Tag Archives: Leslie Bibb

The jeopardy lingo

It seems fitting that I do see sort of Homage to Jeopardy, I was never a fan like a lot are, but Alex Trebek pretty much put his heart and soul into that and it seems fitting that we acknowledge that, if only for that one simple part. This article is largely based on the Al Jazeera article (at https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/11/17/report-us-military-buying-location-data-on-popular-muslim-apps)

So as we see “US military buys location data of popular Muslim apps: Report”, the question becomes ‘Who bought a lot of religious tainted data?’ Yes the military did. It was a setting that was always going to happen and there is every indication that this has been going in for quite a while. It is one of the flags that I saw coming over a year ago setting the stage that Saudi Arabia with its (at present) vastly superior 5G might want to offer apps and such from their locality. Even though it is not about the apps, but consider all US and EU data missing Arabic data, it is something to think about and I saw this scenario taking shape some time ago. 

Next we get “several used by Muslims that have been downloaded nearly 100 billion times” gets us to the question ‘Who at Motherboard was unable to count and weight their data properly?’, yes another point for the blogger, the numbers indicate that the apps in question had been downloaded by every person on the planet at least 12 Tims, in light of the fact that less than to thirds of the planet has an internet capable phone makes the setting a little dubious. 

And as it is time to see “Monday found the US Special Operations Command was procuring location data from several companies”, we get to ‘What did US politicians allow to happen in light of personal privacy?’ Which is a loaded question by itself. You see there is every indication that a lot of people have all kinds of apps, there is another indication that those in the extreme know (those who know extreme actions taking place) have a digital footprint that is close to zero, as such I actually wonder how interesting the data is, as I downloaded the Quran on Android, they might have my details, well good luck to the and if they get personal details on Olivia Wilde, Laura Vandervoort, Leslie Bibb, Natasha McElhone or Olivia Munn, would US Special command please forward that to my personal phone? I gratefully thank you in advance for that. 

As such when we get to “the Motherboard investigation noted some companies obtain app location data when advertisers pay to insert their ads into peoples’ browsing sessions” we almost get to the end of round one where we wonder how foreign intelligence organisations react to the US military acquiring the location at a of its citizens. It is a slippery slope, you see if advertisers can buy it, why not the US military? Isn’t that a fair question? Stating that Halal Malik, on 34th street, best Islamic butcher in New York can get data, yet the US military can not is basically discrimination, as such there is a much larger station there and the question becomes, what additional data was given to the US Military that Malik was unable to get, which boils down to another level of discrimination. So when we get to Timmy the sea-rat Hawkins (allegedly his nickname) giving us “We strictly adhere to established procedures and policies for protecting the privacy, civil liberties, constitutional and legal rights of American citizens”, I reckon that it has the emphasis on ‘legal rights of American citizens’, anyone not in that group might not have any rights. So at that point we get to “it tracks 25 million devices inside the United States every month and 40 million elsewhere – including in the European Union, Latin America, and the Asia-Pacific region” we get to ‘What rights do the 40 million tracked mobile devices have?’, yup they allegedly have none, but that is a speculation from my side, in addition how many players outside of Al Jazeera have this and how much visibility will this part not get, especially in Europe, UK, Australia, New Zealand and Canada. I reckon France (for obvious reasons) will go along with whatever the politicians connected to this will say to them. 

You see there is an almost dangerous setting when we see “US Senator Ron Wyden told Motherboard that X-Mode also admitted selling data it collected to other “US military customers”” I am setting the emphasis on ‘almost’, from my point of view if you have no issues with commercial corporations digging on your needs, then why object to governments doing the same thing? As I personally see it, there is a lot more to question when healthcare insurers get your data than the government does. It seems almost fair, they all get access, and this is what I stated again and again is the price of free apps and free social media, so now that the cat is out of the bag (he is just to the right of your peripheral vision) we will see all these people scream, shout and cry yet I wonder why and what do you have to hide? It pretty much boils down to something (I believe it was Stephen Fry) that was said “If you do not want your nude pictures on the internet, do not pose naked”, the man has a point and it is a point we can adapt or use in emphasis as the actor Chris Evans gave joy to a billion woman, whilst setting his staff to the notion to go vote. Yes that was an accidental unintended pun. 

So even if we consider both ends of the spectrum and the setting where we keep all our data sacred and separate, we will soon find that it is much to late for that. Apart from the things I reported recently giving some people 5 versions of the customer data, and part from these mishaps, there is a whole station of data that is on back-ups, legacy systems and there is close to no stage of any kind of legal rights. We saw the Guardian give us close to a year ago ‘NHS data is a goldmine. It must be saved from big tech’, if you really think that big tech is the larger danger you are quite out of your mind. Even now we see the emotional response to Islamic data on Al Jazeera, so how about your health data available for health instances to tweak your annual premium, or them adjusting the questionnaire? Did you consider the simple question ‘How often do you smoke?’, whilst most people automatically answer ‘Don’t smoke’, yet social media has you puffing something and the health records give them certain other parameters, so when they ask you for verification purposes, you unwillingly set yourself up for a massive price hike, or a stage where you might be discontinued as a customer when you actually need help, because they will claim you lied. The setting eludes a lot of people but it is an important stage, because there are close to a dozen other settings the will give you health issues when you turn 50, 60 and when you are pre-dead.

Which almost gets us to the question ‘Who, what, when, where, how, why for $50’ and you will see that the bulk of the people are not ready for what is linked behind it all.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Law, Military, Politics

Any sport implies corruption!

Yes, I agree that this statement is over the top, but at present, I have had it with sports. Whenever we hear about any sport, we are likely to hear doping, corruption or treason. When was the last time you watched your favourite sport and one of these three elements were not in play? Even if this is the case, when you Google your sport with the keywords ‘crime’, ‘corruption’ or ‘investigation’ you will see a list of events that is tainting your favourite sport.

I am originally Dutch, which means that cycling, skating and Soccer make the list for most Dutch people. I (being a statistical outlier in all this) do not really care about those three. If I am at such an event I will enjoy watching it, but I usually do not really bother watching it on TV, unless it is a special event (like a semi-final or final for a world cup or something like that).

So, when I saw on TV that Qatar had won the World Cup host for 2022, I was just happy for Qatar. I was happy, because a thoroughly European sport would go to the Middle East, hopefully inspiring more people and more nations to take up the sport, which is always a good thing. I also considered that the location would show the ‘smaller’ nations had an opportunity to host the ‘big’ boys in soccer and show them that they too can wield the torch of hosting pride. I had no negative thoughts at all. Although I realised that this was a very warm place, it would be nice for other teams like Qatar, Cameroon and Mexico get to play with home field weather advantage, which was pretty much it for me.

So when I got the news this morning that another corruption scandal had hit FIFA, I pretty much lost it on the spot. I remember the Final games of the 1978 world cup. It was NOT the final that was fixed; it was the match before that. What I still consider today as a match-fixed battle between Argentina and Peru, where the hosts needed to win by four goals to reach the final when they slaughtered Peru with a score of 6-0. I saw how Argentina passed on the left, passed on the right and the Peruvian team played frozen, like zombies in a Haitian Dance festival. In my personal view Argentina made it to the finals on false grounds. Yes, the finals were in my view honestly won, but they did not get there honestly and as such the Dutch were robbed of their final victory.

So when I see sports and corruption I tend to go slightly mad. The allegations against Qatar can best be found at http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2013/oct/03/world-cup-2022-fifa-qatar.

In my view the hosting game needs to get changed. I am so sick of these corruption events. In my view the following needs to happen. When a person is found guilty of corruption, those nations, in this case Brazil, Paraguay and Cameroon are barred from getting officials into FIFA and the IOC (International Olympic Committee) for a term no less than 16 years, furthermore, they cannot become a host nation for that same amount of time. For the first upcoming World Cup, those three nations are then prevented from entering. There is of course a small chance that their families will slightly suffer when Soccer fans go a little nuts at that point, but who gives a fuck? (Pretty please pardon my ‘French’ here.)

I have seen too much corruption and treason and it had too often got settled with a ‘reprimand’. These two transgressions are now often seen as legalised gambling. You have no risk, you get money and perhaps a fee and a slap on the wrists if you get caught. It would be nice to see these people run for their lives. I foresee that sport corruption could take a steep dive towards a 0% sport crime rate, which is good for sports overall.

To be quite honest, until the article in the Guardian, I was willing to ignore the stories. In my personal view, the Telegraph tends to be a less then academic levelled source of information (they usually lay it on a little too thick). I even contemplated the option that all this were false allegations through media giants as the timing and temperatures might result in a shift in dates to play, which could result in a loss of advertisement coinage no less than 1 Billion Euro on a global scale, not to mention the merchandising that might make a sizzler, all that because the Qatarian time zone could shift the games to less civil times for many of the European TV viewers.

Yet the Guardian shows another story. The one passage I do have a slight problem with is “Mohamed bin Hammam, from Qatar, at the time the challenger to Blatter’s presidency, was found by the court of arbitration for sport last year to ‘more likely than not’ have brought cash to two meetings in May 2011 which was then handed to FIFA delegates

The more likely than not is a bit of an issue for me. It is more likely than not that I do not have the purest of thoughts when I see Olivia Wilde (or Laura Vandervoort, Leslie Bibb, Natasha McElhone or Olivia Munn for that matter). That is a sentence that holds ground (not grammatically). In regards to funds it does not really hold any ground (unless there is a better quality of tangible evidence).

I desire a woman? (Yes and it is not illegal!), I desire money? (To some extent, a definite yes if it gives me access to desire group number one and again it is not illegal), Will I be corrupt for it? Very less likely, however I might be willing to falsify my medical records if it gets me access to my initial group one. The last would actually be illegal and it is covered in Criminal Law, so I am definitely not willing to pursue that avenue.

Why the previous rant? It is about evidence and ‘more likely than not‘, just does not cut it in my book when it comes to these levels of corruption. Even though it is a Civil Court requirement and has been in UK courts since Miller v. Minister of Pensions [1947] 2 All ER 372, which was stated by Lord Denning, former Lord Justice of Appeal and former member of the House of Lords and Master of the Rolls as “more probable than not“, yet when we regard the world as it is today, more probable then not is in my personal view no longer a valid reasoning when it comes to larger amounts of money. It is too easy to frame a person; in the electronic age it is too likely to be falsely processed and when you consider the Bitcoin issue of February 2014, was it stolen or actually lost? More likely than not is very probable to imply involved parties in acts of fraud and theft and less likely that a data files were corrupted and through this misplaced into nothingness.

So there we have it! Is there guilt? I am not sure whether this can be easily proven. If certain people are missing out on a billion in revenue and securing it would require blaming three people of taking a few million, is framing three people so far-fetched? I personally think that this is not the case, or stated under the legal premise ‘it is more likely than not that three people were falsely set in an illegal light so that several unnamed persons could walk away with many hundreds of millions of Euros‘. This is a lot easier to sell in many civil courts.

So which scenario is correct?

I honestly do not know, but it still bothers me that no matter what the truth ends up being, and in hindsight when we look at FIFA, the IOC as well as groups that offer global events had to be revamped in several ways for well over two decades. Consider the ‘old boys’ brigade as it was in the UK between WW1 and WW2. In today’s global setting of fast paced events, where this approach just does not cut it.

 

2 Comments

Filed under Gaming, Law, Politics