Tag Archives: Supreme Court

October 10, 2025 · 16:28

Empty luck for bad guys

That happens, it doesn’t make them more bad, or more evil, they just are and to be honest when I saw the news that he had lost my heart skipped a beat. That news made me I personally happy. I get that at times people do not get to rely on ‘Freedom of speech’, don’t get me wrong, I do not believe that he was entitled to that. So as I saw the news (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy856qxzq01o) there was a thought on the core of the setting. It started with “The Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting occurred on December 14, 2012, in Newtown, Connecticut. The perpetrator, Adam Lanza, fatally shot his mother before murdering 20 students and six staff members at Sandy Hook Elementary School, and later committed suicide.” Here is where the Conspiracy Theorists come to ‘live’ and here we get “In September 2014, conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, who runs the website InfoWars, which had previously claimed that the murders were a “false flag” attack perpetrated by the government, made a new conspiracy claim that “no one died” at Sandy Hook Elementary School because the Uniform Crime Reports showed no murders in Newtown for 2012, and that the victims were “child actors.” This claim is false and misrepresents the FBI report. In reality, because the Connecticut State Police was the lead investigator after the attack, the Sandy Hook victims were included in Connecticut’s statewide records (under “State Police Misc.”) rather than under the Newtown statistics.” And we get the continuance that “In November 2016, Erica L. Lafferty, daughter of Dawn Lafferty Hochsprung, the school principal who was shot and killed at Sandy Hook School, wrote open letters to then-President-elect Donald Trump (published in Medium and USA Today), calling upon him to denounce Jones, after Trump had appeared on InfoWars during his presidential campaign and lavished praise on its presenter, saying that the conspiracy theorist had an “amazing” reputation and pledging not to let him down. On February 20, 2017, the Newtown School Board wrote to President Trump and urged him to recognize the murders of 26 people at Sandy Hook and to “remove your support from anyone who continues to insist that the tragedy was staged or not real.”Trump did not respond to the letter. On April 16, 2018, parents of two victims of the shooting sued Jones in Travis County, Texas (where Jones’ media company is based), for $1 million each. On May 23, 2018, six families of victims of the shooting, as well as an FBI agent who responded to the attack, filed a defamation lawsuit in Bridgeport Superior Court in Connecticut against Jones for his role in spreading conspiracy theories about the shooting. In a deposition in the last week of March 2019, Jones acknowledged the deaths were real, stating he had “almost like a form of psychosis”, where he “basically thought everything was staged.”By 2021, Jones did not provide information to support his claims, defaulting in favor of the plaintiffs.” So over the setting of more than 7 years, Alex jones was found guilty and in November 15th of 2021 NPR reported ‘Conspiracy theorist Alex Jones ruled liable in Sandy Hook defamation case’ with ““Mr. Jones was given every opportunity to comply, but, when he chose instead to withhold evidence for more than two years, the Court was left with no choice but to rule as it did today,” Mattei said. “While the families are grateful for the court’s ruling, they remain focused on uncovering the truth.””

So now whilst we are given “Right-wing conspiracy theorist Alex Jones has asked the US Supreme Court to put on pause the nearly $1.5bn (£1.1bn) defamation judgment against him that is forcing the sale of his Infowars media company. Jones was ordered to make the payout in 2022 for claiming the 2012 mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School was a hoax. He has asked the high court to prevent Infowars from being sold to the satirical news site The Onion in order to fund judgment against him, arguing that it will cause irreparable harm to him and his audience of 30 million.” The folly called ‘Justice of the United States continues’ and whilst we also see that they ‘rely’ on “Jones is asking the justices to put the judgment on hold while deciding on an appeal he has filed. The court is expected to consider his application on Friday in private.

Attorneys for Jones and his company, Free Speech Systems, characterized him as a media defendant in their court filing on Thursday. They argued that Jones, who founded the platform in 1999, should enjoy the same free speech protections under the First Amendment of the Constitution that journalists have, according to court documents filed on Wednesday.

They also said the record-breaking payout and the shuttering of his platform would have a “chilling effect” on similar media figures.” And I have to wonder ‘Why Not?’ If there is any setting it is that the media is now a behemoth that is not about the truth of the matter, but largely on the cash of the setting. I have had that for some time, but this case will drive this out in the open to a much larger audience. And I am still in confusion why this conspiracy theorist is given any quarter at all, but the American setting is one where appeal has the largest dollar gain and as I see it, it will play out, will it play out in favor of Alex Jones is something that we have to watch, but as I see it, should Alex Jones win, the larger audience from the United States will start to be denied on a near global scale as the global media will not want to be painted in the American Red, White and Blue colors because of that. That is merely my take on that setting. There will be no stars and the stripes will be seen as bars, horizontal prison bars thwarting American media because of that. But as I see it, we will have to wait until the verdict from the American Supreme Court comes in. So as I see it, after the Connecticut Supreme Court had turned down his verdict of such a lot of coins, $1,500,000,000 if my memory serves correctly. And as we remember that Jones was ordered to make the payout in 2022 for claiming the 2012 mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School was a hoax. So it amounts to him haven over three years to try and ‘auction’ of whatever he could for the time, but the amount of over 1 billion is a lot and if his 30 million audience would hand him $50 each, he might have been able to pay it all. But it seems that his audience doesn’t love him that far, it smilingly comes down to the average hooker gets more credit for a ‘simple’ act then Alex Jones does. And come to think of it, he ‘entertained’ his audience for months, a hooker is done in 15 minutes (if that much is required) and that comes with a protein drink at the end of that sitting. And these people (their clients) got to live behind “It never happened, prove it” so as we get to the next week we will see how the Supreme Court will dress Alex Jones address (or is that redress).

Bygones I say. So have a great day and look out for optional entertainment from the United States Supreme Court, because no matter how you turn this, that nation might go strategically bonkers should Alex Jones get what he wants and then he will cry about all the gun violence coming to his front door. But then they can say “Don’t worry Alex, its just a hoax”

I reckon that Saturday Newscasts will give us more entertainment. It almost sounds like the beginning of a David Sylvian song. Have a great day today.

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media, Politics

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

January 18, 2025 · 18:45

The new optional premise

We have all heard the Anti-Chimetic (might not be a real word) from America. This is the setting we all face, once a Chinese innovative company becomes too big, it gets b banned from America. Yet, now there might be a new premise set. You see the BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3e18qylq5do) gives us ‘US Supreme Court upholds TikTok ban law’ with the added “The US Supreme Court has upheld a law that bans TikTok in the US unless its China-based parent company ByteDance sells the platform by this Sunday” They might hand it to Kevin O’Leary (with a co conspirator), and as Kevin O’Leary is all about making Canada the 51st state he is becoming the enemy of every Commonwealthian. We don’t like that option, yet as I see it there is a second options. 

You see, the idea is that ByteDance creates a new hub in the UAE (optionally in Saudi Arabia) and now America has a problem. What will they do? Stop either of these two players? Good luck with the fallout that this brings. 

If ByteDance creates (for example) a second hub in the UAE, for example Abu Dhabi, and set the pre mine that everyone can post there, the UAE becomes the TikTok hub. The second nice part is that all the advertisement revenue goes there too and now we get a new setting, the international viewers get an international audience and in that the UAE will see a nice windfall too. Optionally we will now see Emaar Properties, Nakheel, Meraas, DAMAC and a few others float to the advertisement top. Optionally it opens the doors for Google to ‘promote’ solutions, but that is how commerce goes. It wasn’t enough for America to fill their pockets, now it turns out they are left with an empty shell. And from there new opportunities will grow and the first nail of the America isolation coffin is set. So whilst American ‘Justice’ is now set against the 170 million users it has in the US. These users might find a new breeding ground for growth. And with the 175 million users it has in Europe, the premise will now be set that America can no longer advertise to over 350 million TikTok users and lose the view of millions of users. I reckon (a speculation) that this loss will be seen all over Google (YouTube) as well. An Anti-Chimetic setting that comes with several hooks and a non-American angle in addition. So how good was this? I set this premise to the content that America had never proven that Huawei was an actual danger and should TikTok seek this solution, it also opens the stage for Huawei to get more and more visibility. There is no fairness in this, America should have given evidence (there was none), merely the fear that is was going to be (and successfully proven at present) that America lost to China in innovation. The setting that was simply set as early as 2010 when SIPO granted 814,825 patents, a year-on-year increase of 40.0%. So this is not new, this has been going on for 15 years. All whist certain ‘captains of industry’ relied on the size of whatever viagra increases instead of revenue. Innovation was a mere spin and now that the die is cast and results are to be shown these people cry like little bitches that the market isn’t going their way. Well the market relies on innovation, something the UAE has proven several quarters over the last 5 years with (allegedly) tremendous growth every quarter. We have seen the numbers and we are shown this with Emirates (with a reported growth of 71%), Emaar Properties Dubai (with a 66% growth) and a few others, but the story should be clear. I actually came up with an idea that could have added even more to that revenue and I grant you that Dubai was a good place to test my IP, before it gets grown into London and Toronto. My IP is never actually localised. It is merely a stepping stone to a more global impact. So as I see it the TikTok ban might open a few more doors for me (pure wishful speculation on my side) and in this where is America? And in this the Guardian gives us ‘TikTok says it will ‘go dark’ in US on Sunday unless Biden acts’ a real nasty setting, because the ‘go dark’ setting isn’t the end, but it is the diminished revenue for America in a stage where they are losing a near dozen in revenue settings on the global stage and when this is the start the TikTok people will find a second stage in the EU where one country will become a secondary hug to Abu Dhabi. A second stage of revenue going from America to another place. So how is that for jolly?

And in all this America only needed to supply evidence, not evidence that players like (for example) Microsoft would like to see presented, but evidence that shows that China was an actual danger to innovation, because it is the innovation that counts. And now there is a stage that could open up sales for Huawei to the EU all that from Anti-Chimetic fears. What a lovely web they weave.

Have a lovely day and feel free to explore what innovation the Huawei Watch 5 brings. The first watch that becomes a threat to both Google and Apple all at the same time. One brand to smite both, so how secure are we with what comes? HamonyOS is now striking out to a much larger population and while Apple and Google are at odds with each other, Huawei is setting the stage to strike at both. And this news is a mere 2 hours old.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Media, Science

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

October 2, 2020 · 02:14

You’re useless and you know it

Yup, quite the opening headline and  would like to tell the reader the it is about him or her, but no such luck, the headline (as is) can only be given to the most useless of useless, the US Senate. Yup, as some voices stated in the past, the US has fruits (US Congress) and nuts (US Senate) and there we sit in the middle of the tutti frutti of the dance floor, one might almost invite Madonna to come over and add a little spice to the mixture.

Yet Reuters who gives us (at https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-senate-tech/senate-panel-approves-sending-subpoenas-to-ceos-of-twitter-facebook-google-idUSKBN26M6FA) the headline ‘Senate panel approves sending subpoenas to CEOs of Twitter, Facebook, Google’, with the quote “The U.S. Senate Commerce Committee on Thursday unanimously voted to approve a plan to subpoena chief executives of Twitter, Alphabet’s Google and Facebook for a hearing likely to be held before the election on a prized legal immunity enjoyed by internet companies”, We can go in every direction possible, but lets start with “passed into law as part of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) of 1996 (a common name for Title V of the Telecommunications Act of 1996), formally codified as Section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934 at 47 U.S.C. § 230. Section 230 generally provides immunity for website publishers from third-party content”, In this we see two elements, the first being that in 1996 there was no Google, no Twitter and no Facebook, in the second on larger beneficiary was the online presence of FoxNews, Yahoo and lets face it as I personally see it, Microsoft who started part of the mess we have now. 

To invoke what I did (the useless part), it is important to see “After passage of the Telecommunications Act, the CDA was challenged in courts and ruled by the Supreme Court in Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union (1997) to be partially unconstitutional, leaving the Section 230 provisions in place. Since then, several legal challenges have validated the constitutionality of Section 230”, in this Justice John Paul Stevens (Supreme Court) wrote in June 1997: “We are persuaded that the CDA lacks the precision that the First Amendment requires when a statute regulates the content of speech. In order to deny minors access to potentially harmful speech, the CDA effectively suppresses a large amount of speech that adults have a constitutional right to receive and to address to one another. That burden on adult speech is unacceptable if less restrictive alternatives would be at least as effective in achieving the legitimate purpose that the statute was enacted to serve. … It is true that we have repeatedly recognized the governmental interest in protecting children from harmful materials. But that interest does not justify an unnecessarily broad suppression of speech addressed to adults. As we have explained, the Government may not “reduc[e] the adult population … to … only what is fit for children.””, as such how stupid does a US Senator tend to be? It passed the Supreme court, it passed a few stations over the term of 20 years and optional alleged beneficiaries (Google, Facebook, Twitter) are called into a Senate hearing? Some sources even state ‘Letting Platforms Decide What Content To Facilitate Is What Makes Section 230 Work’, the latter one is up for debate, but the setting of section 230 is not, it is a legal thing, so why would someone set the stage for a hearing the is basically pointless set the stage? To get a few free dinners and perhaps tax deductibility? I do not know, I merely ask.

The setting of a stage 40 days before election, is the current view and when we see “top Democrat Maria Cantwell, who opposed the move last week, saying she was against using “the committee’s serious subpoena power for a partisan effort 40 days before an election,” changed her mind and voted to approve the move” I wonder what this really is, because as I see it, it has nothing to do with big tech, and optionally section 230 is also not in play, but what is? There is the optional quote given “Republican President Donald Trump has made holding tech companies accountable for allegedly stifling conservative voices a theme of his administration. As a result, calls for a reform of Section 230 have been intensifying ahead of the elections, but there is little chance of approval by Congress this year”, yet optional settings of “stifling conservative voice” would not change that, this is about intentional hurting facilitation, changing the premise of free expression, the moment big tech is held responsible, no opinion is heard and the anti-Trump (those who highlight stupidity) is seen nearly everywhere, as such, President Trump needs every amount he can get. I do not think that this is the right path and more important changing law on this scale to bake (not make) awareness of something set almost in stone for 20 years does not help. 

In this I want to extend my friendliness to give a shout to the largest part of the problem, mainly Republican Senator Roger Wicker, even s he gives us “After extending an invite to these executives, I regret that they have again declined to participate and answer questions about issues that are so visible and urgent to the American people”, I merely wonder if he has any clue who the American people are. This train of thought is seen as Politico gives us “under the newly unveiled Online Freedom and Viewpoint Diversity Act, the legal shield would protect the companies only when they take down specific types of content, including material “promoting terrorism” or which promotes “self-harm” or is otherwise illegal”, as such, when was there an upside when we consider ‘specific types on content’, as I see it it the setting towards a biased filter of what constitutes free speech and freedom of expression. As such the simple question becomes: ‘Who has seen S.4534 – Online Freedom and Viewpoint Diversity Act?’ Deputy Counsel Elizabeth Banker did and gives us “Section 230’s otherwise objectionable clause underpins crucial content moderation efforts that make their platforms safer for everyone. Eliminating that clause will make it harder, not easier, for online services to remove content like misinformation, platform manipulation, or bullying that’s neither illegal nor in the bill’s new description of allowable moderation. This bill would also hamper platforms from adapting to future moderation challenges.“We also have serious First Amendment concerns with this bill. This bill would limit the ability of private online platforms and services, including small forums for schools, churches, and local sports leagues, to set and enforce rules for their communities.””, a direct powerful view given on September 8th (at https://internetassociation.org/news/statement-in-response-to-the-introduction-of-the-online-freedom-and-viewpoint-diversity-act/), as such we takeaway “Eliminating that clause will make it harder, not easier, for online services to remove content like misinformation, platform manipulation, or bullying” does this constitute the idea that the speculated biggest bully in America wants a free pass? And there are also “serious First Amendment concerns” which cannot be ignored. 

When we see this level of issues from the very beginning, how stupid is any senator participating in this, and when we demand under freedom of information their names and tell people that this lit constitutes a list of people attacking free speech, how happy will they be? There is of course the issue of the elected Democrat from the state of Washington Maria Cantwell, I wonder what she has to say for herself, especially it he hearing happens before the elections, I reckon that President Elect Biden will not have too much need for her, but that is merely my speculation.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media, Politics

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

July 13, 2018 · 12:08

Iterative diversity never goes anywhere

Facebook has been on the minds of many people, so merely on how to procrastinate (a student thing), some on the value of the company and some are investigating on how data issues were reported. CNet reported merely a few hours ago ‘SEC asking if Facebook properly warned investors of data issue‘ (at https://www.cnet.com/news/sec-investigating-if-facebook-gave-investors-enough-warning-about-data-issue-wsj-says/), the origin is the Wall Street Journal. My issue is at the top when we consider the quote “The agency is looking into how much Facebook knew about Cambridge Analytica’s misuse of data, says a report in The Wall Street Journal“, do you think that any evidence is still there to be found? Even if the brightest minds unite to finding anything, by the time all the proper access is granted, the decisionmakers will be facing a new government resetting priorities.

Now, I get it. That is the job of the SEC. With “The SEC has requested information from Facebook to learn how much the social-networking company knew about Cambridge Analytica’s data use, according to the Journal. In addition, the SEC reportedly wants to learn how Facebook analyzed its risk as developers shared data with others against Facebook’s policies“, we see that the SEC is merely doing its job and even if we believe the meida and some of the revelations that passed our screens, the SEC has a clear directive, merely set in factual evidence. Yet the can of goods is seen with “The SEC is also looking into whether the company should’ve told shareholders about Cambridge Analytica’s policy violation when Facebook found out about it, in 2015“, it is not the game, but it is a setting of the stage. In my view there is doubt that this was properly done. The issue is not whether it happened, it is the setting that we must speculate on what would have happened next, and that whilst there is no evidence that something was done. Not the acts of Cambridge Analytica their part is a foregone conclusion. The issue is as long as there is no evidence showing that the data was sold on to other parties. The value of the company would not have been impacted, which would have negatively impacted shareholders. That is the game the SEC is set with that is their duty and they are doing that just fine.

The question becomes on what stage is speculation of something that might have happened set in actionable consideration two years after the fact, that is the setting and that will be a dry bone as far as I can tell. Still the SEC has a duty to perform and they are doing that. Even as Endgadget goes with “the agency might disagree with Facebook’s perspective and find the company at fault for not properly informing shareholders“, the setting is not a given. You see, the impact of value was after the revelation and after the shareholders were spooked by the fear mongering media. As long as there is no evidence that a third party has all the raw data, the value impact is close to nil. The only impact that the SEC should be allowed to consider is the negative impact of value, if proven that data left control of Facebook and only when that evidence is proven to have impacted Facebook before Jan 2018, only at that point is there an optional issue and there is a second tier in all this. If any shareholder is in both companies, it becomes a little murky, because at that point the shareholders themselves will be up for investigation. Whether this is true cannot be said because the first part for the SEC is proving that the second player actually has the raw Facebook data, in all this aggregated data lacks value and interactions on aggregates data is just too shallow for consideration.

And this is just one of the settings. The second and main setting is the Diversity report that Facebook has presented. The Verge is all about the focus on ‘Change is coming slowly, if it comes at all‘, which is a given in most companies (Apple and Google are optionally the exception). The setting is however no longer just about optional diversity, it is about bankable value and the national patent value that these places have in that setting diversity be damned and Endgadget knows this the fact that they took a page to focus on ‘diversity’ whilst there are much larger fish swimming in the Facebook pond is to some a total mystery. The IP Watchdog gives us another side and a side that in this day and age are actually really important. There we see (as a small grasp):

  • U.S. Patent No. 8732802, titled: ‘Receiving Information About a User From a Third Party Application Based on Action Types’. Issued to Facebook in May 2014.
  • U.S. Patent No. 8938411, titled: ‘Inferring User Family Connections From Social Interactions’. Issued to Facebook in January 2015.
  • U.S. Patent No. 9740752, titled: ‘Determining User Personality Characteristics From Social Networking System Communications and Characteristics’. Issued to Facebook August 2017.
  • U.S. Patent No. 9798382, titled: ‘Systems and Methods of Eye Tracking Data Analysis’. Issued to Facebook October 2017.
  • U.S. Patent No. 9923981, titled: ‘Capturing Structured Data About Previous Events From Users of a Social Networking System’. Issued to Facebook March 2018.

These are only 5 out of a large basket of patents and the issue is not about diversity of staff, it is about the diversity of the population. The setting does not change that much, because changes might be small, but consider that in this case we have an additional 1 TB a day that can now be used very effectively. So even as the Verge reminds us with “Rep. G.K. Butterfield (D-NC) took some time out of a congressional hearing in the wake of the Cambridge Analytica scandal to grill CEO Mark Zuckerberg about increasing diversity at the company, something that Zuckerberg said that Facebook was “focused on.”“, we can take diversity as stated with ‘increasing diversity at the company‘ as either staff diversity or data diversity, I guess that I am going with number two on that one. You see, even as I tipped on ‘diversity’ we all recollect places like Forbes and the Financial Times on how it leads to better profits. It is the reason it reflects on the shareholders on how that notion gives them an on the spot hard on, male and female shareholders alike. Yet, the much larger revenue boost is seen when we combine the setting of the patents, the data that Facebook has and now we get to yesterday’s story, In yesterday’s article (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2018/07/12/seeking-security-whilst-growing-anarchy/), I left a few screws fall all over the place. With ‘Seeking security whilst growing anarchy‘, I gave a title that could be read in more than one way. The part I just skipped yesterday (as the story would have been too large) was seen with “So now we get the setting of ‘who is exactly waging war on who’, or is that whom?“, as well as “the defense ‘laws governing wars were devised with conflicts between states in mind‘ can no longer be upheld“. These were true settings, yet the setting of the data was partially set in “how many flags were raised by that one person, yet now not on 5 tests, but on dozens of tests, against people, places, actions and locations at specific times“, there we see the issue, but there is a complication, the bulk of the people actively sought all use burner phones, they tend to be nervous and do not call, yet they are closely grouped together and that is a first setting. Now consider that for the most burner phones are useless, now consider these people taking hours to keep busy and some will go for the silliest diversion. A diversion like a simple Candy Crush, now take another look at the 5 patents, consider that the burner phone is useless for intelligence, but now reconsider that value when these patents are used, not merely for tracking needs, but reconsider the ‘Eye Tracking Data Analysis‘ add the camera to take a silent image of the iris, it is almost as good as a fingerprint. Now add ‘Structured Data About Previous Events From Users‘. Two of the five added to the billions of users on Facebook and now we have a system that does a lot more, it is the 32% that Palantir inc. does not have, the patents that Facebook has allows not merely for a diversity growth factor, it will be one of the few times that any company had two massive niches in data, when Combined it allows the US to have a grasp of a system that allows near real time tracking of anyone they seek, this system can void well over 80% of the false flags making the data system well over 10 times as efficient than ever before. So yes, we can argue the truth of “Not to worry, says Facebook VP Allen Lo, head of intellectual property. “Most of the technology outlined in these patents has not been included in any of our products, and never will be,” he told the Times in an email” as a master of IP I do know the length that Facebook has been through with patents and he is telling the truth, the product of Facebook is Facebook, that system will not go there, but will be in all kinds of different technical solutions that allows for new methods of data gathering. Even as it is a burner phone, when they take it for a mere leap into betting solutions and gaming procrastination, they will hit some top 10 app of the month and that is when one element of data is connected to the ones that matter for those seeking these really welcome people for personal one on one interviews. And there we see the link between places like Palantir and Zuckerberg (not Facebook). Sen. Maria Cantwell was asking around the edges for a reason, the April interview had another reason, one that I was never aware off (or considered). It seems that she heard water cooler chats on settings of Palantir, this was about a larger issue and the Patents had clearly indicated options for Facebook, it was not about the setting (as she put it) ‘the talent and the will to solve this problem‘ it is given that Palantir knows that Facebook Inc. can become a contender and with the data that could be available, we see a setting where Palantir would be going up against a new player having 500% of the data that the Palantir customer has and more important, Facebook has the patents to partially solve the burner phone issues much better then Palantir ever had the option for and that is a real new path in this field. So as I personally read it, Sen. Maria Cantwell was asking whether Mark Zuckerberg was ready to become a player in this field.

So yes, even as we see that some steps are small (like diversity and torts law), Facebook has an optional setting to take a leap forward, not by a mere length, but by an entire class of data options, which is new and that is where those investigating Cambridge Analytica never looked at, or so we were meant to believe, Sen. Maria Cantwell might be the first through orders or insight to do just that.

That setting is now still under debate, not because of the tech, but because of a case of OIL STATES ENERGY SERVICES, LLC v. GREENE’S ENERGY GROUP, LLC, ET AL. No. 16–712 (decided April 24th, 2018), this case changes the game all over, because until overruled by the US Congress, we now have a setting where we see that the possibility that patents are no longer property rights is close to an absolute. Patents are not property rights and will not be property rights until Congress overrules the case, so in this the entire patents side is now a new setting that it is set as a government franchise, so in all this Facebook has the one play to set themselves apart from the rest of the data players, and some might state that the setting of the decision of the Supreme Court was a forgone conclusion close to two weeks earlier, so Sen. Maria Cantwell was either on the ball or asked the perfect questions two weeks in advance, I wonder who ended up with a boatload of speculated wealth, because someone definitely got rich in that process (happy speculation with a smile from the writer).

In all this it was not merely the setting of diversity and how to see it, but the fact that a place like Facebook might think iterative within its Facebook app, it has options and therefor opportunities in a much larger field than merely the Facebook app. So if Palantir is not worried on what comes next, they are more asleep at the wheel than you imagine; a small spoiler alert here: the people at Palantir are a lot of things, they have never ever been asleep so they know what is coming and as the path of Facebook is allegedly on now is regarded as government Franchise terrain, we need to wonder where this goes next as they are still all about finding those illusive extremists, all depending on burner smart phones.

I wonder when the rest realises what the patent holders have been able to achieve in mobile communications, now consider 350% of speed increase and 700% of data markers with the release of 5G, now revaluate the Patents that the Facebook corporation has and consider how much larger they could optionally become by 2021. Now reconsider the Forbes list of ‘The World’s Most Valuable Brands‘ and consider its position in 2021. I doubt that it will be #1 at that time, but it will be equal if not bigger then Google by then taking its #2 position away from them, and leaving Microsoft a distant #4. Although Microsoft is doing plenty to diminish its value all by themselves, they do not need to rely on Google and Facebook to reduce their position for them.

Iterative act never go anywhere, it is the setting of new stages where true fortunes are gathered.

Happy Friday 13th everyone! (Please don’t meet a guy named Jason today)

 

Leave a comment

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

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