Tag Archives: Telstra

January 27, 2023 · 21:31

Banking on it

This is the case as I read it a few hours before, it also strengthens my case against banking apps. You see, the BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/business-64240140) gives us ‘Mobile phone fraud: ‘They stole £22,500 using my banking app’’ and we get “A pickpocket took Jacopo de Simone’s mobile phone and used his banking apps to steal £22,500”. In this case I have a few questions. You see, when I have my phone on me it is ALWAYS locked. A locked phone can still accept phone calls. So as I see “He said his bank investigated but found him liable for the losses so he is still fighting to get the money back.” To be honest, I cannot completely disagree, I also agree with “banks need to do more to tackle it, according to charity the Fraud Advisory Panel” which becomes the issue. I always though on a separate app that is NOT next to the app for certain bank activities and that app needs to receive a code within 30 minutes. And when the app receives three (my magic number) wrong codes the app is blocked from that person until he goes to one of his bank’s branches where they can unlock and reset the app. Everyone is always nagging about simplicity of usage, well if you are willing to surrender £22,500 for that convenience  you are welcome to proceed, but somehow I feel certain that it is not worth that much money. So when I see “Criminals are stealing mobiles not for the device but to try to access finance apps to steal thousands of pounds, the Fraud Advisory Panel said” I feel a little happy as I keep zero financial apps on my mobile. I never ever trusted those and the Optus and Telstra issues we had in the last year merely strengthens my resolve on that issue. As such, when I see “Mr de Simone fell victim to the crime while walking around London Bridge in May 2022 when his phone was pickpocketed” the question comes back “How the hell did they unlock his phone?” Then there is “Use different pin numbers for unlocking your phone and opening banking apps” as well as “Don’t store passwords or pin numbers on your phone” in this case I never put pin numbers there and I do keep some passwords, but they are encrypted and my skill of half a dozen languages helped here and if these people can decipher those codes, good luck. The password for my discontinued UTS password is all yours. But there is another setting, like Google allowing for encrypted notes, encrypted via a number. I am a little surprised that they did not cover that after a decade (well, they dropped the ball on a few other matters too, one of those costed them 50 million subscribers). So there is always space to improve things. But when I look at the case of Jacopo de Simone I at present will side with the bank. Parts do not make sense, but the issue of improving security on banking apps remain, more needs to be done and a separate app makes sense. It reminds me of a solution 30 years ago that the insurance agent Aegon had. They called it Aegon LAR. The app contacted the server that agent X needed contact and within 60 seconds the server contacted the agent. As such all the security was on the server side and triggering a hack would not work from a remote location, it contacted the router on a specified number and there were security protocols in place, so you had to be there, you needed the codes and any deviation would stop activities. Simple and  decently safe. How come we let all that slide for simplicity and ease of use? 

It never made sense to me and I do not need a banking app for a few reasons and my distrust of security levels on a few levels makes me avoid ALL banking apps. It is just how I am wired, nothing personal, it is the application of Common Cyber Sense.

Advertisement

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Science

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

October 5, 2022 · 21:46

They just won’t learn

That happens, people Incapable of learning. IT people listening to salespeople because these sales people know what buttons to push. Board members pushing for changes so that their peer will see that they are up to speed on the inter-nest of things (no typo) and there are all other kinds of variation and pretty much every company has them. Even as Australia is still reeling from the Optus debacle, Telstra joins the stupid range (at https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-04/telstra-staff-have-details-hacked/101499920). So explain to me why an HR system needs to be online? OK, you will get away with that and there is a need for some to access it, but in what universe does this need to be so open that EVERYONE can get to it? That is the question we see raised with ‘Telstra data breach sees names and email addresses of staff uploaded online’, a blunder of unimaginable proportions. On the other hand, Telstra will be bleeding staff members left, right and forward pretty soon. You see, this list is well desired by over a dozen telecoms in Europe, North America, the Middle East and Asia. They all need staff all over the place and now their headhunters know EXACTLY where to dig. Even as the article gives us two parts. The first part is “a third party which was offering a rewards program for staff had the data breach in 2017” as well as “Telstra has not used the rewards program since 2017, the spokesperson said” in all this the question that matters are not asked. We get Bill Shorten trying to change the conversation back to Optus with: “get the information so I can stop hackers from hacking into government data and further compromising people’s privacy”. The massive part is “Why was a reward program not used for 5 years still linked to HR data?” It seems that ABC does not ask this and the others do not either. So even if we get “Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus has said he will review Australia’s privacy laws and tighter protections could be brought in by the end of the year” Yet the larger question remains unanswered. How to protect these systems from STUPID people? A reward system that has a direct link to the HR data and was not used for 5 years is stupid, plain and simple stupid. As such this affects their IT and their HR department. Yet the people (politicians and media are not asking these questions are they? They let Labor loser Shorten change the conversation. Oh, do not worry we are not even close to done with Optus, but the setting that the conversation is pushed away from Telstra allegedly implies that Telstra has too large a hold on Media and politicians. So whilst the media allowed Telstra to hide behind “while the data is of minimal risk to former employees” they fail to see the larger picture. In an age brain drains these people are worth their eight in Lithium (more valuable than gold) and it seems to me that an employment database of 30,000 telecom people will be eagerly mined in the three earlier mentioned regions. These hackers were smart, they can get a million easily (over 10-15 customers) and these customers will not care where that data comes from, they need personnel and they needs them now. So it seems that certain people just ill not learn and there is no hiding behind “in an attempt to profit from the Optus breach” Telstra claims to be so superior, of that is so either the hack would not have affected them, or these systems are in a worse shape than ever before and that is also missing from the article. Two competitors successfully hit by the same flaw? It seems that too many people are asleep at the wheel. And no one is asking the right questions, not even the media, why is that?

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Media, Politics

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

October 4, 2022 · 00:02

Cross-path of the delusional

In this case it is me. In this case it is my thoughts on what I am enabling and that is close to bringing me tears of joy. What my mind was seeing was the spreading of my IP. Yes, that is delusional, because the buyers have not decided yet, but in my mind I saw the systems come online, my mind was filling in the blanks and so far the idea seems flawless, which is also a delusional path. No solution is ever flawless so doubt takes over and I revisit all the parts that I designed, from the streaming solution to the 5G hardware and its connectors. I want to make sure that it works as it should be and I went over it ten times over without finding the flaw. This is also delusional. The fact that I cannot see it does not mean that they aren’t there, but it seems to me that there are no massive or obvious flaws. So if the KSA buys the first part, they will be the only player in line to buy the second part. I did say ‘close to’ because doubt will remain. Did I miss something, was there a corner I overlooked? It is the only issue with proofreading, there should be a second person but I trust no one else. Not some wannabe person claiming to be one thing and picking up the phone to Microsoft (or Telstra) a second later. I believe it is time for them to feel the damage that the people hired under the guise of ‘fake it till you make it’ brings. The 50M subscriptions is one part, but the 5G, that will change the stage for too many people a lot, not at first but once it start I truly believe that it will not stop. And there is still the Augmented reality part. I am till trying to decide the data model of that one because no normal data model will hold (no matter what some claim). So that part takes a little more work, but over a period of 2.5 years the model was designed in my mind, iteration after iteration until it became an innovation from scratch. 

I was able to reset the timer for the 4Chan part and now I stop adjusting it. If no one buys it, it will all become public domain on December 31st, my gift to 2023. I feel I am done now. I did what I could and now it is time to look at the crossroad. I need to decide where to go next, but I cannot make up my mind. I can try to create more tech solutions and perhaps a thought will come to mind, but I doubt it, 4 devices, one streaming system in three parts, scripts, and the augmented reality solution. I should look at another video of the Eaton Centre mall, perhaps that will give me more ideas. I did come up with another idea, but it is based on the Dutch Artotheek solution. You see, we might want to see artwork, but what happens when we have hi-res frames in the house and that (as well as your TV) become the fame of art to show when you are not watching TV, during the day and the frames will be connected to an art centre. You become the renter of a digital version of one of their works, maintained like an Apple music, or an Amazon rental. With a limit per artwork (for example 20), so only 20 get to rent that art for $0.99 or €0.99 per week. And you can change the art once a month (for a little extra once a week). A setting that could interest thousands of houses per city, optionally millions of households per nation. Interesting that there is not such a system at present (not as far as I could see). 

Th screens are also interesting. There is a SHUSH30 900mm Screens (900x1800x30) for $237, Eooke also has solution in the 4K 50” setting (for $1499), but that means that cheaper solutions are merely around the corner and for a lot of people the TV might suffice (if that TV is capable). 

All solutions that are out there, like a few other solutions I made public domain, all options that places like Google and Amazon basically ignored (for whatever reason). Yes, Google has an excuse for the streaming solution, but would you ignore (or dump) what you have with the prospect of $500M a month? I would not (I also cannot afford to do that). 

In light of what is out there, in light of the cost of living, can we afford to have it all? Consider that and also consider that this opens up a sales branch for aspiring artists. There are so many ideas out there and will they all work? No, of course not, but the issue remains that what does not work in location A, might have a real chance in location B, it is the option of global thinking that opens up markets and opens up ideas to the larger public. I tried to do that to the largest extent and I reckon that I miss 7 out of 10 times, but those three will be so worth it, it will make up for all the other things. They say that the crossroads of the delusional mind can go to the rational, the looney tunes dirt road, the path of the dreamer and the road of the ruthless. Is it true? I cannot tell, those who are at crossroads seldom can, but I do feel that I am not looney tunes or ruthless. So what am I merely a dreamer, or a person trying to make rational sense of what he has? I believe that is me, not because I want it to be, but because I measure and retest again and again. None of the other paths lead to seeking verification, but that could be me. 

Anyway, if other nations have an ‘Artotheek’ department they might want to look into this. And that is before we consider the thousands of artwork that are too old to have IP protection. And with that I opened the door for some.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Gaming, IT, Science

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

September 29, 2022 · 22:11

Optus seems more stupid

I wrote about this earlier, I had concerns, I had questions and I had to some degree accusations. Yet that is nothing compared to now. The BBC gives us (at https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-63056838) ‘Optus: How a massive data breach has exposed Australia’ this shows a few sides, I was unaware of earlier. They start with “about 40% of the population – had personal data stolen in what it calls a cyber-attack” that is a lot, but Optus has a large user population. It is “Those whose passport or licence numbers were taken – roughly 2.8 million people – are at a “quite significant” risk of identity theft and fraud, the government has since said” which is close to everyone, to become most telecom members, you need 200 points of identification, which tends to include a passport or a drivers license. So when we get to “In an emotional apology, Optus chief executive Kelly Bayer Rosmarin called it a “sophisticated attack”, saying the company has very strong cybersecurity”, is that so? So when the BBC treats us to “Sydney-based tech reporter Jeremy Kirk contacted the purported hacker and said the person gave him a detailed explanation of how they stole the data. The user contradicted Optus’s claims the breach was “sophisticated”, saying they pulled the data from a freely accessible software interface. “No authenticate needed… All open to internet for any one to use,” they said in a message, according to Kirk.” This seems like there is a serious flaw in the Optus system, and when we revisit the statement from Kelly Bayer Rosmarin “I’m disappointed that we couldn’t have prevented it,” she said on Friday”

I tend to side with the less diplomatic version of me stating to Kelly Bayer Rosmarin “Do you know that the condom is also used to stop making you fat? It is not just for the prevention of STD’s” now I might be ejaculating a bit premature (aka was Jeremy Kirk told a BS story or the truth) but if this is true, then Optus failed on a few levels. Protecting the data, protecting the servers and protecting their customer base. You see, the software interface might have allowed for injection of a backdoor making the Optus system now close to completely unreliable. The fact that there is a freely accessible software interface in play implies that its IT security failed, the data was collected and that happened without any red flags on access and transfer of data and we see the fact that all the data is accessible, from way too many places and that is the telecom company that Australia trusts? It gets to be even worse when we look at the article (at https://www.afr.com/companies/telecommunications/optus-hack-could-happen-to-anyone-ex-telstra-boss-warns-20220928-p5blrg) where we are given ‘Optus hack ‘could happen to anyone’ ex-Telstra boss warns’, a wannabe from the stables of Telstra, an immature greedy Microsoft minded telecom. There we see “Former Telstra chief executive David Thodey says the cyberattack on Optus “could happen to anyone” and urged all big and small organisations to be “vigilant” about online security”, Well David, if the information from Jeremy Kirk holds true, you better hope that you have a better cyber and IT security division, more importantly if this level of stupidity can happen to EVERONE, your systems ALL SUCK! And in my personal opinion you all need an overhaul and a 80% wage reduction. This level of stupidity when it comes to personal data is too stupid for any of you to be taken seriously as so called ‘captains of industry’ as such, please apply for an Uber or barber position. 

Now this seems overly emotional, but these are the kind of people who judged me a not being professional and THEY set data next to an open interface? This is the 101 of stupidity. OK, if JK was told a bag of lies I would owe a few people an apology, but that is for tomorrow, for now it seems that a lot of people are not aware of the level of stupid their telecom company hung their personal data on and that is more than a simple investigation, there are plenty who will pay handsomely for that much personal data. The US, Russia, India and China. 4 players willing to pay twice what the hacker wanted and they will not ask questions. A whole collection of personal data that can aid in creating deeper learning personalised rainbow tables, a whole battery of data from all kinds of social media that can now be used for granularity and a whole range of other data sets that can now be completed. And it all hangs on a (currently unconfirmed) version of a freely accessible software interface. “No authenticate needed”. How angry would you be hen these so called professionals charged you again and again and as they changed membership status so that they had more legal options. And they are not held to account? Yes, I would be angry and I am (for now still) with Optus, I get to be angry, my data is out there. So how would you feel?

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,

March 18, 2022 · 21:22

Don’t we have enough problems?

This started this morning. It started when three messages passed by my Chromebook. The first was (at https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/3/16/un-aid-drive-to-avert-yemen-catastrophe-falls-far-short) called ‘UN aid drive to avert Yemen catastrophe falls far short’, so in short, the UN cannot get it done, big surprise here (not really). The second one was from a different corner. The second one was Arab News (at https://www.arabnews.com/node/2044566/saudi-arabia) which gives us ‘Saudi Arabia pumps $19bn into Yemeni aid program: KS relief chief’, so if I see this correctly, the UN was unable to get it done raising only $1.3bn at Wednesday’s conference in Geneva, a little short of the $4.24bn they had hoped to get, a mere 30%, so we see the failure of one, all whilst the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is pumping $19,000,000,000 into that place. And of course it comes with “He added that Saudi Arabia would continue to support Yemen through relief and humanitarian programs in coordination with international and local partners.” Yet the other side, the UN did not really give any notice of the efforts of Saudi Arabia does it, even as Arab News gives us “The event was also attended by UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, President of the Swiss Confederation Ignazio Cassis, Swedish Minister of Foreign Affairs Anne Lindy, UN Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator Martin Griffiths, and Saudi Arabia’s Ambassador to the UN in Geneva Dr. Abdulaziz Al-Wasel”, I saw no mention in the end in western papers. I did however find something else. 

The Sydney Morning Herald gives us (at https://www.smh.com.au/culture/celebrity/ex-bachelorette-georgia-love-slammed-for-instagram-posts-promoting-saudi-arabia-20220317-p5a5lf.html) the stage of ‘Ex-Bachelorette Georgia Love slammed for Instagram posts promoting Saudi Arabia’ and there we see “Georgia Love and Lee Elliott, who found romance in 2016 on the second season of Network 10’s The Bachelorette, have sparked controversy after the pair posted Instagram photos of themselves promoting tourism in Saudi Arabia.” The article by Robert Moran calls for more, hiding behind commenters whilst the SMH has not informed us on more than one occasion that Houthi terrorists were attacking civilian targets. The SMH also did not inform the people on the $19,000,000,000 event from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia all whilst the UN could not get 25% done, they raised less than 10% of what Saudi Arabia contributed. If we are all bout fair and balanced, we need to start being fair and balanced. Iran executed 280 people in 2021, so where is THAT Sydney Morning Herald article? 

Is Saudi Arabia a perfect nation, no it is not. Neither is Australia, a nation who refuses to do anything about ageism. Two people promoted tourism in a nation we are not at war with, two people are doing something to open doors that others cannot be bothered knocking on. 

I think that the SMH dropped a few too many issues to be knocking on some door regarding promoting a nation. Oh, and before I forget it should I get that notion in similar ways, I would offer the 5G IP I have to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia long before I would EVER offer it to Australia! Although, I would try to sell them some other IP first, including a story on how to assassinate a politician.

See how long it takes people to consider that Telstra is an increasing problem, not some solution. We see mere greed driven responses, instead of catering to the larger setting of the people. The AFR (Australian Financial review) gave us two weeks ago “A major upgrade of NBN services in country Australia will be part of a multibillion-dollar regional infrastructure package to be included in Treasurer Josh Frydenberg’s pre-election budget.” And you think this is god for the people. No, it was because ‘Major NBN upgrade planned to fight off Musk’s Starlink’, so why is Elon Musk with his Starlink a negative thing? Is it because it is bad, or because it is bad for players like Telstra and their ‘friends’? If I look at all the issues we face, I think we have more than enough problems. And the anti-Saudi rhetoric whilst WE never did anything in that region when it mattered is just insane, but we are their for Ukraine, it is politically convenient. I reckon the Syrians and the Yemeni’s will have to live with that decision. 

So whilst news dot com dot au “Georgia Love and partner Lee Elliot have deleted their Instagram posts promoting Saudi Arabia but they can’t hide from those tagging them”, it is just another another set of bullies who do not know what they are talking about, because certain media prefers not to inform them. And in the end, do I care? Nope, I never seen of followed Georgia Love. I personally think that the Bachelorette and like minded programs are a waste of my time. But I do care about bullies and that should be on the front of the line. So how much reporting did Robert Moran do on Iranian culture? Their humanitarian efforts? You see it is more likely not his cup of soup and the fact that a person like Georgia Love made the papers (or internet) means that he had nowhere else to look regarding culture. So whilst ABC gave us ‘Women are isolated in sports media, we need more allies for real and lasting change’ three hours ago, the Sydney Morning Herald was all about bully tactics, that is how I personally see it and it is sad that some resort to that, but on the plus side, I can at least make the claim that I tried to better the world by melting down an Iranian nuclear reactor, how is that for cancel culture? In all the issues we face Georgia Love should have been a blip on the radar at present, I personally reckon certain people got upset with the effort and the SMH obliged. That is my take on the matter, but then I could be wrong. You make up your own mind on where I stood, right or wrong?

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Media, Politics, Science

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

May 1, 2021 · 12:54

What did they not see?

You think it is simple, but if you have been in photography like me (1975), that question becomes easier to comprehend, but explaining that becomes harder, I get that. Distractions, obstructions, light and focus are 4 basic elements of missing a detail, optionally several details. Yet the professional photographer learned not to be hindered by obstructions and to adjust for focus and light, which leaves the focussed photographer and the photographer. So the focussed photographer can make the ‘snatch’ shot and the photographer merely looks for a tissue. Seems bland and crude but this example matters.

To see one application, we need to turn to ‘Telstra, NATO and the USA’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2018/06/20/telstra-nato-and-the-usa/), an article I wrote in 2018 “unless you work for the right part of Palantir inc, at which point your income could double between now and 2021”, the shares were at $9.69 and ended last night at $23.18, basically I saw that coming a mile away. And that is not all, there are several avenues where their value should at the very least double within the next 19 months. It is the flaws we set ourselves up for and when the stupid people (loud mouthed politicians) realise that their loud mouths will require data, Palantir is close to the only option they have.

That article has a few more connections to what is to come, the most important part if 5G and there is a lot going on (at https://www.gadgetguy.com.au/australian-5g-speeds-truth-revealed/) in Australia. Gadget Guy gave us last week one take (not the highest quality source), but they do give us  “There are two issues for Australian 5G speeds. The primary is that despite Telstra insistence that it covers 50% of Australians and 75% of the population by the end of June, it does not! nPerf (based on real 5G user’s) shows minimal reception. The second is real download and upload speed. While the average is 240.9/15.5Mbps Mbps, it is well short of Telstra’s hype – so fanciful we won’t embarrass it by mentioning it’s up to 20Gbps claim debacle when first introduced”, oh hold on, did I not give you “The problem is that even as some say that Telstra is beginning to roll out 5G now, we am afraid that those people are about to be less happy soon thereafter. You see, Telstra did this before with 4G, which was basically 3.5G” with a reference to ABC in 2011 on how Telstra was BS’ing the population on the 28th of September 2011. So thats two elements where we see that their ‘photographers’ ignored obstacles, blamed the lens makers for focal points, the sun for shining to brightly and they all went running for their tissues. They audience got distracted (as I personally see it) by all the baubles that they were offering. It worked in 1700, so why not in 2021? Yet CMO gives us 2 days ago (at https://www.cmo.com.au/article/688024/tourism-australia-7-eleven-telstra-balancing-data-driven-engagement-consumer-consent/) “Panel of digital executives share the role of first-party data and personalisation in their customer experience approaches against consumer consent and control of their privacy”, a setting where we might see that a panel of 5 are slicing the new currency (data) cake in a way that THEY are happy with, all whilst we are told “the key is to balance data sophistication as a business with consumer controls and transparency. He also noted the varying levels of control and regulation around using data across geographies such as Europe versus the US, which the tourism bureau is operating in”, yet the answer which was not really an answer is about ‘balance data sophistication’, all whilst ‘consumer controls’ (for the consumer) will be as nonexistent as possible. We might not get that when we see “invest in first-party identifiers as well as a unified ID for the tourism industry that can be leveraged”, yes but to what extend it is leveraged is never stated, merely implied, the additional ‘unified ID’ would have a much larger impact, but that too is never stated, they all want as large a slice of that data pie and Cambridge Analytica has made them very very cautious. 

These two elements are merely that, elements. Yet the underlying data there will require analyses and whilst some will claim that they can, Palantir is close to the only source that actually can analyse the whole lot and that is what I saw coming a mile away. 

A linked small digression
You see it takes a massively large level of stupid (and greed) to cater to this, but I believe that the EU (Margrethe Vestager) is trying and optionally succeeding in pulling this off. She is all about “European Commission anti-trust regulator Margrethe Vestager tweeted that “consumers are losing out”. It relates to charges brought two years ago by music streaming app Spotify which claimed that Apple was stifling innovation in that industry”, you might think that, but I do not. You see the article (at https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-56941173) gives us “It relates to charges brought two years ago by music streaming app Spotify which claimed that Apple was stifling innovation in that industry”, no it had set a premise to all (which it does not), all 23,000,000 Apple developers. It set a premise where they could develop whatever they want whilst having zero deployment cost and they would be charged as they gained incomes, so not the $75,000 upfront to get started, but after the fact and with no time limit. As such wannabe innovators flourished. It never stifled innovation, it limited greed. So whilst we see the painting of bad bad evil Apple, no one is looking at the fact that Spotify is paying artists HALF of what Apple and Google pays them, it amounts to $0.0032 per stream, so to make 1 cent, the song needs to be requested 3 times. This is why I still buy music, at least the artists I care about will get a much better slice. 

And when we see the image where they are now CHARGING for algorithms, all whilst they made a brute gross profit of $575,000,000 in Q4 2020, I think that the EU commissioner is massively loopy. You see, this is about consolidating greed plain and simple and in the process it will endanger consumers (the ones she claimed to protect). 

The image is merely one element of greed, it goes further. That part is not directly seen, but the BBC does give the goods with ‘The ransomware surge ruining lives’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-56933733), there we see “Ransomware gangs are now routinely targeting schools and hospitals. Hackers use malicious software to scramble and steal an organisation’s computer data”, in this the larger stage is not merely the theft, it is how they use larger systems to spread across all the internet and with 5G that danger becomes 5,000%. You see people like Spotify, Epic Games et all want to be outside the Google and Apple store, but they will limit protection (they will call it something else) and when the consumer ends up paying for that, we will get to see all kinds of apologies, but it was not entirely THEIR fault. As such I say, when you get hit (and you will) make sure that as you sue Spotify for damages, you add Daniel Ek and Margrethe Vestager to the culprits of your damages. Organised crime is getting better and better in walking away and as such their greed must be addressed in courts and their approach towards a ‘too big to fail’ setting must be answered, the data will be out there and s such players like Palantir will make even more money, it will be all about the data from 2022 onwards, in this the OCCRP their 2021 serious organised crime threat assessment where we see “The threat from cyber-dependent crimes is set to further increase in volume and sophistication over the coming years”, and in this stage Margrethe Vestager is willing to open the floodgates towards greed driven idiots setting the stage for organised crime getting more? You think that will ever be a great idea? I think not. 

And it does not stop there. The fact that the exchange hack was hard to detect for a long time, some hacks were out in the field for years and now we see greed driven idiots scale away the two decent bastions of protection that consumers have (Apple and Google) and let others skate around them? How long until we see some corrupted Amazon like app via a phishing spree be offered to millions. By the time some will have a clue billions will have been shifted and who pays for that? Insurers?  I very much doubt that. As such these two will be required to sit in the dock explaining their catering to greed. You see if Margrethe Vestager was really about the consumers, she would also be about protecting the artists and where is it acceptable that they get one third of a cent for a song? Is there more? Yes, but I will admit that this is part speculation. The BBC article gives us “The UK’s National Cyber Security Centre, also a member of the Ransomware Task Force says it handled more than three times as many ransomware incidents in 2020 than in the previous year”, you see paying a bitcoin is only one part, the data can still be shared with others and as data become currency the damage setting goes up by a lot. The dangerous part is that commissioner Vestager knows that the law and policing are not up to the task and she is catering to someone with dubious greed needs? One that underpays artists by what I consider to be as close as criminal levels of renumeration? And in my mind, some excuse ‘If we get this they get more’ does not float, in that setting their business model was wrong from day one, in addition, the entire algorithm setting shows a larger exploitation to kindle greed and leave an artist with less. So how accomodating to EU consumers do you think Margrethe Vestager actually is, that in opposition to catering to greed driven players? Apple and Google might not be god, not great but they agreed on a format to keep their consumers safe all whilst giving an option for starting developers to score big, the fact that these players were not as good as they hoped they would be and as they relied on advertisement to push the players is a mere side effect, but without these store protection, the mess will be close to unimaginable and players like Palantir will have the data  and the greed driven players (as well as some not too bright politicians) get to defend themselves in the dock against lawyers with massive class actions. When that happens, be sure that you have  stocked up on popcorn, because it will be worth watching. It will be reality TV with lots of fake tears and CEO’s claiming that they did not know certain things and watch their fortunes dwindle. It will be a much better class of reality TV for some time to watch.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Media, Politics, Science

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

June 16, 2020 · 01:34

Donkey Balls!

The explanation is actually almost too simple, I am writing this whilst I am rewatching the Expanse on Bluray (thanks to the awesome sale JB Hifi had 3 weeks ago). I was watching and browsing whilst I got exposed to ‘Media rules must help news providers harness digital platforms’ value’, the link was on LinkedIn and came from Facebook. I do not disagree with the setting, but the entire issue is much larger and has traps on a few levels. That issue is a little less complicated when we consider the news on the daily mail where we see ‘Top Facebook exec says it DID help Donald Trump win but only because ‘he ran the single best digital ad campaign I’ve ever seen. Period.’ And NOT because of Russia’, the claim was apparantly made by Andrew Bosworth and it was in the Daily Mail on January 8th. It is not the claim that is the issue, it is the linked advertisements that the viewer gets. I ended up with advertisements by Telstra and Microsoft. Now, there was nothing wrong with that, yet if I had not clicked on the story, the advertisements would not have come. That is the issue, even newsmakers need to rely on clicks and there is the first issue. Basically the (short) story has the following 2nd headlines:

  • Andrew Bosworth is a longtime senior Facebook executive and confidant of Mark Zuckerberg
  • Bosworth wrote a 2,500 word memo shared internally with Facebook employees that was published on December 30
  • He claimed the Cambridge Analytica scandal was a ‘non-event’ and admitted the Russians did manipulate the U.S. election
  • Bosworth also essentially branded criticism of the company as fake news because the press ‘often gets so many details wrong’ 
  • The memo was initially leaked to the New York Times on Tuesday before the top executive published it in full on his public Facebook account 

5 times to get the clicks, 5 times to get advertisements and the news channels are in the setting to get CLICKS, making the quality of news debatable and there is the larger issue. When the news becomes a commercial vessel, how can it be trusted?

SO when I looked at the news (according to the Sydney Morning Herald) we get: “It would allow news publishers and digital platforms that distribute news to continue building on existing commercial arrangements, and support the development of a Digital News Council to advance cross-industry collaboration. It would also encourage more transparency for significant changes to the ranking of news content in News Feed and guarantee to publishers we’ll continue to share measurement data on how their content performs on Facebook as well as insights on their audiences, without sharing personal user information.” Here I see that there are optional ‘agreements’ on the sharing of revenue (which I do not debate, or wonder whether that is wrong), yet I do wonder about who has the stronger pull. Revenue based decisions, or news quality decisions and the ambiguity of it deepens the innate mistrust in me and the mistrust of the optional news that it breeds. So the quote “It would allow news publishers and digital platforms that distribute news to continue building on existing commercial arrangements” sets the steps for commercially inclined news, not neutral based and news baked news. It ends up not getting the clicks and that is the larger problem. The digital problem is that there needs to be space for news to set the parameters, yet the click is what gets the revenue and they tend to be on opposite sides of coins of different currency. Better stated was the Expanse response, which was ‘It really is Donkey balls’, the settings a larger one and those relying on click based revenue would not be interested in slaughtering the goose with the golden egg and I get that. But we need to move the news into another stage of the media, now making it revenue based, all whilst those participating should require to pay these newsagents something, it was their material used.

So whether we accept that the previous elections used a much better digital profile, we need to take the news out of it, and give them their own digital channel, not set to a click based system. It requires new levels of innovation on digital media and we all better accept that fast. 

What is the solution?

I actually do not know, but in part it will be creating awareness with the people, they need to realise that they are part of that problem, they are the inquisitive types and usually that is not a problem, yet the push the click based activities forward and at the point they become part of the problem. As I see it, the news might be part of social media, yet they should not be part of the click based equation and until the news starts realising that, as well as the fact that their shareholders, stakeholders and advertisers are part of the problem and not part of the solution, this issue will continue.

So those who have seen the Expanse season three and know that the initial weapon was something more might realise that in the digital media that click is the something more towards a weapon, all thanks to the shareholders, stakeholders and advertisers. We need a much larger change and until cash is taken out of the equation it cannot continue, yet that too is a dicey position, because the news has every right to cash in on materials they created. We cannot ignore that part of the equation.

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Science

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

May 26, 2020 · 22:47

Merging greed with stupidity

At times it happens smooth and almost undetectable slow, like watching paint dry. Yet it happens, the greed driven merge with the stupid stricken and the compact new package tends to foil their pound (or dollar) shaped pupils, that part can be seen in the BBC article ‘Huawei: What would happen if the UK ditched the firm?’. It is important to note that this is not about the article, or the writer of the article. So when we see “Huawei’s major 5G rivals are Nokia and Ericsson – two European firms. The networks claim that having three providers to choose from helps them negotiate lower prices” In all this, one could state that this is the first openly stupid statement. Not the fact of it, the fact is seemingly clear. Yet consider that in the time of the Ford Model T, Jaguar released the X series (as is) something that is a lot ahead of the other, why would it be cheaper? Why would it care that the Ford Model T is there? It does not give us more consideration or make prices cheaper, it merely shows that those choosing the Ford Model T as their mode of transportation, is out of business soon thereafter and that is what we face. Ericsson and Nokia are 2-5 years behind Huawei and in that time the 5G fight is fought and those relying on the Ford Model T is out of the race, like that optionally severely stupid MP stating “there were more important considerations”, so what is that? Being the bitch of American greed driven needs? We see the influence of ‘the influence of the Chinese communist party’ yet so far never one clear piece of evidence has been provided by anyone, and it is not just me, people with much higher skills in IT and cyber security are making the same noise. We are flocking to a nation that has been about exploitation and driving iteration. And now that innovation is at their front door, they scream interference whilst not providing evidence. The BBC article is important as we see “Removing Huawei would seriously delay 5G, costing the British economy up to £7bn”, I believe that the costs will be much higher. The losses will exceed £15bn as well as set the economy back 5-8 years and when that happens, others will surpass and others will get juicy service contracts, a stage the UK cannot afford to lose at present. I believe it is time to DEMAND actual answers, to DEMAND actual evidence of communist interference, I feel driven to this because there is no evidence, people a lot more clever than I had already assessed that part. And we need to realise that this is the time when the greed drive should not be allowed to get the stupid to speak up and take the stage. 

 

So when we see ABC giving us ‘British review of Huawei’s inclusion in 5G rollout welcomed by Australian security officials’, I personally merely wonder how many are sucking up to places like Telstra. In addition, unless they give clear evidence on HOW the Chinese government is taking ‘control’ I wonder how many of them will make statements that include ‘optionally could’ and a few other statements that are speculative. In all this, we show that we are all the bitches of American fear of economic collapse and some of them are likely to get nice presents around christmas, perhaps a bottle of wine. The point is not whether they do or don’t, the issue becomes that these steps will hinder our own progress, because that is what iterative technology does and if it was SO important, UK and Australian technology would drive the future needs, not follow others. In the end I do not care who we are following, this government and the one in London decided to be lazy and let others rule the technology, I can live with that, but to exclude technology on unfounded accusations is just plain stupid. Especially when others (who are slightly less stupid) get to take the reigns in mobile communication, when Asia and the Middle East take charge in forward momentum, do you think even for one second that anyone cares what we needed? That is the hidden part of American push, they do not care what we end up with, they merely need their fears of collapse to go away and when that is done they will worry about the next part. Yet at that point it is already too late for us. Is it not interesting that the 5G sales that Huawei offered received little to no investigation? It did not suit the American solution, their economy still loses and we should not care, we need to care what is best for US!

It seems that in that regime those who need to decide for us, seem to rely on ‘the world is too complex for that’ and they go about their personal needs whatever they might be. So all these people who talk on anonymity, when we put them out in the clear we will probably see a very different stage, I wonder who will wonder about that stage and exactly where WE fit in, because I am reasonably certain that in these dark days we have no consideration coming our way. 

The greed and stupid driven people are in a stage where we should demand that they are in the out and open. And I reckon that we are 2 years away from that loud demand from the people, in 2023 as others are taking the 5G lead will push more and more economy their way, that is the moment that we get wave after wave of ‘carefully phrased denials’ and ’miscommunication between officials and consultants’, at that point our goose is cooked in no uncertain ways. 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Politics, Science

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

October 18, 2019 · 12:25

When we are merely given a paragraph

It happens, we get offered a paragraph and for some reason we wake up, we think: ‘That’s nice! Tell me more!‘ It can be for the strangest and least connected reasons out there. No matter that the push or the reason, we only get that one paragraph and are left hanging. That feeling came right off the bat when ABC gave me ‘ASIO warns of ‘hostile intelligence services’ using social media in annual report‘ (at https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-10-17/asio-warns-of-hostile-intelligence-services-on-social-media/11609726) a day ago. Now, let’s be fair, ASIO is not really the one to play games of open communication, as its employees and governing staff were educated by the people of Sneaky, Peeping and Backstabbing incorporated, they have other markers to work with. As such as I was fed ““hostile intelligence services” using social media to target people across business and government“, which basically is a continuation (to some degree) of the quote we saw at ABC in July 2017 when we were given “help Australian security agencies get access to encrypted messages from suspected terrorists and other criminals“, in itself not an issue one would think, and there is exactly the problem, one did not think. I made references to private chat groups in Social media and extremism before 2016, just nice to know that someone gets around and wakes up every now and then. Or as I would phrase it as ‘What else is new?‘, Yet as Jade MacMillan takes us by the hand in this ABC article, we see: “A report in the New York Times earlier this year claimed China was using LinkedIn to try to recruit foreign spies“, again we go with the ‘What else is new?‘. There is nothing new under the sun as MI-6, CIA, DGSE and optionally ASIS have been using that very same tool to get information. The honey traps, the enticement parties and the stage where you are a winner, the tricks are as old as the very first sign stating: ‘Authorised Personally Only‘. In this the larger issue is avoided, you see financial entrepreneurs have been using these paths to gain information on how to find people with debts and some of them have (allegedly) been reporting those people to international whisper divisions, so that a deal could be struck. So whilst some look for foreign agents, they all ignore the debt collectors mining every bit of social media to gain a momentary advantage to collect on one debt and gain another bonus, and those people will always look for investors, especially investors that have a fluidic opinion of ethics and how to be working towards rewards.

It all comes across as silly and as mindless as “Attorney-General George Brandis said encryption was potentially the “greatest degradation of intelligence and law enforcement capability” in a lifetime“, he could not put gamers in a proper dimensional view, so why would he get this right? It is an easy enough question and there is a link. There was a reason why Facebook suspended and ended all group chat options (there were a few actually), they were off course way late, now that Lone wolves and others have found new means to get this started, they need to be more careful, but the state remains. Mining is the only way to do this and you need resources for that, as well as proper staff who comprehend data and not let some silly deep learning algorithm fix it. For example, consider that a facilitator created an auto fill chat system; it has 250,000 lines an hour, whilst the system has one anchor word, a word you can select. So as we see the chat go through, we make no sense on it, yet the users have set the word ‘الدراجين’ (meaning ‘riders’) even as the initial part makes no sense

WE now get:

يتيح للجميع وقتا طيبا والحزب

الهذيان الكبير في واحة في منتصف الليل

جميع الدراجين سباق اليوم

معلومات السباق في اللعبة

تسجيل جميع الدراجين بعد صلاة الفجر

يجب أن المؤمنين اقتبس مرور البقر

جميع الدراجين يعرفون أن السيارة مائة مؤهلة

 

Even in this setting the programming cannot make sense, and unless you knew that ‘riders’ was the operative word good luck in finding what comes next. a system like this has been in place for years, now there are dedicated programs, yet in the past there were 4-6 in a group of 100, so those 4 guest gamers would not be noticed and by the time someone woke up, it was already too late, the meeting was over and more secure conversations had taken place, this system worked global and now that Facebook chat groups are a thing of the past other means are used for all kinds of groups to find a way to pass a message along.

We get it, the employees of Sneaky, Peeping and Backstabbing incorporated are not supposed to put it in the open, yet the annual report seemingly ignores one part. Instead of having a dozen systems creating a small solution, we need to find the agencies actually working together to avert “ASIO has limited scope to redirect internal resources to address the increasing gap between demand for our counterespionage and foreign interference advice and our ability to furnish this assistance” and partially find a solution that will take care of the extremists, the organised crackpots and the corporate facilitators, if you do not consider the third group to be important, then you have remained asleep for far too long at the wheel.

So when I mentioned Brandis (never the sharpest tool in my personal opinion) we might consider the 2017 event and the quote: “If the laws are passed and technology companies comply, they could help with investigations into paedophile networks, major organised crime or terrorism”, the man is transparent as glass as he hid in the past behind ‘violent gamers’ and now he uses ‘paedophile networks’. Yet the larger issue not seen here are financial services, there is no oversight and there is no telling what an approached debt collector could find out without setting of ANY red flags. And that is with the players who are on the up and up and playing a proper game taking all the proper guidelines and consumer protection laws as noticed and complied with, this wild west group has a truckload of groups all willing to do what it takes to get the score and a foreign player is a stakeholder in finding needs. That group has been able to remain off the books for at least 2 years. They all seemingly forgot that places like Experian, Equifax, Dun & Bradstreet, have their own customer base and who checked out those credentials?

Yes, we can agree that the entire matter is too large for ASIO to deal with, but there is also the flaw that the scope of what they face is not dimensionalised in the proper fashion, it is openly misrepresented and that is optionally acceptable, as long as they know what they face in-house.

And it is not a rocket science deal; the FBI, MI5, BRGE, AIVD, MAD (yes that is the acronym for the German Intelligence Services) and the FSB all deal with these issues. OK, these players will not be calling the FSB but you get the idea. There are players that are about data and proper intelligence mining (Palantir Technologies), yet the field needs to widen but in another direction. If this is Business Intelligence then Palantir is SAS, whilst we need a more IBM statistics and IBM Modeller based solution rolled out, we do not need a solution that fits all, we need to feed clusters of investigators with power tools that allow them to surf data and mine activities to a much larger degree. We need to set server milestones with collected raw data that different clusters can attack. The intelligence branches have wanted to do it the wrong way around for too long (often pressured by wannabe politicians), what we need is a treasure trove of data that all players can have a go at and actually report findings. We create almost 3 Exabyte of data every day, and we need to find 1% of 1% in that, whilst all this happens before 5G, it is about to become 20 times worse and they cannot even handle what is out there now.

All whilst we know that the 1% of 1% remains a group of 98% which is merely misdemeanours playing around, as such we need to change the premise towards collected data, that is what we face at present so the entire matter of “greater awareness among our stakeholders of that threat — has increased demand for our advice and support”, which is misrepresentation in its own right. The stakeholders have their own needs and their own game to play. Consider the IP needs of Telstra (Australia), the Inside protection and mandates of Novartis (Pharmaceuticals), Insider trading on HSBC (Banking) and their needs are their financial protection needs and in this fearless leader Duncan Lewis (ASIO) has to optionally look out for the needs of Telstra (as some claim that hat Telstra needs, Australia needs) whilst hunting those wanting to harm Australians, in this the Stakeholders are more about the revenue and debatable a source of good (they allegedly merely want their bonus safe), as such we should optionally wonder about the needs of the stakeholders and the difference about their claim and their needs.

So whilst we see another batch of mobile swipe and pay solutions being rolled out whilst there are a few concerns on how that data is processed all over the world, we forget that those out to harm national needs are also out looking into all those apps and finding out that for the largest extent the IMEI number of any smartphone is a much easier anchor to work with and mapping the usage also gives a larger content on data and where the target might be, yet most forgot about how the old is still beneath the new, did they not? So even as we consider the title ‘ASIO warns of ‘hostile intelligence services’ using social media in annual report‘, we need to consider that ‘hostile intelligence services‘ is merely part of a much larger problem and that those services use all kinds of methods that the local knights of the round facilitating table (FBI, MI5, BRGE, AIVD, and MAD) are still not looking at (as far as I can tell).

In all this we were merely given a paragraph and whilst people wonder how to find resources, the matter on how to properly apply those resources so that they can have an impact was left off the table, and that was actually the delicious cream that should have graced the Strawberries, or are those Blackberries? I’ll let you work on that little last line conundrum yourself this weekend.

So have a nice day and let’s not forget that the weekend ends in 48 hours! #JustSaying

 

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Media, Military, Politics, Science

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

September 21, 2019 · 11:50

The first changes

We have arrived at the point of the first changes; the next 12 months will give a much larger view of the consumers and the changes that they are willing to accept. The Huawei P30 Pro is the beginning of this; at $1249 this choice is a lot cheaper than its competitor Samsung $1849 (a difference of 32.5%, whilst the Apple at $1999 will set you back an additional 37.5%, this adds up to a lot! Yet the price is not the issue, the fact that the Huawei now comes without YouTube, Google Maps and Gmail among other software, it also does not feature Google’s Play Store. It is an Android game changer; Huawei has pre-loaded new alternative apps of its own. It was the step we expected, the trade wars with China and the persecution of Huawei and the discrimination against Huawei was actually THAT stupid. Now that we are confronted with the changes we will see a new optional change. When an equal mobile is well over $500 cheaper we see the changes that matter. As the people get accustomed to other apps, apps that replace social media solutions we see a shift of consumers, I personally believe it will be a lager change. I do recommend that there will be an upgraded LinkedIn and a new Facebook available, yet there is a situation where the Asian population in Australia will embrace the Chinese solutions, there is in addition a larger need for affordable phones, so there will be a larger shift. Yes, most will hate being without Facebook, yet the credibility Facebook has lost in the past, the people might just keep these solutions on their laptop/Desktop. Yet there is already word that Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp would all be available via Huawei’s own store, called the Huawei App Gallery, so all is not lost, but the fact that Google will lose millions of people who will now go via the Huawei App Gallery is almost a given. The BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-49754376) also gave us: “He added that the firm had set aside $1bn (£801m) to encourage developers to make their apps compatible, and said more than 45,000 apps had already integrated the firm’s technology. But he did not name any of them“, so $1,000,000,000 to corner a market and get a handle into the Chinese app user market. It will be found and it will create momentum. I changed my mobile less than a year ago, so I have no need to change for now, yet there is every indication that the upgrade to a new Android version will see me change as well and why would I not do that? Perhaps I am part of the population that thinks “Maybe they’re just trying to ride it out in the hope that they eventually get access to those Google services later“, I am most likely on that fence, however when I check the amount of options that I desperately want on my Mobile, I am limited to WordPress and LinkedIn, and they are not essential, merely a nice to have on my mobile. I can do either on a desktop. I am not alone, as thousands will shift from one side to the other month by month, Google will feel the pinch. Consider that there will be a close to immediate shift on YouTube metrics, implying that the Google Ads department will start requiring new metrics to keep their push going, we see a larger impact on Google, it will not be immediate, but it will be there and growing from the beginning, even as Google and the US will debate on how wrong the metrics are, they too realise that the American corporations will see the impact on their business, it will be visible and direct, merely because a war on greed by flaccid politicians and surpassed technologists was stated to be in denial.

The US did not to its homework, it neglected the choirs they have and are now pushing their losses on other markets. Even as we contemplate what the impact of “side-loading” Google’s apps onto the handsets and that phone store staff would advise customers how to do that. They are wondering how it would limit its impact as long as the usage impact remains close to 100%, when that falters a few times the consumers will be offered alternatives that are 100% and that is where we see the shift towards Chinese commerce.

Now that Huawei has been informed on my 5 parts of IP (hopefully bringing me decent funds too), there might be a larger shift as the issues in 5G cybersecurity and propagating 5G commerce is still lacking at least 3 elements, I feel that I will win in the long run. All the players that are behind ‘T-Mobile gets closer to launching nationwide 5G on low-band spectrum‘, I have seen that Sprint, T-Mobile, Vodafone, Telstra, as well as BT have not implemented certain parts and even what they designed lacks certain small business needs, as such I feel a lot more confident on my IP. They had 3 years to look at it and they have the same short minded and shallow approach to business ignoring the Small businesses (a little over 400 million of them) to the larger degree. All elements that were clearly visible moved from the 4G premise of ‘Wherever I am‘, to 5G ‘Whenever I want it‘, that failure alone gives Huawei an additional push. As the numbers rack up towards Huawei and Chinese innovation, we will see a larger change towards the business needs and so far none of the non-Chinese solutions have addressed these changes.

As the Chinese app user market explodes in activities between now and December 2020 we will see a larger shift. With Huawei market share at 19% and Oppo at 9.5%, we see a larger growth towards 5G, as Apple is now declining to 37%, we see that Apple in 5G will lose close to 15% all these parts matter, because it does more than increase the market share for Huawei, it actually gives China a larger option to grow in a few directions that it had no real option to grow in previously, the anti-Huawei steps were THAT stupid and now we start seeing the impact. The only way to stop this is for American brands to start offering their phones at the same price as Huawei is. And that is how we see it, Google took that step and offered the Pixel 3XL at a mere 16% extra and that might be a reason to switch to Google, but in the end the others are now pushing themselves out of the race quicker and quicker.

There is a larger need to consider, as the US is getting its thanksgiving and as we are all facing Christmas (and the Dutch will get Saint Nicholas as well) the consumers will have a limited option, yet an essential need to tickle themselves, when you consider that place, would you accept the $1249 that gives you what you need, or would you spend 37.5% for what others market you towards your needs? When you realise that the essentials can be done on the smaller budget, in a time when budgets are still tight and the dangers of recession remains, can you really afford to spend those hundreds of dollars more?

The bulk of the people I know cannot afford them, they often will accept a more expensive contract, yet in the stage when 5G is about to come, would you really want to tie yourself down? And when all the small business owners realise that the current stage will hurt their business for 2-3 years, would they really want to take that chance when the commerce slice is the one everyone wants, at that point can they tie themselves down?

The first changes are here, but they also signal larger changes towards a stage where commerce will be the deciding factor and the bulk of them merely looked at their needs to sell, they to a much larger degree forget to consider what their consumers needed in the 5G environment, that failure will rear its ugly head soon enough, as I see it, Huawei is finding themselves ready for that shift. In the end that is the third stage of innovation that lazy Americans ignored, I wonder how much that will cost them this time around. As I personally see it, 400 million small business owners was too large a group to leave in the cauldron of non-decisions, yet that is exactly what they did in Europe and the US.

Forbes

So as Forbes gives us ‘Shock New Google Warning For Anyone Buying Huawei Mate 30‘, we see how the writer Zak Doffman gives us (at https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakdoffman/2019/09/20/shock-new-google-warning-for-anyone-buying-huawei-mate-30) “Despite impressive hardware innovation, the media write-ups went straight to the lack of full-fat Android, the lack of YouTube and Gmail and Google Maps, the lack of the Play Store” which opposes the BBC, who did give clear mention and as implied so did Huawei. So there we are, already we see issues with the media bringers. After that we see the barricade “24-hours post launch, the reality of the Mate 30 is firming up. It seems highly unlikely there is any Google workaround” yet the reality is that these users get a first glimpse that it is possible to be without Google on their mobile, we do not have to get bothered every minute on news we did not need. In addition with a functional browser we still get what we need, we just will not get it via an app (for now), and believe me when the numbers start slashing into the Google needs, they will want a workaround as desperately as possible. The writer even ends with: “And so for any of you enamoured with the Mate 30 hardware who can live without Google for an unknown amount of time, maybe this is a risk worth taking” which is at the heart of the matter, not the heart we choose and not the one Google choice, because when the numbers start proving that there is real life after google, those numbers will give growth to an exponential growth of people accepting Chinese apps and accepting non-Google solutions. I feel certain that it will happen, merely because the browser is still going to be there and it will show that there is a larger need in people, even if it is to show that the want to prove that dependency on Facebook and Google is a solution, even if it is a mere point of ego, they want to prove that they are not the slave of their mobile. That alone will be a driving factor as well.

No matter how we slice it, within the next 12 months we will see an almost polarised population, those who want the best and fastest and those who need some Google solution, both will have their own validity and merits, yet in the end as small business owners see that Huawei 5G solutions can cater to both, they get to win and that is the real victory, soon thereafter the US will change the blacklist, the moment that there is a clear invoice to the losses and Google will hold the US government accountable to these tax deductible losses, at that point will we see a strong push to find some middle ground, the US will have to give is with every additional billion dollar loss and market shift towards China. They basically have no options left, their inability to deal with Iran is one view, their inability to deal with Syria is a second stage of evidence, and within the next 12 months we will get several other pieces of evidence get released to the larger audience. And that is not the end of it, as the cases regarding Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Purdue Pharma, OrbCare, Insys Therapeutics Inc and their bankruptcy issues are rising, they matter to the regard that the US government is seeing the pinch from 3 directions at present, and that is only whilst California is able to keep its head above the waterline. All these impact are also the impact on 5G propagation, installation and implementation. When you doubt that, consider the Government tech source hat gave us “5G won’t roll out to much of Southern California for a few more years, but companies such as Verizon and AT&T are beginning to install the necessary infrastructure, including those small cells pole by pole, across the region” last April, the fires and other calamities only made things harder, so whilst we see the FCC stepping in, we only see more hindrance for these people, not less and that is the impacting issue from Pasadena to Huntington Beach, and that is only the most visible one. The infrastructure is getting a second hit as we are shown that “the Federal Communications Commission is now restricting how much cities can charge the companies to install equipment: $500 for up to five cells, $100 a cell after that and a $270 annual access fee for each cell“, it is a loaded issue no matter how you slice it and whilst they are trying to figure out how to resolve it, the truth of the matter is that Huawei had this issue solved already and that is how California (and other states) end up getting limited 5G for 2-3 years, all whilst the Huawei case is growing more and more outside of the USA. It is a situation where the technology is not up to scrap and the diminished amount of funds available allows for no alternatives either; now add to this the consumers shifting to some degree away from Google who relies on Google Ads more and more and a near perfect storm is created, a storm that slams the US and gives growth upon growth to China and Chinese interests.

As the EU is accepting Huawei and as Huawei is now embracing a shift towards cloud systems, and as it grows the needs, and sets the growing stage towards 21Vianet, we see a much larger shift and in all this, the first changes brought a push in directions we never considered before. It was only a day ago when Microsoft President Brad Smith requested that the United States should end its blacklisting of Chinese giant Huawei Technologies, we might not realise it, yet the changes allowed for Huawei to look into a partnership with 21Vianet, which will directly impede Microsoft Azure business that is not in Chinese hands (outside of China), in this stage 21Vianet will have a direct option to offer services to European players, as it will not be their solution, but a Huawei solutions and the group of small businesses that are in Europe (a nice slice of 400 million companies) they too will select ‘the other’ Chinese solution. All instigated by a Huawei war that was not based on facts or on reality, it was to address the need of greed and now that it bites back, the US will find itself at the dinner table where only humble pie is to be served. When they buckle (and they will) the shift becomes larger and faster, because at that point the consumers will have the additional questions that will be met with denial on every level conceivable.

Huawei would need to do one additional thing to make that wave a lot larger, I wonder if they will do just that before the end of this year.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics, Science

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