing Russian ‘needs’ regarding the Ukrainian war to be in the thousands of trolls each of them using a massive amounts of click farm numbers. And it does not matter whether Twitter deactivates these accounts. The trolls have more and new methods of creating thousands more each minute. It shows in the first that the 5% Twitter claimed is bogus, more important it shows my initial thoughts that if it can be proven that it is well over double, we have a situation that Twitter has been overvaluing itself for a very long time. The data that places like Trollrensics has, shows this to have been the case for over 5 years, long before the Elon Musk events started. 

But back to the article. There we see “Botometer – an online tool that tracks spam and fake accounts – was used by Mr Musk in a countersuit against Twitter. Using the tool, Mr Musk’s team estimated that 33% of “visible accounts” on the social media platform were “false or spam accounts”.” OK, that is one side to go. I would personally advice Elon to take a step out of his circle and talk to Trollrensics. You see, they have been monitoring and recording events on the Ukrainian war (as well as Russian trolls) for a long time. Now consider that there should be some overlap. But take two circles (like below) we see the two solutions, the overlap is speculative on how much they overlap. 

They are different solutions for different options. As such the overlap cannot be 100%, in theory the second image could exist, but we can prove that, or better stated Elon Musk could prove this. You see, when the two lists of accounts are set together, Twitter has a problem, if image one is true, Twitter’s problem increases by well over 100%, it also blasts the 5% claim out of the water. 

If image 2 is true, Twitter has optionally a smaller issue, but Trollrensics has numbers stating over 40% of all accounts are fake, if so it will be a list supporting the case of Elon Musk, and well over 5%, Twitter will have a hard time opposing that much data.

And now we see in the article a strange event. With “However, Botometer creator and maintainer, Kaicheng Yang, said the figure “doesn’t mean anything”. Mr Yang questioned the methodology used by Mr Musk’s team, and told the BBC they had not approached him before using the tool. 

Mr Musk is currently in dispute with Twitter, after trying to pull out of a deal to purchase the company for $44bn (£36.6bn).” The readers will wonder what is going on, but no fear the BBC did its homework and we see that a little further below with “Botometer is a tool that uses several indicators, like when and how often an account tweets and the content of the posts, to create a bot “score” out of five. A score of zero indicates a Twitter account is unlikely to be a bot, and a five suggests that it is unlikely to be a human. However, researchers say the tool does not give a definitive answer as to whether or not an account is a bot. “In order to estimate the prevalence [of bots] you need to choose a threshold to cut the score,” says Mr Yang.” Now to me this makes sense, but there is a hidden trap. The numbers tend to be less reliable when a hybrid model exists. Let me try to make an image as below.

The hybrid system has three parts. The core (the foundation of that troll system) but it connects to real accounts. The accounts are real, tools like Qanon or whatever tool out there exists to gain coin and perhaps hoping that they are the false prophets that they once hope to become. Trolls and hackers give them a nice little tag and now the troll core has one real account that links to a whole range of people and click farms to like by the thousands and as this hybrid model can go more than one level deep and  consists of an unnamed amount of groups, Botometer and Twitter tools are (speculatively) in a mess, they now can no longer really decide on how real these groups are, and if the troll is intelligent and makes a slightly different message for each group, it can continue almost unabated. Still the Botometer is methodically sound to get the stupid accounts found and there are a whole range of them. Hundreds of thousands of limited click farm accounts, they should be found decently easily. And there I think is Elon Musk, he found the simple ones and he comes to 30%. The stage is real and the fact that is open to debate and moreover starts question the Twitter side of thinks is important. The article has more “Clayton Davis, a data scientist who worked on the project, says the system uses machine learning, and factors like tweet regularity and linguistic variability, as well as other telltale signs of robotic behaviour.” I agree with Clayton and there is also a larger issue. ‘Tweet regularity’ is real but debatable. You see it depends on interaction and time stations. A person has a shifting set. The person who looks at a tweet at 03:00 and retweets it because it is a friend, is different from the same person who is in the office at 11:00 and sees the same or a different tweet. There are more sides to that person, dynamic qualities and I wonder if a learning machine can learn (read: be taught) this. Not telling it cannot, I merely wonder and that makes it harder, than the time zones shift for the travelling person. All elements that can play a role. So when we get “In 2017, the group of academics behind the tool published a paper that estimated that between 9% and 15% of active Twitter accounts were bots.” Which is interesting for me as I considered the number to be around 20%, still that makes it 400% larger than Twitter’s claim, so Twitter does have a problem. And then the gem of the BBC article comes into play. With “Some bot experts claim Twitter has a vested interest in undercounting fake accounts. “Twitter has slightly conflicting priorities,” says Mr Davis. “On the one hand, they care about credibility. They want people to think that the engagements are real on Twitter. But they also care about having high user numbers.”

The vast majority of Twitter’s revenue comes from advertising, and the more daily active users it has, the more it can charge advertisers.” Or as I would state it, there is your Dorsey factor and that part shows both that Twitter is in deep trouble and also that Elon Musk was right all along. There is still a larger debate on how large that stage is, but if proof can be shown that the fake accounts exceed 9%-11% Elon Musk wins and Twitter gets to have a large problem. What I said all along, Twitter is bound to lose this and the media supporting Twitter for their own needs are likely to lose credibility by the day at that point.

A stage that was out in the open and has been for a few years. It was my view and the view of several I knew and now that we are proven correctly, I wonder under which rock the media will hide. The law sees intentional ignorance as a right, a legal station where we are allowed to keep ourselves ignorant, but should the media be allowed that very same thing? I will let you ponder that side of the equation, because it will come out in the open. In the mean time I will consider a few idea’s on Neom and the line bubble to the surface. Perhaps I should have a conversation with Saudi Arabia’s consul general in Sydney, Mashare Ben Naheet. If I am correct it might be worth a few million to the kingdom of Saudi Arabia and I could use the money (I need to pay my bar bill sooner then I would like). 

The problems of old age, they come into play at the least comfortable times.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Media, Science

Meme by Elon Musk

The guardian is giving us a part, other papers are giving us a part. Yet no one is treading on the side where they have to be, the media pussies on patrol. Trying to keep safe their digital dollars. And it is about to come to blows. You see the article ‘Elon Musk may have to complete $44bn Twitter takeover, legal experts say’ (at https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/jul/10/elon-musk-may-have-to-complete-44bn-twitter-takeover-legal-experts-say) gives merely part of the painting. Yes, legal experts state “Quinn said Musk’s information requests on spam accounts were not “reasonable” and would not be accepted by the court. “He can’t use unreasonable information requests to create a pretext to claim a violation,” he said.” But the setting is incomplete. Twitter has maintained that no more than 5% of the Twitter accounts were fake, I have data suggesting it is as high as 20%, another source (www.trollrensics.com) has data showing the number of fake accounts for trolls and misinformation to be as high as 50%, this implies that Twitter is trying to sell a bill of goods, but the bill is only 50% filled and that has been at the centre of this all along. So whilst Jack Dorsey and friends and now in a stage where the gig is up, they need to get as much out of it as possible, because the media will at some point ‘wake up’ and take a much deeper look. Consider hundred of media outlets and they have been avoiding this part all along. Politicians setting their premise, misinformation on covid, election misinformation, and the Ukraine war thousands to troll accounts working day and night to give a false premise of what is going on and in all this the media remained SILENT. 

Trollrensics has data spanning 8 years (at least) and that is merely the beginning. You see, on route to home I remembered that trolls and click-farms rely on greed. As such we see a different setting. First there is the ‘unmonitored source’ that gives us “Twitter doesn’t reveal IP addresses of its users. They use it internally and strictly restrict the public from this information. But there’s always a way. In this article, we’ll discuss how to find someone’s IP address on Twitter.” This implies that we need another path, but criminals and click-farms are lazy, they will reuse what they can. Every second they can tweet is another few cents in their wallet, as such more is better. This implies that if you create a database of the @TwitterAddress and you strip all the messages, you can look per message and see how it moves. This is not a simple solution, you need serious computing power for this. But as such, you get a message that is spread (in the near same instance) from different mobiles in the same location you optionally have a click farm point. Now if we get a multitude of misinformation from clusters of mobiles, we have found such a place. 

This is a mere setting to get to the numbers. You see, Russia and China have hundreds if not thousands of these click-farm locations. And now we have a serious number, when we move that action from nation to nation, we get well beyond my 20% and way past the 5% claim of Twitter. When that is obtained, we get what might be considered evidence towards what some would call the alleged fraudulent sale of Twitter to Elon Musk. Why Fraudulent? Well, Twitter maintained that they have no more than 5% fake accounts. These numbers would prove them wrong and with the previous part that they had IP addresses they had the information a lot longer than anyone would care to speculate on and as they speculatively lived by the rule that they look sexier with 330 million active users, than with 120 million active users. And one source gives us “Twitter has some 330 million monthly active users (MAU) based on its last reported data that leveraged this metric in the 1st quarter of 2019. As of 2020, Twitter’s monetizable daily active users (mDAU) stands at 166 million, which represents a 24% growth from 2019.” In the middle of Covid Twitter grew 24%? I am not saying it is not possible, after all Amazon pulled it off, but how many stores were active during coved? In addition to this, where did these funds come from? In all the presidents men we hear ‘Follow the money’, that equally applies to trolls and click-farms. They got paid, they paid for things, that money trail is equally important in discovering what was what. It is not fool proof, because others use similar paths for valid reasons, but that is one person, one business. Not a person or business with hundreds of phones. 

All this should have been seen and looked at by the media years ago, but it wasn’t interesting is it not? And as for the meme, see below. When you consider the elements of the meme, the silence of the media makes even less sense. Yet, I leave that to you to look into. 

Meme by @ElonMusk

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics, Science

Today in the price is right

Yes, that is at times the question. What is something valued at and what are the reasons and facts of this valuation. The Guardian (at https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/jul/08/elon-musk-buy-twitter-withdraw) gives us ‘Elon Musk withdraws $44bn bid to buy Twitter after weeks of high drama’ Yes, it was high end drama, and it was high end drama because the media doesn’t like Elon Musk and because they should have known better, but in their race for digital dollars, they really do not want all the facts to come out. Even as we are given “Mr Musk is terminating the merger agreement because Twitter is in material breach of multiple provisions of that agreement, appears to have made false and misleading representations upon which Mr Musk relied when entering into the merger agreement, and is likely to suffer a Company Material Adverse Effect” yes legalised porridge this is, but it is a setting of a truth, one that the media was clearly aware of. And we see the dice roll high when we are given “Musk and his lawyers accused Twitter of withholding information about the number of “spam” accounts on the platform. This week, the company revealed that it was suspending more than 1m spam accounts a day.” As such we need to take a much stronger look at “This week, the company revealed that it was suspending more than 1m spam accounts a day”, and this has been going on for a while. I saw some data that indicated that not 5%, but well over 20% was fake, a reliable source (which I discussed) earlier gives us (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2022/06/08/what-the-media-silences/) ‘What the media silences’, a setting that is closer to 50%, that is a really high number, but with the Ukrainian war, Covid and Chinese trolls the number of fake Twitter accounts is going through the roof. And this source has ACTUAL data, data that they collected over years. And when that is proven, even if the evidence shows that it is only 30% (speculative) it implies that either Twitter was incompetent as they see only 5% fake accounts, or they were intentionally fraudulent. I cannot tell which of the two it is but the media had a much larger sight on this FOR YEARS and they did nothing. Now they try to use it to flame for a little longer, but consider that the media was lying to you for years, knowingly keeping us in the dark, I reckon that Twitter might be safer in the hands of Elon Musk. And in this Jack Dorsey has a lot to explain, no matter how the cake knife falls. As I personally see it, he was either incapable of keeping Twitter safe, or he was intentionally grossly overpricing Twitter.  I am willing to let him explain what it is, I feel certain that Elon Musk is dying to hear that part of the equation as well. Either way, he wins, a setting that was never in question.

So when we see “Musk stood to take control of a social media network with more than 200 million users. An avid, but critical user of the platform, he had vowed to push through various reforms, including relaxing its content restrictions, ridding the platform of fake and automated accounts and shifting away from its advertising-based revenue model.” Is anyone wonder if this is including the fake accounts? You see, this would amount to a maximum of 100 million users and if we are to believe some facts, Nicky Minaj has 25,449,548 follower at present, this amounts to 25%, so I reckon that Elon Musk could buy that account for less then 10% of what Twitter is asking. That is one way of doing it, and consider that of all the users one in four is following Nicky Minaj, what is the actual value of Twitter? You merely have to look at it from another side. But that is merely my view on the matter.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Law, Media, Politics, Science

What’s the name, what’s the game?

I saw the news a few days ago, and for the most it does not matter to me, but there is an awful lot of hypocrisy going around and the media is (as I personally see it) as tainted as anything else. The stage is set to Elon Musk, or better stated is set against Elon Musk. Why? Don’t really know the man, but he seems the modern day Midas. Whatever he touches turns to gold. He made an upheaval in the battery market, the mobile market, the energy market. The man is (allegedly) an inventor like me, or he can see proper innovation just like Steve Jobs. How is this a bad thing? Consider the news that he was getting involved in social media. Why not? I do not know if it is a bad idea. But he has the dough to become part of it. Yet the Sydney Morning Herald gives us ‘Elon Musk launches $58 billion hostile takeover of Twitter’ (at https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/elon-musk-launches-hostile-takeover-of-twitter-20220414-p5admv.html) as such lets take a look at what constitutes a hostile takeover? The definition gives us “A hostile takeover occurs when an acquiring company attempts to take over a target company against the wishes of the target company’s management. An acquiring company can achieve a hostile takeover by going directly to the target company’s shareholders or fighting to replace its management” is this true? CBS gives us ‘Elon Musk offers to buy Twitter for $43 billion’, so who is giving us the truth and who is giving a stakeholder a blow job? You think this is rude? You ain’t seen nothing yet. We can argue until the sun goes down, but the setting of finance is clear. If a company is worth it, or could become worth it, you buy it. This has been the case in many occasions. Yet no one is saying that about Microsoft and Blizzard. There we get ‘Activision Blizzard/Microsoft Deal Discouraged by Letter Penned by SOC Investment Group’, how quaint.

So it was today when I saw (at https://www.reuters.com/technology/twitter-adopts-poison-pill-fight-musk-2022-04-15/) ‘Twitter adopts ‘poison pill’ as challenger to Musk emerges’, it is the Guardian version where we see “The method, known as a “poison pill” in the finance world, suggests Twitter will fight Musk to prevent a hostile takeover. It would go into effect if a shareholder were to acquire more than 15% of the company in a deal not approved by the board and expires 14 April 2023.”You see my issue is with the ‘hostile takeover’ part. The guardian gives us those goods with “Jack Dorsey, Twitter founder and former CEO, noted in a tweet on Friday that such surprise purchases are always a risk for the company. “As a public company, Twitter has always been ‘for sale’,” he said. “That’s the real issue.” Musk is already facing legal action for his Twitter purchases, with one investor suing the Tesla executive in a potential class action lawsuit for failing to disclose his buy-up of shares before the required deadline to do so. The lawsuit comes as Musk faces a number of investigations by the Securities and Exchange Commission for his investment activities, including insider trading allegations related to his own tweets.” So we see ‘insider trading’, we see ‘hostile takeover’ but we are given no real evidence of either. Merely the word ‘allegations’ that everyone is overlooking. 

The stage becomes even weirder as we consider the actions that Microsoft unleashed on the gaming industry and it is casually trivialised by too many media outlets. 

In all this the statement “he wanted to release its “extraordinary potential” to support free speech and democracy across the world.” Is trivialised by “Twitter’s board on Friday unanimously approved a plan that would allow existing shareholders to buy stocks at a substantial discount in order to dilute the holdings of new investors”, there is no real setting of who these board members are, the media seemingly forgot about that part. These members that include Bret Taylor (SalesForce), Parag Agrawal (CEO Twitter), Mimi Alemayehou (Mastercard), Egon Durban (Silver Lake), Martha Lane Fox (House of Lords), Dr. Fei-Fei Li (Stanford), Patrick Pichette (Google), David Rosenblatt and Robert Zoellick (AllianceBernstein Holding L.P.) there was a unanimous objection to the purchase by Elon Musk and no media outlet had anything from these members with the simple question ‘Why oppose?’. There might be a very valid reason, but I and all others were not informed, so what gives?

We can speculate on why it was done. Elon Musk sees that the US is going after the billionaires. As such he might be buying anything he can to drop the tax rift, and lets face it, he has been turning things to gold and Twitter is a golden idea. So whilst we see all kinds of objections on how analysts see (and say) things like “KeyBanc Capital analyst Justin Patterson downgraded the social media company in the wake of Elon Musk’s buyout proposal. Patterson cut his rating to sector weight, after being at overweight since January 2021, saying that the potential for the Musk bid to “go up in smoke” will turn investor focus on a more challenging macro environment that elevates downside risk to financial estimates.” I personally honestly do not know what will happen, but when a person buys a company, a person that has transformed several companies into powerhouses, I wonder what really is going on. It could be simple, it could be complex, yet the larger station is that people laughed at Tesla and now we see “As of April 2022 Tesla has a market cap of $1.018 Trillion. This makes Tesla the world’s 6th most valuable company by market cap according to our data.” So as I see it, the joke is on them. What was an idea is now 6th on the most valuable companies on the market and that is behind Apple, Microsoft, Aramco, Alphabet, and Amazon and as I gave voice to Microsoft, there is every chance that it will head of Microsoft in the next 3 years. And that is whilst no one has a clue where Meta will end, because they will become part of the top 7 soon enough (2024), and that too is out into the market. So I have questions and the media is not asking the board members of Twitter, or Elon Musk a clear set of questions. And all that before someone decides to ask KeyBanc Capital a few uncomfortable questions. So what is in the name Twitter, what is in the name Elon Musk and what is in the shares game being played now. No matter what is happening, I feel certain that the media will not properly inform us, that mush seems a personal given. Yet in all this we see the approximation of “to support free speech and democracy across the world”, it seems to me that Elon Musk is giving us options, options in mobile technology and energy technology. Who else has been giving us that? I see questions and no one asking them, it is weird, is it not?

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Gaming, Media, Politics