Tag Archives: Mark Zuckerberg

Are there two coins?

That is the question I put before you. Are there two coins, or is merely spinning with different currencies? That is the setting that the Wall Street Journal gives us. With ‘They Paid $3,500 for Apple’s Vision Pro. A Year Later, It Still Hurts.’ (at https://www.wsj.com/tech/they-paid-3-500-for-apples-vision-pro-a-year-later-it-still-hurts-496de341) we see the (almost) crybaby style of “I never actually needed it”, we see the setting of “It was Apple’s first major product release in years! It’s the first device you look through and not at! Typing can be done in the air! But buyers who wore them in the wild say they got nothing but dirty looks and sore necks. Now, the devices are daily reminders of their misplaced bravado.” As I personally see it, they wore this in the wold, so they would look ‘innovative’ almost like the influencer who wanted to appeal to everyone, but they never knew how. It seems like a variant on the West Wing setting taken from Alexandre Auguste Ledru-Rollin with “There go my people. I must find out where they are going so I can lead them.” As I see it, a pointless exercise that costs money and leads to nothing. I, on the other hand could never afford it and I came up with several IP variants where their customers could have enjoyed the setting. In November 2024 I wrote ‘One step left for a new world’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2024/11/16/one-step-left-for-a-new-world/) where I combined education and gaming with languages for the masses. And Apple has his translation software, and that could bestow education and fin for the masses (who could afford it) and beyond that (after a year) it could be transferred to whatever MetaQuest offers. I did that in under two days and even set the premise in this blog to give them the setting to a unique ‘game’ with Guerrilla Games. Did they catch on? No, they are all on a non-existent AI horse (not the one used for Troy), but just as fatal for the people without imagination. So when I see “No player in the virtual reality space has yet to figure out how to drive widespread adoption of the technology. Apple hasn’t disclosed how many of the devices it has sold. The company has struggled to get developers to make apps for the Vision Pro, putting its success at risk, The Wall Street Journal has reported. Apple declined to comment.” I merely laugh. It took me two days to set the premise of close to a dozen ‘games’ (OK, several have an educational nature) and as such it is on Apple. Especially when you see “The company has struggled to get developers to make apps for the Vision Pro” on two days I have the setting for a dozen games (close to 10 all with the same setting) and there is as I personally see it, a need for it. They just needed to get Ubisoft (desperate for more revenue) and Guerrilla Games on board (who might wanna do it, for the unique venture it allows for) and basically this would be close to no funds required, merely expertise and hardware. And as both developers have 80% of the software done. The setting should need little time and from the moment on the visibility rises as gamers all over the world are seeking such a solution and that is merely the start. So is Apple or Timmy the Cook interested in that setting, or are they hiding from the idle bomb called AI to implode in their faces. It could be that the WSJ doesn’t see what could happen, but as I came up with the idea nearly a year ago, I am willing to push the blame to Apple. This is basically what you get when you have mere yay sayers and none of them an innovative bone in their body. 

Could I be wrong?
That is a fair assumption, but I published those articles in 2024 and what have they produced? Nothing, not even an article that my ideas were just not that realistic, which would have been folly as the first setting was seen on a Playstation 3 with a mere 256MB memory on 20GB storage, as such it was produced 18 years ago. And I found a novel use of IP that was over a decade old. The second idea is a bit more dodgy as it was made on a PlayStation 4 with 8GB and 500Gb storage. It should be possible, and that would have been the real people drawer. As such I feel confident that I could set the winning solution. It just needed a conversation between Timmy the Cook and Arjan Brussee. The impact on the world would be amazing. All these so called innovators and they  simply missed that setting. The consequence of no creativity connected to imagination.

So when we see “Fox says he’s worn his Apple Vision Pro headset about four times in the past year.” Did he even consider the setting with real estate? He is a realtor after all. Did he consider that he could show something in 3D in ones view? Just a thought.

The settings are there and Apple needs to consider that idea’s this new needs a tiger team for setting the brand to the developers. As such they need to come with idea’s (perhaps different ideas from me) and see what developers could set the premise? I found two developers, one who desperately needs revenue and they have almost completed (as I reckon it to be) close to 80%. So when did you see a developer who cannot complete the idea for the last 20%. It is a simple question. 

So from there when that first setting is shown these programs can evolve into ‘newer’ settings where people can learn start Arabic, Latin, Italian, French and English. Just on the setting of the same premise and as you evolve the game where clothing was once cosmetic, the larger setting becomes that better clothing and a better location allows for more evolved language skills. Something that could entertain and educate people for weeks at a time. So how was that difficult?

And if Timmy isn’t up for it, perhaps Mark Zuckerberg can see a whole new dimension of options with the Meta Quest. The hungry want to at and more revenue allows for that. The most simple of settings that we can now see and where does that leave Apple? That is the question. Well, of all else fails, Timmy could become the Cook people needs to make them muffins. In the mean time the innovators in the world will take whatever they can to propagate themselves, because that is also a consequence of the innovator gene. You get to go places.

So have a great day, still Sunday here with a mere 225 minutes until dinner.

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, Gaming, IT, Media, Science

The tradeoff

That is at times the question and the BBC is introducing us to a hell of a tradeoff. The story (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0kglle0p3vo) is giving us ‘Meta considers charging for ad-free Facebook and Instagram in the UK’, the setting is not really a surprise. On April 10th 2018 we were clearly given “Senator, we run ads” and we all laughed. Congress is trying to be smart over and over again and Mark Zuckerberg was showing them the ropes. Every single time. There was little or no question on this on how they were making money. Yet now the game changes. You see, in the past Facebook (say META) was the captain of their data vessel. A system where they had the power and the collective security of our data in hands. There was no question on any setting and even I was in the assumption that they had firm hands on a data repository a lot larger than the vault if the Bank of England. That was until Cambridge Analytica and in March 2018 their business practices were shown the limelight and it also meant that Facebook no longer had control of their ship of data, which meant that their ‘treasure’ was fading. 

So now we get “Facebook and Instagram owner Meta is considering a paid subscription in the UK which would remove adverts from its platforms. Under the plans, people using the social media sites could be asked to pay for an ad-free experience if they do not want their data to be tracked.” It makes perfect sense that under the guise of no advertising, the mention of paid services make perfect sense. This is given to us via the setting of “It comes as the company agreed to stop targeting ads at a British woman last week following a protracted legal battle.” I don’t get it, the protracted legal battle seems odd as this was the tradeoff for a free service. Is this a woke thing? You get a free service and the advertising is the process for this. As such I do not get the issue of “Guidance issued by the regulator in January states that users must be presented with a genuine free choice.” This makes some kind of sense, so it is either pay for the service or suffer the consequences of advertising. And lets be clear the value of META relies on targeted advertising. What is the use of targeting everyone for a car ad when it includes the 26% of the people who do not have a drivers license. There is the addition that these people need to have an income of over $45,000 to afford the 2025 Lexus RX $90,350 which is about 30%. We can (presumptively) assume that this get us a population of about 20%-25%, so does it make any sense for Lexus to address the 100% whilst only one in four or one in five is optionally in the market? Makes no sense does it? As such META needs to rely on as much targeted advertising as it can. And as you can see, The advertising model, known as “consent or pay”, has become increasingly popular. And at some point they were giving the people “But it reduced its prices and said it would provide a way for users not willing to pay to opt to see adverts which are “less personalised”, in response to regulatory concerns.” That is partially acceptable, but I have a different issue. You see, I foresee issues with “less personalised”, apart from gambling sites, there is a larger concern that even as Facebook (or META) isn’t capturing some data. There is the larger fear that some will offer some services and now care about capturing collected data. For example sites outside the EU (or UK). Sites in China and Russia like their social sites that collect this data and optionally sell it to META. You see, there is as I currently see it no defense on this. Like in the 90’s when American providers made some agreement, but some of them did not qualify the stage of what happened to the data backups and those were not considered, when they were addressed it was years later and the data had left the barn (almost everywhere). 

There is a fear (a personal fear) that the so called captains of industry have not considered (I reckon intentionally) the need of replacing and protecting aggregated data and aggregated results. Which allows for a whole battery of additional statistics. Another personal fear is the approach to data and what they laughingly call AI. It is hard to set a stage, but I will try. 

To get this I will refer to a program called SPSS (now IBM Statistics) so called {In SPSS, cluster analysis groups similar data points into clusters, while discriminant analysis classifies data points into pre-defined groups based on predictor variables.}

So to get data points into a grouping like income to household types, this is a cluster analyses.

And to get household types onto data points like income to household types, is called a discriminant analyses. Now as I personally see it (I am definitely not a statistician) If one direction is determined, the other one should always fail. It is a one direction solution. So a cluster analyses is proven, a discriminant analyses to income ill always fail and vice versa. Now with NIP (Near Intelligent Parsing, which is what these AI firms do) They will try to set a stage to make this work. And that is how the wheels come of the wagon and we get a whole range of weird results. But now as people set the stage for contributing to third party parsing and resource aggregation, I feel that a dangerous setting could evolve and there is no defense against that. As I see it, the ‘data boys’ need to isolate the chance of us being aggregated through third parties and as I see it META needs to be isolated from that level of data ‘intrusion’. A dangerous level of data to say the least.

There is always a downside to a tradeoff and too many aren’t aware of the downside of that tradeoff. So have a great day and try to have a half cup of good coffee (data boys get that old premise)

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

As history catches up

On the first of February 2022 I wrote ‘The opportunity for 2022’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2022/02/01/the-opportunity-for-2022/) where I set a stage for augmented reality, at a later stage I also set it for glasses and windows (an actual window pane) and with that I started a thought process that could revitalise malls on a global scale. I initially covered tourism, but soon thereafter I covered commerce, advertising and awareness creation. The focus for me was the Eaton centre (Toronto) as it was a clear case of awareness improvement. There were a few other sides for mobiles, but this stage was explored by my mind and last week I was given a jolt of energy as Meta (at https://about.fb.com/news/2024/09/introducing-orion-our-first-true-augmented-reality-glasses/) gives us the Orion, previously codenamed Project Nazare, as I kind of envisioned it. I thought that Google and/or Amazon would have picked it up, but no, it was Meta. So as I see it Meta now has a clear advantage over advertising and a new realm of awareness creation. So whilst Amazon and Google were cutting staff, cutting all kinds of enablements Meta now has more than the inside track. They can whisk advantages in advertisement, tourism, awareness creation and a few other directions. This is what sets them apart from the wannabe innovators. And I left all the evidence all over the internet, as such I can truthfully see myself as an innovator. As I see it, the one part not grabbed by Meta is the mobile layer where they can grab the attention of jewellers on a global scale. I am not merely talking about the small players, I am talking about Pandora, Harry Winston, the Swiss Richemont Group, Bernard Arnault and his LVMH scoundrels (as the expression goes) and a few other players. They all become very willing players in this realm. A stage that wan’t open to many of us, now becomes a new stage of revitalisation. And the malls need them and as such Meta gets to surpass Google with YouTube and Amazon with whatever they have. I actually didn’t think to be this ahead, I was in some believe that this was 5-10 years away. History catches up with me. Oh, and I was thinking also a bigger picture. You see this could work well for publishers and book shops as well. As the jeweller has its domain, the domain of books could equally profit from augmented reality. 

Meta already has the skills to put in place the technology to set the domain for advertisements and with that the malls could revitalise soon enough. For me it is another moment of bliss. Whilst several people made claims that I was nuts, the technology now exists to make larger parts of my ‘delusion’ a reality. I feel awesome, those shouting I was a nutcase have just exposed themselves to be nothing more than wannabe’s with a lack of creativity. 

And later today I will add another story, it will be all about books. Well one in particularly. Have a great day.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

The side not illuminated

The BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c5111qxl2nro) is giving us ‘Apple in breach of law on App Store, says EU’ We get a few sides, but one side is not given to us. We are given “European Union regulators have accused Apple of being in breach of new laws designed to rein in big tech companies” It sounds nice, but at present the station “rein in big tech companies” is at least sanctimonious. We are also given “The firm charges developers an average of 30% commission on its App Store” and the penalty is given as we are given “The firm faces a potential fine of up to 10% of its global revenue if it fails to comply with the rules”. You see the one part we are NOT given is that all these developers get a channel to publish their work. The get their million by harassing people with advertising. These developers have no interest in giving gamers a real gaming satisfaction (some, but massively too little). So the EU should consider the fallout. You see Apple and Google could do two things. Pull all the games with an advertising channel, stating that this is not permitted. The second part is that they can start charging for the service. The bulk of these gaming ‘companies’ will soon thereafter collapse. You see when all these companies get CHARGED for spreading these games and cyber security. The net thing we see is that these companies will go somewhere else and the dangers of servicing hackers becomes rather large. 

The next part is that this becomes a new setting where the UAE and Saudi Arabia will get the option to offer the same thing Apple and Google did, but charging a mere 5% to 10%, the rest will probably going to China, making the EU and US lose even more revenue. 

All this because the shareholders of Epic Games wanted more revenue and they got this by throwing a tantrum like a child so that they get charged less for services. And lets be clear, they were eager to accept the deal when they were small, now that they are big they can afford to pay for the services. But that is not the only part. Epic Games wanted another path and when even one of these 3rd parties get to be hacked and the players get the damage, Epic Games will face the largest class action lawsuit in history. At that point I wonder how the shareholders will reflect on a pay cycle that will cost them billions. They had a safe environment with Apple and Google, but when that falls away these two will help to give the victims all the numbers and all the support they need to clean out the vaults of all the game developers who took the greedy way out. In addition the EU will get a new problem. As game makers fall flat and optionally move to China or the Middle East the EU will lose revenue. In the last 8 years 10 games made $13,000,000,000. So what will the EU do when that goes to China (or the Middle East)? There are over 200 companies, 105 made over $500,000,000. This was a bad call. These politicians have a socialistic mindset, Take from the rich, but they forget that these rich companies set the foundation of growth. Sergey Brin, Steve Jobs, Mark Zuckerberg and Jeff Bezos were real innovators. The mediocrity of Microsoft is pushing them back more and more. And whilst they might be shown as the richest, they are losing more and more ground. Now with the EU, more and more business will move to better (read: non-European and American) shores. 

And the EU did this to themselves. Consider the DMA:

  • Business users who depend on gatekeepers to offer their services in the single market will have a Fairer business environment (But these services come at a cost, no more Freebees)
  • allow third parties to inter-operate with the gatekeeper’s own services in certain specific situations. (If hacked those services become nullified)

Just to part, the first will nullify these innovators, they cannot afford these services and they will go to a cheap solution making them a target for hackers. The second part will end some games, gamers have no patience and no humour. So when their game stops they will all cry like little children, their toy was taken away and when a hacker does get to upper hand, the class actions will come calling for all these companies. It is a war that the EU cannot win and the larger companies will become empty shells (my prediction). 

Until this first case was decided there was merely a threat of things, now it is coming to pass. 

I wonder what happens to the ‘fake’ economy in Europe when this starts. When advertising through gaming stops. What will the damage be? Amazon, Apple and Google have other means for getting advertising revenue. The others? Anyones guess, but there is a chance that a few hundred companies are sweating because no revenue meant no cost and that could stop now. So they need to find bankers. And what will those bankers demand? All issues that the DMA (Digital Markets Act) did not consider. I believe that this Apple case is opening a can of worms  no one is ready for and the implications are long term.

And now it is Thursday, Enjoy this day when you get to this point.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Gaming, IT, Law, Science

The ranking of potatoes

There was an insight in July. In this I wrote “I sometimes get a month subscription to load up on missed things and I have to as we all have budgets. I reckon that the UK is facing a much harder time. When they get to decide on two of the items (Food, Rent and heating) Netflix will be the first to go, and after that cheaper internet deals” and guess what. The Guardian gave us 4 hours ago (at https://www.theguardian.com/media/2022/oct/17/uk-homes-cancel-streaming-services-to-reduce-spending) ‘UK homes cancel streaming services to reduce spending’, all whilst my quote comes from Realisation, which is three months older (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2022/07/14/realisation-2/), so the issues given three months ago were largely ignored (like wannabe analysts stating that the loss of subscriptions were a mystery to them, or something like that). I saw the writing on the wall and the Guardian caught up three months later. As such I look at “total number of homes with at least one subscription fell by 937,000 from January to September” I see no real mystery here. As such we also get “The premiere of two of the most-hyped and expensive shows of all time – the $650m (£580m) productions of Rings of Power and House of the Dragon – failed to prove a big enough draw to reverse a decline of another 234,000 homes with at least one paid streaming service in the third quarter” yes, because these people really want to put their housing or food on the template of chance when it comes to a TV series and the setting that they are the most expensive or most hyped shows do not matter. People need to pay for food, people ned to pay rent and these elements were out on the shelf for too long. There is no real cap on food and the rent cap is limited to say the least. So these series miss out and those who have a few quid left, they will buy it when it is released on bluray. Which is given to us as “as cost-conscious households choose paying for essentials – such as energy, food and mortgage repayments – over home entertainment”, a simple part of the equation I saw three months ago and that is to some extent the solution I saw in gathering 50 million subscriptions. Because that will become a much larger station and it will get the one doing it $500 million or more. But then these people were aware, were they not? Consider that I accused Amazon and Google of letting that lie on the floor and three months after I stated the writing was coming to a wall near them. They did wake up and investigate, did they not? For all I care Elon Musk can buy it now and make life for them and Microsoft a lot harder. But I cannot do that yet, I am still awaiting response from Riyadh. So when we are given “The world’s biggest streamer, which has cut staff and become more disciplined with its $17bn annual content budget after earlier this year reporting its first subscriber declines in a decade, is forecast to add just 1 million new signups globally when it reports third quarter figures on Tuesday” I wonder if they caught on at all. More disciplined is a joke expression, it is like Google with their wannabe cheerleading “I am a lion”, all nice, but we know that the hunt is done by the lionesses, the lions just get them pregnant twice a day if possible. You see the lions are their for the lionesses the real hunters and “lions mate roughly every 15 to 20 minutes for two or three days—200 to 300 times in succession”, as such when you realise that what were the salespeople hoping at Google? For me the laughing matter becomes when (or if) Riyadh buys my IP, when they trump Netflix, Amazon, Microsoft and Facebook all in one swoop. I wonder who will be crying like a chihuahua then? Will it be Reed Hastings, Andy Jassy, Satya Nadella, Mark Zuckerberg or all of them? And it was not a hard equation, the fact that I saw this coming 26 weeks ago makes it that easy and there is optionally more, but I want to have a little more fun with this, as I should be allowed to.

The ranking of potatoes is not who is the biggest, it becomes a ranking of whom was the most idle of the lot and that insight might give you a few handles on where you have to go with what you have. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Science

Bloomberg cake time

I got a nice surprise yesterday. Bloomberg handed it with the article (at https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2022-09-11/amazon-will-spend-15-billion-on-programming-this-year), there we learn ‘Amazon is the Least Understood Company in Hollywood’. It was interesting because I do not know anything about tinseltown (Hollywood) and I put all these creators, streamers or not on one pile. It seems that there are differences and the article brings out a few sides I never considered. So when I read “Amazon has been making original series for as long as Netflix with far less to show for it. But there are signs its strategy is starting to pay off” my mind started procedure ‘Wake up’ and I took notice. You see, I created plays as stories, mini series, even a movie, but with nothing more in mind than a story. I put some of it in my blogs and that is the end of it (or so I expect) and as a storyteller. 3 series, 2 mini stories and a movie is not a bad result, especially as it is not my field, I am in technology. I am a call centre operator, a customer care person and I am happy there, even though I also miss technical support. So as we see the three things we need to be mindful “Six Gulf States told Netflix to remove videos that violate “Islamic values.”” My movie ‘How to assassinate a politician’ was specifically designed for these states. Then we get “The world’s second largest movie theater chain declared bankruptcy” yes this is sad, but it is also a sign of the times. Hollywood did not help here, they are all about creating more and too little about creating higher quality, that is definitely part of the equation and I am NOT looking at Marvel movies. Their endgame was magnificent, I still watch it at least twice a year and I might upgrade that one to a 4K edition when possible (I still do not have a 4K TV, so no rush). Then we get “Mark Bergen’s YouTube book is now for sale”, I merely wonder why that is a factor? Let’s be clear, it might be an optional work like  the Social network, you know, that movie with Mark Zuckerman’s lookalike Jesse Eisenberg. But that is optionally one movie, perhaps the book has more than I reckon, but I haven’t read it yet. So when we get to “Netflix has spent more than Amazon over the last decade, and produced a much higher volume of shows. But Amazon Studios chief Jen Salke has a $10 billion budget. If you include sports, Amazon is projected to spend $15 billion on programming this year, according to Bloomberg Intelligence. That’s comparable to what Netflix (and many others) will spend”, we see the first element I foresaw ‘produced a much higher volume of shows’, it is about more, not better. And there is the rub. Lets be clear, Netflix has created high quality work (the Sandman) no one denies this, but Hollywood produced in 2019 (pre Covid) 792 movies, that is almost 2 movies a day just to see it all, now we get that they cater to a niche and every movie house has a niche. Yet in 2000 they only produced 371 movies, that is quite the jump in less than 20 years, and as we are aware that the number of writers did not exponentially increase they either tailored to less quality or upped the pressure on writers giving that very same result, yes that is a personal view on the matter.  As we get to “Yet we know that Amazon is a very successful company that generated $470 billion in sales and $33 billion in net income last year. We also know that its advertising business is booming” we can speculate that they are doing something right, or they have additional data none of the others have. So when this is supported by “This is Amazon’s greatest strength, but also its greatest weakness. The company has seemingly unlimited resources — and no real need to win, at least not right away. While Netflix and Disney stress over whether shows attract new customers or prevent people from canceling (or churning), churn at Amazon is almost nonexistent” We optionally see a second part that is not mentioned and merely hinted at. It is not the resources, even though that helps. They can cater to THEIR population, which implies that churning is reduced to zero, and they keep focus on the projects and so far that is paying off. There is a benefit when you OWN the bank, but I reckon that they have a stage where they cater to a plan that holds 100% of their customers. Reality makes me rephrase that into ‘that holds 95% of their customers’, a stage both Netflix and to a lesser degree Disney cannot adjust for. Not unless they spend a whole lot more and that is the danger, they do not own the bank and the first insight that involves ‘Islamic values’ is actually a lot more important. Instead of creating an offspring with the focus on the gulf states, the ego of Hollywood thinks it can do it all and there is the trap that sinks 1000 titanic’s. To be honest, I would love to see the data that Amazon relies on but I reckon that only a few (at Amazon) ever get to see that whole picture. A simple lieutenant does not get the image the generals have and these generals have to make the hard calls, the tough calls and so far it seems that them at Amazon re making the right call. I personally speculate that they are playing the long game whilst the others are limited to quarterly pushes, until the next stockholders meeting. That is why in the end Amazon will overcome nearly all hurdles and most others are sunk as they were unable to see three hurdles ahead. The article holds more and Lucas Shaw did a really good job here, he showed me a few sides I never knew (why would I), and it brought information and delight all at the same time, so you should definitely read that article, it is worth your time.

Now I need to focus on fortune cookie marketeers, hopefully more in several hours.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, movies

Population One

It might be the most depressing outlook one could ever have. When the population depletes to one, thee will be no reproduction (and no sex either). It does not matter who wins, whether it is a he or a she. Greed is based on the foundation that everyone else must fail. So it ends with a population of one. Yet I did not get there in a single stroke, I went beyond the DNA virus that could kill 97.3% of all people. I went beyond the fake promises of politicians, the calculated misinformation the media aids them with and it all comes down to the man in charge. The most greed driven ding dong on Wall Street. We are all in a stage of self destruction. Whether it is some form of discrimination, whether it is some form of gathering wealth by people who should not be allowed to have a dime in the first place (not referring to the wealthy people like Beff Jezos, Gill Bates or Zark Muckerman), I am talking about the wannabe’s who got creative and turned the law into something productive FOR THEM. I am talking about those who cut corners so that they can scrape a few coins they never worked for and if that results in some gap driven solution where people in the UK find out their house is stolen from under their noses, that is just business. So when you read the BBC article (at https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-essex-59069662) and see “the duplicate driving licence issued by the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency in Mr Hall’s name, details of a bank account set up in his name to receive the proceeds of the sale, and phone recordings of the house being stolen” You would be wrong that this is a fluke. You could optionally accept “We work with professional conveyancers, such as solicitors, and rely on them and the checks that they make to spot fraudulent attempts to impersonate property owners. Despite our efforts, every year we do register a very small number of fraudulent transactions”, and I would too, but in this case we are both wrong. You see, this was not a fluke, this was well thought through, this was orchestrated and this was intent and all parties failed to protect a homeowner. Yet in all this, the banks cut corners. So where was the notary? Oh right, someone gave the clear indication that a notary was no longer required, it is so much faster to get a councilman doing that. It is a mess and the mess is merely increasing, all because some players are crying that things have to move faster and we all complied, we all did this.

But this is not about a house, or a notary, or any form of simple matter. This is a much larger problem and it includes politicians, the media and us. We were always part of the bungle. Me too, I cannot claim innocence, I am a part of this screw up, just like you are. And perhaps it is already too late. 

Step One
In step One I wish to remind you of older articles. On December 10th 2020 I wrote ‘Uniform Nameless Entitlement Perforation’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2020/12/10/uniform-nameless-entitlement-perforation/) There I brought a report to the surface by the European Environment Agency. A report from the United Nations Environment Programme was included at the end of the article. But the most striking part was that the EEA gave us that 147 facilities are producing 50% of ALL pollution damage. That is a clear indication, we saw the Guardian helping out some vague friend by setting the stage that if rich people stopped using their jets, 10% less pollution would be the case (a setting I highly doubt), so whilst we aren’t clearly seeing that, the claim of “Global ‘elite’ will need to slash high-carbon lifestyles”, it amounts to I will fuck the neighbours wife without a condom so that we can safe the environment. Yes, we could all slash high carbon living, but that means we would be able to have a life, and that is not the case (at present).

Then on July 1st 2021 I wrote ‘Big Oil in the family’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2021/07/01/big-oil-in-the-family/) there we are given “An unprecedented wave of lawsuits, filed by cities and states across the US, aim to hold the oil and gas industry to account for the environmental devastation caused by fossil fuels – and covering up what they knew along the way”, you see it is another wave of the blame game. There is truth in the statement, but it also comes with the seal of approval by Wall Street, greed never sleeps and oil was an instant moneymaker. People in the oil industry were printing money on the spot. Do you have any believe that those people give up that gained benefit? I think not

Step two
Here we take a gander. 

we take a small step to Forbes (at https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamiehailstone/2021/10/01/industrial-air-pollution-costs-europe-2-3-of-gdp/) there we are given “The report – by the European Environment Agency – concludes that half of this pollution is caused by just 211 facilities scattered over the EU”, which is interesting as the images I gave you all shows it to be 147 facilities, but the locations are unknown. In addition we are given “Just 211 sites of the 11,655 facilities reporting emissions caused 50% of the pollution in 2017”, interesting as I was looking at 2020 material, So why is Forbes, in an October 2021 article going back to a 2017 report? And I got to that point 10 months before Forbes did. Someone does not want the whole enchilada out in the open. So where is that stakeholder? My assumption is Wall Street. 

In one of the articles I gave the quote “In the early 1990s, Kenneth Lay helped to initiate the selling of electricity at market prices and, soon after, Congress approved legislation deregulating the sale of natural gas” and now we see prices of Gas explode out of proportions. We see ‘electricity at market prices’ yet they did not upgrade installations and the need for electricity has also exploded out of proportions. Now one of those really wealthy people is sitting on a solution, but governments have not made any interesting move to make it happen, to push renewable industries to a much greater extend, and that is now starting to bite. 

Step Three
Now we get to the good stuff. I see a video by some grandmother named Gina McCarthy pass by. I see the text “the US is back in a leadership position”, it took 3 vials of Haldol to get me back to hysterics. The US has not been in a leadership position for the longest of time, Wall Street is. And in 7 weeks we get to see them flexing their muscles again. You see, we see headlines like ‘Prime Minister Boris Johnson unveils £3bn climate aid commitment at COP26’, where is he getting the money? Where is the US getting the money? Their clock runs out in 7 weeks and they do not have any funds, the larger polluter is China according to some of these reports, but where are they? What are they setting up? In all this the US is seemingly the least powerful player (an empty wallet does that), it is one of the less rich players (Canada) that is making larger and optionally tougher strides, will it be enough? 

You see, it remains to be seen, there are too many eyes on this event, so we are getting all the same messages. Yet it is next month, and January (after Christmas) that counts and it is then that we are more likely than not see more wealthy jet stories (the Guardian) or older reports (Forbes). And that is when you will need to take a stance, will you hold politicians and media accountable for luring you away from the limelight of truth? Consider that one source gives us two quotes. The first is “Special Envoy for the Great Barrier Reef, Warren Entsch won’t attend the UN Climate Summit in Glasgow”, the second is “Mr. Entsch has now confirmed he opted out of the summit after the uncertainty around being able to return home”, so how committed is he? Perhaps he is afraid he’ll miss an episode of Home and Away? #JustAsking

We have global problems, we have problems all over the world, yet to be honest, I never would have guessed that Australians would be guilty of destruction of their Great Barrier Reef by being ignorant. And a similar (optionally even worse) event is happening is Western Australia. We all destroyed our planet, you, me, all of us. We let the Wall Street people act and cut corners to facilitate greed and we let the politicians assist them. As I personally see it, getting rid of 97.3% of all people might have been the humane solution. I will let you consider whether I am absolutely insane, or if I might have a decent case. In the end Greed only requires a population of one, my solution would be an option for 210.6 million people. Around what it was in the year 800. We need to reconsider what we do, we need to reconsider what will work, but flying people all over the world making presentations they cannot keep, enforce or pay for is not the solution. 

I will let you decide.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics, Science

Realisation

I had the idea already for a few days, yet it wasn’t until Rachel Riley (one of three mathematicians in the UK that are exceedingly hotter than a nuclear explosion) said something on Twitter that got me thinking and you need to be aware. And you need to be aware now, not tomorrow.

To set the stage you need to grasp back to (what is categorised as) a game called ‘Second Life’. A virtual setting. Not unlike the ‘environment’ you saw in the movie Ready player one. Now consider that meta is second life on serious steroid. It is in all directions 1000 times larger and it will be for each person 1000 times more crowded with objects. Look around you, look at the largest apartment or mansion you could ever dream of. Now consider that EVERY person will have a mansion or a penthouse like that. Now consider that every person has it filled with stuff, all of it linked to advertisements or optional an advertisement free space (for a price). So Zuckerberg is sitting on an approach that will make him billions per month. It is quite ingenious and we were always going to go in that direction, yet Mark is getting there ahead of all. This explains the 10.000 people he is hiring. By the time they launch he will have optionally well over a million objects and thousands of locations. It will also be a space where people could make real and serious money. But that is not what this is about.

There is also a serious danger, a danger that might not be seen, but Rachel alerted me to this in a different way and my mind started to race. Consider that items could have historical significance, items could be personally set and traced. As such we can see the stage where neo-nazi’s have their flags, their items and their locations all heralding WW2 Germany, all out in the open and there will be for the longest time nothing anyone can do against it. More importantly, hacker could facilitate ‘scraping’ and replace the stage with German WW2, or ISIS flags. And how long until we see protected locations advocating radicalisation? This is not an accusation against Zuckerberg et al. This will be a consequence of a new environment that will be driven to user interaction loaded with all kinds of advertising. Now, I admit that it seems that I am against the advertising, but I do not. There is no such thing as a free ride. I am worried that the advertiser tag will allow for a little more than the original designers set their minds to. A stage where A lead to C because B was unknowingly too close to A. A stage that no one can vouch for but it will be a consequence. Metaverse allows for so much more new beauty, but the beauty of one is the nightmare of the other and there remains a debate what is one and what is the other. A stage that is assumed and at ties presumed but none is guaranteed as that new world is not ready yet. 

And it will not be long until you can link systems, consoles and other media to your location and then the borders between your real life and your meta life will start to fade a little, all the sources all ready to be framed, to be mailed within the Metaverse and that is the beginning. You will have a large TV that will show you trailers, advertisements and intro’s to things you are interested in. Millions will be able to reach you, millions more will be set to a stream for virtual radio and virtual TV, optionally virtual console too. Thee amount of advertisements will triple optionally a bit more. And as we sign on, we forget to sign off and the race begins.

Zuckerberg did the one thing that others failed to consider at this point, he moved the boundaries towards a much larger stage a much larger population and it will impact advertisements for all others. A stage that was there and has been there since 2003, now that we are getting close to the full 5G stage, Zuckerberg found a new application and it will make them rich beyond believe. Yet the other side will also be there. How long until someone hacks the Israeli flag and replaces it with the Nazi Germany flag? 

How long until people will request a Horch 400 Polizei-Mannschaftswagen 1? And there would be a decent case to have such a classic automobile. None of it will be some neo nazi reason. But the filter people will not be able to tell the difference and that is where the problem will really start. The grey area an area that would grow on a near daily basis and it allows those having less than pure reasons to set the larger stage and harass others. It is a larger stage all because the current social media is ridden with bullies, trolls and other types of negative charging entities. 

I wonder how long it will take the media and politicians to see the dangers we are heading to and we are heading to dangerous water, you better believe it sooner rather than too late. 

I have no plans to be anti Metaverse, but it needs to be said that it needs a lot more security and protection than we see in Facebook at present. 

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Science

The tweets that flame

Yes, it seems harsh, and it is not meant to be. You see, this might be the tweet of today, but the setting has never changed not for three decades. Even as political windbags are all claiming that they are doing their bit, they are actually relying on emotional events to keep the flames going, especially when they do not resolve anything. My blog has covered it for almost a decade, and I have been stating it for another two decades. And this tweet is bringing it to the surface yet again.

People are all about ‘taxing billionaires’, ‘taxing corporations’, and ‘taxing churches’, the last one is nice, I hardly ever see that one. So let’s take a jab at this (yet again).

Taxing Billionaires
Yes, it is all about discrimination, taxing the billionaires. I still hope to become one, that is if Papa Smurf (Sergey Brin), Clever Smurf (Larry Page) and optionally Tracker Smurf (Sundar Pichai) wake up and take notice. OK, wake up is incorrect and uncalled for, they are likely awake 18 hours a day and they optionally take notice of a dozen matters every hour of every day, but so far they are not noticing my 5G IP (darn).  So at what point will we ‘tax’ the billionaires? Will we check their bank accounts and levy it for 20%? At what point do you think will these 614 billionaires move to Canada, or Europe and leave the US completely bankrupt? What do you think happens when $5,000,000,000,000 moves to another nation? I have another issue, these people made money in whatever way, and not all are a Lawrence Elliot, Mark Zuckerberg or Google top. As such do you really want the creative top of the world to vacate to another place?

Taxing Churches
There is a larger stage here and I am not against taxing the churches. The Catholic church has pillaged in their own way the planet for centuries. So will you tax one (discrimination) or tax all? It is a slippery slope, and ever as it is not the worst idea, it is a trap waiting t explode in all our faces, we just do not know how. 

Taxing corporations
They are getting taxed, it is the degree of required taxation that is the issue. 

The point is not taxing them, it is overhauling the tax laws and on both sides, both democratic and republican presidents, they all failed. From 1993 onwards the USA has had two democrats, two republicans and now another democrat President, the last 4 all failed to overhaul the tax laws.  As such, blame Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Barack Obama, and Donald Trump for this failure. In April 2019 we saw “Amazon, Netflix, IBM, and General Motors are among the 60 big companies paying $0 in federal income taxes in 2018”, not one, not two, not three, but 60 big companies all avoiding taxation, avoiding not evading. Evading taxation is illegal, avoiding it is only paying what the letter of the law tells you to pay and that is how it should be, as such tax laws need an overhaul and this has been clear for 30 years, so why is it not done?

Because we see flames, we react to flames and no one is considering (intentional or not) to push legislation to overhaul the tax laws. It is the same joke again and again. Tax and gun laws are trodden on, we see all the crocodile tears, but people die and die again and until gun laws are truly overhauled, starting by giving the ATF the teeth they need to take a chunk out of guns, this will continue. And the media knows this too, but they cater to their shareholders, their stake holders and their advertisers and none of those three are happy about overhauling tax laws. 

And until the people unite complaining to the media nothing will change. It is funny that a valid objection by a journalist regarding an Oprah Winfrey interview, where we see a reported “Over 57,000 complaints have been delivered to Ofcom” regarding the point of view of a reporter, yet I am willing to bet that NONE of those 57,000 people ever complained on the need to overhaul tax laws. And we notice people complaining that nothing gets done, well, does this not start with you? A person can tweet to high heaven, but that does not change things. Getting hundreds even thousands complain to electable officials never happens (and the politicians, as well as corporations are happy about this), they need the rich to pay for their reelections and that will not happen when tax laws are overhauled.  

This is also not limited to the US, it is a global issue and if people really want poverty to go away, you need to demand an overhaul of the tax laws. It is really that simple. But beware, when you push corporations away it has other impacts. California is now learning that the hard way as more and more corporations are moving to Texas. So this is a much larger slippery scale and their will be consequences, no matter how we slice that tax cake.

But I am not against taxation, but I too will take the tax avoidance route when called on, it is not because I am against paying taxation, I am against paying too much taxation, that is why tax laws were created. A paper in 2014 gave us “‘Tax avoidance is a taxpayer’s course of action in line with the letter but contrary to the spirit of the law’. Definitions phrased along these lines can be found in many policy statements and legal provisions. They are common, but nonetheless problematic. It is the ‘spirit of the law’ part which poses problems. These difficulties not only have theoretical import; they also cast doubt on the legitimacy of efforts to combat tax avoidance. And the skeptics – ‘non-believers’ in the spirit of the law – are many.” The paper by Hanna Filipczyk gives us a lot in that regard, on the problems and on the 27 references that show that this has been going on for a long time, and until politicians stop wanking about the spirit of tax law and do something about the letter of tax law, this will continue, and its continuation will never cease. And the media is making it easy for them as they cater to part of that group. Should you doubt that, then wonder when the media told you to that to achieve a proper level of taxing, tax laws need to change. Do not take my word, check what THEY said, you will see I was right and I have been correct in this case for well over a quarter of a century. 

It was never hard, it was never complex, it merely needed to be done and the previous 4 presidents did not achieve it, why not? I will let you ponder that part for a little part longer.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media

Consider the question

We always have questions, we all do. Some are based upon curiosity, some are based on acquisition and some on compilation. The people tend to have questions in the range of one and three, businesses on two and three, with an optional need for the first group to see if a creation towards awareness is required. And in this we need to see ‘Facebook v Apple: The ad tracking row heats up’, the article (at https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-56831241) gives us “The IDFA can also be paired with other tech, such as Facebook’s tracking pixels or tracking cookies, which follow users around the web, to learn even more about you”, yet the question no one seems to be asking is how much is an advertiser entitled to get? I have no issue that Facebook, within Facebook measures and ‘collects’ it is the price of a free service, but did we sign up for a larger stake (or is that steak) at the expense of the consumer? Even as we tend to agree and accept “Apple co-founder Steve Jobs acknowledged that some people didn’t care about how much data they shared, but said they should always be informed of how it was being used”, in this the question takes a few steps and has a few exits in where to go next and we tend to remain in the dark about our needs, and what we are comfortable with. This is not new, but digital marketing is new, we have never faced it before. Even as we accept the quote by Tim Cook, the setting given with “If a business is built on misleading users, on data exploitation, on choices that are no choices at all, it does not deserve our praise. It deserves reform”, we forget that this is not merely misusing, it is a much larger stake. I some time ago refused to play a game because it collected my religion. Since when is a game’s requirement the religion I have? So (its Catholic by the way), even as we decide to not use an application, consider the price we pay and it goes further as app’s and their advertisements strategy on nearly EVERY device is set to showing us advertisements (to further the financial setting of the maker), in this I have no real problem, but what information is collected by the advertiser? And we all like the steps Apple seems to be making and as we ‘revere’ “Apple is baking privacy into its systems. Its browser Safari already blocks third-party cookies by default, and last year Apple forced app providers in iOS to spell out in the App Store listings what data they collect” we are forgetting what all advertisers are collecting and no less the issue becomes what happens when 5-7 games collectively are collecting and for the most we have no idea where this will end and it is important to take that in mind. It is there where Facebook is getting the largest negative wave. With “And it argues that sharing data with advertisers is key to giving users “better experiences””, precisely what is that ‘better experience’? And in what setting should ANY data be shared with an advertiser? We get that the advertiser wants to segment WHO gets to see their advertisement, we get that and I reckon no one will object. Yet why share our details? How is that priced and why are we not informed? OK, we are not told that Facebook is getting money of us, it is after-all a free service and as Mark Zuckerberg told the senate in a hearing “We sell ad’s”, yet he did not say “We sell ad’s and user data”, you all do understand that there is a fundamental difference between the two, you do get that, do you? And we see that given in the BBC article when we are given “Facebook appeared to accept the changes and promised “new advertiser experiences and measurement protocols”. It admitted that the ways digital advertisers collect and use information needed to “evolve” to one that will rely on “less data””, but that now gives us a much larger problem (optionally), when we see ‘new advertiser experiences’ we should be concerned on what it will cost, in pricing, in experience and in data segments. It does not make Facebook evil or bad, but when we are given “Technology consultant Max Kalmykov wrote in Medium that advertisers had to “prepare for the next, privacy-focused era of digital advertising””we accept change, we accept evolution, but in the stage of digital marketing most can be achieved WITHOUT sharing data of any individual level with the advertiser, the setting we see come might be good, yet I am concerned with their view of ‘new advertiser experiences and measurement protocols’, a setting for sales, not the consumers and optional victims, because to some degree that matters. Do I care when I see another advertisement by MWAVE.com.au? No, I do not, and for the most I do not care about that part, it is basically the cost of a free service, but no one accepted sharing data and that I what Apple is bringing to the surface even more than Cambridge Analytica brought. 

There is a larger setting in all this and we optionally see that with “Device fingerprinting combines certain attributes of a device – such as the operating system it uses, the type and version of web browser and the device’s IP address to identify it uniquely. It is an imperfect art, but one that is gaining traction in the advertising world”. You see I made the personal choice not to link devices, not to link services of any kind, it will not stop aggregation, it will merely slow it down, yet most of the people did not have the foresight I had a decade ago, as such the apps that have a identifier of hardware, they will get a lot more information on non-Apple devices in the near future. When the people realise that all others will take a backstage, it is a powerful advantage that Apple is creating, I wonder what Google will do next, because their market is in the middle of Apple and Facebook, they need to side one way or the other and it will have deeper repercussions in the long game. As such we see that Apple made its choice, it is one the consumers will embrace, some will accept the scenario that Facebook offers, and laughingly they oppose the data governments have and give it to whomever else wants it. In this Google has an opportunity (or a burden), but only if they change the game they are playing. When the consumers see this, they will wonder where to go next and they are all about flames and biased options through the media. 

It started last year and got to be serious in December 2020 when we were given (at https://www.theverge.com/2020/12/17/22180102/facebook-new-newspaper-ad-apple-ios-14-privacy-prompt) ‘Facebook hits back at Apple with second critical newspaper ad’, in one form we are given “Forty-four percent of small to medium businesses started or increased their usage of personalised ads on social media during the pandemic, according to a new Deloitte study. Without personalised ads, Facebook data shows that the average small business advertiser stands to see a cut of over 60% in their sales for every dollar they spend”, is that true? When you pick up the newspaper, how much is personalised? There will remain a level of personalised ads within Facebook, but the following outside of Facebook (within Apple products) stops and that might be a relief to a lot of consumers. As such I have a much larger issue with “the average small business advertiser stands to see a cut of over 60% in their sales for every dollar they spend”, I would be interested to investigate the data that brought the statement, and I have some reservations on the application of the data used. We could optionally say that the digital marketing that relies on such a 100% application is also to some degree unfair on printed media, but that is a very different conversation. 

And in all this the question will soon become “What should you (be allowed to) collect from me?” And now with the upgrades Apple has created a massive advantage, Google will need time to define an answer and direction, because Google will need to make a choice, and this is not a simple one, their business profile will alter accordingly and as Facebook is setting its premise, we see a larger stage, one with the option where Google Plus might be re-introduced in a much larger application of personal and non personal data, you see they are all about the personal data all whilst the hardware fingerprints in 5G will be a much larger setting then it ever was and there a much larger gain could be made by the proper makers in all this.

Did you see the new world where your mobile, tablets, laptop and domotics are linked? I can see it and the application of one of my mobile devices, yet the stage that it offers (or not) is still open to a lot of the players, so as I see it the next year will see a rapid evolution of digital marketing. Those who adjust will see 2023, those who do not ‘Goodbye!

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Media, Science