Tag Archives: the Guardian

January 29, 2025 · 01:44

And the bubble said ‘Bang’

This is what we usually see, or at times hear as well. Now I am not an AI expert, not even a journeyman in the ways of AI, But the father of AI namely Alan Turing stated the setting of AI. He was that good as he set the foundation of AI in the 50’s, half a century before we were able to get a handle on this. Oh, and in case you forget what he looks like, he has been immortalised on the £50 note.

And as such I feel certain that there is no AI (at present) and now this bubble comes banging on the doors of big-tech as they just lost a trillion dollars in market value. Are you interested in seeing what that looks like? Well see below and scratch the back of your heads.

We start with Business Insider (at https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/tech-stock-sell-off-deepseek-ai-chatgpt-china-nvidia-chips-2025-1) where we are given ‘DeepSeek tech wipeout erases more than $1 trillion in market cap as AI panic grips Wall Street’ and I find it slightly hilarious as we see “AI panic”, you see, bubbles have that effect on markets. This takes me back to 2012 when the Australian Telstra had no recourse at that point to let the waves of 4G work for them (they had 3.5G at best) so what did they do? They called the product 4G, problem solved. I think they took some damage over time, but they prevented others taking the lead as they were lagging to some extent. Here in this case we are given “US stocks plummeted on Monday as traders fled the tech sector and erased more than $1 trillion in market cap amid panic over a new artificial intelligence app from a Chinese startup.” Now let me be clear, there is no AI. Not in America and not in China. What both do have is Deeper Machine Learning and LLM’s and these parts would in the end be part of a real AI. Just not the primary part (see my earlier works). Why has happened (me being speculative) is that China had an innovative idea of Deeper Machine Learning and package this innovatively with LLM modules so that the end result would be a much more efficient system. The Economic Times (at https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/markets/stocks/news/worlds-richest-people-lose-108-billion-after-deepseek-selloff/articleshow/117615451.cms) gives us ‘World’s richest people lose $108 billion after DeepSeek selloff’ what is more prudent is “DeepSeek’s dark-horse entry into the AI race, which it says cost just $5.6 million to develop, is a challenge to Silicon Valley’s narrative that massive capital spending is essential to developing the strongest models.” So all these ‘vendors’ and especially President Trump who stated “Emergence of cheaper Chinese rival has wiped $1tn off the value of leading US tech companies” (source: the Guardian). And with the Stargate investment on the mark for about 500 billion dollars it comes as a lightning strike. I wonder what the world makes of this. In all honesty I do not know what to believe and the setting of DeepSeek the game will change. In the first there are dozens of programers who need to figure out how the cost cutting was possible. Then there is the setting of what DeepSeek can actually do and here is the kicker. DeepSeek is free as such there will be a lot of people digging into that. What I wonder is what data is being collected by Chinese artificial intelligence company Hangzhou DeepSeek Artificial Intelligence Co., Ltd. It would be my take on the matter. When something is too cheap to be true, you better believe that there is a snag on the road making you look precisely in the wrong direction. I admit it is the cynic in me speaking, but the stage that they made a solution for 6 million (not Lee Majors) against ChatGPT coming at 100 million, the difference is just too big and I don’t like the difference. I know I might be all wrong here, but that is the initial intake I take in the matter. 

If it all works out there is a massive change in the so called AI field. A Chinese party basically sunk the American opposition. In other news, there is possibly reason to giggle here. You see, Microsoft Invested Nearly $14 Billion In OpenAI and that was merely months ago and now we see that  someone else did it at 43% of the investment and after all the hassles they had (Xbox) they shouldn’t be spending recklessly I get it, they merely all had that price picture and now we see another Chinese firm playing the super innovator. It is making me giggle. In opposition to this, we see all kind of player (Google, IBM, Meta, Oracle, Palantir) playing a similar game of what some call AI and they have set the bar really high, as such I wonder how they will continue the game if it turns out that DeepSeek really is the ‘bomb’ of Deeper Machine Learning. I reckon there will be a few interesting weeks coming up. 

Have fun, I need to lie still for 6 hours until breakfast (my life sucks).

3 Comments

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics, Science

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

December 14, 2024 · 14:10

Calling a bluff

That happens, some people bluff and others tend to call the bluff. That is the setting that president elect Trump called on himself. We all heard how the upcoming Trump administration called the setting that they opened. They threatened the Canadian Trudeau administration on tariffs when “Trump threatened in a social media post to apply devastating levies of 25% on all goods and services from both Mexico and Canada, vowing to keep them in place until “such time as drugs, in particular fentanyl, and all illegal aliens stop this invasion of our country!”” As I see it, a larger setting that the US called upon itself. The war on drugs has been going on since June 17, 1971, during which President Richard Nixon declared drug abuse “public enemy number one”. I get that, drugs are the filth of any civilisation. Perhaps America could have changed tactics decades ago, when it was set to ‘the black population’, being white an wealthy enabled cocaine habits, all whilst crack users got the bulk of the heavy punishment. I cannot voice any opinion because it is too far from my bed. Yet the media used that setting to give us “New Jack City” and “Boys N the Hood” with an entertaining “Cocaine bear” for good measure. I reckon that “Traffic” is one of the best views on the subject (there are many I never saw).

So after half a century of failure the President elect Trump now blame the neighbouring countries. Well two can play at that. In the first I suggest any American arrested on drug charges (outside of USA) get the death penalty. No options, no trials, just point and click the gun. In the second we consider the stage that Ontario’s premier, Doug Ford is suggesting (at https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/dec/12/canada-ontario-premier-trump-tariffs). With ‘Ontario leader threatens to halt energy exports to US if Trump imposes tariffs’. This is actually not a bad move (better than my idea). At present we have the idea that Canada’s revenue from electricity exports to the United States hit a record high of C$ 5.8bn. Quebec is the largest exporter, with Ontario following second at 13.9m megawatt-hours of power sent south. Of course the setback is that Ontario loses that near essential revenue. But consider that America loses 13.9m megawatt-hours of power which adds to the hardship America has at present and the next 2 quarters that hardship could be seen as close to debilitating. 

So should the Trump administration push the tariff bluff, the payback that follows is nothing short of a banger of a payback. I see all these bad press moments of Doug Ford, I cannot answer whether they are valid, but I reckon this one is on point and only 6 hours ago we were also given ‘Ontario premier suggests stopping US liquor imports over Trump tariff threat’ (at https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/dec/13/ontario-trump-tariff-liquor) not a big thing for the non alcoholics and lets face it, Ryan Reynolds gives us Gin (perhaps soon Canadian Gin too), Dan Ackroyd (part Canadian) gives us Crystal Head Vodka and Canada also has its Whiskey types. As such, it will hurt America a lot more than it will Canada. 

There are other drinks that come from outside of the USA. There is Jenever (Dutch Gin, Netherlands), Gin (UK), Aquavit and Absolute Vodka (Sweden) not to mention the dozen of wines from the French speaking regions (like France). Oh, and Raki and Ouzo are Greek. As such plenty of non-American options. As I personally see it, the response to the Trump bluff will be countered in a few ways and it is my belief that the Trump Administration will be forced to do a 180 degree on the spot, that is if they would like to keep their other ventures running somewhat smooth. 

I personally think that Doug Ford called an upcoming bluff in several ways and all are promising answers to the situation that Canada is in no way to blame for. So what do they want? A 8,891 km wall? Who pays for that? As I see it, the war was essential for a long time, but as the ‘law’ unfairly differentiate the rich and the pour on drugs, this was never going in any direction fast. 

It seemed like such an easy solution but that was never go down well, because the complexities that American law allowed for made it way too complex (as I personally see it).

Have a great weekend, Toronto joins un on this Saturday in 2 hours.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics

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

December 12, 2024 · 17:44

Sheep to the slaughter

There was a view, I agreed but not for the same reasons. I agree that Brexit was needed but for different reasons. You see, I saw the EU corruption for what it was. A setting where banks had their own little club, the club of 22. And there we saw Mario Draghi was a welcomed sight. I was hesitant to see it for good. Even as Mark Carney had its own ideas, he was right. Brexit was the way and the way was going to be hard. Now we see the Guardian embraces the story ‘Majority of Brexit voters ‘would accept free movement’ to access single market’, the carrot for idiots. There was no free movement, there was merely what others would allow us to do and that free movement comes at a price. So as we are given “A majority of Britons who voted to leave the EU would now accept a return to free movement in exchange for access to the single market, according to a cross-Europe study that also found a reciprocal desire in member states for closer links with the UK.” Yes but at a price. Now that the ‘settings’ are reset, the stupidity of the EU opens up again. The EU was on the verge of collapse as they are in denial of the consequences. You see we are given “85% of the EU’s debt has been incurred since 2020” but the story was worse, much worse. The debt of the EU has been calculated at €14,300,832,000,000 it was that bad (still is), the breaking through Brexit made sure that the UK was no longer held to account to that debt. Now that the trolls and corrupt ‘friends’ of the Euro got their stories to account going on since 31 January 2020 they finally won and the reset is about to take place (the fact that the idiot Keir Starmer assisted in the matter was a great help to the EU). What is the matter? Well in part they are right, the UK benefits from the strength of the EU matters on one side, the opposing setting is also true. A family with 27 family members and I reckon that 6 or them are nothing less than a newer version of the village idiot. They have a voice, but they also were chomping at the bit to get access to the credit card of the EU and that is not a good thing. The second that the banks come in, the setting will be final. The Greeks are loving this. There is every chance that the Greeks will blow out their debt again. The reason is simple, they don’t have what it takes and they take what everyone else has. That was an I personally think is the remaining setting. They are not alone, but they were the most visible one in 2019. Now that stage will erupt again. The EU doesn’t have the checks and balances it needs to stop that level of idiocy. 

We are also given “The report found about half of Britons believed greater engagement with the EU was the best way to bolster the UK economy (50%), strengthen security (53%), effectively manage migration (58%), tackle climate change (48%), allow Ukraine to stand up to Russia (48%), and for Britain to stand up to the US (46%) and China (49%).” My issue becomes. What data? How was the data collected? When we see ‘effectively manage migration (58%)’ how many want to push their migration numbers to UK? How many are are anti China minded? As we are given ‘for Britain to stand up to China (49%)’, are they sure they meant ‘for Britain to stand up for China’ and in all this the new markers are presented and not given towards the Middle East. That becomes a nastier kettle of fish. In the end, when the tally is shaped there will be anger towards the media for not letting us know the truth. I reckon that at some point media moguls will go the way of Brian Thompson but now with a mere rope and a tree as support for their distrust of the media. We are almost at that tipping point and reversing Brexit will give us the stage in 12 months or less. At that point the finger pointing starts and the media will lose whatever support they had. As I personally see it, the largest issue is seen in the last paragraph. With: “The Brexit-era divisions have faded and both European and British citizens realise that they need each other to get safer. Governments now need to catch up with public opinion and offer an ambitious reset.” One side is the media “British citizens realise that they need each other to get safer” and this is largely because a false picture was given for years and as this is shown to be wrong, the people will go for the throat of the media. This is no longer the 90’s where the media had overwhelming powers. Now they are held to account and optionally with their lives. As for the ‘ambitious reset’ this is largely enabled by banks and their need for the reset of their credit cards. What comes next will be the stuff of nightmares. It won’t happen directly, it will be a soft landing, like landing in a pool of molten lead. Within a year the UK will get their new demands handed to them and that will be the game, the EU (Germany) will win and suddenly they will they will side with Russian demands. As such the Ukraine will suffer and the EU will suffer too. The Americans will hand Russia through the Republican Party. Republicans are far more likely than Democrats to say the United States is providing too much support to Ukraine (42% vs. 13%) (source: Pew research Centre). And when that comes to blow, America will distance from the EU. It was too hard and they have too little cash left. A setting that was always come to pass. As such the anti-China sentiment was in favour of America, as they pushed their goods. So how long do you think that setting will last? In all this, the solution to embrace the Middle East and China was a larger option then anyone thinks. It gave the EU breathing space against Russia. Now the UK is in the mix and the only option (I believe they have) is to open the door to BRICS and China. It don’t think it is a good option, but it is better to see that then to see the new maps of 2040’s stating Netherlands Oblast (or more likely Holland Oblast). That danger is more and more real as America lets the Republican setting of “U.S. support for Ukraine” getting smothered to death.

As I personally see it, Europeans are leading themselves as lambs to the slaughter. What a disgusting end to the foundry of civilisation (1095 – 2040). 

Could I be wrong? I hope I am, but the wrong people got to speak at media events and I am keeping a list of media people who are leading the run towards the gallows. Like the Dutch writer Marga Minco who wrote Bitter herbs (1957). As the character in that book who through the personal inside of people decided who was handed to the devils and who went the way of angels. I reckon that not many media people are going the way of angels. And those howling that they merely viewed that the people had a right to know will see the digital age as the one serving them, not the people. There needs to be a tally, especially of the media.

Have a great day and if you are with the media, the gallows are down the lane to the left, overlooking the emptiness of the fields of bankruptcy.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics

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

December 11, 2024 · 16:59

Out of bounds

Is the setting we should enable. You see, there are. Few sides and many of them come from an unreliable media (which includes nearly ALL media). We are given ‘Jamal Khashoggi’s widow urges Starmer to raise husband’s murder at Saudi meeting’ (at https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/dec/09/jamal-khashoggis-widow-urges-starmer-to-raise-husbands-at-saudi-meeting). You see, my issue (since the very beginning) has been that the data is unsubstantiated, lacks reliability and a few other settings. 

In the very first is that there is not now, nor has there been ever a body. Forensic evidence has been lacking since day one and in the clear setting (based on law) we can say that Jamal Khashoggi has been missing, but that is all. The media has been rife with all kinds of speculations based on grainy pictures. Pictures that could have been taken in the White House for all we know. Ever since it was on my radar, going back to 2020, I started the stages in ‘Demanding Dismissal’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2019/07/04/demanding-dismissal/) where I gave a report on the stages that I had an issue with. The larger debatable presented truths was debated by me in “[92] Turkish Intelligence assessed that he may have been dead within ten minutes after entering the Consulate. Here we are treated to ‘he may have been dead’, ‘may’ refers to speculation, not fact, the footnote gives us “The ten minutes reference is based on the fact that after ten minutes, Mr. Khashoggi voice was not heard”, this implies that Turkish Intelligence has 100% of the embassy bugged and wired, that is extremely doubtful on several levels.” I debate the issues set in the UN document and basically attack the UN for doing such a hatchet job on an attack against a monarchy that was seen in the document which I will attach at the bottom. As such the Guardian giving us “Jamal Khashoggi’s widow has urged Keir Starmer to raise her husband’s murder at his meeting with the Saudi Arabia’s crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman.” Get’s my response of ‘What murder? What evidence can you present?’ You think I am joking, but I am not. More important, the document (from the United Nations under essay writer Agnes Calamard) gives the much larger setting (made by me) of “The report mentions ‘interrogation’ 4 times, yet these so called tapes on the torture/interrogation of Jamal Khashoggi. Who heard them? How were they forensically tested and who tested and seconded any report of these findings and optional facts?” The tapes which spiralled the non-logical media into flame driven and digital currency driven idiots. Up to now, 4 years later I have yet to see any report on the settings of the ‘interrogation tapes’ none of this was ever presented and the Turkish media (who flamed things out of proportions all by themself) has yet to present any kind of intelligence or mere forensic evidence of this media. 

As such I have an issue with that. I have less of an issue with “We look here to your country, to the UK and to the US and most western countries, with respect because you have justice and you care for democratic and human rights. Forgetting Jamal’s case does not align with the values of justice and democratic and human rights in your country.” It is her view on the matter. The setting that the so called transgressions happened in a foreign location in a foreign country, neither of them United Kingdom or United States makes it a nice statement, but that is all it is. Oh and by the way, should Keir Starmer open his mouth in that case, I will demand loudly that he also raises his voice for all the Turkish Journalists that have died in Turkish captivity. Not one but dozens of them. I get why Hanan Elatr Khashoggi raises the issue, but al far as I know at least one source stated that Jamal was with a 19 year old (now 25 year old) mistress on a location in Bora Bora. I cannot vouch for the quality of that intelligence, but there you have it and as far as I was able to tell, none of the media looked into that matter, either to debunk or verify that ‘setting’. As such, I can tell that the attacks should be seen as merely anti-Saudi rhetoric. 

As such as we see “The government said the project aimed to generate £250m of investment and was expected to create more than 1,000 skilled jobs in Greater Manchester.” And as I (personally) see it. 1000 skilled jobs versus one journalist no one cares about, the journalist loses. Is it that bland a situation? Yes, it is. Mainly because no valid evidence has ever been produced. The CIA report gave us “please explain to me how the United States has any actual evidence regarding the events in a foreign nation on a consulate that is another nations grounds? How was this evidence collected? Creating a mountain of non-substantial evidence is not really evidence, even as circumstantial evidence that is founded on probability will not hold water, even if the statement “officials have said they have high confidence“, they lost the credibility they had with a silver briefcase holding evidence on WMD in Iraq, you do remember that part, don’t you? (It was roughly 16 years ago)” If it was actual evidence, the CIA would not hand us “officials have said they have high confidence” it blands the taste of spices and merely gives us the burger with the taste of a drip-mat. And it is always nice that the Guardian (not the most reliable source on Saudi intel) is wrecking up the past with an article like this. I countered their (and other sources) forms of ‘evidence’ within an hour. And the UN essay involved helped immensely. It came from statements in the document like “officials have said they have high confidence”, “he may have been dead” as well as “Mr. Khashoggi had been injected with something, passed out, and taken alive from the Consulate in some box or container” shows massive levels of speculation. I can do that as I was on the other side of the Indian Ocean, they (as I see it) cannot. And should Keir Starmer put 4,000 British jobs valued at a quarter of a billion at risk for something that is highly speculative and placed out of the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom from day one, he should be regarded as more stupid than anyone would hazard a guess on. Just my point of view and I get why Hanan Elatr Khashoggi takes that stage, but no one else will put their livelihood on the line. With the exception of those wanting the limelight for a useless cause (those people do exist), as such I see this article as one that should be out of bounds from the very start.

a_hrc_41_crp.1Download

It is what it is. Have a great day.

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media, Politics

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

November 21, 2024 · 23:10

One pond is not like the other

This happens. We are not always aware, but it pays off to check. It is an easy mistake to make in Europe and America, but there are rules and thinking that you are from a ‘free’ society does not mean you can ignore the rules another place has. As such we get to The Guardian (at https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/nov/20/london-18-year-old-arrested-in-dubai-for-sex-with-17-year-old). You see, there are strict rules in some places. Most of them involve drugs, criminal activities or sex. We are given “We really liked each other but she was secretive with her family because they were strict. My parents knew about our relationship but she couldn’t tell hers. She had to meet me without telling them it was to see a boy.” And there we see the first red flag. With “she was secretive with her family because they were strict” we get the problem. And with “Fakana was charged because the girl’s mother found their chats and pictures back in the UK.

It is understood the woman subsequently contacted police in Dubai and Fakana was arrested.” And with the premise of “Sex outside marriage is legal for tourists, but only if both parties are over 18.” We see an entire life getting squandered. I have no clear picture how the mother was about it all, but as she called the police in Dubai I can guess that she was not OK with it. And the bleeding heart stage of “Fakana’s family has called on the foreign secretary, David Lammy – their local MP – to intervene.” We get nothing. You see he broke the law and that is the real drive. The UAE sees crime and deals harshly with it. We can ‘break down’ the setting as much as we want and the Guardian does this in the byline with “Marcus Fakana could face two decades in jail for having sex with girl, also from London, while on holiday in UAE”, no the setting is much simpler. He had sex with an underage girl and the parents (at least the mother) of the girl are not OK with it. Don’t get me wrong, I was a teenager once (I think that was at the time of the Crusades) and I get the setting, but the law is the law. And he should be lucky. If he had smoked a joint afterwards he might hang in the real sense of the word. And he is lucky because the punishment in the UAE for rape of a minor is the firing squad. And if she maintains that she was not ready for that he gets to feel what many have felt before. That is the part we do not see here. 

There is an abundance of party timers and as long as they party in Europe they tend to be fine. When the age difference is low (like in this case) many places have the Romeo and Juliet law. The UAE, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia (mostly Muslim countries) do not. So the ‘excuse’ “has since turned 18” will not work. She was a minor in the eyes of the law. As such the sentence “Detained in Dubai, which campaigns to help people it says have suffered injustice in the UAE” does not work. He broke the law and she was still a minor. All that beside the point that the UAE has strict laws regarding sex outside marriage. And that should have been the first issue for the parents of Marcus Fakana. It pays to know the minimum of local laws. And do not blame Islamic law. In North Carolina and Virginia Oral Sex is a Felony, and that is regardless of the marital status. So, rejoice his life could have been blown after he was blown. 

And the media is partly responsible for this mess (to a degree). The Independent gives us ‘Briton, 18, facing 20-year jail sentence in Dubai over holiday romance with 17-year-old girl’, no, he had sex with a minor. And the word minor is not given once in the article in the Independent. The Standard makes the same mistake. We are led to believe that it is so unfair. But the simplicity is that countries have laws and other countries have different laws and this is one law the parents should have made clear to their son. And as for the excuse ““The girl was just a few months younger than Marcus and he didn’t know that at the time,” said Radha Stirling, the chief executive of Detained in Dubai” I get that she has a job to do and with that the second excuse should not hold water either, it is “This is not something Dubai should be prosecuting.” Yes Dubai should. You see, she was a minor. Ignorance is not a valid defence. I personally believe that he should not serve 20 years, but there need to be consequences. The media handling of the issues is making that clear. Perhaps a month (at the most) and after that he becomes persona non grata. I reckon that he gets that in the UAE, Saudi Arabia and several other nations will deny him access to.

I am for the most a black letter law person. I do believe in the spirit of the law and for me (and many others) this is not a serious case, but for the parents of the girl it is. In islamic law the ‘spoiled’ woman is not a good one (sorry for that term). And it could have been prevented if Marcus would have been told of the laws of the land he visits. 

So I am willing to blame the parents more than Marcus, but in the end he must face the music.

Enjoy the day, it is almost Friday here

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media, Tourism

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

November 12, 2024 · 18:28

Short of brain, short of memory

As I see it, Georgina Rannard from the BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx2lvq4el5vo) needs a little education. It started my (somewhat) raging nature when I saw ‘Ultra-rich using jets like taxis, climate scientists warn’ I was ‘set off’ in a light of day that is somewhat darker then blue. You see there are around 24,270 private jets, two thirds are registered in the US and many of them, are corporate jets. You know these ‘scoundrels’ employed by Google, Amazon, Microsoft, IBM and alike. There is a fair amount of jets used by the ‘ultra-rich’ but the the numbers fade in to the corporate world. And she gets assistance from Prof Gossling (not the brightest professor in the land). I feel repetitive, as I wrote on December 10th 2020 in the article (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2020/12/10/uniform-nameless-entitlement-perforation/) where I wrote ‘Uniform Nameless Entitlement Perforation’, where Tim McGrath made equally mindless accusations. As I see it in 4 years they didn’t learn anything, they just used a new vessel to spout there nonsense. You see, the fallback in 2023, the 13th to be exact. I wrote ‘The Guardian just won’t learn’ I added a few details there, details that was available to the press for obvious reasons. There I wrote “ignoring the fact that over 15 years 41,000 flights a day have been added and we do not get to see how much pollution that brings” each year 1,000,000 were added bringing to the total of 41,000 flights a day, every day. At this time (as far as I was able to check) was the fact that per 2021 there were 151,435 daily flights in the air. All whilst in 2019 there were 106,849 flights. I think that the stupidity of Georgina Rannard and Prof Gossling is clearly shown here. In addition to this is the fact that these jet are a lot more fuel efficient. It is just another example where leftist idiots put a little more blame on the ‘ultra-rich’ and I have no hidden agenda. I will never be ultra-rich, I have no intent to being ultra rich. Just rich would do, rich enough to have a nice place to live in and a nice retirement, but I reckon I am no different than 80% of us who all share that same wish.

As such I have questions, how was this “The 46% increase in emissions by private jets is probably due to rising demand and the limitations on commercial travel caused by the Covid pandemic” determined? The 15,000,000 flights from 1995-2010 would diminish these numbers. The other side is that the ultra rich would not fly them all the time, so where did these two dodo’s get the numbers? Then we get “The group is estimated to comprise about 256,000 people, 0.003% of the global adult population, each owning an average of $123m (£95m), according to the scientists.” So are they all sharing the 24,270 private jets? Then we get “One travelled by private jet 169 times in 2023, emitting an estimated 2,400 tonnes of carbon dioxide – the equivalent of driving 571 petrol cars throughout the year.” So who was that? Was that a Google (or Microsoft or Shell) plane transporting staff members? There is an amount of data (possibly fictive) that we are exposed to, and one case in 24,270? How random is that? As such we get the statement “The scientists chose not to name individuals, making clear they did not wish to point the finger at any one person.” Makes sense, but it also makes there data debatable. Because if there was clear evidence (like a thousand planes) we would get a really nice sentiment. And in response to this, I get back to the previous article ‘Uniform Nameless Entitlement Perforation’ from 2020 where we see that 50% of the environmental damage came from 147 facilities in Europe. 

The EEA report (also in that document) gives a clear perspective, as such are Georgina Rannard and Prof Gossling anything else but a joke? The EEA gave us a clear report that 147 facilities were responsible for 50% of the damage, so why aren’t the BBC and the Guardian digging into that? They had the report for over 4 years. The media had that report and decided to ignore the report. So how blatantly stupid (and optionally corrupt) are they? A simple question and it gets worse from there. How many empty planes are flying? You see 41,000 implies well over 100,000 people. How many non-tourists are flying? I was in a plane from Amsterdam international to Budapest (Hungary) and we had a 767 plane to ourselves. Less than 25 people were in that flight. How much damage was caused? I reckon that at least 10% of the flights could be cancelled. But then we get economic issues like reserved (but unused) seats come into play and that is the larger extent. You can’t have it both ways. And I think the BBC knows that. 

Sorry for the rant, but these leftists accusing dodo’s get the hairs in the back of my neck up and there is enough evidence to do just that at present. Enjoy your day today.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

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

October 9, 2024 · 01:07

When the credit card stops

That is the setting for the US of A. The BBC gives us ‘US debt would increase under Harris and soar under Trump – study’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ce81g9593dro). We are given that there is basically no escape for America, I have articles going back to 2018 where I give sight of what is coming. Oh, and by the way at what point do you cancel someones credit card? We are given “Donald Trump’s campaign proposals would increase the US national debt by double the amount Kamala Harris’s would, according to a new analysis by a non-partisan group.” We are also given “Trump would add $7.5tn” now consider that the interest on this would be around 450 billion, just on the increase alone. Now consider that the total debt is 500% larger and now consider that the US economy needs to come up 2.25 Trillion EACH YEAR to deal with the interest alone and I saw that coming 5 years ago and the news media and these so called financial experts never saw this? I do not believe this. We were all told and presented a story. And they are about to lose whatever leeway they thought they could hang over us. The media was the tool some were able to use (with what I speculatively see) as stake holders to ‘bring’ the presentation. And the media seemingly was left in the dark, or were they?

The problem is that we cannot see or prove any of this. But consider that I saw this coming for over 5 years and I do NOT have an economic degree. What makes you think that I am more clever than these financial wizard in the media (CNN, BBC, WSJ, the Guardian) and many more? Do you really think that they made a miscalculation? They isn’t nickel and dime stuff, this is about 35 trillion dollars. How much sneaky bookkeeping is involved to put such an amount under the tables? This would require the cooperation of media, banks and governments. So when your retirement falls away, who will you blame? The media? The Banks? The Governments? Seems ludicrous, almost some crazy conspiracy. But consider the facts. Consider the evidence and the avoidance of the media to address certain economic facts. That is not some cooky setting, the evidence is out there on the internet. Consider all the media and consider what the media never gave us. I can tell you more, but it is time to consider what I am telling you here and make your own mind up. 

Now consider that the EU had six trillion euros in taxable revenue in 2022. Now we see that America is optionally about to increase its debt more that the taxable income of 27 countries and it does not raise an issue? Now we know that plenty of EU countries have a GDP that equals an apple and an egg. But together they should amount to a fair amount considering that these countries have a total population of 449.2 million, which is a lot more than America (about 34%). Now consider that people pay taxation, companies pay taxation as well. But the tax breaks are mostly for companies. As such I look at the people. There is a baseline that extremely roughly applies and when that baseline is applied the numbers do not match up as I personally see it and I have seen this setting for over 5 years and the media ignores it all. 

Could I be wrong?
Yes definitely, but overall certain numbers create levels of equilibrium and I see that these numbers aren’t here at the moment. And the media seeing these debt levels fail them could also be seen as optional evidence. So how does it work? It seems clear that the media can no longer be trusted (in my opinion). So how to get the numbers? I cannot give you my sources, so you are a little on your own in that regard.

Have a great day.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media

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

October 8, 2024 · 23:53

Making money

Yup, you can make money in three ways. You create it, you steal it, or you can make the government reimburse you. The third one is one that has its own risks. Yet the BBC informs us ‘Customers of failed crypto firm FTX set for refunds’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0qz3dg21vqo) Where we are given “Creditors of the collapsed cryptocurrency exchange FTX are poised to receive up to $16.5bn (£12.6bn) under a bankruptcy plan approved in the US on Monday.” And we get more with “Last year, former boss Sam Bankman-Fried was convicted of stealing customer funds ahead of the collapse and later sentenced to 25 years in prison. The deal will allow former customers to recover a sum worth about 119% of what they had in their accounts at the time of bankruptcy, according to FTX.” As such it seems that these customers get 19% on top of what they had in their accounts. There are ups and downs. We are also given “Some have suggested the repayment in cash will not match the loss of crypto holdings that would be worth far more today had they not been stolen. The value of bitcoin has more than tripled since November 2022.” As such I would surmise that someone went shopping with an approximate 180% of the total of sums. As the outstanding bill was set to “$8bn in customer funds were reported missing, not including debts to investors and others. Mr Ray’s team has since recovered assets worth $14.7-$16.5bn” As such 8 billion was found missing, Roughly double was retrieved and these customers only get 119%? I think there is a stinky fishy smell coming from the realm of banks. They might small consolation that Sam Bankman-Fried is convicted to 9125 days in Hotel Sing-Sing, but that might be merely the impression some feel. You see, the larger premise might be that we are given “the approval of the plan was a “significant milestone” in the firm’s efforts to repay the money to people and firms in more than 200 jurisdictions around the world” but the underlying issue that the BBC seems to ‘ignore’ is that people like Elisabeth Holmes and Sam Bankman-Fried (aka SBM) are given way to much leeway. Holmes was given 11 years imprisonment, where the Guardian on May 8th gave us that her sentence was reduced by two years and four months before original date. As such her sentence is reduced by almost 20%, so what reductions is SBM looking forward to? If is is a similar 20%, he could be out by 2044 and if he plays nice (good behaviour) he might be out even sooner that that. As such we might surmise that crime pays nowadays. And the media will milk these two for whatever they can be milked for. 

Enjoy the day ahead of you.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,

October 1, 2024 · 19:11

Two words

I saw an article by the BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cj31lpvnzl3o) where we are given ‘Netflix fails to get Baby Reindeer lawsuit dropped’ where we are given “The show, created by Richard Gadd, is billed as “a true story”, but certain key events, like the conviction for stalking, did not happen in real life, the judge concluded.” As we look at the ‘facts’ I got the idea that Netflix has a few more problems then they were ready for. Were they really ready for cutting the workforce? In 2023 we were given “The streaming giant said it was cutting 300 more jobs – roughly 4% of its workforce – mostly in the US, after axing 150 people in May” I wonder if one person was made redundant when that person could have given us the same solution that I had in mind and it would have saved them a court case. Instead of handing the viewer “a true story” when two words made the difference through “based on a true story” the word based hands the amounts of alleged inaccuracies towards creative writing and possibly makes the court case  thrown out and the defamation lawsuit falls flat. Now, I could be wrong here, but that I how I see it. In the meantime Netflix will optionally have a larger issue. When defamation becomes proven you will see dozens of involved people go over every movie that Netflix had on their channel for 2-5 years. Leave it to people to see their greed driven pupils draw attention towards that what could leave them loaded with cash. Perhaps a little skeptical, but that is where I am. You see if I could come up with the two words that could save Netflix a defamation case? Why didn’t Netflix come up with that.  But there is more, the Guardian (at https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2024/sep/30/fiona-harvey-baby-reindeer-defamation-lawsuit-richard-gadd-netflix) gives us “the show was wrongly billed as a “true story” when Netflix “made no effort” to fact check Gadd’s story or disguise Harvey as the inspiration for Martha”. You see the fact check is another matter. I think that my suggestion could have prevented the case, but the fact check is another matter. I believe that any script writer could be ‘blamed’ for creative writing to give space towards super shrinking the alleged defamation case, but that is merely my point of view. So, what happens at Netflix? That is the question but that should require a lot more consideration on the structure of Netflix. To this part I raise the fact checking and the optional allotment of two words. And there  might be more issues in the weeds. For this I would need a lot more knowledge in the inner working of Netflix and my script(s) are meant for Dubai Media and the SBA (Al Arabiya in particular). So whilst the Guardian gives us “US district judge Gary Klausner noted that because the show’s episodes begin with the line “This is a true story”, it invited viewers to take the story as fact.” As such they didn’t need two more words, they merely needed to change the first two words and that was not done. As I see it, if I interpret the words by US district judge Gary Klausner correctly, my change would negate his observation, or so I believe.

How much would I have saved Netflix, and to be brazen, can I have a slice of that? It might be easier to ask Sergey Brin for $11,000,000 post taxation and a Canadian passport, but I don’t have his phone number. You see, even I am drawn in towards optional cash, but it doesn’t control me or make me greed driven. That is merely the smaller (and optionally more desperate) cluster of people.

Have a great day. We are all on the Wednesday clock. From Vancouver in the East through to Wellington in the west. 

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Law, Media, Stories

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

September 28, 2024 · 22:22

How I fall short

That is the stage, that is the setting. I do not know everything (too boring anyways) and even as I see how things develop and are optionally staged. The fact that I do not know everything gets in the way of some things. Now, I know very little about oil. It is a commodity everyone needs, it is a commodity only some countries have and the two biggest players in that field are Aramco and ADNOC, oil is black and it is needed for the production of petroleum. That’s about all I know. The current price is about $68 dollars per barrel. So when I saw ‘Oil price drops, and BP and Shell shares slide, as Saudi Arabia ‘prepares to abandon $100 crude target’’ I didn’t think too much of it. The story comes from the Guardian (at https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2024/sep/26/european-reconstruction-bank-cuts-growth-forecasts-energy-ukraine-elon-musk-uk-investment-summit), there were more sources, but I am handing you this one. We get “Saudi Arabia is reportedly ready to abandon its unofficial price target of $100 a barrel for crude as it prepares to increase output” yet Oil&Gas journal gives us “Saudi Arabia is preparing to abandon its informal target of $100/bbl for crude oil as it plans to increase production, signalling the kingdom’s acceptance of a period of lower prices and intentions to take back market share, according to sources cited by the Financial Times”, now in my book the shortage of one commodity means prices go up. I do understand that any player will protect market share, as such I get the increase of product to protect your market share. That makes sense. And as such we see Saudi Arabia deciding an increase for about 1 million barrels per day as per December 2024. There are a few players on this field and I like the idea that the increase will make sure that Russia has less customers to get it from Russia is not happy. And as several media are giving us the goods, there is no other way for me than to agree with the setting. In overall there is still a larger concern I have. Oil is a commodity with a finite supply, so how much supply is there? I believe that the middle east has the bulk of it, but the finite session gives us the dangerous setting that at some point, the three countries with supply will be Russia, Iran and Venezuela. That is not a setting I want to wake up to, although at present it is highly unlikely that I will be around the morning we get that piece of news. In the meantime there is a larger issue at stake. How will Aramco increase its creation of oil with an additional 159,000,000 litres of that black fluid. You see everyone is looking at the end result and no one is looking at the how. What is required to that level of increase? I feel certain that it will require a lot more than one pump. It is the increase of 10% (near to that) and comes from 300 rigs. The simpleton in me sees this as an additional 30 rigs. It takes 18 months to five years to commission a rig, the construction timeline for an oil rig can vary significantly depending on several factors and that is if the oil comes from rigs. Saudi Arabia has one hundred oil and gas fields, so if it comes from there, other means are needed. The largest oil field is the Ghawar field. So how can you increase the production there? And is that the only place? We are so desperate for oil that the basic security is overlooked and there is at present Iran, Houthi forces and a few others who are very willing to hurt Saudi Arabia. So what more is needed, because when by November that increase is realised, some will take offence to this and that problem will possibly create all kinds of new problems. And we do not see enough information on that side of the equation.

And advice from me? Nope, I know next to nothing on that topic. I can merely see hurdles and optionally a personal belief that I see options, but that is not what the actual expert on the topic has. And the media? Solutions do not make their digital wallet fat, flames do that and in that view it is not a good idea to put flames close to oil, a mere personal view on the matter.

Have a great weekend.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Politics

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