Tag Archives: the Verge

A Peter Sellers world

That is what hit me when I saw ‘How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bubble’ (source: Bloomberg) which comes from Dr Strangelove where we get “How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb” it started a larger set of thoughts. 

I didn’t use that article as Bloomberg uses a paywall. And it starts with yesterdays article in FXLeaders (at https://www.fxleaders.com/news/2025/12/07/oracles-ai-bubble-bursts-peak-glory-at-345-now-a-217-hangover/) where we see ‘Oracle’s AI Bubble Bursts: Peak Glory at $345, Now a $217 Hangover’ we are given “ORCL ended the week at $217.58, up 1.52 percent, but it still had a 37 percent hangover from its 52-week high of $345.72. This is a microcosm of growing concerns about debt loads, AI infrastructure spending, and whether the “infinite demand” narrative for AI compute can withstand real-world economics.” As well as “Oracle’s recent decline in stock value reflects broader market concerns regarding the high valuations of AI-related companies, as its forward price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio exceeds 33. The company projects revenues of $166 billion from cloud infrastructure and $20 billion. Investors adopted a “sell the news” mentality, raising questions about the sustainability of these forecasts. Oracle’s fundamentals remain solid. The company experienced  52% growth in cloud infrastructure and has $455 billion in remaining performance obligations (RPO), largely due to its partnership with OpenAI. Currently, the stock is trading at 13.9 times projected earnings for the end of this decade, leading some investors to view the decline as a potential buying opportunity.

As I see it Oracle passed their burst bubble setting. And whilst we see ups and downs, I would unreservedly trust the Oracle stock to be a beacon of steadiness. It might not be sexy, but it is a trustworthy sign for those who need a decent return on investment.

Or as Peter sellers would say:
As long as the roots are not severed, all is well. And all will be well in the garden. Yes! There will be growth in the spring!” (Source: Being there) it was a better time and weirdly enough the age of Peter Sellers applies to the days that 2025 brings. And from that setting we get to MyNews (at https://sc.mp/ihj4g) where we see ‘Why 2026 will be the year AI hype collides with reality’ an opinion piece that gives me “The reckoning ahead for the AI bubble promises to reprice expectations, force economic trade-offs and call out circular deals” but the stronger setting is given with “Speculative assumptions guiding trillions of US dollars in AI investments are colliding with real-world obstacles. Escalating costs, stratospheric stock valuations, tenuous collaborations and energy bottlenecks are compounding the inevitable challenges when new technologies struggle for profitability. Many are worried the bubble may be bursting. Morgan Stanley projects that the cumulative amount spent worldwide on data centers could exceed US$3 trillion by year-end 2028. China’s AI investment could hit 700 billion yuan (US$99 billion) this year, 48 per cent more than last year, according to Bank of America, with the government supplying US$56 billion.” There is a setting for both ‘AI investments are colliding with real-world obstacles’ and ‘worldwide on data centers could exceed US$3 trillion by year-end 2028’ the weird feeling I have that it will not get this far, this entire setting will implode before the end of 2027, investors will stop feeling lovingly towards the boom that is not coming and will start feeling pressured that the terms required that will grow erratic setting for the need for greed and that is the setting that comes along long before 2027 is reached. 

Then we get to AOL who gives us (at https://www.aol.com/finance/goldman-sachs-issues-warning-ai-103249744.html) where we are given ‘Goldman Sachs issues a warning to AI stock investors’ where we are given ““Our discussions with investors and recent equity performance reveal limited appetite for companies with potential AI-enabled revenues as investors grapple with whether AI is a threat or opportunity for many companies. While we expect the AI trade will eventually transition to Phase 3, investors will likely require evidence of a tangible impact on near-term earnings to embrace these stocks. Unlike Phase 2, there will likely be winners and losers within Phase 3,” Goldman Sachs US equity strategist Ryan Hammond wrote in a new note on Friday. Hammond thinks AI investment as a percentage of capital expenditures could be nearing a climax. In turn, that sets the stage for overly upbeat AI investors to be let down if earnings don’t come in strongly in future quarters.” As I see it, when we are given these settings everyone seems to get concerned, so when we get in addition “Salesforce (CRM) and Figma (FIG) got drilled on Thursday after their earnings reports didn’t wow. It’s clear that the hype on their earnings calls wasn’t enough to paper over soft areas of the earnings reports. Growing concern on the Street centers around the pace of AI demand by corporations, given what looks to be a slowing US economy.” As I stated this before, the need for greed overwhelmed everything. When the setting of NIP (Near Intelligent Parsing) is not clearly laid out and it is caught in the waves of board of directors and Investors believing that they have the AI solution everyone is looking for you gets a larger setting, consider that and consider what happens when OpenAI “fails to wow” the investors, or even a delay and it all comes to a large shutdown and that is even before we see 9 News giving us “A Sydney data centre that will host ChatGPT is being hailed as a win for Australia, but an expert warns the country lacks the energy supply needed to power it reliably” I gave a few months ago that there would be an energy problem on numerous levels and now we are seeing that whilst we are dealing with the the fallout of other settings. And less than an hour ago Deutsche Welle gives us ‘Google raises AI stakes as OpenAI struggles to stay on top’  with “Given those strengths, Adrian Cox sees “a very high probability” Google will have the leading model at least into next year — not OpenAI. OpenAI’s priority, he says, is identifying a business model capable of funding a user base that could soon approach a billion people per week.” This is not about OpenAI, I did that already, the larger frame is set in the perception of whatever the bubble is and I believe that there are two factors that the media doesn’t want or is avoiding to include. First there are the doom sayers trying to early burst confidence in favor of short gains and then there are people trying to short on whatever they can so that they can get another jolt of profit and they are all out trying to set social media on their side. 

So if this is the prologue of what is about to unfold we are in for a jolly good time, and as I see it, there is a chance that Christmas for some will be a disaster.

I wanted to include more of Peter sellers, like the Party or the Pink Panther but I am running out of juice. But there was one more thing and I got it from the Independent about an hour ago. It states ‘OpenAI rushes out new AI model in ‘code red’ response to fears about Google’ (at https://ca.news.yahoo.com/openai-rushes-ai-model-code-105822611.html) that was the snippet I was hoping for. With “The ChatGPT creator will unveil GPT-5.2 this week, The Verge reported, after OpenAI CEO Sam Altman declared a “code red” situation following the launch of Google Gemini 3 last month. Google’s latest AI model surpassed ChatGPT in several benchmark tests, including abstract and visual reasoning, as well as advanced knowledge across scientific disciplines.” But that comes in a setting, you see, I stated in ‘TBD CEO OpenAI’ two days ago (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2025/12/06/tbd-ceo-openai/) “in a software release any of a hundred things can go wrong and they all need to go right at present.” And when things are rushed out things will go wrong. But there is a snag, for this to happen The Independent article had to be correct and as they are the only one giving us this, there is no real verification available. But when you are in a stage when bubbles go boom (or plop) all the available facts become important. And I massively wish that a Peter sellers setting would help me out. And perhaps in view of this, his classic phrase “It’s no matter. When you’ve seen one Stradivarius, you’ve seen them all.” Especially when looking at NIP software. But that is also the snag. I have seen excellent applications and I have seen lesser ones. I reckon that it amounts to who plays the violin, if it is a creative person that person will find new life in whatever that person. applies NIP to, if it is a salesperson it will be about maximizing greed and that setting tends to have limitations on several degrees. In addition we are given “The new model was originally scheduled to launch in late December, but will now be released as early as 9 December.” I understand the pressures that come with this but they better understand that early launch bring dangers and investors don’t really like to be spooked (they also don’t like them) What we see is open to interpretation and it is a valid thought that my views are also open to interpretation. 

So in this I leave you all with a presenting view not unlike Peter sellers would say “To see me as a person on screen would be one of the dullest experiences you could ever wish to experience” and 

As you I have never been in a movie (at least I don’t remember being in one) you are spared that dull experience. So have a great day and don’t forget to love the bubble (if you haven’t invested your wealth there).

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

The sound of war hammers

It is a specific sound, nothing compares to that and it isn’t entirely fictional. Some might remember the Walter Hill movie Streets of Fire (1984) where two men slug it out with hammers, but that is not it. When a Warhammer slams into metal armor, the armor becomes a drum and that sound is heard all over the battlefield (the wearer of that armour hears a lot more than that sound) but is distinct and I reckon that some of those hammer wielders would have created some kind of crescendo on these knights. So that was ‘ringing’ in my ears when NPR gave us ‘Here’s why concerns about an AI bubble are bigger than ever’ a few days ago (at https://www.npr.org/2025/11/23/nx-s1-5615410/ai-bubble-nvidia-openai-revenue-bust-data-centers) and what will you know. They made the same mistake, but we’ll get to that.

The article reads quite nicely and Bobby Allyn did a good job (beside the one miss) but lets get to the starting blocks. It starts with “A frothy time for Huang, to be sure, which makes it all the more understandable why his first statement to investors on a recent earnings call was an attempt to deflate bubble fears. “There’s been a lot of talk about an AI bubble,” he told shareholders. “From our vantage point, we see something very different.”” So then we get three different names all giving ‘their’ point of view with ““The idea that we’re going to have a demand problem five years from now, to me, seems quite absurd,” said prominent Silicon Valley investor Ben Horowitz, adding: “if you look at demand and supply and what’s going on and multiples against growth, it doesn’t look like a bubble at all to me.” Appearing on CNBC, JPMorgan Chase executive Mary Callahan Erdoes said calling the amount of money rushing into AI right now a bubble is “a crazy concept,” declaring that “we are on the precipice of a major, major revolution in a way that companies operate.” Yet a look under the hood of what’s really going on right now in the AI industry is enough to deliver serious doubt, said Paul Kedrosky, a venture capitalist who is now a research fellow at MIT’s Institute for the Digital Economy.” All three names give a nice ‘presentation’ to appease the rumblings within an investor setting. Ben Horowitz, Mary Callahan Erdoes and Paul Kedrosky are seemingly mindset on raking in whatever they can and then the fourth shines a light on this (not in the way he intended) we see “Take OpenAI, the ChatGPT maker that set off the AI race in late 2022. Its CEO Sam Altman has said the company is making $20 billion in revenue a year, and it plans to spend $1.4 trillion on data centers over the next eight years. That growth, of course, would rely on ever-ballooning sales from more and more people and businesses purchasing its AI services.” Did you see the setting. He is making 20 billion and investing $1.4 trillion, now that represents a larger slice and the 20 billion is likely to make more (perhaps even 100 billion a year. And now the sides of hammers are slamming into armour. That still will take 14 years to break even and does anyone have any idea how long 14 years is and I reckon that $1.4 trillion represents (at 4.5%) implies that the interest is $63,000,000,000. That is almost the a year of revenue and that is the hopefully glare if he is making 100 billion a year. So what gives with this, because at some point investors make the setting that the formula is off. There is no tax deductibility. That is money that is due, the banks will get their dividend and whomever thinks that all this goes at zero percent is ludicrously asleep and that is before the missing element comes out. 

So then in comes Daron Acemoglu with “A growing body of research indicates most firms are not seeing chatbots affect their bottom lines, and just 3% of people pay for AI, according to one analysis. “These models are being hyped up, and we’re investing more than we should,” said Daron Acemoglu, an economist at MIT, who was awarded the 2024 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences.” He comes at this from another angle and gives us that we are investing more than we should. All these firms are seeing the pot at the end of the rainbow, but there is the hidden snag, we learned early in life that the rainbow is the result of sunlight on rainwater and it is always curves t be ‘just’ beyond the horizon and it never hits the ground and there will be no pot of gold at the end of it according to Lucky the Leprechaun (I have his fax number) but that was not the side I am aiming for, but it gives the idiocy we see at present. They are all investing too much into something that does not yet exist, but that is beside the point. There are massive options for DML and LLM solutions, but do you think that this is worth trillions? It follows when we get to “Nonetheless, Amazon, Google, Meta and Microsoft are set to collectively sink around $400 billion on AI this year, mostly for funding data centers. Some of the companies are set to devote about 50% of their current cash flow to data center construction.

Or to put it another way: every iPhone user on earth would have to pay more than $250 to pay for that amount of spending. “That’s not going to happen,” Kedrosky said.” This comes from Paul Kedrosky, a venture capitalist who is now a research fellow at MIT’s Institute for the Digital Economy, and he is right. But that too is not the angle I am going for. But there are two voices, both in their field of vision, something they know and they are seeing the edges of what cannot be contained, one even got a Nobel Memorial Prize for his efforts (past accomplishment) And I reckon all these howling bitches want their government to ‘safe’ them when the bough breaks on these waves. So Andy Jassy, Sundar Pichai, Mark Zuckerberg and Satya Nadella (Amazon, Google, Meta and Microsoft) will expect the tax system to bail them out and there is no real danger to them, they might get fired but they’ll survive this. Andy Jassy is as far as I know the poorest of the lot and he has 500 million, so he will survive in whatever place he has. But that is the danger. The investors and the taxpayers (you and me) get to suffer from this greed filled frenzy. 

But then we get “Analyst Gil Luria of the D.A. Davidson investment firm, who has been tracking Big Tech’s data center boom, said some of the financial maneuvers Silicon Valley is making are structured to keep the appearance of debt off of balance sheets, using what’s known as “special purpose vehicles.””, as well as “The tech firm makes an investment in the data center, outside investors put up most of the cash, then the special purpose vehicle borrows money to buy the chips that are inside the data centers. The tech company gets the benefit of the increased computing capacity but it doesn’t weigh down the company’s balance sheet with debt.” And here we get another failure. It is the failure of the current administration that does not adapt the tax laws to shore up whatever they have for whatever no one has and that is the larger stakeholder in this. We get this in an example in the article stating “Blue Owl Capital and Meta for a data center in Louisiana”, this is only part of the equation. You see, they are ’spreading the love’ around because that is the ‘safe’ setting and they know what comes next. You see the Verge gave us ‘Nvidia says some AI GPUs are ‘sold out,’ grows data center business by $10B in just three months’ (at https://www.theverge.com/tech/824111/nvidia-q3-2026-earnings-data-center-revenue) and that is the first part of the equation. What do you think will power all this? That is the angle I am holding onto. All these data centers will need energy and they will take it away from the people like you and me. And only 4 hours ago we see ‘Nvidia plays down Google chip threat concerns’ and it is all about the AI race, which is as I said non-existent, but the energy required to field these hundreds of thousands of GPU’s is and no one is making a table of what is required to fuel these data centers because it is not on ‘their plate’ but the need for energy becomes real and really soon too. We do not have the surplus to take care of this and when places like Texas give us “Electricity demand is also going up, with much of it concentrated in Texas due to “data centers and cryptocurrency mining facilities,”” with the added “Driving the rise in wholesale prices next year is primarily a projected 45% increase at the Electric Reliability Council of Texas-North pricing hub. “Natural gas prices tend to be the biggest determinant of power prices,” the EIA said. “But in 2026, the increase in power prices in ERCOT tends to reflect large hourly spikes in the summer months due to high demand combined with relatively low supply in this region.”” Now this is not true for the whole world, but we see here a “projected 45% increase” and that is for 2026. So where are these data centers, what are their energy surpluses and what is to come? No one is looking at that, but when any data centre is hit with a brownout, or a partial and temporary drop in voltage in an electrical power supply. When that happens any data centre shuts down, energy is adamant for all its GPU’s and their better not we any issue with energy and I saw this a year ago, so why isn’t the media looking into this? I saw one article that that question was not answered and the media just shoved it aside, but as I see it, it should be on the forefront of any media setting. It will happen and the people will suffer, but as I see it (and mentioned) is that the media is whoring for digital dollars and they need their advertisement money from these 4 places and a few more, all ready for advertisement attention and the media plays ball because they want their digital dollars (as I personally see it).

So whilst the NPR article is quite nice, the one element missing is what makes this bubble rear its ugly head, because too many want their coins for their effort and it is what is required. But what does the audience require? And the audience is you an me dear reader. I have set a lot of my requirements to energy falling short, but there is only so much I can do and it is going to be 32 degrees (celsius) today, so what happens when the energy slows down for 5.56 million people in Sydney? Because the Data centers will make a first demand from their energy providers or they will slap a lawsuit worth billions on that energy provider. And we the people (wherever we are) are facing what comes next. Keeping data centers cool and powered whilst we the people boil in our own homes. As such that is the future I am predicting and people think I am wrong, but did they make the calculation of what these data centers require? Are they seeing the energy shortfalls that are impeding these data centers? And the energy providers will take the money and the contracts because it won’t coexist to this, but that is exactly what we are facing in the short run and the investors? Well, I don’t really care about them, they invested and if you aren’t willing to lose it all with a mere card to help you through (card below), you aren’t a real investor, you are merely playing it safe and in that world there are no bubbles.

Remind me, how did that end in 2008? The speculated cost were set to $16 trillion in U.S. household wealth, and this bubble is significantly larger than the 2008 one and this time they are going all in on money, most of them do not have. So that is what is coming and my fears do not matter, but the setting that NPR gives us all with ‘Here’s why concerns about an AI bubble are bigger than ever’ matters and that is what I see coming.

So have a great day and never trust one source, always verify what you read through other sources. That part was shown to be when we all see (from various sources) that “The United States is on track to lose $12.5 billion in international travel spending this year” whilst my calculations made it between 80 and 130 billion and some laughed at my predictions a few months earlier and I get that. I would laugh too when those ‘economics’ state one amount and I come with a number over 700% larger. I get that, but now (apparently) there is an Oxford economics report that gives us “Damning report says U.S. tourism faces $64 billion blow as Trump administration’s trade wars drive away foreign visitors and cut spending”, so I have that to chase down now, but it shows that my numbers were mostly spot on, at least a lot better than whatever those economics are giving you. So never trust merely one source even if they believe to be on the right track. But that is enough about that and consider why some bubble settings are underexposed and when you see that the NPR gave you three additional angles and missed mine (likely not intentional) consider what those investment firms are overseeing (likely intentional) because the setting that they are willing to lose 100% is ludicrous, they have settings for that and as the government bailed them out the last time, they think it will save them this time too.

Have a great day today, I need an ice cream at 4:30 in the morning. I still have some, so yay me.

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics, Science, Tourism

The Christmas sphere

Yup, we all go there, there is no holding us. Still it is not a setting that I would have guessed that the Republicans would enter (perhaps a small oversight on my part). It started on the October 9th 2024 when I wrote ‘Personal Perception’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2024/10/09/personal-perception/). Today, one of the coolest dudes I know from Uni (Thanks Yoshi) brought this to my attention (at https://www.theverge.com/2024/11/18/24300033/doj-google-monopoly-remedies-search-chrome-android-ai) where the Verge are giving us: ‘US lawyers will reportedly try to force Google to sell Chrome and unbundle Android’. Let me give you a small education. It happens in sports and n business. In uncertain times you keep your strongest players strong (example the Toronto Maple Leafs) and your businesses in pretty much the same order. As such there is an upside to all this (sort of). For Huawei Christmas comes early, as such, I personally believe It is up to Ren Zhengfei to get Merrick Garland (Attorney General of the United States) the hamper of all hampers this Christmas. (See below)

Fair is fair I think. With this sentiment the DoJ will hand mobile supremacy to Huawei and SymphonyOS on pretty much a global level. We are given (in the Verge) “Bloomberg reports that DOJ lawyers will try to break up Google’s search monopoly by targeting Chrome, Android, and AI Overviews.” And the supporting text “The Department of Justice is planning to ask for Google’s antitrust trial judge to force the company to sell off its Chrome browser after the judge ruled the company has maintained an illegal search monopoly, reports Bloomberg.”. It comes down to “Don’t underestimate the woke opponent population to destroy your their own army for you” It is the one reason Sun Tsu forgot to teach his generals among him (the silly bunny). 

As Google gets slammed left, right and in front of them by self centred greedy minded people We need to come to an understanding that Merrick Garland gave China the best Christmas present ever. In the first they took a slippery situation in 2019 to take resources and create Harmony OS and now it is its own solution away from Android and at present is available in 77 language for all 64-bit ARM, x86-64, RISC-V, LinxiISA systems. It is about the solution for smart systems and now as Google is about to be hobbled by its own justice system, the one global solution for nearly all parties. It is the one system that Apple feared, and it was partially secure knowing that Google could counter whatever Huawei could bring. That advantage is about to be gone. Ren Zhengfei had nothing to do but to await the American woke powers to be to become this stupid. And in the end the only America basically cut its own wrists right before the price fight. And that is merely part of it. You see our protection was “Finally, they will reportedly push for “a ban on the type of exclusive contracts that were at the center of the case against Google.”” You see it was not for Google, it was for the consumer who relied on stability and protection from the dangers in the mobile worlds, the scammers. I reckon that by 2026 the world needs to become aware of the scammer danger and by 2026 they get more easy access to mobile users all over the world. Google was our protection and I reckon that 2026 will become the year of Huawei (2025 might be a little too soon). And that also reverberates all over the Middle East. A more clear example is given by “In total, we estimate Google’s products support between 4.3 and 10.5 SAR billion a year in economic activity. Over the last five years, the economic activity driven by Google Search and Ads has grown by 189% in nominal terms” (source: anonymous, the mouse we all adore). With this as well as “Google launched a cloud region in Saudi Arabia in November 2023, located in Dammam. The company had been in discussions with Saudi oil firm Aramco about a data center joint venture since early 2018, and plans for a GCP region in Saudi were officially announced in late 2020” If Huawei gets to show pockets of inconsistency (something the DoJ is about to deliver) Google will have a much harder time and with that part out in the open Huawei will get almost easy access to the United Arab Emirates as well. Yup, that was what the DoJ accomplished, all for the good of Huawei. Suck to be radical and woke, doesn’t it?

In addition Bloomberg gave us “Google’s regulatory affairs VP, Lee-Anne Mulholland, said that the DOJ “continues to push a radical agenda that goes far beyond the legal issues in this case,”” gives me the sentiment that Lee-Anne Mulholland underestimated the ego of any woke mind to fumble a technology war. In other news, today I made a desperate attempt to something else and it brought me to the Canadian Consulate (in Sydny, a joke the Canadians will get). It was the most awesome experience ever. Never ever was I so happy to go to any Consulate, I actually left that place with the Christmas cheer in my heart. It took hours to make that feeling fade. 

So don’t think that I am all business (OK, I am all business at present). 

What does one have to do with the other? Nothing really, I just wanted to give you that Christmas cheer can be found in the most uncommon corners of the Universe (In this case in Australia).

So when you consider that the DoJ is pushing a radical agenda you need to consider why and more precise who does it profit. Because it is not the consumer and it is not Google. So consider that these actions are not seen in 2000 with Microsoft and with “the Circuit Court did not overturn Jackson’s findings of fact, and held that traditional antitrust analysis was not equipped to consider software-related practices like browser tie-ins”, now the setting changes. With this they enable Huawei to grab supremacy in all kinds of legal ways and it seemingly will hurt Google. So at that point what do you think will happen to Merrick Garland and his minions?  In those years Microsoft could play the games they did and now They are faced with Huawei and Tencent Holdings Ltd. And in this Pony Ma (Tencent) and Ren Zhengfei (Huawei) are about to get access to 1.8 billion consumers in a move that Google was unable to get. How is that for competitive laws? 

I reckon that the dust will settle around 2028 and the American ago will have to lick its wounds from that. Stupidity is about to end technological supremacy. I reckon they would have called me crazy around 2000. We only have to wait for the political ego to crush their own marbles. What a day.

Have a great day.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics, Science

Setting of the day

On a good day
The Khaleej Times Jost informed me on how a good day comes to pass. Here (at https://www.khaleejtimes.com/uae/meet-the-uae-police-officer-who-uncovered-183-money-laundering-cases-in-15-years) we are introduced to Major Saad Ahmed Al Marzooqi. 

The headline ‘Meet the UAE police officer who uncovered 183 money laundering cases in 15 years’. We are also given “He was recently appointed as the first Emirati member of the Financial Action Task Force’s (FATF) International Cooperation Review Team” and we can be mesmerised, or brag about his abilities, but the numbers imply that he slightly uncovered more than one case a month. There are plenty of police forces all over the world where half of these numbers would imply a stellar career. As we gawk over “exposed 183 money laundering cases that are related to drugs and financial embezzlement. He had also created a database of incidents, which contributed to an increase in convictions from a monthly average of 3 to 14” we need to realise that the increase of 3 to 14 implies that this one person achieved more than any average police station in Europe. 

This is the kind of man the world needs and that will be explained in the next article, because the universe relies on balance and the imbalance we are about to see takes the cake and changes an optional day to night.

On a bad day
Yes like any hero that needs a antagonist to make things interesting, we have Microsoft in two mentions. Now this isn’t directly involving anyone at Microsoft, but the follies are a setting that makes things a lot worse.

First we get Wired (at https://www.wired.com/story/microsoft-copilot-phishing-data-extraction/) who gives us ‘Microsoft’s AI Can Be Turned Into an Automated Phishing Machine’ we get to see “Attacks on Microsoft’s Copilot AI allow for answers to be manipulated, data extracted, and security protections bypassed, new research shows” which is not good, but anything positive can me mauled into a criminal jester for organised crime. The additional “Microsoft raced to put generative AI at the heart of its systems. Ask a question about an upcoming meeting and the company’s Copilot AI system can pull answers from your emails, Teams chats, and files—a potential productivity boon. But these exact processes can also be abused by hackers.

Today at the Black Hat security conference in Las Vegas, researcher Michael Bargury is demonstrating five proof-of-concept ways that Copilot, which runs on its Microsoft 365 apps, such as Word, can be manipulated by malicious attackers, including using it to provide false references to files, exfiltrate some private data, and dodge Microsoft’s security protections.” Now, I haven’t seen this, but Wired has a solid enough level of credibility to not ignore this. And that isn’t all. Bargury gives the world “the ability to turn the AI into an automatic spear-phishing machine. Dubbed LOLCopilot, the red-teaming code Bargury created can—crucially, once a hacker has access to someone’s work email” as I speculatively see it a mediocrity solution to turn the Internet of Things into a machine serving organised crime, optionally the NSA too, well done Microsoft. As I see it, the workload of Major Al Marzooqi would increase fivefold when this hits the open world, actually it already has if I understood the words from Michael Bargury correctly. In this, we optionally an even bigger problem, or at least a lot of corporations will.

You see there is a second message, in this case from Cyber Security News (at https://cybersecuritynews.com/microsoft-entra-id-vulnerability/). They give us ‘Microsoft Entra ID (Azure AD) Vulnerability Let Attackers Gain Global Admin Access’ with the subtext “Security researchers have uncovered vulnerabilities in Microsoft’s Entra ID (formerly Azure Active Directory) dubbed “UnOAuthorized” which could allow unauthorised actions beyond expected controls” Now take these two parts together and the phishing expedition could hit every R&D system on the planet using Azure. I am certain that Microsoft will have some patch coming soon, but in the meantime the bulk of R&D (under Azure) will be vulnerable and approachable by many hacker and especially organised crime, because selling secrets to competitors tends to be a lucrative setting and most corporations aren’t that finicky in acquiring something that raises (and assures) the bonuses of the members of their boardroom. OK, this is speculative on my side, but wonder what some will do to get the upper hand in business, especially if there is a bonus raise involved. 

I wish I had a solution, but my personal feeling is that Microsoft has too many holes, loops and a whole rage of other issues and switching to either AWS, IBM cloud or Google Cloud tends to be an essential first step coming to my mind. Now, if there are sceptics who think that I am anti-Microsoft here, they are probably right. Therefor the Links to the two articles were added letting you look at the stories yourself. In the meantime I remember a story in April and it should be my ‘duty’ to inform SAMI that ‘BAE Systems and Microsoft join forces to equip defence programmes with innovative cloud technology’ had a nice article and with the two articles mentioned, SAMI could lay its hands on a truckload of BAE IP. Not sure how far they will get, but free IP is the way to go I say. So when you realise that a large corporation like British Aerospace with all the civilian and military hardware can be accessed, what chances do you think that Novo Nordisk (Denmark), LVMH (France), ASML (Netherlands), SAP (Germany), Hermez (France), L’Oreal (France) have? I do not know if any uses Azure, but it is a good moment for them to select one of the other companies. They could after the event sue Microsoft for damages, but Delta Airlines is already suing CrowdStrike and I am not sure how that will go. In the end it is my personal opinion that this could potentially bite Microsoft hard and it is one of the reasons I do not let them near my IP.

As I personally see it, the companies racing the be the first to launch their (fake) AI will now have a much larger impact. There were already fake data issues, but now the phishing options that are mentioned and when that gets linked to what Cyber Security News calls “UnOAuthorized” the entire IT game changes dramatically and I have no idea how that will play out. 

As my Sunday is almost over and Vancouver only just started there’s a chance we postulate that the next 72 hours will be an interesting one. Have a lovely day (when you are not on Azure).

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Military, Science

When does it become a lie?

That is the question. It is not as simple as it sounds and I understand that. But here we are, the BBC gives us an article. I almost passed it, but then I saw something that didn’t read right, so I dug a little deeper. Their disadvantage was that I had just read up on several cases for material, so I reopened it and it is time to give you the fruits of my labour.

The BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy9eegg0rdvo) gives us ‘What could Google monopoly ruling mean for you?’. Well that is an open question but let me run you through the elements. 

The US said Google was currently paying firms like Apple huge amounts of money each year to be pre-installed as the default search engine on their devices or platforms”. OK, so this is a business proposition. Apple decided that the benefits of Google in their systems would help them in numerous ways and Google was willing to pay this. It was a price for services.

It comes with the repetitive quote “Apple’s Safari browser for example uses Google by default” what the BBC is not giving us is the offset that Apple would have to endure and they were getting $20,000,000,000 as a bandaid, if I got that kind of money I would say “Google slap me silly”. Now we get the parts that matter, it start with “Something that’s easier to imagine is some kind of choice screen, where people opening a browser for the first time are asked whether they’d like to use Google or an alternative like Microsoft’s Bing” This is hilarious. I have had first experience with Bing. Bing influencers were HIJACKING my search and pushing it through Bing. It took me days to undo that damage. Choosing between a bully and Google is not much of a choice. To put it mildly “Google has a 91% marketshare, Bing has 3.86%, where do you get the most bang for YOUR buck?” In this simple setting Google comes out on top EVERY time. And a secondary setting is that Bing has been around for 15 years. It isn’t just that Google is better, Bing has yet to show any level of pure innovation in searches. Microsoft lacks data, innovation and proper etiquette on search engines. 

Now we get to the issue I had, which starts with “Back in 1999, Microsoft found itself in a very similar situation to where Google is now.” You see, Netscape faced new competition from OmniWeb and Microsoft’s Internet Explorer 1.0, it continued to dominate the market in 1995 and beyond. In 1997 Netscape had 72% marketshare. That is, until Microsoft switch off the proverbial oxygen to Netscape and whilst the IE was free for all (it was installed with Windows 95), thing went south in several ways for Netscape and the one ‘ruler’ in those days became Microsoft with its Internet Explorer. Google released its browser in 2008. As such (as I see it) Microsoft wasted 10 years and within 2 years nearly everyone was using Google Chrome. They overwhelmed everyone with innovations. They released Chrome v9 in 2011 and Chrome v17 in 2012. What did Microsoft do? Nada, nothing, zip, zilch. In 2012, responding to Chrome’s popularity, Apple discontinued Safari for Windows, making it exclusively available on OS X (source: ubuntu life) . So here is the first setting. Apple made an educated choice. Create your own and reinvent the wheel or select the wheel maker of choice. Even at this point we need to recognise that Microsoft’s star was faltering and falling. That was then. Now there is a different setting. Then it was which American company gets the cake. Now it is different, China is now a much larger participant. They caught up with the US and even now the UAE and Saudi Arabia are massively catching up with America. They decide to waste the time of Google on trivial matters whilst calling it “monopolising” stating that the others should be given a ‘fair’ share. In this day and age it is handing the handling of the commerce horse to China and all the good it will do the American commerce. Small hint, it will not. 

There really more issues with Microsoft and particular with Edge and particularly Daniel Aleksandersen, who called this “clearly a user-hostile move that sees Windows compromise its own product usability in order to make it more difficult to use competing products.” There are issues with edge as Douglas J. Leith, a computer science professor from Trinity College, Dublin, Microsoft Edge is among the least private browsers. He explained, “from a privacy perspective Microsoft Edge is much more worrisome than the other browsers studied. These two quotes are on different sides of edge. But in aggregating these quotes it is my distinct believe that if Google Search is broken up, the American Department of Justice will receive roses from nearly every big organised crime syndicate. It is a mere believe I have, but after having suffered the edge bullies hijacking my browser and inserting edge ad a search engine against my wishes is the beginning of much more. The Verge accused edge of “spyware tactics”, a setting we have never seen Google use (speculation by me). In this day and age of commerce, the economy and data security you want to play with Google? I think that is a really bad idea.

Enjoy today, it is now midweek, the run to the weekend starts…….now.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Media, Science

The misaligned cogs

This is a little hard. I just read an article on the Military hacks by North Korea, it doesn’t fit. Let me explain with a little time line.

2012
The Dutch had a press tour in North Korea. The Koreans confiscated temporary their camera’s and the Dutch were howling with laughter, they still had their iPhones and Android equivalents. They kept on filming. The Korean officers had no idea what a smartphone was, as such the Dutch had all the footage.

2014
Sony get hacked and soon thereafter we get all kinds of ‘leaked’ information. In addition within a year (I have no specific date) we get an amalgamated

The FBI later clarified more details of the attacks, attributing them to North Korea by noting that the hackers were “sloppy” with the use of proxy IP addresses that originated from within North Korea. At one point the hackers logged into the Guardians of Peace Facebook account and Sony’s servers without effective concealment. FBI Director James Comey stated that Internet access is tightly controlled within North Korea, and as such, it was unlikely that a third party had hijacked these addresses without allowance from the North Korean government. The National Security Agency assisted the FBI in analysing the attack, specifically in reviewing the malware and tracing its origins; NSA director Admiral Michael S. Rogers agreed with the FBI that the attack originated from North Korea. A disclosed NSA report published by Der Spiegel stated that the agency had become aware of the origins of the hack due to their own cyber-intrusion on North Korea’s network that they had set up in 2010, following concerns of the technology maturation of the country.

The sources were the New York Times, Times magazine, The verge and CNBC. I had issues with the release of information, but my issues were speculative and based on the Dutch field trip to Korea

2017
In ‘The Good, the Bad, and North Korea’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2017/09/30/the-good-the-bad-and-north-korea/) I wrote “I got this photo from a CNN source, so the actual age was unknown, yet look at the background, the sheer antiquity that this desktop system represents. In a place where the President of North Korea should be surrounded by high end technology, we see a system that seems to look like an antiquated Lenovo system, unable to properly play games from the previous gaming generation, and that is their high technology?” This is my second opposition. Between 2012 and 2017 they had apparently gained the ability to produce their own smartphone. This is realistic.

2024
Now we get “North Korean hackers have conducted a global cyber espionage campaign to try to steal classified military secrets to support Pyongyang’s banned nuclear weapons programme, the United States, Britain and South Korea said in a joint advisory on Thursday.

The hackers, dubbed Anadriel or APT45 by cybersecurity researchers, have targeted or breached computer systems at a broad variety of defence or engineering firms, including manufacturers of tanks, submarines, naval vessels, fighter aircraft, and missile and radar systems, the advisory said” (at https://www.reuters.com/world/north-korean-hackers-are-stealing-military-secrets-us-allies-say-2024-07-25/).

My issue (still speculation) is two fold. In the first we get to se that the Sony Hack was apparently not North Korea, but the Guardians of peace (the Lazarus group). We see references to “links to” and a small byte that they are “Originally a criminal group”. It is my speculation that these criminal ‘masterminds’ are either Russian or Chinese. They cater to North Korea as it allows them to act freely and I would expect them to share whatever intel they get with North Korea.

Even if these formerly known criminals were behind this setting, the whole picture doesn’t add up. I reckon that we all work at our own speed, however when we see Reuters give us “one elite group of North Korean hackers had successfully breached systems at NPO Mashinostroyeniya, a rocket design bureau based in Reutov, a small town on the outskirts of Moscow.” I do not debunk that setting, but over the timeline I have seen (many might have seen it), it is possible that this last statement is a smokescreen. Was it breached or were the Russians willing to hand over that ‘victory’ to make them sound more of a threat? In addition when we see “The hackers, dubbed Anadriel or APT45 by cybersecurity researchers, have targeted or breached computer systems at a broad variety of defence or engineering firms, including manufacturers of tanks, submarines, naval vessels, fighter aircraft, and missile and radar systems” I mostly worry about the state of cyber security at our own shores. That they get breached by China or Russia is understandable, They are on par in technology with us. North Korea is not. It is like a hacker with an 80282 AT computer, a processor from 1982 coming up to a server with a Xeon processor stating ‘gimme your data’ It is like a swimmer slamming a great white shark with a BB gun. Utterly ineffective. That is merely the hardware, These hackers would have lacked at least a decade of hacking skills. The NSA and GCHQ would be running circles around them. No, I believe that this is another player making North Korea their patsy. 

Now consider that all (or some) of my speculations are wrong. I get that, this is realistically possible, we still get the stage that the time line doesn’t fit. It is like going from an Apricot PC, to an IBM Q System One in a little over 7 years, without the required resources mind you. The other, more realistic, option is that defence and engineering firms have made a booboo and failed their cyber security requirements and now all avenues are racing to hide these facts. 

Can North Korea get to this point? Yes, that is possible, but it seems to me that ‘western’ criminals are using that place to hide their actions and loot whatever they can, whilst they part time hack into places and hand these secrets over to North Korea. OK, I am still speculating. However, remember that building in Russia filled with hackers? Russian forces had to intervene there. It seems to me that these hackers would like another place to work from. It doesn’t make China innocent either. They might have the same issues and these hackers also need a place to work from. In this story, I merely come to the speculated conclusion that the term ‘North Korean Hacker’ is almost an newly seen oxymoron. 

In all this the cogs are not aligned. In 1776 native American Indians got their hands on rifles. It took time to get good with them. In 1877 Satsuma Rebellion, led by Saigo Takamori faced Japanese forces with modern weapons, it took them time to adequately use these weapons. With the complexity of a system the time line expands. The timeline expands even more when excellence of a system is required. As such I feel that these technology skills do not fit the abilities of the North Koreans. But that is merely my point of view.

Have a great Friday, another 150 minutes until I have breakfast.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Media, Military, Science

The students of Mediocrates

This is the setting I found myself in. Early this morning (0r late last night) I wrote ‘War never Changes’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2023/10/29/war-never-changes/). It was several hours after that when I got a message from JB-Hifi who was flogging the Microsoft laptop ‘Surface Laptop Studio 2’ and I decided to search on some reviews. I knew nothing of this device and soon enough I understood why. The Verge gives us ‘Surface Laptop Studio 2 review: this could be so much more’ with the byline “Microsoft’s new Surface Laptop Studio 2 has new chips, a new touchpad, and a very, very high price tag”, the review was given to the people on October 4th (world animal day no less) and there we see “there’s the biggest problem for the Surface at this price, which is that its battery life is not anywhere near what Apple can offer. I only averaged four hours and 19 minutes of continuous use out of this device with Battery Saver on” as such this battery is a lot less then what the MacBook Air gave us in 2020, the new MacBook Air is even better. More importantly it loses 7 out of 8 tests against the MacBook Air with a M2 processor. I was horrified that it took Microsoft 47% longer to export 4K video. That is nothing less than a joke. The larger issue isn’t this, it is that Intel just announced its “Meteor Lake” CPU generation, and we expect to see those laptops roll out around December. I have no idea how Microsoft stacks up against that puppy, but I fear the worst for Microsoft.

You see, we get that not every laptop is a given for everyone, I am fine with that. Yet to rely on an I7 processor implies you need a sturdy battery to begin with and that one is missing from the get go.

This is the larger setting of Microsoft, wanting to be in a race merely to compete, never to win it. They lost 6 times over already and they are losing more. How much longer before the Microsoft sycophants give up on the brand? Microsoft always had competitors (Asus, Apple, Dell, HP) and now Intel is in a position to surpass them as well. That is the problem with Microsoft, they aren’t in it to win it. They can claim whatever they want, yet when you get “Unfortunately, the Studio 2’s benchmark scores were underwhelming. Don’t get me wrong: it’s certainly an improvement over the OG Studio. Whether exporting in Premiere or running Tomb Raider, it is faster. But these are far from the best numbers you’ll see among premium workstations today.” To be labelled underwhelming is a problem. They shouted for the longest time that their console was the most powerful in the world and within 2 years it was surpassed by the weakest console of them all (Nintendo Switch) and I am about to hand 50 million potential customers (in phase one) to another vendor (preferably Amazon).

Microsoft is now the favourite corporation to end up with the wooden spoon (dead last in a race). They lost against so many (see previous article for names) and now we see that Intel and Tencent Technologies are potential better players too.
It puts Microsoft on a sliding scale of revenue. It needs to get $4 billion in interest alone on current loans and when their so called mountain of revenue dwindles down because they are losing too many places where they are in the top 2 it becomes awkward and disappointing on several levels. This is the setting I spoke about yesterday and some still call me delusional. Not to worry, the facts are out there and the Verge (at https://www.theverge.com/23900932/microsoft-surface-laptop-studio-2-2023-intel-review) added to the hardship of Microsoft. 

When you get quotes like “right now is a particularly not-great time to be buying a horrendously expensive 13th Gen laptop” especially when the 14th gen laptops are being released next month before Christmas. Then we get “the current Surface Laptop Studio is an okay convertible. For its price, it should be more than that”, as I see it it is Mediocrates all over again. He was the man famous for “Meh, good enough” and in IT that just doesn’t hold the mustard. If there is an upside then it would be the design and the screen. All these parts that I saw looked pretty spectacular. But does that warrant the $3,499.99 price-tag? I personally don’t believe so, but others might feel differently on that. It seemingly has more options to connect and that is good, but as stated lacks a full SD slot. That is an issue I had with the Lenovo Chromebook 5 years ago, but that thing was $349, for $3K more I expect better and the lack of a full slot tends to have other issues when working in laptop mode, but I will agree that could merely be me.

So on Sunday I learn that Microsoft still worships Mediocrates, not a good setting to be in, not at all.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT

Are they really?

I have had my issues with Microsoft for the longest of times and for the most I never cared, that was until they decided to mess with the serenity of gamers. At that point I became livid and I made mention of this as late as yesterday (read: previous article). Then I saw a piece by the Verge and I had to let that sink in. The article (at https://www.theverge.com/2023/8/30/23851902/microsoft-bing-popups-windows-11-malware) comes from writer (Tom Warren). He is a senior editor covering Microsoft, PC gaming, console, and tech. He founded WinRumors, a site dedicated to Microsoft news, before joining The Verge in 2012. He still looks like a teenager in the photo, so he might want to update that one. Even as the article starts with “I thought I had malware on my main Windows 11 machine this weekend. There I was minding my own business in Chrome before tabbing back to a game and wham a pop-up appeared asking me to switch my default search engine to Microsoft Bing in Chrome. Stunningly, Microsoft now thinks it’s ok to shove a pop-up in my face above my apps and games just because I dare to use Chrome instead of Microsoft Edge.” I reckon that Microsoft has been desperate for a while and I had my issues with sicofans pushing edge in my Google search issues, but now we get that Microsoft is on that same page. So when we get to “We are aware of these reports and have paused this notification while we investigate and take appropriate action to address this unintended behaviour,” says Caitlin Roulston, director of communications, in a statement to The Verge.” As such it is the same BS spin we have seen too often before. As I personally see it, a pop-up is not unintended behaviour. It is the mark of intent, as such how does ‘investigate’ fit? Is it their way of trying to ascertain how far they can go with these actions? Well, when you lose a match 5 times over (see previous article) that sense of desperation seems on point, not correct, but on point. You see, I wrote this before and I do not mind repeating this. I foresee Microsoft collapsing in 2026. It is still a fair bit away, but when the 5 lost battles also gets a new player on the field (Tencent Technologies) and that combination invokes close to 15% of the global population going somewhere else. How much damage will Microsoft endure? How much more damage will Microsoft spin until the banks start to catch on and even as we see reports that they only have a debt of $60,000,000,000 (which is not much compared to their revenue). The setting of losses across several industries imply that Microsoft will have to prune their corporate tree no later then next year, not doing so implies (implies is not a given) that 221,000 employees will have an impact on the total revenue and that is about to become a shifty one. 

You see if that was not on the premise of shifty, Microsoft would not resort to pop-ups telling people what to do (they will call it politely giving consideration to change). It took me some time to undo the unrequested changes that Microsoft minded people did to my laptop, as such I reckon that these pop-ups have larger impacts all over the field. How far it goes is unknown, because the media is too unwilling to look into matters. Microsoft is too large an advertisement account to unsettle (a personal issue I faced in 2012 with Sony), but it applies to all advertisers and now we see how filtered information works. When I seek (in Google) “Microsoft pop-up news” I get three hits, the Verge is one of them. None of the news media picked it up for any reason. Weird that.

The Verge also gives us “This isn’t Microsoft’s first rodeo, either. I’m growing increasingly frustrated by the company’s methods of getting people to switch from Google and Chrome to Bing and Edge. Microsoft has been using a variety of prompts for years now, with pop-ups appearing inside Chrome, on the Windows taskbar, and elsewhere. Microsoft has even forced people into Edge after a Windows Update, and regularly presents a full-screen message to switch to Bing and Edge after updates.” And this is before they hit the upcoming hard times. So when you consider that Microsoft has become the bully of IT, how much longer before you consider switching away from Windows? To Linux of Mac? 

And after all this, you should wonder how come the media is avoiding this issue. Why the media is just ignoring the bullied plight of millions, because that is what this amounts to and this is far from over. So when we consider that Edge’s is 8.1% on desktop and just 0.1% on mobile (another lost battle) and with Bing having a marketshare of 3.02%, which implies yet another battle lost. How many losses will Microsoft endure before considering to refocus on strengths. You see they are slowly losing the office market share too. So you still think that my predicted downfall of Microsoft around 2026 was a jest? How many times does any army need to lose before it is regarded as a has-been and now seen as a joke?

I let you figure that one out, but consider that their only asset is the ability to spin, how far will that get them? 

Enjoy the weekend.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Media

Two items

Yes, there are two items that are on the mind of may people. One is directly on the mind of many and as I stated in ‘Utter insanity’ on October 4th a lot of impact will be seen and the poor will get the brunt of that impact. As I see it, there is a lot that will be going wrong and even as the US Democrats are hiding behind the media slogans like ‘Biden: Republicans playing ‘Russian roulette’ with US economy over debt ceiling’, we better catch on quick. This issue is not now, it has been going on for over a decade, too much spending, no exit strategy and upping the debt every time and this has been going on since the Presidents George W Bush, Barack Obama, Donald Trump and President Joe Biden were in office. From 2001 the debt want from $6 trillion until now as it is $28 trillion. I will agree that President Biden got a really bad hand and he inherited the debt, but so did Obama and Trump. George W Bush had Afghanistan and Iraq in consequence to what happened in New York which was not on him, but ALL these presidents had the option to overhaul the Tax system and NONE of them did so, this pox is on BOTH the Republican and the Democrat houses. A budget that was there to enable big business and media but none acted over well over 20 years, so this is on more. In this Bill Clinton was the one who left the budget was in surplus so his inaction has a decent acceptable excuse. And now the Republicans say enough is enough, I cannot fault them for that. As I showed the Defence department wasted $30-$45 billion on TWO PROJECTS, two projects that does not meet the bare minimum but we go on paying those wasting the funds. Why is that? And the lack of adjusting Tax laws, not to tax the rich, but the setting of justly tax ALL. An optional setting that as offered to them in 1998, but they were eager to state that it was too hard. Now consider the Google Ads system that properly (and decently) charges the advertiser and not greedy grab the advertiser like the advertisement  agencies did for decades. So it was not that hard, was it?

And as we now see the need to ‘overhaul’ the Senate rules to end the amendment of the ‘filibuster’, a stage that has been there for a long time is now regarded by the Democrats as too hard to handle. I am not the voice for against that decision, yet consider that THEY TOO would not overhaul the tax system when it was in their administration, so is it fair? And in all this Wall Street is giving whatever ‘free’ advice the media is willing to listen to, they are so scared now. 

What was issue two?
It cones from a different corner. When the BBC gave us ‘Princess Haya: Dubai ruler had ex-wife’s phone hacked – UK court’ 8 hours ago (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-58814978) I saw “The High Court has found that the ruler of Dubai, Sheikh Mohammed Al Maktoum, interfered with British justice by ordering the hacking of the phone of his ex-wife, Princess Haya of Jordan. The phones of her solicitors, Baroness Fiona Shackleton QC and Nick Manners, were also targeted during their divorce custody case, according to the court”, it took a few second (approximately 7.1) and my mind raced. You see the media is a nice source to use given information against them. You see, The Verge gave us on July 23rd (at https://www.theverge.com/22589942/nso-group-pegasus-project-amnesty-investigation-journalists-activists-targeted) ‘NSO’s Pegasus spyware: here’s what we know. In that article we get “NSO Group’s CEO and co-founder Shalev Hulio broadly denied the allegations, claiming that the list of numbers had nothing to do with Pegasus or NSO. He argued that a list of phone numbers targeted by Pegasus (which NSO says it doesn’t keep, as it has “no insight” into what investigations are being carried out by its clients) would be much shorter”, It is the setting of “has “no insight” into what investigations are being carried out by its clients” against the setting that the BBC gives us which is “referred to the hacking as “serial breaches of (UK) domestic criminal law”, “in violation of fundamental common law and ECHR rights”, “interference with the process of this court and the mother’s access to justice” and “abuse of power” by a head of government”, we can agree with the point of view, but where is the evidence? The NSO stated that it does not keep any, so what is the source and the foundation of the evidence? The link the BBC gives us the judgment (at https://www.judiciary.uk/judgments/al-maktoum-judgments/) yet there I see in the reference for the Hacking fact finding part:

i. The mobile phones of the mother, two of her solicitors (Baroness Shackleton and Nicholas Manners), her Personal Assistant and two members of her security staff have been the subject of unlawful surveillance during the course of the present proceedings and at a time of significant events in those proceedings.

ii. The surveillance has been carried out by using software licensed to the Emirate of Dubai or the UAE by the NSO Group.

iit. The surveillance has been carried out by servants or agents of the father, the Emirate of Dubai or the UAE.

iv. The software used for this surveillance included the capacity to track the target’s location, the reading of SMS and email messages and other messaging apps, listening to telephone calls and accessing the target’s contact lists, passwords, calendars and photographs. It would also allow recording of live activity and taking of screenshots and pictures.

Yet in all this, how was this evidence obtained? The findings rely on the setting stated by Baroness Hale, which is fair enough and she stated “In this country we do not require documentary proof. We rely heavily on oral evidence, especially from those who were present when the alleged events took place. Day after day, up and down the country, on issues large and small, judges are making up their minds whom to believe. They are guided by many things, including the inherent probabilities, any contemporaneous documentation or records, any circumstantial evidence tending to support one account rather than the other, and their overall impression of the characters and motivations of the witnesses.” Here I have a problem. Not the setting that Baroness Hale states, it applies for many cases and I would support this, yet in this technology the problem is that even those deep into this technology do not completely understand what they face. When we look at sources all over, we see a former intelligence officer from Germany who cannot state that Huawei is a danger, because their technology people do not comprehend it. We see source after source flaming the NSO group issues but they are flaming and even those sources are debated as it refers to sources from 2016, long before the Pegasus group had the software it deploys now. If we accept the words by Baroness Hale “We rely heavily on oral evidence, especially from those who were present when the alleged events took place” yet what happens when that witness the average normal person, how can that person give credibility to neural surgery? It is the same, a stage where the media relied on flaming and keeping people off balance, how can a person who does not comprehend technology be given the credibility that this court has? And should the court disregard the influence the media has, they merely need to see connected contributory manslaughter Martin Bashir was a part of, as I personally see it, his actions resulted in the path that led to the death of Lady Diana Spencer. 

In this I support “the court’s findings were based on evidence that was not disclosed to him, and that they were “made in a manner which was unfair””, I will take it one step further, if the submitted evidence is held to the cold light of day, its value will be debatable on a few levels. So when we consider “Dr William Marczak, who is based in California and is a senior research fellow at the University of Toronto’s Citizen Lab, which researches digital surveillance. He told the court he had no doubt the phones were hacked using NSO’s Pegasus software. He also concluded “with high confidence” that the phones were hacked by a single operator in a nation state. He concluded with medium confidence that it was most unlikely to be any state other than the UAE.” In this we saw the CIA with their “with high confidence” and I wonder hat it is based on. I am not attacking Dr William Marczak, there is no reason to, but when you consider “with medium confidence that it was most unlikely to be any state other than the UAE”, so he is not completely certain, he is decently certain that someone did it, but there is no evidence (aka he cannot swear) that it was the UAE, feel free to read the settings and the statements, it could have been anyone, if the evidence holds up to scrutiny and that pert is also a part I am not certain of. You see when we see “A senior member of NSO’s management team called Mrs Blair from Israel on 5 August 2020 to inform her that “it had come to their attention that their software may have been misused to monitor the mobile phones of Baroness Shackleton and HRH Princess Haya” and we hold it up to the interview in The Verge on July 23rd with Shalev Hulio we see conflicts, conflicts of optional evidence by the same source, why is that?

These are the two Items that were bugging me to some extent and as my mind is racing towards another TV series stage (it will be the third my mind designs) I wonder what the eager bored mind is able to contemplate. So as we wonder what drove the judgement (no negativity implied), I see too many strings going from one place to another and they might be just in my mind (the place between ones ears) but too much evidence does not make sense, in both stages offered and the media took centre stage to both, and the media is the weakest link of credibility, that has been personally proven a few times over.

1 Comment

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

The same gramophone

It started over a month ago with ‘From horse to course’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2021/07/23/from-horse-to-course/) there we saw the attack and the debatability on some of the presented evidence. Today we see (at https://www.theguardian.com/news/2021/sep/15/eu-poised-to-tighten-privacy-laws-after-pegasus-spyware-scandal) ‘EU commissioner calls for urgent action against Pegasus spyware’ and it would make sense, until we get to “The investigation was based on forensic analysis of phones and analysis of a leaked database of 50,000 numbers”, so in well over a month there are no top-line statistics? The list was attacked by a few well over a month ago, but here we see the Guardian, specifically Daniel Boffey hash over the same stage with nothing to show for it, so is he what some might call ‘a fucking tool’ for stakeholders or a wannabe journalist? Consider that we pretty much get the same details we saw in my article and these parts came from the BBC and the Guardian’s own article from last July. That article gave us “NSO has said Macron was not a “target” of any of its customers, meaning the company denies he was selected for surveillance using its spyware, saying in multiple statements that it requires its government clients to use its powerful spying tools only for legitimate investigations into terrorism or crime”, so whilst we now see “analysis of a leaked database of 50,000 numbers, including that of the French president, Emmanuel Macron, and European Council president, Charles Michel”. So did Daniel forget to do his homework or was he acting on the needs of a stakeholder? I actually do not know, hence I ask here. The largest failing is that the Guardian gives us some emotional charged article and no homework was done, there is no top-line on the nations involved with the 50,000 phone numbers. All whilst I also showed (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2021/07/28/retry-or-retrial/) a few days later when The Verge got involved that 50,000 numbers imply a cost of no less than $400,000,000 which is still not looked at, so why is the Guardian (BBC too) this unable to perform? In that article ‘Retry or retrial?’ We see the Verge giving us “The Washington Post says that the list is from 2016” and that journalist no one cares about was still alive. A setting that is seemingly overlooked by TWO news organisations and none of them vetted information through a top-line which is what I would have done first. So how many of these numbers are EU numbers? How many are in France, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Germany or Sweden? In over a month neither newsagent got that part done and if the Verge is to be believed the 2016 list without a top-line shows newsagents to be massively incompetent. 

Added here we see the added part “A consortium of 17 media outlets, including the Guardian, revealed in July that global clients of the Israeli surveillance firm NSO Group had used hacking software to target human rights activists, journalists and lawyers”, that part negated is that the NSO group is a service branch towards governments on the tracking of criminals and terrorists. This caper costs a government “$500,000 for an extra 50 phones” (source: The Verge) all whilst the entire list represents a minimum value of $400 million. So which governments spend that much on these numbers and when you consider that it was a list of governments, we see additional info that the leaked list is a fictive list, there is no leak that hands the phone lists of all these governments and that is before we consider that one number might be on several lists. Consider that both Macron and Johnson want to know where Merkel gets her lingerie (ha ha ha). OK, that was a funny, but the setting is valid, there is a genuine need for several governments to keep track of a person and when we consider that I could have made a top-line within a week (depending on how the data looks) why did the Guardian and the BBC not succeed? Why do they not have any reference to the leaked list being a 2016 list? 

Also in the end we see the Guardian give us “NSO says it “does not operate the systems that it sells to vetted government customers, and does not have access to the data of its customers’ targets”” when we consider that we see more debatable sides to a list of 50,000, we see the lack of actions for well over a month (almost 2 months) and at no stage do we see any clear allegations against any government apart for some mention of Hungary, all whilst the top-line results could have pointed the finger at someone. Do you actually believe that the UAE or Saudi Arabia have any interest in a Dutch Human rights activist? At the prices that the NSO charges, I very much doubt it. 

So here I stand asking the Guardian (and specifically Daniel Boffey) what on earth do you think you are doing? Who are you serving, because the lack of evidence and lack of clear verifiable data implies you are not doing this for the readers, if that were true the article would have looked very different.

2 Comments

Filed under IT, Media, Military, Politics, Science