Tag Archives: technology

May 28, 2025 · 02:15

The call for investors

That is at present the larger setting, everyone wants investors and they all tend to promise the calf with golden horns. As I see it, investing in gold mining, Oil mining and a few others are near dead certain return on investments. The larger group that will seemingly want to invest in AI, the new hype word. Still, considering that Builder.ai went from a billion plus to zilch is a nice example what  Microsoft backed solutions tend to give. You see, the larger picture that everyone is ignoring is that it was baked by Microsoft. Now, this might be OK, because Microsoft is a tech company. But consider that Builder.ai (previous known as Engineer.ai) was supposed to be all ‘good’, yet the media now reports ‘Builder.ai Collapsed After Finding Sales ‘Inflated By 300 Percent’’ This leads me to believe that there was  larger problem with this DML/LLM solution. Another source gives us ‘Builder.ai’s Collapse Exposes Deceptive AI Claims, Shocking Major Investors’ and another source gives us ‘Builder.ai collapse exposes dangers of ‘FOMO investing’ in AI’ yet that is nothing compared to what I said on November 16th 2024 in ‘Is it a public service’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2024/11/16/is-it-a-public-service/) where I stated ““a US strategy to prevent a Chinese military tech grab in the Gulf region” and it is my insight that this is a clicking clock. One tick, one tock leading to one mishap and Microsoft pretty much gives the store to China. And with that Aramco laughingly watches from the sidelines. There is no if in question. This becomes a mere shifting timeline and with every day that timeline becomes a lot more worrying.” With the added “But several sources state “There are several reasons why General AI is not yet a reality. However, there are various theories as to what why: The required processing power doesn’t exist yet. As soon as we have more powerful machines (or quantum computing), our current algorithms will help us create a General AI” or to some extent. Marketing the spin of AI does not make it so.” You see, the entire DML/LLM is not AI, as we can see from the builder.ai setting (a little presumptuous) of me, but the setting that we get inflated sales and then the Register ended their article with “The fact that it wasn’t able to convince enough customers to pay it enough money to stay solvent should give pause to those who see generative AI as a replacement for junior developers. As the experience of the unfortunate Microsoft staffers having to deal with the GitHub Copilot Agent shows, the technology still has some way to go. One day it might surpass a mediocre intern able to work a search engine, but that day is not today.” Is perhaps merely part of the problem the “the technology still has some way to go” is astute and to the point, but it is not the larger problem. It reminded me of the old market research setting, take a bucket of data and let MANOVA sort it out. The idea that a layman can sort it out is hilarious. I have met over the last half a century less than a dozen people who know that they were doing. These people are extremely rare. So whenever I hear a student tell me that they had a good solution with MANOVA, my eyes were tearing with howls of deriving laughter. And now we see a similar setting. But the larger setting is not merely the coded setting of DML and LLM. It is the stage where data is either not verified or verified in the most shallow of situations. And now consider that stage with a 500 billion solution. Data is everything there and verification is one part of that key, a key too many are seeing aside because it is not sexy enough. 

And now we get to the investors who are in “Fear Of Missing Out”, for them I have a consolation price. You see, RigZone gave me (at https://www.rigzone.com/news/adnoc_suppliers_pledge_817mm_investment_for_uae_manufacturing-27-may-2025-180646-article/) hours ago ‘ADNOC Suppliers Pledge $817MM Investment for UAE Manufacturing’, and as I see it Oil is a near certainty of achieving ROI, and as everyone is chasing the AI dream (which of course does not exist yet) those greedy hungry money people are looking away from the certainty piggybank (as I personally see it) and that kind of investment for manufacturing will bring products, sellable products and in the petrochemical industry that is like butter with the fish. A near certainty on investment. I prefer the expression ‘near certainty’ as there is always some risk, yet as I see it, ARAMCO and ADNOC are setting the bar of achievement high enough to get that done and as I see it “ADNOC said the facilities are situated throughout the Industrial City of Abu Dhabi (ICAD), Khalifa Economic Zones Abu Dhabi (KEZAD), Dubai Industrial Park, Jebel Ali Free Zone (JAFZA), Sharjah Airport International Free Zone (SAIF Zone), and Umm Al Quwain. They will generate over 3,500 high-skilled jobs in the private sector and produce a diverse array of industrial goods such as pressure vessels, pipe coatings, and fasteners.” As such the only danger is that ADNOC will not be able to fill the positions and that is at present the easiest score to settle. 

So as we see the call for investors coming from the sound of a dozen bugles, remember that the old premise that getting the call from a setting that works beats the golden horns that some promise and the investors will need another setting (or so I figure). And in the end, the larger question is why builder.ai was backed inn the first place. Microsoft has a setting with OpenAI and as one source gives me “Microsoft and OpenAI have a significant partnership, where Microsoft is a major investor and supports OpenAI’s advancements, and OpenAI provides access to powerful language models through Microsoft’s Azure platform. This partnership enables Azure OpenAI Service, which provides access to OpenAI’s models for businesses, and it also includes a revenue-sharing agreement.” I cannot vouch for the source, but the idea is when this is going on, why go to it with builder.ai? And was builder.ai vetted? The entire setting is raising more questions than I normally would have (sellers have their own agenda and including Microsoft in this is ‘to them’ a normal setting) I do not oppose that, but when we see this interaction, I wonder how dangerous that Stargate will be and $500,000,000,000 ain’t hay. 

And going back to ADNOC we see “ADNOC’s commercial agreements under the In-Country Value (ICV) program have enabled facilities that allow businesses to benefit from diverse commercial opportunities, the company said. The ICV program aims to manufacture AED90 billion ($24.5 billion) worth of products locally in its procurement pipeline by 2030.” More impressive is the quote “ADNOC’s ICV program has contributed AED242 billion ($65.8 million) to the UAE economy and created 17,000 jobs for UAE nationals since 2018, according to the company.” You see, such a move makes sense as the UAE produces 3.22 million barrels per day, that has been achieved from 2024 onward and some say that they exceeded their quota (by how much is unknown to me). But that makes sense as an investment, the entire fictive AI setting does not and ever since the builder.ai setting it makes a lot less sense, if not for the simple reason that no one can clearly state where that billion plus went, oh and how many investments collapsed and who were those investors. Simple questions really.

Have a great day and try not to chase too many Edsel’s with your investment portfolio.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

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

May 25, 2025 · 18:06

Curveballs

Sometimes life throws you a curveball, that is the simplicity of effects. It is a curveball as people cannot foresee them and in times it is because it comes from an unexpected side. There is basically nothing on this. You just have to accept it. Whether it was fate, karma if luck. These things happen. 

The subject of the ‘guilty’ party is Google (or Alphabet, whatever you want to call it) and the guilty person in this is Sergey Brin (now without a beard apparently. So yesterday I was handed two articles, they came basically out nowhere and appeared in my search finds. I am not even sure what I was looking for, but there you have it. 

First comes ZDNet with ‘I tried Google’s XR headset, and it already beats the Apple Vision Pro in 3 ways’, I don’t know about that as I never tried either, but as Apple seems to be sleeping at the wheel, lets see if Google can make something of this. You see, as Apple was asleep I created 2+ IP solutions for them, but will you know it, they are still seemingly asleep. 

The first one is seemingly the latest, but it was the first my mind created using the idea of partnering Guerrilla Games with Apple and it could just as easy be Google. I mentioned this in 

‘Are there two coins?’ (At https://lawlordtobe.com/2025/05/18/are-there-two-coins/) and optional setting that would give uniqueness and drive to the Apple Vision Pro, not that I really care as my nog tends to solve issues, like melting down Iranian/Russian nuclear reactors (a story for another time) I also created a stealth solution to make Iranian harbours useless for extended times. I cannot control my mind at times. But in this case I wondered what Apple could have done and I came up with several solutions that seemingly slipped their minds. The second set of IP was linked to Ubisoft and now we get to the second article. It was TechCrunch who gave me the second part with ‘Google launches AI tools for practicing languages through personalized lessons’ this seems fine, but in ‘One step left for a new world’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2024/11/16/one-step-left-for-a-new-world/), which I wrote on November 16th 2024 I gave the setting that Ubisoft with its Assassin’s Creed franchise had the ability to create language skills as they had already created over 80% and that was the hard part, now I see that the missing part has been created by Google and we get to see (at https://techcrunch.com/2025/04/29/google-launches-ai-tools-for-practicing-languages-through-personalized-lessons/) “Google on Tuesday is releasing three new AI experiments aimed at helping people learn to speak a new language in a more personalized way. While the experiments are still in the early stages, it’s possible that the company is looking to take on Duolingo with the help of Gemini, Google’s multimodal large language model.” So consider that AC Brotherhood could give you lessons in Italian and Latin, AC Unity could cover French and AC Syndicate could cover English. English could also be taught using Watchdogs 2 and 3 (Legion) there is of course Egyptian (AC Origin) and Arabic or Persian from AC Mirage. These games are ready and could be transferred to the XR headset making it even more personal and the kicker is that Apple had these options for over a year. Sucks being granny smith, doesn’t it? Oh, and if Google hadn’t done away with their Stadia they could have had at least 6 billion a year extra (phase one) and a lot more after that. Seems that they weren’t all awake either.

And all this was already on my blog site. As such there is a question where Apple gets its ideas, but in light of the failures I saw in 2024 I am not going to go there. Still if Google can do something more, they are happy to give it a go (a donation to yours truly would be perfectly acceptable).

Not the worst setting for today, but in a Few hours I am going to hand some dodo its liver, I feel a little frisky today. It’s not the weather, it wasn’t raining so I am decently fine. Have a great day.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Gaming, IT, Media, Science

Tagged as , ,

May 24, 2025 · 00:09

A swing and a miss

It is no secret that I hold the ‘possessors’ of AI at a distance. AI doesn’t exist (not yet at least) and now I got ‘informed’ through Twitter (still refusing to call it X) the following:

So after ‘Microsoft-backed Builder.ai collapsed after finding potentially bogus sales’ we get that the company is entering insolvency proceedings. Yet a mere three days ago TechCrunch gave us “Once worth over $1B, Microsoft-backed Builder.ai is running out of money”, so as such with a giggle on my mind I give you “Can’t have been a very good AI, can it?” So from +$1,000,000,000 to zilch (aka insolvency), how long did that take and where did the money go? So consider this, TechCrunch also gives us “The Microsoft-backed unicorn, which has raised more than $450 million in funding, rose to prominence for its AI-based platform that aimed to simplify the process of building apps and websites. According to the spokesperson, Builder.ai, also known as Engineer.ai Corporation, is appointing an administrator to “manage the company’s affairs.”” Now, I am going on a limb here. Consider that a billion will enable 1,000 programmers to work a year for a million dollars each. So where did the money go? I know that this doesn’t make sense (the 1000 programmers) but to consider that they might accept a deal for $200,000 each, there would be 5 years of designing and programming. Does that make sense? The website Builder.AI (my assumption that this is where they went gives us merely one line “For customer enquiries, please contact customers@builder.ai. For capacity partner enquiries, please contact capacitynetwork@builder.ai.” This is not good as I see it. The Register (at https://www.theregister.com/2025/05/21/builderai_insolvency/) gives us “The collapse of Builder.ai has cast fresh light on AI coding practices, despite the software company blaming its fall from grace on poor historical decision-making. Backed by Microsoft, Qatar’s sovereign wealth fund, and a host of venture capitalists, Britain-based Builder.ai rose rapidly to near-unicorn status as the startup’s valuation approached $1 billion (£740 million). The London company’s business model was to leverage AI tools to allow customers to design and create applications, although the Builder.ai team actually built the apps.”

As such the headline of the Register is pretty much spot on “Builder.ai coded itself into a corner – now it’s bankrupt” You see coding yourself into a corner is not AI, it is people. People code and when you code yourself into a corner the gig is quite literally up. And I can go on all day as there is not AI. There is deeper Machine Language and there are LLM (Large Language Model) and the combination can be awesome and it is part of an actual AI, but it is not AI. As such as Microsoft is believing its own spin (yet again) we can confuse that there is now a setting that Qatar’s sovereign wealth fund, and a host of venture capitalists have pretty much lost their faith in Microsoft and that will have repercussions. It is basically that simple. The first part of resolving this is to acknowledge that there is no AI, there is a clear setting that the power of DML and LLM should not be dismissed as it is really powerful but it is not AI. 

As I personally see it, the LLM is setting a stage that the chess computers had in the late 80’s and early 90’s. They basically had every chess game ever played in their memory and that is how the chess computer could foresee what was possible thrown against it. And until 2002 when Chessmaster 9000 was released by Ubisoft, that was what it was and for that time it was awesome. I would never have been able to get as far as I did in chess without that program and I am speculatively seeing that unfold. A setting holding a billion parameters? So I ,might be wrong on this part, but that is what I see and we need to realise that the entire AI setting is spin from greedy salespeople that cannot explain what they are selling (thank god I am not a salesperson). I am technical support and I am customer care and what we see as ‘the hand of a clever person’ is not that, not even close. 

So as we are also given “Blue-chip investors poured in cash to the tune of more than $500 million. However, all was not well at the startup. The company was previously known as Engineer.ai, and attracted criticism after The Wall Street Journal revealed in 2019 that the startup used human engineers rather than AI for most of its coding work”, as such (again speculation) a simple trick to replay a mere 1800 days later. And this is what a lot are (plenty of them in a more clever way) but the show is now on Microsoft. They cracked this, so when they come with a “we were lured” or “it is more complex and the concept was looking really good” we should ask them a few hard questions. So whilst we are given “While the failure of startups, even one as high profile as Builder.ai, is not uncommon, the company’s reliance on AI tools to speed coding might give some users pause for thought.” And when we consider “might give some users pause for thought” is a rather nasty setting as I was there already years ago. So where the others? As such we should grill Satya Nadella on “Last month, Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella boasted that 30 percent of the code in some of the tech giant’s repositories was written by AI. As such, an observer cannot help but suspect some passive aggression is occurring here, where a developer has been told that the agent must be used, and so they are going to jolly well do it. After all, Nadella is not one to shy from layoffs.” As such I wonder when the stake holders for Microsoft will consider that the ‘USE BY’ date of Satya Nadella was only good until December 2024. But that is me merely speculating. So I wonder when the media and actual clever people in media are considering that this is a game thatch only be postponed and not won. So will the others run when the going gets tough, or will they hide behind “but everyone agrees on this” as such the individual bond will triumph and there is a lot of work out there. The need to explain to people (read: customers) is that there is a lot of good to be found in the DML and LLM combination. It remains a niche market and it will fill the markets when people cannot afford AI, because that setting will be expensive (when it is ready). These computers will be the things that IBM can afford, as can the larger players like an airline, Ford, LVMH (Louis Vuitton Moët Hennessy) and a few others. But the first 10 years it will remain out of the hands of some, unless they time share (pay per processor second) with anyone who has the option to afford one. That computer will need to work 80%+ of the time to be affordable. 

As such we will see a total amount of spin in the coming months, because Microsoft backed the wrong end of that equation and now the fires are coming to their feet. Less then. Less than an hour ago we were given ‘Microsoft Unveils AI Features for Windows 11 Tools’. I have no idea how they can fit this in, but I reckon that the media will avoid asking the questions that matter. As such we will have to wait the unfolding of the people behind builder.ai. I wonder if anyone will ask the specification off what happened to said billion dollars? Can we get a clear list please and where did the hardware end? Or was a mere server rack leased from Microsoft? This is just me having fun at present. 

So have a great day and I will sleep like a baby knowing that Microsoft swung and missed the ball by a fair bit. I reckon that this is…. Let’s see there was the Tablet, which they lost against Apple and now Huawei as well. There was the Gaming station, which was totally inferior against Sony. there was Azure (OK, it didn’t fail but a book vendor called Amazon has a much better product, there was the Browser, which is nowhere near as good as Google. And there are a few others, but they slipped my mind. So this is at least number 5, 6 if you count Huawei as a player as well. Not really that good for a company that is valued at 3.34 trillion. So how many failures will we witness until that is gone too? 

Have fun out there today.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

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

May 18, 2025 · 15:01

Are there two coins?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, Gaming, IT, Media, Science

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

April 22, 2025 · 19:25

No Uber to the rescue

That is the setting that CBC gave me today and it angers me. For the most any situation that sets danger to children angers me. I reckon that is within all of us. Our first care is to a child, any child and that takes precedence over almost anything else.

The CBC (at https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/uber-drives-off-with-child-1.7513379) is giving us ‘An Uber drove away with her kid. Then Uber wouldn’t connect her or police with the driver’ with the subtext “Uber representatives refused to help them or Toronto police contact the driver” a blatant setting that optionally will endanger a child. Lets be clear, there could be a setting that a person is not to be connected to a driver, but the police? The Toronto metropolitan police force towards the protection of a child? As I personally see it, all Uber activities will stop immediately until this setting is resolved. No matter what the impact is, to optionally endanger a child is something you don’t get back from.

So when we get “An officer called Uber to get contact information for the driver but Julia says a representative for the ride-sharing company refused to provide it — stating the police needed to fill out a form” your blood should be boiling, as did mine. So, I do get part of this, still the operator could have contacted the driver and take it from there. The driver could then have called, the operator could have logged the event and within 1-2 minutes there would have been clarity. Now, the child was left in danger, as such I have no value for the statement “Toronto police found her child about an hour and a half later, without the company’s help” or the ‘official’ excuse “An Uber spokesperson said in a statement the safety of everyone who uses the platform is the company’s top priority”, well that setting is a downright lie, because the setting of the operator calling was seemingly overlooked. And the setting that a child was without her mothers care for 90 minutes should wake up every mother in Canada ignoring Uber as a solution for them for some time (or ever again), the latter setting is not to be ignored. Especially against “We immediately began reviewing the details of this incident internally to identify opportunities to improve our processes and support systems.” In under a minute I found a solution that ANY call centre operator could have considered in seconds. But it was to no avail, Uber fell short everywhere (Überall in German) and it goes from bad to worse from there. You see the setting of “The company says its support team followed Uber’s standard protocols, which are designed to protect the privacy and safety of all users” is a debatable one, I reckon that Uber set that setting to protect themselves and optionally illegals that might get some cash by becoming an Uber driver. You see, in villages like New York they have the setting “Under New York’s Vehicle and Traffic Law, ride-share companies such as Uber and Lyft are regulated as “transportation network companies” (“TNC”). To become a TNC driver, a worker must be at least nineteen years old and hold a valid New York State driver’s license issued by the DMV.” I reckon that this rule applies in many American cities, as such, as Uber needs drivers, they need to get space to keep their illegals ‘somewhat’ safe. And this setting with the child, a freak, one in a million events got in the way from what I personally see, the ‘protection’ of illegals. Now it is fair to say that I am wrong, but consider the simplicity of a call centre operator contacting the driver, optionally handing the data to a police officer against the escalation that the CBC is handing us implies that my version is likely correct. Just the setting that Uber refuses to aid the police department to resolve this situation gives it a much nastier turn and as such there is a larger setting that actions against Uber becomes essential, if only to guarantee that children get a much better safety net under this unsafe premise. And for those who state that I am wrong. Consider the following scenario. The child fell asleep, the mother was moving the three children and when she returns the cab is gone. So far, so good. Now the taxi driver rides off, hits a bump or pit in the road, as mother is no longer there, the child is thrown in the cab optionally causing damage to neck or other body part. This could have been not noticed (because mother is gone) and she falls out of sight and the taxi driver might be unaware. This is a possible setting and calling the driver could have stopped this from happening within minutes, and the child was ‘found’’ 90 minutes later, so for over an hour she remained in optional danger. 

As we get the last insult with “Julia’s boyfriend later received a $10 credit from Uber, which she considers “a massive slap in the face.””, as I see it, make Uber not an option for 10 months in Canada, a dollar a day so to say.

Yes, I am going for the larger danger, but as I see it, there is a clear need for this. In this I also oppose the setting that Carmi Levy, a technology analyst give with “traditional elements of customer service have been lost in today’s gig economy”, I oppose it, because as I see it the proper setting that seems to apply is “traditional elements of customer service have been lost in today’s gig economy for the larger need of profit, margins of profit and the pleasing of shares and stake holders” Yes, you forgot that, didn’t you? Uber works for profit slashing as many of the margins that they can to remain profitable and the funny part is that the phone call of the operator to the driver would not have impacted it. 

I will let you decide what the proper form of action is, consider that Uber gives us “Whether you’re in the back seat or behind the wheel, your safety is essential. We are committed to doing our part, and technology is at the heart of our approach. We partner with safety advocates and develop new technologies and systems to help improve safety and help make it easier for everyone to get around”, yet the website give us no information on where they are. So where do Canadians send their complaint letter to? For that matter, the line “technology is at the heart of our approach”, really? So is a phone call to the driver not technology? As such technology is not in any heart of approach and as I see it, a clear reason to block Uber from operating In Canada (optionally for 10 months), how does that go over with the share and stake holders?

Just a small merry thought, so you all have a lovely day and if you are Canadian consider City Taxi Toronto, 130 Westmore Drive, Suite 219, Toronto (reachable at (416) 740-2222)and keep yourself and your children safe, a random taxi service in Toronto was chosen. I personally do not know how good they are, but as I see it, optionally better than Uber.

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media

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

April 18, 2025 · 17:18

A viewpoint is not a point of view

Yes, nice and confusing. But that is the meaning of this exercise. You see, I don’t agree on the point of view the law makes in this case. They have altered their point of view on the law in motion. In a setting that ran for over a decade. I don’t think they are to blame, there is no real guilt here (apparently), but the setting stands. In this I call to attention the BBC article (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3674nl7g74o) stating ‘Google has illegal advertising monopoly, judge rules’ I do not agree and for this I call to attention two ‘pieces’ of evidence. The first is the actor Ryan Reynolds, a person I have called more than once the craziest marketeer on the planet. The second piece of evidence is a firm named CAASIE.co, an advertisement services firm apparently in Brisbane (I thought they were in New York). These two stand out, in a pool of millions. Set in a presence of “The US alone spent almost $481 billion on marketing in 2022, with digital marketing seeing significant growth. Australia’s marketing industry is also substantial, valued at over $20 billion.” With the added “While a precise count isn’t available, the scale of the industry suggests a large number of professionals are involved in marketing roles worldwide. The demand for marketing expertise is strong, and the industry is continuously evolving, particularly with the rise of digital marketing”. Don’t get me wrong, there are good marketing teams. The bigger brands have decent teams and at times places like Coca Cola and Heineken stand out. Yet in that setting of millions of people these two stand out. Why? Perhaps marketing is seen by some as the path you take when you can’t do anything else? Perhaps these men (women too) can talk their way into the panties of the youthful ladies and they thought, perhaps I can make money out of this venturous situation. And they went into marketing, mainly because ‘sex sells’. The truth couldn’t be farther (or is that further) removed from the truth. 

And there the problem starts. You see, Google isn’t monopolising things, they merely had the proper handle on things. The marketing bulk doesn’t know what it its doing and as ‘they’ see it Google is in the way. In the early days Google (read: Larry Page and Sergei Brin) figured out a few things. As Microsoft was talking dirty to the CFO’s in the land (in the late 80’s and beyond) these two youthful young sprouts figured out that the work was done by the m inions of these CFO’s, so as they catered to the bulk of the worker ants, Microsoft was wasting its time on expensive dinners and drink parties and they got all the CFO’s and CTO’s of the Fortune 500. But these people needed their worker ants and Google had created a search system that catered to THEIR needs. So whilst these youthful young sprouts were at Stanford University, their buddies all went for the knickers of the ladies. They created a page rank system, because they saw ahead that the web was going to be a mess, millions of voices create cacophony and they cut through the mess.

So ahead we go 20 years (take or leave a year) and Google figured out that their system is gold. So they venture forward and they create Google Ads (formerly Google Adwords) and that was in 2000. Again they hit gold, although it was a natural continuation from page rank and again Microsoft wants ink on the game, but wannabe’s and spin creators can merely make shallow creation and it is seen in their product. At present known as Microsoft Advertising, holds a market share of around 3-4% of the global search engine market. This is bad news for the marketing wannabe’s as they bought the shite that Microsoft is seemingly selling. Even I saw the bing hijacking of people seeking and as Microsoft is all playing innocent, they did (as I personally see it) enable the system to be abused. It matter not, Google created a firm product and now the marketing bitches (both male and female) decided to cry fowl (intended typo) So that I the setting.

Marketing today is people who talk a lot present a lot, but as I see it, they do not know what they are doing. Merely hoping that their revenue cup runneth over and it is based on decade old settings (which is what schools rely on). At UTS (University of Technology Sydney) we had one lecture on page rank and that opened my eyes (unlikely as much as it hit Sergei and Larry), but the setting was clear. Google created the largest setting by thinking of what to do, not to wine and dine the people with money and they followed Microsoft as they didn’t realise what they were up against. The internet of things is a massive beast with plenty of horns and these are the horns of plenty.

So now we get to the ‘court case’ that the BBC gives us. So as we are given “The US Department of Justice, along with 17 US states, sued Google, arguing the tech giant was illegally dominating the technology which determines which adverts should be placed online and where” and as I personally see it, they are catering to millions of people who do not know what they are doing and they think it is unfair that these people should miss out on a business they are unlikely to understand. You see, I name these two at the start as they have figured out a few things. Ryan Reynolds created billions from understanding the world and its business (Mint Mobile, Aviation Gin, and Wrexham AFC. He also co-founded Maximum Effort, a marketing agency and production company) he figured out a few things and that sprout is a mere 48 springs old. He saw the options and turned several products in a multi billion dollar empire by engaging with an audience and telling a story in a way they remembered. The other (the wannabe’s) can scoop up a mere $100,000 dollars at a time as I see it. Let’s not forget that this man started as an extra on the X-Files, now he surpassed the main cast of that series (including the director) in several ways.

Second we get CAASIE.co, they come with “buy outdoor ads globally – from your browser”, with the byline “Self-service. No contracts. No commitments” and consider this quote “In 2007, São Paulo, Brazil instituted a billboard ban because there were no viable regulations of the billboard industry.” For decades these billboards were out there and in 2020 (a mere 5 years ago) they decided to change the premise. So as we get “They are an advertising company specializing in Digital Out of Home (dOOH) advertising, programmatic advertising, and digital signage. Their headquarters are in Brisbane, Australia”, a setting that was clear for decades but no one considered what there was and these people did, so as they gain favor and altitude by being innovative the wannabe marketeers can (for all I care) go duck themselves. 

These two examples are a clear sign that the crying marketeers need to grow up, or as the Americans say “Go big or go home” and that is noticeable on the future of marketing as I see it. Now they are all about AI and creating hypes, but that doesn’t pay for the yacht (or for diner as I see it). 

So as I see “US district judge Leonie Brinkema said in the ruling Google had “willfully engaged in a series of anticompetitive acts” which enabled it to “acquire and maintain monopoly power” in the market.” Is wrong by at least half a continent (a mile seems so shallow), so as I see it, when did the law start catering to village idiots? The fact that there are thousands of voices doesn’t make this clever. Reynolds and CAASIE were clever, they were very clever and that is a setting that CAASIE can enjoy, you see when they get access to the stage where the Google Ads people use CAASIE as the global interface to get global visibility, CAASIE will grow a lot more and what will the marketeers do to get their slices of pie? Cry a little more? Since when did we cater to the stupid to give value to this world?

The is the setting I see and as I see it the larger folly of US district judge Leonie Brinkema, so their goes her “willfully engaged”, Google walked a path for decades and that thought paid off and as I see it, Google was not catering to CAASIE, CAASIE found its own niche of global needed marketing. These two settings (Reynolds and CAASIE) show that there was space and these are raking in the billions (CAASIE not yet) but they can get a lot more by expanding into the UAE and Saudi Arabia, optionally Bangladesh and Indonesia as well. A setting that will iterate in new areas and that was something that a player like Microsoft never understood. My evidence in that statement is the fact that they lost marketshare 6 times over.

So the viewpoints of Google, Ryan Reynolds and CAASIE are not points of view, they are intentional strides in the Internet of Things and their views of how to make money. A lesson a lot of marketeers never learned in the first place. Although they got their collection of panties n their trophy cabinet, something I never ever had, but I decided to remain innovatively engaged. So as I had the ball several times from DARPA, Ubisoft and Microsoft (optionally Amazon and Apple as well) I can relax to see these departments of Justice (globally) fumble their balls and as things go from bad to worse I can giggle (not Google) from the sidelines. How the stage is the play of things, something Shakespeare figured out in 1623.

Have a great day whilst you ponder the wisdoms I left here with two hidden snags, the clever people out there can work out what I left for others to find. Have a great one.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Media, Science

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

April 10, 2025 · 12:08

New short term thinking

The news hit me somewhere yesterday. I got it by means of a LinkedIn mention, and it gave me reason to pause. Here is one version of that news (at https://techwireasia.com/2025/04/microsoft-pauses-key-builds-in-indonesia-us-and-uk-amid-infrastructure-review/) with the mention ‘Microsoft pauses data centre investment in Indonesia, US, and UK’, and here we see the byline “Microsoft pauses or delays data centre projects in the UK, US, and Indonesia.”, it is my view that they cannot afford this setting. You might have heard the American expression, “Go big or go home” and I think that Microsoft is about to go home. You see, I have forever had the clear opinion that there is no AI. I call it NIP (Near Intelligent Parsing), the setting that if too many start accepting the setting that I was always right (which comes from the clear setting that there is one AI station and it was given to us by Alan Turing) the people will realise that there is no AI and it comes down to programming and a programmer. That setting puts Microsoft in hot water for a lot of heavy water (to be poured over their heads). And lets be clear, a side you can confirm with mere logical thinking. A data Centre is a long term setting. No matter what you put in the White House (by some called the village idiot) whatever this administration is, it is short term and a data centre is long term and that so called hype around their AI should never waver. You see, this short term action (read: knee jerk reaction) implies short term planning and that is where they all get into hot waters. Why did you think that I made mention that Google needs to put a data centre in Iceland and consolidate their thinking into geo thermal reactors? (Reactors might not be the right word). A setting where ceramic tiles (or cylinders) surrounding new constructions that is not unlike a nuclear reactor, but the reactor is all around them, not Uranium rods, the Lava (or Magma) is the powerful and as it is merely bleeding the radiation, the fuel never dissipates and never ending energy is theirs. For all these parties looking of creating data centers (as far as I can see around 50 in total globally) they will all require energy and as one data centre takes energy close to a amount a small city does, we will get energy issues a lot sooner than we think.

Did Microsoft think this through? Pretty sure they did and their conclusion is that they cannot spend billion on data centers. So at the same time as we are given “Rivals Oracle and OpenAI ramp up investments”, I come to the conclusion that Microsoft can no longer afford the bills their ego’s committed themselves to. Feel free to disagree, but they set out this AI ‘vibe’ and own 49% of OpenAI, so why close down their Data Centers whilst they ‘own’ one of the ramp up partners? They are figuring out that they are too deeply committed. And as the world realizes that NIP is not the same as actual AI, they fear what is coming next.

So you decide what to make of the stage of “Microsoft has acknowledged changing its strategy but declined to provide details about specific projects. “We plan our data centre capacity needs years in advance to ensure we have sufficient infrastructure in the right places,” a Microsoft spokesperson said. “As AI demand continues to grow, and our data centre presence continues to expand, the changes we have made demonstrates the flexibility of our strategy.”” As I see it, it is an answer, but not the one that touches on this. I come with questions as ‘What growth?’ All this sets the need for some lowered activity, not pausing, unless you know what comes next and there is a larger setting with Oracle, Tencent and Huawei, I know there is a Swedish centre as well but I forgot the name. All these are ramping up, but Microsoft is pausing? That makes no sense unless there is another reason and my thought of “They can no longer afford it” takes another gander and when we consider that they paused “North Dakota, Illinois, Wisconsin, the UK midlands and Jakarta, Indonesia.” That implies something is going on and when we combine this with “Microsoft cuts data centre plans and hikes prices in push to make users carry AI costs” (source: The Conversation, March 3rd 2025) these elements together implies (imply, not proven) tells me that there is a funding setting for Microsoft. Combine that with the lovely voiced fact of “OpenAI brought in US$3.7 billion in revenue – but spent almost US$9 billion, for a net loss of around US$5 billion.” (Source: the Conversation) we see another failed setting and that failure gets to be bigger. As Amazon, Google, Oracle, Tencent and Huawei steam ahead getting larger data centers and ready long before Microsoft is there means less revenue for Microsoft. I did say that they could go big or go home? I reckon that Microsoft already lost 6 times on front settings and they lost to Amazon, Apple (twice), Sony, Adobe, Google, and IBM. I should add Huawei to that list but they already bungled that setting before Huawei became an actual competitor. A simple deduction from little stupid old me. 

So whatever you do, you might look into the trust you gave Microsoft and see that you are not left with an empty shell. Oh, and to prove that I am not anti-Microsoft you need to know that they did corner the spreadsheet market (Excel) and the flight Simulator market. Microsoft did some things good, but when it comes to the spin setting of vibes they need to reassess their situation.

Have a great day, it’s midweek now. I am happily in the next day.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

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

March 26, 2025 · 22:06

The tradeoff

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

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

March 17, 2025 · 21:50

The what? Cry me a river.

Yup this happens. I am in the mindset to cry a river as Cookie Tim (apparently the CEO of Apple) screwed up the application design of Apple products to such a degree that several apps are now lagging and giving me less joy and appreciation of what Apple does at present. In Music, Keynote, And Photos and a few more items. These three hit me personally. So as such if I can give Cookie Tim a hard time I will. As such when the BBC gave us ‘Global smartwatch sales fall for first time’ I was interested in reading that ‘news’. News by Imran Rahman-Jones. So first we see “Global sales of smartwatches have fallen for the first time, new figures indicate, in large part due to a sharp decline in the popularity of market leader, Apple.” That is nothing short of weirdly imaginative and a lack of reasoning has applied. Then we get “Market research firm Counterpoint says 7% fewer of the devices were shipped in 2024 compared to the year before. Shipments of Apple Watches fell by 19% in that period, Counterpoint says.” And the first thing I wonder is where is the data? I am decently convinced (like 80%+ certain), I could drill holes in that, possibly the size of the grand canyon. So where is my view? Well, the general setting is that “Samsung introduced a rectangular smart watch, the Samsung Gear, in 2013, two years before the first rectangular Apple Watch.” And yes, Apple ruled that market in the beginning. As I personally see it I reckon that in a short time Apple had that market for about 70% and Samsung for 30% And when you consider that in 2025 Android has 71.75%, IOS has 27.78%, So there is a large abundance of non-Apple systems. So Apple did something extremely right in those days. The larger setting that the BBC seemingly overlooks is that the consumer gets a watch once and then some time later another one. You see, these bad boys cost a few shillings and as such plenty of people cannot afford one. So I bought my Smartwatch last year and I expect that this device will last until at least 2027 and it is not as expensive as the Apple variety (and I am an Android fan). As such, at present we have iTouch, Garmin, HardHat, GadPro, Nexus, Huawei, Withings, Amazfit, Xiaomi, Imoo, HiFuture (all iOS options) and some of these are being marketed as ‘the economical choice’ the iTouch is less than $50, whilst the Apple Watches come at well over 1000% ($500+). As people cannot afford a lot of stuff and some are still new in the Smartwatch category, Can you blame them for selecting the cheaper option at present? 

As the article is blatantly short on ‘data’ can you blame me for not believing a word that the BBC prints here? That is besides the lack of the words ‘pricing’, ‘price’ and ‘expensive’ in this article. Another reference is “Another large contributor to the global sales drop was India, which fell from 30% of the market to 23%.” It seems like an issue that is until you realise that in India “In 2023, Android held a share of 95.17 percent of the mobile operating system market in India. This was followed by Apple’s iOS, a distant second, with 3.98 percent market share.” (Source: Statista), so when you consider that a 7% drop over a market they only have for 4%, the drop is negligible. But the BBC wanted something to write about, how about we write about the lack of data in this setting? Oh, wait they are already screwing this up in regards to the Hamas setting. As such this lack is merely laughable. 

Another setting I dropped over (not in this article) was “So, it makes sense for users to buy an iPhone, especially if they already have a Mac, iPad or even the Apple Watch.” Now this isn’t a given, but I reckon that a smartwatch lacks vision if you do not have the proper smart phone. 

So is there a real setting?
Actually the article gives us that “the fact a rumoured high-end Ultra 3 model never materialised.” This could be a reason, but that implies that these customers from 2024 are merely waiting for a release in 2025, so they aren’t gone, there are merely set in a waiting pattern awaiting the go signal. I would be in the same setting with the MAC Studio (if I could afford one). Why select the M4Max over an M3Ultra, it would make more sense waiting until the M4Ultra comes (and perhaps at that time I could afford one). So we have two settings, the affordability (in this economy) and the technology when it comes available as well as the realistic option that there is a market saturation, or near that setting and with a dozen brands Apple will lose a few notches and that too is missing from the article. It gives us ‘how great’ Chinese brands are doing, but there is more than China. There is a flood of brands coming to the customers now and as Apple staff (in their shops) are ‘indoctrinated’ to do the Apple talk in a few ways, they are losing market share there too. I reckon that it is the price of depending on teenagers doing the job because they look fresh and appealing. I reckon that it is costing Apple more than they realise. It is a choice and I reckon it is no longer the better choice.

Still that doesn’t excuse the BBC article, it is as I personally see it shoddy all by itself. 

Have a great day this Monday.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

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

February 27, 2025 · 01:35

When words become data

There is an uneasy setting. I get that. You see AI does not exist, and whilst we all see the AI settings develop and some will be setting (read: gambling) 500 billion dollars on that topic, we now see that META is banking on a 200 billion on the stage. But what is this stage? We can tun to Reuters  who gives us ‘Meta in talks for $200 billion AI data center project, The Information reports’ (at https://www.reuters.com/technology/meta-talks-200-billion-ai-data-center-project-information-reports-2025-02-26/) where we are given “A Meta spokesperson denied the report, saying its data center plans and capital expenditures have already been disclosed and that anything beyond that is “pure speculation”” However, when we set the stage on a different shoe we see another development. You see, when we think of this in non-AI terms we get that a Data Centre generally ranges from $10 million to $200 million with a typical commercial data center costing around $10-12 million per megawatt of power capacity; smaller data centers can cost as low as $200,000 to build. So when we consider that the upper range of a data centre is $200 million. So what kind of a data centre gives the need to be a thousand times bigger? Now, consider that there are enough people clarifying that AI does not exit. I see AI what some people call True AI and that springs from the mind of Alan Turing. He set the premise of AI half a century ago. And whilst some of the essential hardware is ready, there are still parts missing. Yet what some now call AI is merely Deeper Machine Learning and it gets help from an LLM. This setting requires huge amounts of data, so when you consider that that data comes from a data centre. What on earth is META up to? When need a data centre a thousand times bigger? The only size that makes sense for 200 billion is a data centre that could gobble up whatever Microsoft has as well as Google’s data centers in one great swoop and that is merely the beginning.

Speculation
The next part is speculation, I openly admit that. So when (not if) America defaults on their loans we get an implosion of current wealth and the new wealth will be data. Data will in the near future be the currency that all other parties accept. As such Is META preparing for a new currency? As I see it the simplest setting is whomever has the most data will be the richest person on the planet and that would make sense, that explains Trump’s 500 billion for a data centre and now META is following suit. You see Zuckerberg is really intelligent. I saw that setting 5 years before Facebook existed, but my boss told me that my idea was ludicrous, it would never work. Now we see my initial idea spread all over the planet with every marketing organisation on the planet chomping at the bit to get their slice of pie. So Zuckerberg does have the cajones and the drive to proceed. When data is currency they will be one of the few players in the new economy. And when you take my speculation (possibly even insightful presumption) these data centers make sense and being able to set predictive data learned from active and historical data makes sense in a very real way. Predictive data will be the wave of the future. It still is not AI, but it is in very real ways the next step in data needs. Predictive analytics set the path of this wave 1-2 decades ago. And now we see more data transformations and when the main roads are dealt with the niche markets can be predicted and seen in very real ways.

And the stage is more real than you can see. When people like Zuckerberg are cashing out to get their data centers up and running, there is a real drive to be first to cash in. As I see it, my next step would be to score a job with a data centre doing mere maintenance and support work. You see, as all these big players evolve their needs, their manpower will need to come from infrastructures that these data centers require. So support and power will have the greatest staffing needs in the next decade. Just my thoughts on the matter.

Have a lovely day today

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

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