Tag Archives: Microsoft

October 9, 2024 · 23:48

Personal perception

It is always funny to see greed and stupidity in one compact package. In this instance I am introducing you to the American department of Justice. The one that will not prosecute Microsoft, the one that hands their economy to China and the one that throws away whatever economic options they have. Hobbled by ego trippers without a clue, chastised by a failing religion, one nation under the league of flaccid atheists. 

Is that clarity enough? In comes the BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c62504lv00do) giving us ‘Google threatened with being broken up by US’ where we see “The US government is considering seeking the break-up of the world’s biggest search engine, Google, which it accuses of causing “pernicious harms” to Americans.” Really? The US government is accusing Google of “irreparable harm done through evil or insidious corrupting or undermining”? Who is the idiot making that accusation? Lets have a rundown

It was founded in 1998 by Sergey Brin and Larry Page. They released Google search and they were clever they had the IP properly patented. Two clever dudes designed something that Microsoft never considered. Microsoft who was licking the rear end of the CFO’s of the fortune 500 were outsmarted by two students who gave people a system they needed, they handed system the people needed. So in this daytime and age, who would you rather appeal to? 500 persons who think they know it all, or a few million who are happy to be grateful? One implies money, the other gives you clusters of happy workers. In 2010 they improved the search engine making it twice as fast. At that point they had the cornerstone of modern telecom electronics. And  that is when 4G came out. And Google became the power player it is today. The story is a little more complex but this is the gist of it. The power player who proclaimed to be innovating were surpassed by two students who actually were innovative. Apple took the option of letting the innovators be and offered their technology for a large payout. 

There is more to all this, but the lowdown is that innovators recognise other innovators (YouTube) and they came up with Google Ads and in all that time the so called innovators (Microsoft) couldn’t even get close to what Google designed. They failed to offer a decent search engine (Bing) and they had nothing to offer against Google Ads (Microsoft Advertising) they failed 4 times over. And now we get stakeholders to push for breaking up Google. So let’s see how stupid that is.

In 2019 Huawei created HarmonyOS. In 5 years it created a decently worthy opponent to Android. It is now available in 77 languages. Last year it created HarmonyOS NEXT. It allows several smart devices to talk to one another. We can speculate that Harmony OS NEXT is more than a worthy opponent to Google. It will allow Huawei to hand the people in Europe, Africa, Asia and the Middle East with mobile solutions that will be happily accepted in the houses there. That is what the DoJ is achieving. And this is not the first time they are interfering where they seemingly have little knowledge. And for me it could open another door (yay me). 

All this matters because Huawei Harmony OS NEXT will enable seamless interactions among a wide array of device forms, from earphones and automobile head units to smart TVs and mobile phones. Google does this with the devices they have, but until now they had no real competitor, Microsoft was too soft and not enough micro and beside that they are spread too thin. Now that the DoJ is seemingly planning to break up Google Huawei gets a nice clean playing field to promote their brand outside the USA and with that America loses more and more market share. So whatever deceitful claim America makes They are about to be sliced and diced in the mobile industry by Huawei, TikTok (ByteDance) for video and on the electronic field by Tencent. Three companies that have real innovators and the one innovator that needs the space to continue their work is hobbled by “If the DOJ pushes ahead with the proposed remedies – and they are accepted by the judge in the case – it would represent arguably the biggest regulatory intervention in the history of big tech” which hands a clear victory to Chinese entrepreneurs. How silly they are.

As I see it, they are about to lose seven times over with the losses they have and looking at timeline of the innovators, the stakeholders as I personally see it are handing Chinese companies massive victories and I reckon that those ‘siding’ with America will change sides to the Chinese corporations before the ink dries of whatever bankrupt statement America gives the world and with the 35 trillion dollars they have less then 4 years to avoid that and I have no idea what happens to whatever Wall Street will side with. This is my personal perception of what is about to happen. Many will say that I will be wrong and I could be, but there is too much data siding with me and whilst these stakeholders get politicians to side with the need to line their pockets America keeps on losing more and more. 

In 2022, Saudi Arabia signed $4 billion worth of arms agreements with China, including deals for armed drones, ballistic missiles. In 2024 it has grown to $50 billion. This is partially important as I wrote on the 21st of February 2021 ‘How to miss out on $20,000,000,000’ And I was wrong, I stand corrected. Their revenue grew to $50 billion a mere three years later. I saw it coming a mile away and now it is happening. And the DoJ is making it worse. As I see it Google, Adobe, IBM and Oracle are the last of the real innovators and the DoJ is about to hobble one of these four, it will soon be that bad. 

As such, is my perception wrong? It might be, but my presumption has been a lot more correct than it has been wrong. No matter how you view it the entire Google mess is being mishandled (as I personally see it) pretty much from the beginning. 

And now America gives the option for a much larger win to Huawei Technologies. It will not impact  America, but Google is very likely to lose market share on several fronts. There is a much larger loss if Huawei would include TikTok on every Huawei mobile. Should these mobiles come with HarmonyOS NEXT the damage would increase and with their multi sharable sides Apple revenue would also be impacted as well as a loss of revenue to all kinds of accessories. These losses of revenue will hit Apple as well as Google. As I see it a simple creation of imbalance by people who (by my reckoning) have no clue on the internet of things. What a lovely present ego makes for others.

Enjoy the coming day.

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Media, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

September 25, 2024 · 21:13

Good News

Well, it is good news of a sort. The Guardian reported yesterday (at https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/sep/23/violent-crime-murder-rate-fbi-2023) that ‘FBI confirms US murders declined in 2023, contrary to Republican claims’, it is here we get “Murder dropped by more than 11% in largest single-year decline in decades while rape and other crimes also fell”, as plenty of us consider the one nation that is mostly in decline (due to the Karen’s) it is nice that we see an article like this. We also get “Meanwhile, the broader category of violent crime nationwide decreased about 3%, said the data, which is audited and confirms earlier reporting from unaudited statistics”, as well as “the FBI said rape decreased by an estimated 9.4%, property crime dropped 2.4% and burglary fell by an estimated 7.6%”. Some say that it is nothing to write home about. The larger setting is that in a country as overloaded with 343,477,335 people both good and less so. These drops are nothing to be sneered at. I say hurrah to the police and FBI department on a national scale. I am still of the mind that criminals tend to find other ‘activities’ to fuel their need for greed and violence. What it is is anyone’s guess. In certain fields I tend to be a gloomy source of skepticism. And it is here that Jonathan Greenblatt, CEO of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), said: “Data drives policy, and without having a complete understanding of the problem, we cannot effectively address this significant surge in hate violence” OK, I will agree with that. Data tends to be the driving instigator in understanding certain crimes. It is also a little weird that hate violence would be the driving power against sexual assaults and burglaries. One does not optionally fuel the other side and as such I feel uncertain what to think. That is the other side of data. The lack of numbers does not fuel the understanding into another side. It is not that we can state with any kind of ‘comprehension’ that (2022) 16 sexual assaults + 84 burglaries = 14 sexual assaults + 58 burglaries + 28 hate crimes (2023) it just presumptuously does not work that way. But in the end crime went down to some extent and for that we can say ‘hurray ye police departments’ and ‘hurray ye FBI’. We then get ““Our administration has improved and expanded background checks, announced the single largest investment in youth mental health in history, and been an unprecedented resource to states, cities, and local communities,” said Kamala Harris” I am less convinced here. I am not debating the soul and spirit of the thought, there is a larger stage to consider. I wrote a few years ago that the ATF is staggeringly underfunded and for the longest time there was no head at the organisation. There was a lack of IT funds and all kinds of settings that sets the ATF with decades of lack of innovations at their disposal. In addition, last year the WBUR (in 2023) gave its audience ‘Does the man enforcing the country’s gun laws have the tools to do the job?’ I had raised that amendment issue a few years earlier. They gave us “ATF protects the public from crimes involving firearms, explosives, arson, and the diversion of alcohol and tobacco products. Regulates lawful commerce in firearms and explosives, and provides worldwide support to law enforcement, public safety, and industry partners.” All whilst the gun lobby does everything to make things harder for the ATF. And all whilst all the Tech biggies (Amazon with AWS, Microsoft with Azure and Google with Gemini) have lacked in assisting the ATF in ways that work. I am not placing blame in any of those three, but the lack of innovation in IT power in the ATF is staggering. And in that setting the FBI and the local police forces need to do their work. Weird is it not? Then in 2020 we see ‘Rethinking ATF’s Budget To Prioritise Effective Gun Violence Prevention’ apart from the fact that the ATF was without a permanent director for seven years the wondering setting by Kamala Harris with “Our administration has improved and expanded background checks” but I have issues with the statement. I will fully agree with the statement that it was true, but consider a car in 2022 when it was going at a speed of 23 mph, the fact that it now does 43 mph makes the statement true, but when we consider that the fact that the ATF is to be seen as The Tiger Brigades (1974) where the officers relied on something not dissimilar of the Ford model T, the improvements would be impressive all whilst the criminals out there relied on their Lamborghini Countach LP400 (179 mph), you do see that the police has absolutely no way of winning. When we realise this a lot more could be done, but political players relying on the gun lobby donations are o so willing to throw a clog in the wheels (the origin of the expression saboteur) and the larger issue is not that America needs to stop crime. It is important that they are gaining access to the tools that allows them to do their job.

So I am not attacking the good news we were given, but the fact that the truth is that certain organisations were supposed to do their job with one hand on their back. The lacking funds for infrastructure does not help I reckon. 

All reasons for applauding the local police departments and the FBI for getting some of the work done. So to all involved: “Well Done!”

I am now pondering a thought I had yesterday and a larger premise. Not sure yet what to do, but it is a consideration to behold. And now, with my eyes on the Scotia bank on Yonge street (Toronto) I will sign off and enjoy a glass of ice tea.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Law, Politics, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

September 24, 2024 · 22:59

Two sides of technology

There are always two sides on any technology. The question is whether they are aligned or not. The first story is found at (at https://www.edgemiddleeast.com/ai/tsmc-and-samsung-consider-100-billion-uae-chip-projects) where the Edge Middle East gives us ‘TSMC and Samsung Consider $100 Billion UAE Chip Projects’, it all comes across as straight forward. We are given “Semiconductor giants TSMC and Samsung are in early talks to establish massive chip-making facilities in the UAE, potentially marking a significant expansion in global production.” It seems to me that this is a straight forward option, especially for the UAE. We are also given “develop potential chip projects in the United Arab Emirates, with investments that could exceed $100 billion. The discussions, which are still in the early stages, were first reported by The Wall Street Journal on Sunday” and this article ends with “Should these plans move forward, they would mark a significant milestone in the UAE’s efforts to position itself as a global technology hub.” The second article was initially from the Financial Times (but they are behind a paywall), as such I I cannot give the link, but the headline reads ‘UAE president meets Joe Biden in push for more US AI technology’ where we are given “Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed al-Nahyan seeks to formalise fledgling partnership between both countries” as well as “The United Arab Emirates’ leader met US President Joe Biden in Washington on Monday to advance artificial intelligence co-operation as the Gulf nation tries to secure easier access to US-made technology” and “The UAE is one of the US’s most important allies in the Middle East, but relations have been strained at times in recent years. Talks for a formal security pact with Washington have stalled, and Abu Dhabi was infuriated by what it saw as a lukewarm US response to attacks on the UAE’s capital by Houthi rebels from Yemen in 2022.” This is a dangerous time for America. The trivialisation of the Houthi terrorists will cost America dearly, it has before and it will cost America more than they imagined. You see, as I personally see it. There is a bigger fish. The option that China will play nice with Taiwan when there is a larger part of the $100,000,000,000 could give China the edge they need. And in this setting China will have several bonus options that would fall away from American. That alone would entice China to play nice with Taiwan to a whole larger degree. Is it viable? I honestly cannot say as the media is massively anti-China. Ask Huawei is you doubt my view on this issue. 

How could this happen?
There are several options, but if I were a betting man China would offer Taiwan independence UNDER China. Would Taiwan accept this? I don’t know, but if China would enable a diplomatic solution via the United Arab Emirates it could happen. China is more interested in the collapse of America sooner and will hand an independence ‘option’ to Taiwan. And the setting with Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed al-Nahyan gives China a larger option to manouver. It is my believe that the Biden administration is driven to not make my speculation happen and for that it needs a slice of the UAE AI business and America will offer whatever it has to to make their entrance a done deal. On the positive side if Microsoft gets involved there is every chance that their affinity to mediocrity will blow up in their faces and the American stance becomes a whole lot weaker. This is not ‘fear mongering’, this is merely the view I have on Microsoft and the blunders they have made in the recent past. The UAE embraces perfection, as such Amazon (AWS) or Google would be a much better fit. But this is not about bashing Microsoft (it is fun though). The AI investments that could be coming the way of the UAE, there is a larger field. We hear all about ‘AI’ and the developers (Amazon, Apple, Google, et al) but most forget that Huawei has its own system. The FusionMind AI platform. I don’t know how good it is. Whatever the media tells us, once Huawei gets to demonstrate their system. No matter what others think, if the UAE considers it good enough, the American race for revenues goes in the wrong direction (for America that is). Don’t ask me how good or how bad the Huawei system is, because I have never seen it, but I know about it and the media is doing its best to ignore Huawei, but I am not convinced that this is a good move to make. The IT people (like me) want to assist people with solutions that WORK. I do not think it is a good idea to ignore the Huawei system. And I believe that neither Saudi Arabia or the United Arab Emirates are ignoring the Huawei technology side of it all. For me the larger setting isn’t merely what works, but it is the dim witted view of accusing Huawei whilst not offering ANY clear evidence. That is the larger stage and if Huawei, or the Chinese government can convince Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed al-Nahyan to allow Huawei to present their case, American will have additional worries to deal with. I personally think that Google AI with Mandiant would be personally the better option. That is merely because I have have limited exposure to AWS and no exposure to Amazon security solutions. So my view is slightly biased. In all this, Google needs to convince the UAE that they have what the UAE needs. After that Saudi Arabia should be shown these solutions too (likely they have already seen them).

When we see these sides, one side is the technology, the other side is the software and when we optionally see these chip solutions the bigger winner becomes whomever sets the premise of their software to the hardware provided. I personally hope for Google (I am biased here), but the end game is nowhere near concluded at present. I reckon the Biden administration is hoping for a memorandum of intent, but that is something we might see on Wednesday. So keep looking.

It is almost Wednesday here and Vancouver is following in 18 hours. So anything is possible. Have a great day.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

September 18, 2024 · 23:35

It’s fun to get it right

On the 11th of September I wrote ‘A brief recollection’, a story where I had issues with the setting of ‘monopolisation’ by Google and with that I also stated “Google innovated this market more than anyone ever considered. The fact that Microsoft has no chance and lacks expertise in software to make any dent in Google application is one part of the evidence. It also didn’t stifle competition, the fact that Microsoft had no option to push anything in Google’s path seems to me that this is the second part of the evidence is also nullified. After decades of ‘exploitation’ of customers, Google gave them all a fair chance. So why doesn’t anyone see that?” And now, less then four hours ago, the BBC gives us ‘Google scores rare legal win as 1.49bn euro fine scrapped’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c62rjd363j1o) with the text “It said the Commission had not considered “all the relevant circumstances” concerning the contract clauses and how it defined the market. Because of this, it ruled the Commission did not establish “an abuse of dominant position.”” That was what I basically said. The lack of creativity by others (read Microsoft) is no evidence of abuse. Their failure to see an equal footing five times over (once by Apple, once by Amazon, once by Sony and twice by Google) is not a setting of dominant abuse, it is merely dominant captaincy due to a failing to set the stage on creativity and I myself am about to give that lesson to Microsoft twice more. So how stupid do they need to get? 

As such it seems that the legal profession had to admit defeat on the mere stage to scrap the fine with the quote “The Commission concluded Google had abused its dominance to prevent websites from using brokers other than AdSense when they were seeking adverts for their web pages”, which is not correct either. You see Microsoft has edge and its advertisement solution. It is however failing on several fronts It falls behind Chrome having 65% and behind Safari with its 18.5%, Edge has a mere 5.3%. And behold, Safari is only on Mac systems. In February 2024 MacOS systems had a mere 15.42% and PC’s had over 72% and even in that environment Edge has a mere 5.3%, failing to come close to Safari. Does that not tell you something. It isn’t that Google is abusing dominance, there simply isn’t anything close to compatible. It isn’t abuse, there is simply no equivalent in that game and the advertisement game is cut throat to say the least. And as I see that, I see two additional blows I can give Microsoft and that pretty much ends Microsoft to be the competitor. It is a mere agent of mediocrity and as such it loses more and more market share. I can give (for a fee) one to Google and the other one to Amazon and they can show Microsoft what it is to be dead last in a game that only has space for the victor. Soon America will try its luck on shaking down Google for cash as we are told “The US government is also taking the tech giant to court over the same issue, with prosecutors alleging its parent company, Alphabet, illegally operates a monopoly in the market.” I wonder how they tend to prove that when the competitors (mainly Microsoft) are showing to be ridiculously short changed on competition. As I see it, it is a court session waiting to fail. The nice side is that I could optionally still rely on Kingdom Holding and Tencent Technology to enter a deal with me to broker technology and is definitely worth it when it comes to Kingdom Holding, and optionally Tencent Technology would be a worth the talk to. Amazon waked away from this and once these two setting pan out, all can see how much of a shortage Microsoft had. And that is a shortage that has been visible to those who think critically for at least a decade. The media spin has no hold over them and as we are told ‘Microsoft Wants To Stop The Next CrowdStrike Error Before It Causes PC Shutdown’ a mere 10 hours ago is set against “Microsoft even got everyone together at a security summit earlier this month where the company had talks about changing the dynamics of who can access the Windows kernel and control the changes” with the added “Microsoft realises that unrestricted access to Windows kernel is the big reason why the Crowdstrike outage occurred in the first place. It was even pointed out that Apple will never give that kind of access to its partners and vendors, which explains why no Mac machine was down on that day.” As such we get that MAC systems never had the issue and the collaborated events give rise to the stage that the CrowdStrike issues could optionally still happen. Did anyone guess what happens to cloud systems when this is not addressed in the next 48 hours? How many vendors will switch to AWS as such? When we consider that “changing the dynamics of who can access the Windows kernel and control the changes” could not normally be resolved in 48 hours at all. This is the setting that Microsoft is up against and that is all before we realise that it is a fundamental shift required in search and advertisement systems that makes Edge even less of a competitor soon enough and that gives Google more leeway. That realisation is what these courts are fighting against. There is no monopoly when there is not competition. And Microsoft is no longer any kind of interfering factor. That merely leaves Google, Amazon and Apple. Amazon holds 7.3% of the online ad market, Apple gets 30% from Google, which only leaves the optional others. And when we consider that Amazon has a bigger share than Microsoft/Edge. How much of a competitor was Microsoft to begin with? So who is setting the fictive breach towards ‘abusive monopoly’? Isn’t that the critical question? What voices speak to the EU and US lawmakers? That is the question that matters and I personally think that it is those who have a personal gain through Microsoft stages that are screaming murder. They bet on the wrong horse and as I see it Microsoft is a horse no show. The EU had to cancel that €1.49B euro fine as this could optionally backfire as well. The stage as I saw it was always different. As Microsoft went its way into the boardrooms, they forgot that those dozen people (times Fortune 500) depend on millions of workers doing stuff and that was where Google grew. And the Microsoft strategy fell flat. I myself found another nice worth billions in pretty much the same way. As such one of my solutions was primarily for Amazon as Google dropped their Stadia, which made the Amazon Luna the only contender and Microsoft with its solution fell flat behind Sony (PlayStation) and Nintendo (Switch), yet Tencent came roaring with its solution and became a contender. This shows how certain people in the US are using the Department of Justice and as (September 9th) we were given “According to the lawsuit filed by the Department of Justice (DoJ) and a coalition of states in 2023, Google dominates the digital ad marketplace and has leveraged its market power to stifle innovation and competition.” I see the same failing happen under Google “leveraged its market power to stifle innovation and competition” and equal shortage as there are no innovators (they heed to solve their CrowdStrike issues before they also lose the cloud market and there is no competition as there is a competition of one, that is no monopoly, it is the lack of equally sharp minded people gaining serious forward momentum. That is the actual stage and that was the setting all along. And the setting is easy to fathom. Consider the mere first strike “On the 9th of October 2006, YouTube was purchased by Google for $1.65 billion” In 2006 Microsoft had the cash and the option to buy this, but they did not. 

The former employees of PayPal were out there and Microsoft didn’t see the option. That is how much they failed for 18 years. After that Microsoft had at least three options to compete, but they did not. 2005, 2006, and 2014. Microsoft did nothing (as far as I know). More over in September 2016 ByteDance created TikTok. In 4 years it surpassed 2 billion downloads and still Microsoft was in the dark on what they had missed. You think this is not related, but it is. The competitors a near complete lack of comprehending its audience for close to 18 years and that is where the Department of Justice comes in? Competition is created by the players who understand their audience. It is something that is known for half a century. A monopoly is created when there are like minded players stifle matters like innovations (which requires innovators) and competition (which requires market share) most (especially Microsoft) failed on both matters. Amazon had its own niche market and had its own 7.3%. The only one with any right to cry foul (or is that fowl) is ByteDance, but the Department of Justice are silencing that voice. 

So as I am having fun because I saw the field correctly all along will (hopefully) soon have two more reasons to roll on the floor laughing and the fun part is that a player like Microsoft is too stupid to see the audience that they are disregarding. 

I wonder what the American DoJ will make of that.

Have a great day.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Politics, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

September 13, 2024 · 05:31

As the walls start to crumble

Yes, this is a little speculative, but the story is not. I just learned of the BBC story that they released 4 hours ago, 17 hours after I wrote the previous story. The BBC article (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cq82852kkz8o) is giving us ‘Microsoft lays off more gaming staff in new cuts’ with the subtext “It laid off 1,900 staff in January and, in May, closed four studios bought before its purchase of Call of Duty maker Activision-Blizzard”, as well as “He said the decision to cut more jobs – about 3% of its gaming staff – was made “as part of aligning our post-acquisition team structure” and organising the business “for long-term success””. The ‘he’ in this story is Phil Spencer, and that long-term success? As I personally see it Microsoft will implode within the next 30 month, so that long term is relatively short (as I see it). And as for the layoffs being towards post-acquisition team structure. That might be the intention, yet the issue remains that the interest alone on a $69,000,000,000 purchase should be no less then 4.5 billion dollars and the gaming stage brought Microsoft (according to several sources) no more than 2 billion dollars. As such Microsoft is coming up short around 50% of the interest alone and that is before we factor in what more is needed to take care of the principle. And as Microsoft is dealing with all kind of fines and several angry people suing for what they think they are due, the numbers will not come up nice, more like tainted and covered in blood covered red. We then get “Xbox boss Mr Spencer told gaming website IGN he was expected to run a “sustainable” gaming business and show growth during a June interview”, so what does this Spencer person think what ‘sustainable’ means? In my book it means able to be maintained at a certain level, and how does that work when you lay off over 2000 people? Support? Managers? One gives relief to hardship and buggy environment to the customers (something that Microsoft is intimate familiar with) and the managers are often the creative part of the company and they have had the ears of their staff. Now these fired people could optionally use my freebees and create these games on NON-Microsoft systems. Giving Microsoft even more hardship. A game that makes perfect sense in the business mind of Microsoft, but gaming is mostly art and that is a setting that they seem to misunderstand. I like it when the unworthy give me resources and tools that can be used against them. Karma tends to be a bitch. The quote we see is “In its latest finance report Microsoft said its gaming revenues had increased, mostly due to its ownership of Activision-Blizzard, which also produces World of Warcraft, Diablo and Overwatch” what we do not see are the issues that Diablo 4 still has (on whatever system). It might have been the big cash cow (over $666M in the first 5 days) but what did it cost to develop Diablo 4? It took 6 years, that is nearly all we know about it and Microsoft is really happy to hide a lot of numbers and merely focus on the good stories which is to be expected, but as we now see that thousands have been cast out, there is every chance that these people could become their worst competitor and not in a good way. Another setting is seen (at https://www.inverse.com/gaming/xbox-enotria-delay-microsoft-ps5) where inverse tells us ‘Enotria Is Just the Latest Game to Hit A Mysterious Snag With Its Xbox Launch’ with the byline “Something’s amiss at Microsoft”, I think that it is a lot more. How is it possible that Phil Spencer can smilingly visit the board of directors as we are given things like “it was canceling the Xbox release of HAAK. According to the developer, it spent over 14 months attempting to register the game for release on Xbox, when it estimated it needed only about two weeks of porting work. However, bugs in Microsoft’s Partner Center and Support site prevented it from applying”, as such I wonder, when a we see registration issues and bugs. What is Microsoft doing, or better asked, not doing? 14 months? There seems to be an increasing issue with transparency and in gaming it is damaging, as such what is Microsoft doing? I see it as a setting where the walls come crumbling, but what if I am wrong? What if Microsoft has a more insidious plan? I have no idea what it is and I have no clue what they are doing but there is a setting where Microsoft is all about all games online and in the cloud. So what happens when gamers are all controlled from a singular place? I have no idea what is going on, it was a mere speculation, but the increasing amount of issues (including bugs all over the place) does not fill me with comfort. Consider this and wonder why they were willing to pay 69 billion, all whilst there is a lack of revenue. There is more going on and I think it is becoming more and more imperative to create games on OTHER systems and bleed Microsoft dry. The other part is that the (speculated) intentional lack of clarity in regards to the numbers we see reports of 160% year on year growth, but with gaming it is merely based on the next game and so far quality has been lacking. The failures that Redfall brought, the lack of issues in Starfield is one side, the lacking sales of the Xbox is the other part. When you see the list of issues we must understand that there are plenty of intelligent people at Microsoft, so what is this about? We can wait to find out, or we can create a wave of excellent games and give the gamers an option to select the Amazon Luna, the Sony PS5 (PS4 too), the Nintendo Switch or the Tencent Handheld as their new home. At this point China becomes a contender in the gaming industry. That should be a hard sell to the US government, would it not be? As such I set the gaming IP I designed as Freebee to non-Microsoft systems. I might not know what Microsoft is up to, but I do know that they are greed/revenue driven, and as such I know what would hurt them and should Kingdom Holding accept my offer the hardship of Microsoft merely increases. A nice way to end my career, by partially saving the gaming world (a bit presumptuous perhaps). Microsoft should never have done what they did, they wanted to become absolute ruler and that didn’t sit well with me, a such I created IP and stories for game developers. The one rule was, ‘not for Microsoft systems’. Making the ideas public domain made the most sense to me. Or as Frank Herbert wrote in 1965 ‘He who destroys a thing, controls a thing’ as such I went to work. Now I believe that the BBC is merely handing me a partial confirmation (as I see it) that I was right all along. When the staff leaves it becomes a problem. 

Oh and as this becomes a new reality, China gets a real chance to pick up hundreds of people with a good grasp of gaming. That is merely my point of view and I could be wrong. 

Have a great day, the day before the weekend. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Gaming, IT, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

September 12, 2024 · 06:18

The attention an idea gets

That was a little bit of a spark that the Middle East Monitor gave me last week. I wasn’t sure if and how to pick this up. The article (at https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20240905-what-could-saudi-arabias-first-aaa-game-be-like-following-chinas-success/) starts with ‘What could Saudi Arabia’s first AAA game be like, following China’s success?’ The subtext that stopped me was “Within just three days, “Black Myth: Wukong” shattered records, selling over 10 million copies and reaching 18 million within two weeks, with lifetime sales projected to reach up to 30 million. The game also achieved a peak concurrent player count of 2.2 million worldwide and has overtaken “Cyberpunk 2077” as the most-played single-player game on the online distribution platform Steam.” It shows one part that I have been saying for a long time. You see, the people have basically had enough of a repetitive Ubisoft and their umpteenth version of Assassins Creed, FarCry, Watchdogs and so on. 

As such there are hundreds of thousands of gamers who will eagerly pick up an original feeling game and Black Myth: Wukong addressed that feeling. It is yet another side to what I claimed over the last two years when I put original IP on my blog for the eager developer. It was theirs to use. People want original games, a feeling of novel and new and I gave the (eager developing) audience a new system and the storyline to a new approach in gaming. Actually I did a little more than that and again I am seemingly proven correct (yet again). And when some developer takes the ideas I stated here and takes an interest in being original They could go to town on branders like Ubisoft and Bethesda. You see, Microsoft is playing it very careful now. If they push Bethesda too much they lose that brand as well. They first thought they had the bong of happiness with Redfall. At present the game is reviewed as “it faced poor to middling reviews and lost thousands of players in just three days. Currently, it’s one of Steam’s most poorly-rated games due to extremely buggy performance, incredibly stupid AI, lack of matchmaking (in a co-op game!), and a whole other host of issues” and this view was given whilst the game is out now for over a year. Microsoft knows that they banked too much on their arrogance and now they have only have Bethesda left (at present) with some credibility. And Bethesda earned this credibility. Skyrim released on 11.11.11 still holds up as one of the most engaging RPG games in the field. They lost a lot of credibility with Starfield (a 60% game) only for Microsoft systems and even as the people got news that things were coming, the game has been out for a year. We now get ‘While Some Players Are Still Finding Starfield’s Gameplay Frustrating, Others Are Taking Issue With What Fans Are Creating For The Game – And How Bethesda’s Handling It’ (source: ScreenRant) as such Bethesda has basically one arrow left at present. The elder Scrolls and Microsoft knows that this needs to be a hole in one. As we see “The Elder Scrolls 6 is expected to be released sometime during or after 2026”, this might speculatively become their own Swan Song. Not bad for a $7,500,000,000 investment (nyuk, nyuk, nyuk). Activision Blizzard is (as I see it) another decent failure. We get that the annual revenue in 2021 was $12.10B, all whilst Statista reported “In the second quarter of 2023, Activision Blizzard’s net income amounted to 587 million U.S. dollars” (one source gave me US$1.51 billion (2022) of net revenue), you might think this is good, but Microsoft acquired this baby for $69,000,000,000. As such the annual interest of a loan that big is more than the net revenue of that firm (I predicted this well over a year ago as much). This all has impact. At present Microsoft has an immense losing streak in gaming (I truly hope that I am contributing to that). As such I handed original IP to game developers making the hardship worse for Microsoft and now they merely have the one final arrow of Bethesda left, which is expected somewhere in 2026. As such these factors all have impact. You see Black Myth: Wukong is one part (I had absolutely nothing to do with that) for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, referred to in the article has options. There is Scheherazade’s 1001 nights. I put a few issues out in the open. The idea of an RPG all based on the Arabian life and challenges. There was an option I considered to use an RPG game to promote Islam (for all people) with teachings in the game. There could be an option to take another look at Peter Molyneux’s Magic Carpet now that the systems are a lot stronger than the first Playstation, as such you can increase more than graphics. The game play could be taken to a new stage and the intensity of the game could be set to 11 (as the saying goes). Those are merely a few mentions that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia could entertain and I made reference to at least two more games in a relaunch/remaster and refitted vibe. All settings I made mention of over the last two years alone. 

But it is not all sunshine for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. You see it has an uphill battle as the Middle East Monitor states with “As a non-Western, non-Japanese contribution, the game faced extensive media scrutiny ahead of its launch, including “controversies” over alleged sexism within the development studio, government censorship on politics and feminist propaganda, and some technical issues upon release”, there are a few items. I will state that the accusation of “alleged sexism within the development studio” is pretty much bogus. All the development studios are dealing with these ‘kids on the block’ issues as the saying goes. And government censorship? I need to see this to make it count, but I state this as the Middle East Monitor did. 

I think that the biggest challenge for Saudi Arabia is to bring something unique. They have the area and the landmarks, but the other players (Japan, USA, Canada) have had the singular field of gaming, as such it is important to bring something unique. I believe that this is possible as Black Myth: Wukong made it happen. Still, it will be a challenging field. Making something look Arabian has been done and Ubisoft with AC: Mirage pulled it off. So it is just as important to have a unique Arabian voice, look and gameplay. Still, there is something to be said for a new Magic Carpet (from Bullfrog) now that the hardware is 3,500 times more powerful there is a lot of achievement open to the audience. There is an additional field with Arabian lore (which I explore in my created script ‘How to assassinate a politician’) and there is more to do. You see I still believe that RPG is the most true game environment. I have nothing against other modes. But the RPG field can be utilised or used to create another type of game, optionally based on this new RPG. 

As I see it (and as Black Myth: Wukong proves) it is more about being original. There will always be some gamers that yearns for a certain game style, but the masses want originality. You see, a lack of choice only works for some time. In this an Arabian game could be good, but it is important that all the right characters are dotted and crossed (as in the I and T). That is a first essential need for any game to make it to the release stage. Then there is the music, here Saudi Arabia has an advantage. There is a lot unknown to us and as such there should be plenty of options. Then there is the additional idea. For example Saudi Arabian developers could use existing locations to create another setting. Whether this is a addition to a new Division game, or a Die Hard touch towards a shooting game. And another idea is to use Tahlia Street (aka Prince Mohammed bin Abdulaziz Street) as the backdrop of a variation of ‘Where in the world is Carmen Sandiego’ But now a realtime challenge to find the person that is trying to evade capture. Your only aid is his/her digital trace that you have access to. That could actually be a multiplayer approach where the mouse (aka criminal) and the cats (aka authorities) and the cheese dealers (contenders for the mouse empire) have to capture this so called mouse. With the stage that capture the wrong person makes you a target for arrest and there is the ring race. The mouse is rated on time it took them to evade capture and the others on the this it took them. And with that location completely mapped out it becomes a nice rat race (for the mice involved). I don’t think this has ever been done before to this degree and there is the rub. I just took this thought to a new level as I was writing this. So why can’t some of the existing developers come up with this? Think about that and as you try to figure this out consider that this is an optional new world with over 150 million possible new gamers. You can become a copy of what is, or come with something new, some version of an old game but now in a way never done before. And I have done that before, I considered a new version of Murder on the Zinderneuf and I made it into a 3D version of the game with interactions as well as imbuing it with elements of Iron Helix (1993). So there is a world of new IP out there. Now consider how much new IP Microsoft got for their $70,500,000,000 and what you could use (from what I have written here) without spending a penny. And the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has a lot more to offer, Lore, Myths and a few more challenges. All that could create the new generation of games and gaming. The crowds are hungry for original gaming IP and the current player have very little to offer. Feng Ji might have come here first as the new player, but that does not stop Saudi Arabia from heralding their own chapter of gaming to the world of gamers.

Have a great Thursday, The weekend is now one day away (plus an additional 8 hours of work).

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Gaming, Media

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

September 11, 2024 · 03:01

A brief recollection

Yesterday I saw an article (source: BBC) that gave me reason to give a little recollection. The article (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckg2dpkpmv1o) giving us ‘Google’s lucrative ad tech business goes on trial’ and the text “A trial beginning on Monday will hear the Department of Justice’s case that the search engine’s parent company Alphabet illegally operates a monopoly in the market.” set me off. You see, I worked on that system as an operator, a technical account manager if you prefer. I worked on this system in 2015. This is important because in the nine following years Microsoft and its ‘system’ Bing couldn’t even remotely get anything working that presented some weak looking imitation. The system was that excellent. And excellent is the operative word. You see before that advertising agencies were taking their clients in some kind of a looting ride. Prices were out of this world for the advertisers. It was a business limited to big business. The Google ad system was made so that everyone had a clear possibility, a fair system that didn’t overcharge, something that wasn’t possible before. That was a new approach to advertising. 

Bid for placeCharged
9.001.28
3.001.27
2.001.26
1.251.25

The setting was that the higher bid was only charged one cent more than the previous one. The advertisement agencies would pocket the difference from $7.62 of the first bidder. Now consider this happening ten thousands of times every day. When you realise this you see how this was the better system. There was no monopoly, customers suddenly had a fair chance to their advertisement options. That part is missing. It is not the fault of the BBC, they merely report. They also give us “Alphabet has argued its success is due to the “effectiveness” of its services – but prosecutors say it has used its market dominance to stifle rivals” which is exactly what I am saying. But the prosecutors are exaggerating (as anyone would suggest). We then get ““It is a really important industry that grabs billions of consumer dollars every year,” said Laura Phillips-Sawyer, a professor at the University of Georgia School of Law.” A statement (possibly taken out of context) from a law professor from Georgia. The less excusable statement was “grabs billions of consumer dollars every year”, that is where my example comes in. This is not the way of this system. It tempers the cost and need for ‘over’ bidding. I gave an example of four, but the list goes on for a lot more. This illustrates the loss of Laura Phillips-Sawyer and how little she knows of this system. So its not “I think all consumers have an interest in this litigation”, I believe that Microsoft minded people want to get into this business and the prosecutor is a possible way for these people to get in. 

As such we see that the statement “Google dominates the digital ad marketplace and has leveraged its market power to stifle innovation and competition” Google innovated this market more than anyone ever considered. The fact that Microsoft has no chance and lacks expertise in software to make any dent in Google application is one part of the evidence. It also didn’t stifle competition, the fact that Microsoft had no option to push anything in Google’s path seems to me that this is the second part of the evidence is also nullified. After decades of ‘exploitation’ of customers, Google gave them all a fair chance. So why doesn’t anyone see that? How come that this is not shown to us all? Is it perhaps that the prosecutor has the ear of those people who lost their golden eggs? I am stating that not only is Google innocent in this, the world doesn’t realise how fair this system is. And the wannabe’s want to hack into this system for their own selfish needs. We are also given “It argues that competition in the digital ad space is growing, not contracting – citing increased ad growth and revenues for companies such as Apple, Amazon and TikTok as proof”, in this I say that the digital ad space is growing because Google made it more fair and as such players like Apple, Amazon and TikTok are given a space where they have millions more to advertise against the once exploitative system. What we do not get to see is that I enabled dozens of advertisers, small business units to get a grasp of advertisement space on. Monthly basis. They had the option to set a budget for as little as $5 a month to get several placements every day. Yes, they might not be above the fold as the expression goes, but they were on the page. The advertisement agencies would not have even talked to those. Now consider that this happens to tens of thousands of customers and realise that the statement “I think all consumers have an interest in this litigation” becomes folly.

When we consider this the statement “Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly” is equally folly. And I wonder who Judge Amit Mehta was serving. Even as the judge was an optional idolising fair play person we need to realise that the Google rank system was re-invented

The eigenvalue problem behind PageRank’s algorithm was independently rediscovered and reused in many scoring problems. 

In 1895, Edmund Landau suggested using it for determining the winner of a chess tournament. The eigenvalue problem was also suggested in 1976 by Gabriel Pinski and Francis Narin, who worked on scientometrics ranking scientific journals, in 1977 by Thomas Saaty in his concept of Analytic Hierarchy Process which weighted alternative choices, and in 1995 by Bradley Love and Steven Sloman as a cognitive model for concepts, the centrality algorithm. (Source: wiki). 

Now consider that Sergey Brin and Larry Page made this system 30 years ago based on ideas dating back to (as quoted) 1895. And then three times more and no one at Microsoft woke up. They were all so focussed on greed and gaining the attention of board of directors at big business. Google focussed on the millions of people working there and getting the attention of people who needed a better option. “As of September 24, 2019, all patents associated with PageRank have expired” and now these systems are under attack. However, the data is already with Google and the larger players (read: Microsoft) will need decades to catch up and they know they are not able to, in case of Microsoft I personally believe that they merely have at most 24 months left until they collapse and that is it for the once computer behemoth. As per now, fr a player like Microsoft, the ad space is a much safer option to recollect lost revenue and keep their head above water. I admit that this is speculative, but it makes the most sense. Even in 1995 I saw how Microsoft was lagging behind, but they had serious problems (read: Netscape) and it get worse after that. But that is not the aim of this article. As I have shown here Google was a true innovator and you need to wonder if monopoly is a valid setting when all the others cannot even get close because their innovators are merely presented spinners, or optionally previous exploiters. How is it a monopoly when there is no other realistic contender for the crown? Is an island with a population of one totalitarian in nature?

Simple questions that are hard to answer. Enjoy your day today, this fine Wednesday where we start yearning for the coming weekend.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Law, Media, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

September 9, 2024 · 22:27

The other Palette

This is the setting I switched to. From Microsoft (too much issues) to a nice palette. Not to paint, but if the painting on an easel is the current version of a game. 

There is another version, ‘my’ improved version. You see between 1985 and 2000 Atari (with their Atari 800 and Atari ST) and Commodore (with their Commodore 64 and Commodore Amiga) launched 10,000 games. Now if we only look at the top 10% of these games we end up with 1000 games. I am guessing that 50% has some level of IP protection (still an optional path) but 50% have no protection at all. That was what I was trying to tell Kingdom Holding. It is a path to about one third of the path to a 5 billion dollar annual revenue. And I recently completed the thought of a fourth game to relaunch. Consider that Microsoft with their 23 development houses have 2000 games. This path would gain 50% of that marker and Microsoft isn’t doing good (they will be in denial) and in that same setting, I got another idea. The top 10% are all set to a rating or 80% or better. This could be done with a lot less people and when the first two dozen games are out their streaming solution would only pick up more and more. The first stage would be reached with a setting of 50 million consoles. So as we were given “As of August 2024, lifetime unit sales of Xbox One consoles in North America reached nearly 33 million, while in Europe, lifetime unit sales surpassed 12.8 million. In total, nearly 58 million Xbox One units have been sold worldwide as of August 2024.” And my idea would equal that within 2 years. It took Microsoft 11 years to get to this and within 4 years I would have surpassed them. And that is just for starters. I speculatively (it remains speculation, not presumption) see the 100 million surpassed within 4 years. It would set this new console on the level of Sony and Nintendo. I personally (wishful thinking) see the new system equal the Nintendo Switch and the Playstation 2 in half the time they needed. This isn’t grandiose posturing. The path was made by them and now I see the option to reap the rewards. Either via Kingdom Holding or via Tencent, hoe doesn’t matter. I still see the vision of handing Phil Spencer the wooden spoon. He’ll end up dead last in a race he never really understood and as Microsoft enters more and more hard times divisions of Microsoft keep on being hollowed out. My work becomes increasingly easier. 

So at this point it is largely a stage where my brain sets the premise of how to set the look of these games, not by ‘rad looking’ graphics, even though they will be a lot better. But these games it was largely about playing and the joy of playing. These ‘game makers’ are all about advertisement money. They all advertise ‘no wifi’ or even more ludicrous ‘no payments’ whilst they merely set the premise to another fitting. Pay to win, disguised as an clever way to pay to grind. How disappointing. I do not blame them. Too many gamers nowadays are delusional falling into a trap and that tend to be demoralising. My idea was handed before in this blog and a few people picked up on this, or they had exactly the same idea (I cannot prove how they got there) but that is fair enough. So I decided to remaster in my mind these games and I got game 5 to a second setting of the master version. I will keep these thoughts offline. I initially had the idea for Google, but 3 days later they dropped the Stadia, so basically Amazon (Luna) and Tencent (handheld) remained. Tencent has a satisfying bonus. These high and mighty captains of industry would have surrendered another industry to China. And they do not have a lot left to work with.

A simple setting that I solved three years ago, and they were all blind to what was staring them in the face. Soon I will have to write more about the solution I had for malls. Another path that a few corporations (like Google and Amazon) overlooked. That is fair, you can only run an industry when you have bright developers falling asleep on the job and when waking up they have that spark with a new idea. A never ending stage of deadlines tend to be debilitating in the end. 

So how does these two link? 

The idea I had came to me three years ago (and I wrote about it here) and in that time I merely revamped these games with more and more improvements, this is not against those games. Some of these games were launched before 1990 and I had 30 years to spin a few webs combine that with the graphic improvements we have now and the versatility of the hardware and we get an estimated 250% better game. And the captains of industry (specifically Microsoft) never looked beyond the spin hype they themselves created. A simple example Richard Garriott created the Ultimate series, ahead of its time and When you recreate Ultimate 4, Ultimate 5, Ultima 6 and Ultimate 7 on an Elder Scrolls Oblivion shoe anvil, there would be millions of gamers reset to this storyline. You see, the storyline of these games were perfect, the location (a whole world) was perfect and the setting we see with the virtues and the stones, mantras and a few setting more was perfect. I got hooked on Ultima 3 (Exodus) in 1984. This game never lost its appeal, not in 40 years. The games 4,5,6, and 7 have a very similar map and the fact that you play with a party of 8 people gives it even more bang. That is what Bethesda could never deliver (they were not trying to). Microsoft overlooked one of the greatest RPG IP’s EVER created and that is merely the tip of the iceberg. 1984 was a marvel in more than one way. The other game was Elite, now called Elite Dangerous by David Braben and he did something amazing. That is the stage Microsoft overlooked as well (or Braben was way ahead of them) and there are dozens more games that could fit the new bill on streaming systems. Another game from those days was Boulder Dash. Upgrade the graphics and you should have an amazing relaunch. That is the simple setting that still hold sway after 40 years. And you wonder why I think that these people were asleep at the wheel? Another stage is that with 2 games the fighting ring could be transitory. And there is space for Kingdom Holding (or Tencent) to enter this field as the current ‘captains of industry’ are seemingly about the “worst decisions of their career” whilst I showed up to three years ago showing that it was already a lot worse. 

So what more can be done? I am not sure, I send the notion to both Andy Jassy and Al Waleed bin Talal Al Saud, but I had no response. I am not surprised they both probably get hundreds of people saying that they had the golden idea. And now I get to address Tencent Holding. Not sure how that pans out, but the thought of a 5 billion revenue (annual) might appeal to them (if I get paid that is). I have no illusions that I might merely make 1%, but that still amounts to $50,000,000, as such I would not complain. Still the idea of asking for 1% of the revenue for 20 years seems more on point (for me that is) and if so I shall make the mall solution public domain. 

If you look back in my blogs for these three years you will find a lot more, including the stage for a completely new RPG, with original ideas and a few stages I considered during me Oblivion playing days. As well as a completely new IP on RPG that hd not been done before. Including a setting between two worlds which was a little based on the idea Stephen King gave me from the book The Talisman. It was one way of traversing locations. Not a copy of his idea, merely the premise of his approach. All these things I see (in my mind) and game developers never caught on what else they could do. They merely went for ‘looking cool’ whilst wannabe gamers stood in a doorway keeping everyone else out. Oh, what a lovely stage. That is what passes for game developer? Wanting to be cool with multiplayer games all whilst plenty of people (a majority) where happy in single player mode). I still think they did this so that they never had to properly develop clever NPC programming. As such I even surpassed that when I came up with a setting though IP created by Vint Cerf, he merely saw the business need. I saw a whole new approach in gaming and as such his ‘IP’ should be open to me. Another path Microsoft overlooked. They merely bought Bethesda and thought that their problem was solved. I took one look and thought “Oh, perhaps I could do this?” One thought was all it took. So, where is Microsoft now? I reckon by 2026 on a whole new plane of problems (if they still exist by then). For tomorrow I need to write in protection (if protection is the right word) of Google, the BBC forced me to go nuts on my keyboard. Google deserves someone who stands up for them as well, although I feel certain they have that in hand. I merely want to give my support on that cause.

Nearly time for another Jalapeño sandwich with cheese. Have a great day.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Gaming, IT

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

September 8, 2024 · 23:27

Alignments?

Less than 24 hours ago I wrote about Microsoft and the statement I gave there, namely “When you need to appease 400,000 partners things go wrong, they always do. How is anyones guess but whilst Microsoft is all focussed on the letter of the law and their revenue” led to a few questions. So, how is 400,000 partners an issue and the 12,000 partners of Salesforce are not? Well, I never said that 12,000 partners are not a problem, but as I see it the 400,000 are. 

To get where I am going, a few definition are needed. A partner (in IT) is set to “A partnership when it comes to IT is within the IT sphere and has mutual or at least some value for both companies.” But here the issue starts. You see, some have a somewhat more defined setting “In some mild cases, there are a few well-intentioned and hard-working partners who are just out of the loop. In more extreme cases, certain partners are not bought in, are not being held accountable, and are negatively impacting performance.” This is where the problem starts. Partners have an alignment to you, but they also have their own agenda. Microsoft can make all the claims they want, but this is reality. So lets get a useful presentation image. 

So see this boat, that is the Micro boat (a very soft presentation) the goal is the 100% mark, right on course. Now consider that in a polarising setting there are two directions, And the group of 400,000 is split up. In this we get that one group is larger and it has the breaching impact of the good ship Microsoft coursing to the right. Reality gives us that there will be be clusters in all directions. 

Some ahead to the left or the right, but those behind the ship will also slow it down with all kinds of budget overruns. No matter how good the Microsoft agreements are, there will always be interest groups for THEIR interest trying to ‘steer’ the ship more in their direction. As such 400,000 partners is (as I see it) folly. Revenue and greed will only help anyone so far, as I see it, Microsoft has had its problems. I reckon that not all the news is sincere and completely valid. Some were (as I personally see it) issues with alignment. Their might not have been drastic but there will have been issues. That is my point of view and in business intelligence I have seen my share of ‘issues’ not all of them drastic but plenty of them with some kind of impact. 

Take this as well as the news we saw through Wired and we get a much larger issue and now as I personally see it, partners could become debilitating. Mess with a partners revenue stream and things go pear shaped really fast. We see this 1 hours ago when we are told “Nvidia Loses $470 Billion in Value in a Week. Should Investors Be Worried? · The market as a whole is shaky · Nvidia remains in an extremely solid position.” Really? At what point does a firm remain in a solid position when they lose $470,000,000,000 in a week? Now take this setting (which might be a temporary thing) and take it to the next level. A major side to the so called AI stage. That firm loses four-hundred and seventy BILLION dollars. That’s about 20%, so this was a simple dip which recovered in mere minutes. So at what point and why did it drop to that degree? And as I see it, any partner that does not react is on a fools errand. Now consider that 400,000 partners call Microsoft at that point to learn what THEIR impact might be. So a software vendor needs to appease 400,000 partners. And I couldn’t get support (in the past) for hours. So how does this compute? Well look at the first image. These partners will not be in one direction, but in dozens of directions. So are you catching on now? So take that and News by TechTarget giving us ‘Understand Microsoft Copilot security concerns’ and the underlying text “Microsoft Copilot can improve end-user productivity, but it also has the potential to create security and data privacy issues.”and that with the news at Wired (see previous article) gives a lot more weight to “the potential to create security and data privacy issues” and now, what will the partners do? How many will optionally panic? Now watch the good ship Microsoft slow down and drop their anchors for the storm (optionally in a teacup) recede. What is the bill belonging to such a knee-jerk reaction? 

You tell me, but there will be a reaction. As I see it, they either have 400,000 customers (optionally non paying) and they will not make a sound, but it makes Microsoft seem more important, or they have 400,000 real partners and you see what I described above. I am merely throwing the terms they publish (via media). You can’t have it both ways and it all ends with the setting of Alignment. I do not know a real good read on the alignment of customers versus partners. But one gets you revenue and the other gives you a smoking hand grenade. You tell me what you prefer to deal with. 

OK, not the most positive writing, but it came from a question that gave ma additional pause to think. 

Have a great Sunday (Vancouver) and I am moving towards Monday a present (in 40 minutes).

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

September 8, 2024 · 01:09

Poised to deliver critique

That is my stance at present. It might be a wrong position to have, but it comes from a setting of several events that come together at this focal point. We all have it, we are all destined to a stage of negativity thought speculation or presumption. It is within all of us and my article 20 hours ago on Microsoft woke something up within me. So I will take you on a slightly bumpy ride.

The first step is seen through the BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20240905-microsoft-ai-interview-bbc-executive-lounge) where we get ‘Microsoft is turning to AI to make its workplace more inclusive’ and we are given “It added an AI powered chatbot into its Bing search engine, which placed it among the first legacy tech companies to fold AI into its flagship products, but almost as soon as people started using it, things went sideways.” With the added “Soon, users began sharing screenshots that appeared to show the tool using racial slurs and announcing plans for world domination. Microsoft quickly announced a fix, limiting the AI’s responses and capabilities.” Here we see the collective thoughts an presumptions I had all along. AI does not (yet) exist. How do you live with “Microsoft quickly announced a fix”? We can speculate whether the data was warped, it was not defined correctly. Or it is a more simple setting of programmer error. And when an AI is that incorrect does it have any reliability? Consider the old data view we had in the early 90’s “Garbage In, Garbage Out”. Then. We are offered “Microsoft says AI can be a tool to promote equity and representation – with the right safeguards. One solution it’s putting forward to help address the issue of bias in AI is increasing diversity and inclusion of the teams building the technology itself”, as such consider this “promote equity and representation – with the right safeguards” Is that the use of AI? Or is it the option of deeper machine learning using an LLM model? An AI with safeguards? Promote equity and representation? If the data is there, it might find reliable triggers if it knows where or what to look for. But the model needs to be taught and that is where data verification comes in, verified data leads to a validated model. As such to promote equity and presentation the dat needs to understand the two settings. Now we get the harder part “The term “equity” refers to fairness and justice and is distinguished from equality: Whereas equality means providing the same to all, equity means recognising that we do not all start from the same place and must acknowledge and make adjustments to imbalances.” Now see the term equity being used in all kinds of places and in real estate it means something different. Now what are the chances people mix these two up? How can you validate data when the verification is bungled? It is the simple singular vision that Microsoft people seem to forget. It is mostly about the deadline and that is where verification stuffs up. 

Satya Nadella is about technology that understands us and here we get the first problem. When we consider that “specifically large-language models such as ChatGPT – to be empathic, relevant and accurate, McIntyre says, they needs to be trained by a more diverse group of developers, engineers and researchers.” As I see it, without verification you have no validation and you merely get a bucket of data where everything is collected and whatever the result of it becomes an automated mess, hence my objection to it. So as we are given “Microsoft believes that AI can support diversity and inclusion (D&I) if these ideals are built into AI models in the first place”, we need to understand that the data doesn’t support it yet and to do this all data needs to be recollected and properly verified before we can even consider validating it. 

Then we get article 2 which I talked about a month ago the Wired article (at https://www.wired.com/story/microsoft-copilot-phishing-data-extraction/) we see the use of deeper machine learning where we are given ‘Microsoft’s AI Can Be Turned Into an Automated Phishing Machine’, yes a real brain bungle. Microsoft has a tool and criminals use it to get through cloud accounts. How is that helping anyone? The fact that Microsoft did not see this kink in their trains of thought and we are given “Michael Bargury is demonstrating five proof-of-concept ways that Copilot, which runs on its Microsoft 365 apps, such as Word, can be manipulated by malicious attackers” a simple approach of stopping the system from collecting and adhering to criminal minds. Whilst Windows Central gives us ‘A former security architect demonstrates 15 different ways to break Copilot: “Microsoft is trying, but if we are honest here, we don’t know how to build secure AI applications”’ beside the horror statement “Microsoft is trying” we get the rather annoying setting of “we don’t know how to build secure AI applications”. And this isn’t some student. Michael Bargury is an industry expert in cybersecurity seems to be focused on cloud security. So what ‘expertise’ does Microsoft have to offer? People who were there 3 weeks ago were shown 15 ways to break copilot and it is all over their 365 applications. At this stage Microsoft wants to push out broken if not an unstable environment where your data resides. Is there a larger need to immediately switch to AWS? 

Then we get a two parter. In the first part we see (at https://www.crn.com.au/news/salesforces-benioff-says-microsoft-ai-has-disappointed-so-many-customers-611296) CRN giving us the view of Marc Benioff from Salesforce giving us ‘Microsoft AI ‘has disappointed so many customers’’ and that is not all. We are given ““Last quarter alone, we saw a customer increase of over 60 per cent, and daily users have more than doubled – a clear indicator of Copilot’s value in the market,” Spataro said.” Words from Jared Spataro, Microsoft’s corporate vice president. All about sales and revenue. So where is the security at? Where are the fixes at? So we are then given ““When I talk to chief information officers directly and if you look at recent third-party data, organisations are betting on Microsoft for their AI transformation.” Microsoft has more than 400,000 partners worldwide, according to the vendor.” And here we have a new part. When you need to appease 400,000 partners things go wrong, they always do. How is anyones guess but whilst Microsoft is all focussed on the letter of the law and their revenue it is my speculated view that corners are cut on verification and validation (a little less on the second factor). And the second part in this comes from CX Today (at https://www.cxtoday.com/speech-analytics/microsoft-fires-back-rubbishes-benioffs-copilot-criticism/) where we are given ‘Microsoft Fires Back, Rubbishes Benioff’s Copilot Criticism’ with the text “Jared Spataro, Microsoft’s Corporate Vice President for AI at Work, rebutted the Salesforce CEO’s comments, claiming that the company had been receiving favourable feedback from its Copilot customers.” At this point I want to add the thought “How was that data filtered?” You see the article also gives us “While Benioff can hardly be viewed as an objective voice, Inc. Magazine recently gave the solution a D – rating, claiming that it is “not generating significant revenue” for its customers – suggesting that the CEO may have a point” as well as “despite Microsoft’s protestations, there have been rumblings of dissatisfaction from Copilot users” when the dust settles, I wonder how Microsoft will fare. You see I state that AI does not (yet) exist. The truth is that generative AI can have a place. And when AI is here, when it is actually here not many can use it. The hardware is too expensive and the systems will need close to months of testing. These new systems that is a lot, it would take years for simple binary systems to catch up. As such these LLM deeper machine learning systems will have a place, but I have seen tech companies fire up sales people and get the cream of it, but the customers will need a new set of spectacles to see the real deal. The premise that I see is that these people merely look at the groups they want, but it tends to be not so filtered and as such garbage comes into these systems. And that is where we end up with unverified and unvalidated data points. And to give you an artistic view consider the following when we use a one point perspective that is set to “a drawing method that shows how things appear to get smaller as they get further away, converging towards a single “vanishing point” on the horizon line” So that drawing might have 250,000 points. Now consider that data is unvalidated. That system now gets 5,000 extra floating points. What happens when these points invade the model? What is left of your art work? Now consider that data sets like this have 15,000,000 data points and every data point has 1,000,000 parameters. See the mess you end up with? Now go look into any system and see how Microsoft verifies their data. I could not find any white papers on this. A simple customer care point of view, I have had that for decades and Jared Spataro as I see it seemingly does not have that. He did not grace his speech with the essential need of data verification before validation. That is a simple point of view and it is my view that Microsoft will come up short again and again. So as I (simplistically) see it. Is by any chance, Jared Spataro anything more than a user missing Microsoft value at present?

Have a great day.

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,