Tag Archives: NY Times

April 15, 2025 · 10:24

The clever get the advantage

That was always the setting to be envied, when the bullies come calling, the last breath is given to the clever people. In this the NY Times gives us (at https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/14/us/harvard-trump-reject-demands.html) ‘Harvard Says It Will Not Comply With Trump Administration’s Demands’ and I was skeptical at first, but as we see “Harvard University said on Monday that it had rejected policy changes requested by the Trump administration, becoming the first university to directly refuse to comply with its demands and setting up a showdown between the federal government and the nation’s wealthiest university.” My skepticism comes from the setting we saw last year when the Guardian gave us “Minouche Shafik, the president of Columbia University, appeared beleaguered and uncertain as one Congress member after another assailed her over her institution’s supposed inaction to stop it becoming what one called “a hotbed of antisemitism and hatred”.” For universities to let anti semitism unanswered and the setting of “who became Columbia’s president last July, into changing her testimony after she earlier told the Democratic representative Ilhan Omar that she was not aware of any anti-Jewish demonstrations at the university.” Which is a massive problem at the first setting as I see it. Now that Harvard sets a new line, they could massively profit by that standard. So as we see “Harvard’s response, which called the Trump administration’s demands illegal, marked a major shift in tone for the nation’s most influential school, which has been criticized in recent weeks for capitulating to Trump administration pressure.” We see two advantages for Harvard, the first first being that the wokiest woke people (whatever that means) will take their money out of their previous donation university and basically had it to Harvard (the people who openly hate President Trump might do the same), the second advantage is the academics who were unsettled by the federal ‘guide lines’ are likely to make a move from place previous to new place Harvard. This will name Harvard more renown than ever before and I reckon (a mere speculation) that these academics might increase the distance between Harvard and whomever has places 2 through 8 and in the academic world that matters (a lot). 

Is it right? Well, I think that the federal setting should not have gotten involved (but that is a personal view), I do believe that if a university is guilty of crimes than that is a different matter, and as most law student have been cast in the reading of the Nuremberg trials and the acceptance of illegal orders the setting for Harvard was (blatantly) simple. Don’t think it is a simple setting, because Harvard has the most money at present (read: the richest), other universities are a lot more dependent on Federal funding and that makes it a hard sell for a lot of them, but perhaps the setting that Harvard now has given the rest of America, others will follow. 

We can only hope.

In other news I just saw that Canada had to bid farewell to Gerry McNamara at the age of 90. As a wannabe goalie I give a heartfelt goodbye salute to this actual former goalie and former General Manager for seven seasons of the Toronto Maple Leafs. And I give my condolences to his family, friends and former team mates. And below we see Gerry McNamara at a slightly younger age

Have a great day and enjoy the end of the pre week today, midweek tomorrow.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics, sport

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

December 28, 2023 · 23:31

Not changing sides

It was a setting I found myself in. You see, there is nothing wrong with bashing Microsoft. The question at times is how long until the bashing is no longer a civic duty, but personal pleasure. As such I started reading the article (at https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/new-york-times-openai-lawsuit-copyright-1.70697010) where we see ‘New York Times sues OpenAI, Microsoft for copyright infringement’ it is there where we are given a few part. The first that caught my eye was ““Defendants seek to free-ride on the Times’s massive investment in its journalism by using it to build substitutive products without permission or payment,” according to the complaint filed Wednesday in Manhattan Federal Court.” To see why I am (to some extent) siding with Microsoft on this is that a newspaper is only in value until it is printed. At that point it becomes public domain. Now the paper has a case when you consider the situation that someone is copying THEIR result for personal gain. Yet, this is not the case here. They are teaching a machine learning model to create new work. Consider that this is not an easy part. First the machine needs to learn ALL the articles that a certain writer has written. So not all the articles of the New York Times. But separately the articles from every writer. Now we could (operative word) to a setting where something alike is created on new properties, events that are the now. So that is no longer a copy, that is an original created article in the style of a certain writer. 

As such when we see the delusional statement from the New York Times giving us “The Times is not seeking a specific amount of damages, but said it believes OpenAI and Microsoft have caused “billions of dollars” in damages by illegally copying and using its works.” Delusional for valuing itself billions of dollars whilst their revenue was a lot less than a billion dollars. Then there is the other setting. Is learning from public domain a crime? Even if it includes the articles of tomorrow, is it a crime then? You see, the law is not ready for machine learning algorithm. It isn’t even ready for the concept of machine learning at present. 

Now, this doesn’t apply to everything. Newspapers are the vocalisations of fact (or at least used to be). The issues on skating towards design patents is a whole other mess. 

As such OpenAi and Microsoft are facing an uphill battle, yet in the case of the New York Times and perhaps the Washington Post and the Guardian I am not so sure. You see, as I see it, it hangs on one simple setting. Is a published newspaper to be regarded as Public Domain? The paper is owned, as such these articles cannot be resold, but there is the grinding cog. It was never used as such. It was a learning model to create new original work and that is a setting newspapers were never ready for. None of these media laws will give coverage on that setting. This is probably why the NY Times is crying foul by the billions. 

The law in these settings is complex, but overall as a learning model I do not believe the NY Times has a case. and I could be wrong. My setting is that articles published become public domain to some degree. At worst OpenAI (Microsoft too) would need to own one copy of every newspaper used, but that is as far as I can go. 

The dangers here is not merely that this is done, it is “often taken from the internet” this becomes an exercise on ‘trust but verify’. There is so much fake and edited materials on the internet. One slip up and the machine learning routines fail. So we see not merely the writer. We see writer, publication, time of release, path of release, connected issues, connected articles all these elements hurt the machine learning algorithm. One slip up and it is back to the drawing board teaching the system often from scratch.

And all that is before we consider that editors also change stories and adjust for length, as such it is a slightly bigger mess than you consider from the start. To see that we need to return to June this year when we were given “The FTC is demanding documents from Open AI, ChatGPT’s creator, about data security and whether its chatbot generates false information.” If we consider the impact we need to realise that the chatbot does not generate false information, it was handed wrong and false information from the start the model merely did what the model was given. That is the danger. The operators and programmers not properly vetting information.

Almost the end of the year, enjoy.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Law, Media, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,

November 23, 2023 · 00:07

Changing gears

This is something I have seen an I have been confronted with in some form. Yet when the NY Times reported on ‘Why Banks Are Suddenly Closing Down Customer Accounts’ (at https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/05/business/banks-accounts-close-suddenly.html). I was taken aback a little. This is not some case of criminal activity, that I would accept. Here we see “Bank customers get a letter in the mail saying their institution is closing all of their checking and savings accounts. Their debit and credit cards are shuttered, too. The explanation, if there is one, usually lacks any useful detail” with an additional “the telltale pause and shift in tone. “Per your account agreement, we can close your account for any reason at any time,” the script often goes”. There are two settings that come to mind (of the top of my head). The first one comes via Dutch journalist and entrepreneur Luc Sala “the world will have two types of people, those who have and those who do not” it is a statement he made 30 yeas ago and we have been moving towards that setting. A stage of enablers, consumers and others. The second thought that came to mind is seen with “Individuals can’t pay their bills on time. Banks often take weeks to send them their balances. When the institutions close their credit cards, their credit scores can suffer. Upon cancellation, small businesses often struggle to make payroll — and must explain to vendors and partners that they don’t have a bank account for the time being.” I see this as the case that to some degree saw with the SVB bank in march. They are so close to the edge that they are closing down all accounts that are not labelled as enablers or consumers. The algorithm is set to what in some circles would be called platinum or gold customers, the rest is cut as a liability. It is all so that they can continue a little longer. As long as they stay away from the edge they will be ‘safe; for another week (or two). And the explanation by Jerry Dubrowski, a spokesman for JPMorgan Chase, the nation’s largest bank with 80 million retail customers and six million small-business ones does not help. The stage where we are given “whose former account holders sent nearly 200 complaints to The Times” is a metric. So how many complaints did The Times get in the preceding 6 months? How many in 2022, 2021 or 2020? These are metrics that we can use and they would give me something to go on, most likely that the two reasons I just mentioned are not merely the most likely ones. It shows that I got it right. The second excuse “We act in accordance with our compliance program, consistent with our regulatory obligations” is seen by me as equally bogus. You see in June 2023, we were given “JPMorgan Chase is fined by SEC after mistakenly deleting 47 million emails” with the added text “The deletions occurred after JPMorgan’s corporate compliance technology department, which had been trying unsuccessfully to delete some communications from the 1970s and 1980s, sought help from an outside vendor managing the bank’s email storage”. Now consider that an additional 40TB for storage costs $2,899. Now consider the two parts “According to the SEC, JPMorgan has been unable in at least 12 civil securities-related regulatory probes to comply with subpoenas and document requests for communications that had been permanently deleted.” Is the first part. The second part is seen when you consider that these activities required the cost of an external deleter (this is not a free skill) and the fact that they tried to delete 53 year old emails implies that the setting was on shaky grounds to begin with. So where was the side of “our regulatory obligations” then? Then we return to 2020 where we see ‘JPMorgan Chase & Co. Agrees To Pay $920 Million in Connection with Schemes to Defraud Precious Metals and U.S. Treasuries Markets’ which amounts to another setting of ‘obligations’ as such the spin is turned back to JP Morgan Chase. This is about (my personal view) algorithm and the ‘dangers’ that these numbers represent. It makes my mind turn to a movie called Margin Call (2011) with Kevin Spacey, Paul Bettany and Zachary Quinto. At some point we get the quote “Fuck me… Once this thing gets going in the wrong direction. The losses are greater than the current value of the company…?” I do not think that the banks are there yet, but with my view on US treasury bonds several banks are now on the edge and they are trimming all the liable fat they have, so those who are not enablers or consumers are cut. I doubt it is only JP Morgan Chase, but they are the first to visibly twitch. If this is right those who saved ALL THEIR LIVES are about to lose a hell of a lot. 

Am I wrong?
That remains the question and it is a fair question and it can be debunked by giving the people (all of us) a clear list of where all those bonds are and who (especially banks) owns more than $50,000,000 in bonds. I reckon that several banks have way more than that and they relied on the quote ‘too big to fail’, but that myth has been taken to bed and treated to the medicinal use of a 12 gauge. 

As such my view could be dispelled easily enough and I made that same request around the SVB bank months ago, even as the media NEVER looked in that direction (for unknown reasons).

The second mistake by Jerry Dubrowski was “the vast majority of closures are correct, consistent with the regulatory obligations we are required to follow” it comes with the realisation that ‘vast majority’ implies that plenty are wrongfully cut and when was there a bank that relied on “You could be wrongfully culled, but that is how regulatory obligations work” said no one ever. It is the relying on ‘vast majority’ that gives the edge to the victims of this. And now JP Morgan will either be required to give full explanation to EVERY ACCOUNT (as I personally see it) or cop another fine of millions, but they are tax deductible and that is the most likely path they will be on. But that could merely be me and I could be wrong.

In this article Ron Lieber and Tara Siegel Bernard give a good account and I could have looked at it earlier, but I did not. This happens and I have no regulatory obligations. And it was only 6 hours ago when we saw ‘Analyst view: Goldman Sachs rates Polycab as ‘Buy’, JPMorgan still bullish on Reliance Industries Limited’ with the added “JPMorgan (NYSE:JPM) has maintained an “Overweight” rating for Reliance Industries Limited (RIL)” I see no “impressive retail sector performance” I see a reliance on algorithm to get every penny away from the ‘edge’ as possible. I could be wrong there too, but there is every chance that JP will have to call itself ‘JPMorgan Edging’ soon enough. There is another side, but that is an icky one (always wanted to have a reason to use the word icky). It takes me back to the shores of the Dutch SNS bank. Several sides and they might be the first bank in Dutch history that gives a view that white collar crime pays. One got 12 months, 4 got suspended sentences and the Dutch government is down €804,000,000. This relates to the JP case because of the algorithm. How was the bad bank script invoked? How was it ‘allowed’ on paper to fraud and corrupt? Where were the ‘regulatory obligations’ there? It is what the law allows for and as such we see the hardship on the people who are cut (and optionally merely hit hard times). So now consider that the banks cut all those who hit hard times, and still all non-cut customers of that bank are due their fees. So where was the risk management there? The risk has become too great and they are all cut now. That is how I (optionally wrongly) see it.

The last ‘issue’ is that only the NY Times has this, none of the other newspapers have it. The NY Times has enough credibility, but my mind races. There is absolutely no way that JPMorgan Chase is alone here, so why is the NY Times the only one that has this? I doubt it is merely algorithm. This makes me wonder (yet again) how much in US Treasury bonds does JPMorgan Chase has at this moment? 

Just a question. Enjoy the day. I am two minutes from Thursday, Vancouver is only just starting Wednesday.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media

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

July 10, 2023 · 17:14

Tweeter and Sylvester Musk

There is a stage out there, I cannot say whether I am seeing it right, or wrong. I could be massively wrong, but this is how I see it. It started yesterday with one article and the articles started to pile up and an image was created. Now do no take my interpretation as gospel. I could be wrong, this I say upfront. The story you are about to read had been shaping for some time, yet yesterday the BBC struck a chord within me. As such this all escalated with ‘Twitter Blue accounts fuel Ukraine War misinformation’ (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-66113460). It was not new, I have other sources making similar claims and they were supporting this with data evidence. I had seen at least one of the claims and I rejected it outright. Twitter is not a valid source, but they do carry valid sources (BBC, the Guardian, Washington Post, NY Times). I might not agree with them, but for the most they tend to properly inform their audience. As such when I saw ““French police are fired upon with American rifles that may have come from Ukraine,” reads the headline.” I knew this was a lie, propagated by someone really stupid (usually) or trolls (often enough) and here we get “BBC Verify has traced it back to pro-Kremlin channels on the Telegram messaging app” and now we have the beginning of a larger setting. Too many people are realising that when you take the blue mark (at $8 per month) you get to spout all kinds of lies gaining followers and reducing Twitter to a populist cloud of misinformation. So as we are told (n the end) “Twitter’s press office acknowledged receipt of our enquiry, but declined to comment” we need to realise that even as Jack Dorsey is not a reliable person, this was NEVER on his watch. He was able to stop many of these issues giving a larger station to laces like Threads to grow and grow they most likely will at present. To see this we need to take the second article. This time it is the Guardian (at https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/jul/10/twitter-faces-legal-challenge-after-failing-to-remove-reported-hate-tweets) who gives us ‘Twitter faces legal challenge after failing to remove reported hate tweets’ in this article we see “Twitter faces a landmark legal challenge after the social media giant failed to remove a series of hate-filled tweets reported by users in what could be a turning point in establishing new standards of scrutiny regarding online antisemitism” it is merely one side of a multitude of sides that are haunting Twitter and optionally pushing people to the less agreeable data capturing driven Threads. It is about to become a fight between two parties and the stag is lighting up by the notion, which of the two are the lesser of two evils. And the interesting quote here is “Twitter has received notice of the legal action and has since acted to block some of the offending tweets.” Where they only act when legally being pushed to. It is a dangerous station as it is the setting that populist sources rely on. You see Twitter has had an average of 350,000 tweet per minute and that makes sifting through the fake imagery and discriminating seas of dumbo’s a real challenge. I cannot say how it is as the limits make the old setting incorrect and I have no idea how Manny tweets we get now, yet 10,000 tweets a day for verified users implies that it pays for misinformation to get the blue checkmark at $8 a month. As such for $800 a month a troll farm can instil massive amounts of damage and there is no one to stop them and as it implies, until Twitter gets a legal summons they aren’t likely to do anything either. 

Yet this is not the whole picture, to see a little bit more of this situation we need to add one more article which aired a few hours ago by both the BBC and the Guardian. Here we see ‘Top US senator calls for probe into KSI and Logan Paul energy drink’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/business-66150857) the texts we need to consider are “US Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has called on regulators to investigate an energy drink promoted by high-profile YouTubers KSI and Logan Paul” as well as “In 2022, Logan Paul and KSI – who have around 48 million YouTube followers between them – launched the caffeine-free Prime Hydration drink” and the coup de grace comes from “The caffeinated Prime Energy drink was launched in January this year. It is promoted by the company as being sugar-free and vegan.” This now gets me to my speculated view. “A company relies on two stupid people to set the stage for a population (Logan Paul and KSI), these people get their coin and as we are given “a caffeine-free Prime Hydration drink” as such these two never did anything wrong, this is seemingly clear. What happens next is that the company released their caffeinated Prime Energy drink on the coat tails of the previous and as the company owns BOTH drinks they will not sue themselves for ‘Is one more alike than the other’ and they get to ride the wave on a high and now we see Chuck Schumer starting an investigation. The company is racking in the dollars, two YouTubers are used to maximum effect and no one did anything wrong? And this is not even the start, this is also about to get a lot worse. When the people behind this new Twitter are setting a much larger stage of ‘Not our problem’ we will have one. The media lost most credibility they had, social media is racking in before it collapses on the draconian overreach of most governments and I am watching on the sidelines when I can get my slice of a multi billion dollar pie, because as that gets worse my position merely improves. I need to consider who I prefer to sell to Google (least likely), Amazon, Apple, Kingdom Holdings (preferred) or Tencent Technologies. 

In the end with the examples that we are seeing today and as we saw them over the last few months as these populations clusters scatter wherever they feel the safest. I lean back and realise that I had the right combination from the start and as the setting decreases in stability (Twitter) we see governments trying some knee jerk reaction towards a solution that was too late to be implemented in the first place. I reckon that after the second child death all will run for the hills and I will watch it happen. What did you think would happen when a child gets 4 times the caffeine meant for an adult? The company might try to hide behind “it is not recommended for children under the age of 18, people who are sensitive to caffeine, pregnant women or women who are breastfeeding”, yet the larger station will be that it was promoted as “as being sugar-free and vegan” and more alike then the ‘less healthy’ version. If it is the one word ‘Energy’ and ‘hydration’ that company has a problem and I reckon that Logan Paul and KSI better start moving, because when the children start dying their 48,000,000 followers will go somewhere else, and fast. 

There is now a station where we have fake information, false information and deceptive information and the people at large can no longer tell the difference between them. As such what will happen next you think? In the meantime other companies will look at the setting that Prime had and they will try to reflect on how they could cash in, the bottom line for them is the dollar (or soon enough the Yuen). I reckon that ChatGPT with their deeper machine learning will add to the confusion. So when you consider that Spark is another word for energy and Sparkling for hydration, what happens when these two drinks are identified as ‘spark’ drink and ‘sparkling’ drink? What is the result when people like Chuck Schumer and whomever brought it to THEIR attention miss it too? How many people will have to dies for people to take notice? I don’t Carew, I have no children, but consider what was done in Yemen, there 11,000 children have died so far. What did you do? I did nothing either, I will admit that. But at least I tried to bring it to the front page of plenty of places, more than many other did.

Enjoy your first day after the weekend.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics

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

June 23, 2023 · 20:24

This news is not news

Yup that happens as well, sometimes the news agencies are right on top of something (in this case the Canadians) and we heard it before. That doesn’t make it not news in Canada, but when the same failings happen, it becomes a little less applauding. For this we need to take a look at the BBC (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-65969970) where we are given ‘Facebook and Instagram to restrict news access in Canada’ a setting that happened in Australia in 2021, yet here too the setting is slightly irritating. You see, News agencies USE Meta to advocate their brand, They advertise. As such we might see (see images below) choices of what news they offer. For example the Daily Mail

We get a forced login at times with a paywall (like the New York Times)

This is called advertising. So not only are they advertising on Facebook (or Meta), they now demand fees for their own advertising? How lame is that? In the defence of Canada, none of the Canadian news outlets have done this Montreal Gazette, CBC to name but a few. BBC and the Guardian do not employ those tactics either. But there are too many who do and if one is set to scrutiny, it must be demanded that these news outlets either vacate Meta completely (and do so until an agreement is reached) or they offer that news freely, which is fine by me. Yet I think that they are not on board for option two. In case of the Daily Mail you get taken to a different screen with all the advertisement that they offer, which is fair enough, especially as they do not invoke a paywall that many do. In the age of digital awareness newspapers become more trivial and less of a credible news source, which adds to the equation as I personally see it. 

So when we see another imploding gas tank in a field with someone humming the music of Titanic (by James Horner) consider that this is soon to become the quality news we can expect from some sources. 

The article also gives us ““A legislative framework that compels us to pay for links or content that we do not post, and which are not the reason the vast majority of people use our platforms, is neither sustainable nor workable,” a Meta spokesperson told Reuters.” A stage which I have to agree with, it is not what some Canadian news outlets were hoping for, but that is what it is, and it bites in several cases, but the stage was never workable and that is the truth of the matter. We see journalists (and wannabe’s) being fired left right and center, yet the message is not that they did the wrong thing, their bosses leached on a digital platform they never properly understood and the money went nowhere and definitely not into their pockets. Some people will wonder what now. I think just like the Yellow pages lost their appeal plenty of others are on that same boat and evolution tends to do that (I am happy is solved it in other ways). 

Will certain things happen? They all will, it is a shifting timeline and it will come to everyones doorstep. As world powers collapse (which is inevitable) the media will suddenly be confronted with a new line of demarcation and there they have no say in the matter. This is starting right now and some will chose to diversify (preferably before they fire their journalists) and new grounds will open to those who can see the new fronts (and news fronts), but I give you one clear message. Those who have been screaming ‘Jamal Khashoggi’ on every turn they had are pretty much done for. A personal vision, but I feel that I am getting that one correctly.

The weekend is coming, be ready.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,

May 2, 2023 · 12:57

Wages of fear

That happens, we at times decide to take a very risky road and US politicians more than most, but now they are about to head into shallows with a cruise liner? You will state that this is no big deal, tugs will pull it into deep water and normally you would be right. Yet in this case the cargo is nitroglycerine, so as it hits the shores the ship goes badaboom, a really big badaboom and it is not a ship we are talking about, it is the US economy. So as we consider what is about to happen, lets give you an example.

Netflix


Netflix at present (and over the last year has had well over 225 million subscribers, giving it an annual payday of well over $27,000,000,000 which is not too shabby, a good setting to work from.  So after the 17 billion in new media it has over 10 billion and change, I reckon that 50% if not more into technology, as such they are doing fine.

US Economy
Now we get into a less good place, the US economy and do not mistake one for the other. The US economy has many. Complexities, but the setting does not change, it needs to pay bills. As such we rely on Forbes giving us “The National Debt Approaches $32 Trillion, Will It Bankrupt America?”  (at https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikepatton/2023/04/25/the-national-debt-approaches-32-trillion-will-it-bankrupt-america/) and this is where two groups are opposing, those in denial claim it will not be so (very wishful thinking). I myself and many others are on the opposing side of the debate. Forbes gives us “The current revenue of the federal government is approximately $4.6 trillion while spending exceeds $6.0 trillion. Thus, the current budget deficit is over $1.4 trillion. It’s clear that members of Congress are spending like drunken sailors and like the Titanic, the U.S. is on a collision course with a financial iceberg” yet this is merely one side of the shallows they are heading for. You see, that we get from another side (the New York Times) who gives us that the US is running out of money somewhere between June and September. Yet that is not the whole enchilada. These two parts should alert you to the US Bonds fiasco, I tried to warn you a few times over. You see whilst everyone is cheering on bonds, there is a downside. These pesky papers mature and even as the interest payday seems small (1.65%) over $20,000,000,000,000 that still ends up being a $330 billion invoice and the budget does not take that in. OK, it is not all due immediately, but a rough estimate gives is that in the next 4 years $2,400,000,000,000 does and that is still a massive amount. Add to this the budget deficit that has been going on for years and you see the problem the US economy is heading for. It might never have been avoided, it could have been delayed by a lot. And with the current deficits, where will the US find $600 billion annual in maturing bonds (2023-2027)

I warned of this 25 years ago when I called for a tax overhaul where companies (Google, Facebook, IBM, Apple, that loser Microsoft and several more) would pay their fair share, merely their fair share.

The point of no return was reached when Barack Obama became president of the United States. Lets be clear, this was NOT his fault, but the point where we cannot avoid what comes next was achieved. If only people had woken up a lot sooner. But there we got past a point where the problems would accelerate and now we are almost at that point. And the banks will be no help. I tried to warn you a few times over. Some of their risk and liquidity is in US bonds and when the US forfeits payment your 401K and many other things will become worth close to nothing. So if you wonder where wealth of middle class incomes is, look towards Mexico. 

And will it get worse? Yes, but how remains an issue for now. Politicians will give way to wealth and rich friends first, so that they an get their slice and these people will go to Monaco, Dubai and the Bahamas. Many of them saw this coming and they already have places there, they have had them for years. So what can be done? Actually nothing, it is too late for that, all the whining and claims will fall flat and merely moves the timeline. The American children will know what true poverty feels like, they will get there at the end of their teens or early adult life. There are a few things that will happen, pushing forward bonds will be the easiest and convincing these owners to sell to appointed people or let it ride for a lot more, but that is a bill that adds a decent amount. Whomever has a billion in bonds and is offered 3.8% instead of 1.65% will consider it and I reckon that this is why we now see 20 years bonds (personal speculation). But after that the options go dark, really dark and that is what banks fear too, because the next bank run will take away a truck load of liquidity. It is like the stowaway that went for the happy shores or America, only to learn that the weather is foul and they suddenly realise that the cargo hold is filled with Nitroglycerine. Would you chance swimming, or hope for the best. Don’t forget that the shallows were YOUR saviour, not that much for a cruise-liner with combustibles.

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

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

April 18, 2023 · 19:45

The choice of options

Part of this started yesterday when I saw a message pass by. I ignored it because it seemed trivial, yet today ( a few hours ago) I took notice of ‘Google rushes to develop AI search engine after Samsung considers ditching it for Bing’ from ZDNet (at https://www.zdnet.com/article/google-rushes-to-develop-ai-search-engine-after-samsung-considers-ditching-it-for-bing/) and ‘Alphabet shares fall on report Samsung may switch search to Bing’ (at https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2023/4/17/alphabet-shares-fall-on-report-samsung-may-switch-search-to-bing). In part I do not care, actually this situation is a lot better for Google than they think it is. You see, Samsung, a party I disliked for 33 years, after being massively wronged by them. Decided to make the fake AI jump. It is fake as AI does not exist and when the people learn this the hard way, it will work out nicely for Huawei and Google. There is nothing like a dose of reality being served like a bucket of ice water to stop consumers looking at your product. I do not care, I refuse any Samsung device in my apartment. I also dislike Bing, it is a Microsoft product and two years ago I got Bing forced down my throat again and again through hijack scripts, it took some time blocking them. So I dislike both. I have no real opinion of ChatGPT. As we see the AI reference. Let’s take you to the Conversation (at https://theconversation.com/not-everything-we-call-ai-is-actually-artificial-intelligence-heres-what-you-need-to-know-196732) I have said it before and they have a decent explanation. They write “AI is broadly defined in two categories: artificial narrow intelligence (ANI) and artificial general intelligence (AGI). To date, AGI does not exist.” You see, I only look at AGI, the rest is some narrow niche for specific purpose. We are also given “Most of what we know as AI today has narrow intelligence – where a particular system addresses a particular problem. Unlike human intelligence, such narrow AI intelligence is effective only in the area in which it has been trained: fraud detection, facial recognition or social recommendations, for example” and there is an issue with this. People do not understand the narrow scope, they want to apply it almost everywhere and that is where people get into trouble, the data connected does not support the activity and adding this to a mobile means that it collects massive amounts of data, or it becomes less and less reliable, an issue I expect to see soon after it makes it into a Samsung phone. 

For AI to really work “it needs high-quality, unbiased data, and lots of it. Researchers building neural networks use the large data sets that have come about as society has digitised.” You see, the amount of data is merely a first issue, the fact that it is unbiassed data is a lot harder and when we see sales people cut corners, they will take any shortcut making the data no longer unbiassed and that is where it all falls apart.

So whilst the ‘speculators’ (read: losers) make Google lose value, the funny part is that when the Samsung connection falls down Google stands to up their customer base by a lot. Thousands of Samsung customers feeling as betrayed as I was in 1990 and they will seek another vendor which would make Huawei equally happy. 

ZDNet gives us “The threat of Bing taking Google’s spot on Samsung phones caused “panic” at Google, according to messages reviewed by The New York Times. Google’s contract with Samsung brings in an approximate $3 billion annual revenue. The company still has a chance to maintain its presence in Samsung phones, but it needs to move fast” I see two issues here, the first is that the NY Times is less and less of a dependable source, they have played too many games and as ‘their’ source’ might not be reliable, as such is the quote also less reliable. The second source is me (basically) they weren’t interested in my 5 billion revenue, as such why would they care about losing 3 billion more? For the most, there is an upside, when it falls down (an I personally believe it will) Samsung could be brought back on board but now it will cost them 5-6 billion. As such Samsung would have to be successful without Google Search for 3 years and it will cascade into a collapse setting, after that they will beg just to return to the Alphabet fold, which would also make this Microsoft’s 6th failure. My day is looking better already.

Am I so anti-Whatever?
No not really. When it is ready and when the systems are there AI will change the game and AGI is the only real AI to consider. As I stated before deeper machine learning is awesome and it has massive value, but the narrow setting needs to be respected and when you push it into something like Bing, it will go wrong and when it does it will not be noticed initially until it is much too late. And all this is beside the setting that some people will link the wrong parts and Samsung will end up putting its IP in ChatGPT and someone will ask a specific question that was never flagged and the IP will pour straight into public domain. That is the real danger for Samsung and in all this ChatGPT is free of blame and when certain things are found the entire setting needs to be uploaded into a new account. When we consider that a script with 65,000 lines will have up to 650 issues (or features, or bugs), how many will cause a cascade effect or information no one wanted, least of all the hardware owner? Oh, and that is when the writers were really good. Normally the numbers of acceptability are between 1300-2600, as such how many issues will rise and how long until too many patches will make the system unyielding? All questions that come to mind with an ANI system, because it is data driven and when we consider that the unbiassed data isn’t? What then? And that is before we align cultural issues. Korea, India, Japan and China are merely 4 of them and seeing that things never aligned in merely 4 nations, how many versions of data will be created to avoid collapse? As such I personally think that Google is not in panic mode. Perhaps Bard made them road-wise, perhaps not. 

I think 2024 will be a great Google year with or without Samsung and when Microsoft achieves disappointing yet another company its goose will be royally cooked on both sides of the goose no less. We have choices, we have options and we can mix them, but to let some fake AI make those choices for us is not anything at all, but feel free to learn that lesson the hard way.

I never liked Samsung for personal reasons, and I have been really happy with my android phone. I have had an Android phone for 13 years now and never regretted having one. I hope it stays that way.

Enjoy the day and don’t trust an AI to tell you the weather, that is what your eyesight can do better in the present and the foreseeable future.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Science

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

April 17, 2023 · 22:23

Dimension of oversimplification

This all started a few days go when I initially saw the article (at https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/toronto-pearson-airport-delays-1.6534360) where we are given ‘Toronto’s Pearson airport has a PR problem: It’s known as the worst airport in the world’ the article was one that had been around since October 2022, as such I reckon they wanted to pour salt on the wound. I am more of a solution kind of man, I wanna find out what the target makes it tick. Yet in the heart of the matter for any service set location, it tends to boil down to two elements. Resources and funding. The heart of the matter always boils down to these two, there tends to be no alternative. As such when it comes down to an airport, especially an essential one like the one for a village the size of Toronto, things did not make much sense to me. So lets take a look at the article.

“Disgruntled travellers passing through Pearson are posting about their bad experiences on social media, complaining about long line-ups, flight disruptions and missing baggage.” There are three items on this list line-ups, flight disruptions and missing baggage. The flight disruptions are put aside. Flight disruptions can have all kinds of reasons and none of them need to be the airport (not a given). But the other two are, as such I focus on them.

Luggage on the left
Yes, we all see luggage as a massive number one issue and besides my encounter with British Airways in 1998, I never had an issue with it. That is one issue in 25 years and the delay was send to my front door 12 hours later, as such not really an issue. But so many complaints tends to be noticed and there is a simple path The path is from plane to pickup point. Something does not add up for this many complaints to come to the surface. So when did Pearson makes its last assessment? There are logistical elements and manpower elements. The logistical is the hardware moving luggage from point one to point you and that consists of trolleys and runways. The trolleys are man operated and the runways are automated, but something in these two elements is not aligned. The people have managers and the runways have optional tag readers. Something here does not work properly and that is how I see this oversimplified in mere minutes. And this is not rocket science. The setting of plane to destination point with a suitcase has a few simple elements. So what aren’t they seeing? 

The simplest of reasons could be seen by trying to set a report from students from the University of Toronto to create a business Intelligence report on how to improve this path and how toe create rollback points. This took less than 10 minutes, the report might take a few weeks, but the score of this airport hasn’t changed in a while and the title ‘Toronto’s Pearson Airport is a special circle of hell. The worst airport experience ever’ should have been looked at some time ago. So was the first element funding or resources? Optionally a mix of both, so why do we look at this now, what has Deborah Ale Flint flint done? She was the big wig for almost 3 years now. Is it manpower, IT, hardware failures, something does not add up and this title needs addressing.

Lining up towards tomorrow
This tends to be resources, either manpower or check in points (which might be funding). When was it last looked at? How many check points are there and how many passengers do they deal with? Then there is the side setting that lineups are from departure and arrival, the departure points are the airlines problem, the arrival is customs and passport check. I am more interested in arrivals as they are on the airport. Are there enough arrival points? One source gives me that there are over 1000 daily departures from the Toronto airport and there is daily service to more than 180 destinations across 6 continents. 1000 flights implies up to 300,000 people every day. This gets us to 12,500 an hour. As such you need to process over 200 a minute. This implies 15-24 passport gates, are they there? How many gates are there to process passports? Then there is the IT and logistics and making sure that 20 are operational gates at pressure times is a minimum. So is this funding or resources? It is not directly a given, but it is either the gates or the people, people is funding (and availability), the other one is funding. How many gates are there and how long have they been there? Is the IT properly working, are the scanners up to date? All simple questions and I saw this in minutes. I am not an authority, but in my time I travelled by air 26 weeks a year, as such I have seen my share of airports and for the most I never had an issue, some waiting time in Heathrow, but a place that big, some waiting time is to be expected and still I got through it in mere minutes. So why is Pearson an issue?

Both could have been driven to the surface with BI students at the University of Toronto. I saw that in minutes and I cannot say what they will find, yet I believe it is enough to give Pearson Airport the ability to shed the title ‘The worst airport experience ever’ which is a really bad achievement to have. So whilst we mull over “The airport’s troubles have also been featured in major international publications this month, including The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and the BBC.” What was actually done to address the issue? I never saw the articles and I do not have to, they tend to be emotional driven and it is facts that we need to look at. Any BI analyst knows this, the numbers speak and they tend to push the ugly parts to the surface. 

Perhaps I am oversimplifying the matter, but something needs to be done, I believe I pushed that element to the surface, in case people were blind for the obvious. The idea that the worst airport is a Commonwealth one offends me, that is something we leave to the Yanks at best, or a Russian or Asian airport we do not care for, the idea that Pakistan has better airports than Canada, should also appeal to the dark side of Canadian pride, but that might be merely me, as I said, oversimplification gets people mad and that results in actions.

Have a nice flight (or day).

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,

February 28, 2023 · 02:05

The story not told

This is how it started, but then I realised that there are two stories that are not told. The western media does not want you to know any of it. It makes them simple red light debutantes. Whoring for digital dollars and all at the expense of not informing you. So how are you feeling now?

The story that started this was given to us by Arab News (at https://www.arabnews.com/node/2258916/saudi-arabia) where we are given ‘Saudi project clears 882 Houthi mines in Yemen’ in addition we are given “Overseen by the King Salman Humanitarian Aid and Relief Center, special teams destroyed five anti-personnel, 195 anti-tank mines, 681 unexploded ordinances and one explosive device” as well as “A total of 388,433 mines have been cleared since the start of the project” but in all this did you consider the larger stage of the issue?

(Photo by Saleh Al-OBEIDI / AFP)

There are two sides. The one side is that Iran was instrumental in delivering over a million mines to Houthi terrorists. The second side is that Saudi Arabia is trying to clear Yemen from these horrific devices, there is of course the third side where we see that the large wining media solutions (The Times, The Guardian, NY Times, Washington Post, Boston Globe and LA Times) as far as I can tell never makes mention of ANY of it. Not the Iranian side of delivering mines. Not the Saudi side of stopping Yemeni casualties. Why is that? There is even an additional side, you see if these media jokes do not change their way, they will soon be less reliable than Arab News and Al Jazeera. And we can add Fox News to the list of useless sources. There is also an upside, these two sources can already be captured with their apps and give you the ACTUAL news regarding the middle east. The photo placed earlier was intentional. It came from Arab News but the source is the AFP, so why is this photo not all over the western news? Why are we kept in the dark on what Iran has been doing? You see Houthi terrorists do not have the means, the materials or the logistics to create a million mines. In the mean time we are given “In June 2022, the project’s contract was extended for another year at a cost of $33.29 million” whilst everyone is ignoring what Iran has been doing. We failed the Yemeni’s in many fronts. We are only partially able to stop weapon smuggle from Iran, We are unable to stop Houthi terrorists and the people doing something about it and that is merely the top of the list. And there is an overbearing other reason. With the claims out there made by 6,047 journalists in the US and over 320,000 journalists in the EU and I, a non-journalists am informing you? Where are these digital dollar seekers? Why is this Arab News not global news informing you on what Iran is part of? How about Houthi terrorists placing over a million mines? Who informed you? There is a decent chance that the western media did not, as far as I can tell, the only active western (French) player is the AFP at present. 

It is time we ask the hard questions from the media and do it in the limelight, preferably asking the stakeholders for their assistance in all this, but that is my sense of humour in action.

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Politics

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

February 20, 2023 · 01:43

The wrong wake up call

Yup that happens, but the way it was done was rather surprising. You see, I wrote about this situation and I did it reflecting on my own experiences. I reckon one of the clearest moments was August 2021 when I wrote ‘As credibility moves to the arctic’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2021/08/26/as-credibility-moves-to-the-arctic/) and the most recent was ‘The part we seem to forget’ where I wrote “The media is the bitch of shareholders, stakeholders and advertisers”. This is a stage I have mentioned since 2012, so I have been aware of this stage for 10 years. When it upsets the advertisers it is trivialised (Sony, 2012) and they are not alone. When it is a larger issues the media gets to meet with stakeholders who provide a narrative and that is how it is set, there is more with shareholders, but that is for another day. And now the BBC gives us ‘BFM journalist Rachid M’Barki suspended in scandal linked to disinformation firm’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-64677232) where we see “he admits to bypassing BFM’s editorial checks”, yes admitting to incompetence is the way to go, but here it is not enough. I reckon he stepped on the toes of the wrong stakeholder and he is hung out to dry. So when we are given “an investigation by Le Monde newspaper in conjunction with the campaigning organisation Forbidden Stories has revealed more details. According to the investigation, M’Barki ran reports on a variety of subjects – luxury yachts in Monaco, a Sudanese opposition leader, allegations of corruption in Qatar – that had all one thing in common: they were planted by an Israel-based outfit specialising in ‘news for hire’.” We have hundreds of news sources starting at Reuters, but these three gave enough to set the stage to an Israeli firm? I have questions and a lot of them. It is possible that a whole range over a time would give an optional narrative, yet the larger problem with the media is not merely copying one another, it is that there is no vetting of information and I am not talking about editorial checks. The need for news-by-wire is setting a stage where proper vetting of information is surpassed (as I personally see it). And this time around a man named Rachid M’Barki gets the joker served in a not so nice way, he is hung out to dry. Now it is simple to say that something is not possible. I say some things are too highly unlikely and there is a second stage, this is coming to the forefront all whilst these connected stakeholders are massively shy of the limelight. Their value is not being seen. This is why some people have lunch meetings with stakeholders and often in a neutral place. Please do not take my word for this, seek out your own evidence. I woke up when I saw Australian news ignore events surrounding Sony in 2012, a mere week before the PS4 was launched and they ALL ignored it, Sony advertisement money was too powerful, too incentive for words, as such the fact that 30 million gamers were exposed to changes was ignored by pretty much all of them. From that moment on I started to track certain events and the media did not disappoint, they dropped the ball time after time and I started to see patterns (as I would call them)  digital patterns all about the money and infused by below quality reporting as I saw it. I made several mentions from 2012, but the load started to become heavy from 2019 onwards. And now the BBC gives us another wake up call, but it is one they might not want to make, because we are given the guilt of Rachid M’Barki butt that also opens up the an of worms that we get to see with most of the media and that includes BBC, the Guardian, NY Times and a few other players. As I personally see it, all media has its own stakeholders and we are denied the news, we are merely handed filtered information. Information filtered to the needs of share holders, stake holders and advertisers. That is how I personally see it.

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Politics

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