Tag Archives: Twitter

It is the same coin

I got alerted to something via Twitter. It has two sides and a friend of mine had one side, as such I give you the tweet below. This of course made me look at the YouTube by Simon Pegg (the Hot Fuzz man). 

He was emotional and he has a point, but so does my friend. Optionally they do not realise that they are both a side of the same coin, one cannot exist without the other. It is a flaw in those heralding science as the one solution, it never is. It merely becomes some Theranos creation, all science and too much of it debatable. You see my friend had the answer in her tweet. Alan Turing created something from nothing. A setting that is utterly impossible. He got there through an artsy side in him. Alan Turing created the foundations of computers and AI, both required an art element to get there. You see, even when we realise it was all science, his brain had to make some leap of faith and that requires art, science alone will not let you do that. He created these two and his foundation of AI is still used today, over half a century later, with all the elements of evolved science, his artsy side overcame what did not yet exist. It is one of the reasons that (even if I was not eligible), I would have voted for Brian Blessed to become Chancellor of Cambridge in 2011, but I was not eligible. It became Lord Sainsbury of Turville, my issue here is that science was taking too big a chunk of what was almost an even Steven setting. I personally believe that Science without art is pointless, art without science is useless. It is not completely true, but as an axiom it often works. Science without art cannot grow because science for the most relies on previous data and as such NEW technologies cannot evolve. Alan Turing created (for the most) the foundations of electronics. It required investigations into the electron as well, but when you see that Alan Turing created AI half a century before we had any partial foundation of that is optionally evidence enough. 

The other side needs to be illuminated as well. Simon Pegg did this (at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHEpywFCtwA) in his own emotional way and he does have a point, but so did my friend. The artsy people tend to ignore that science is their friend. Take any movie, the lights are set up to maximise the effect, it is not art, that foundation is science, science created the camera and a lot of other parts. They use that technology and they use it well. But it supports art and that is forgotten. That being said that children need maths, but they need art too and the science pushers are all about ‘forgetting’ the art and that power. You see, if you have all science and no art, you end up creating Theranos minded creators. The ones that are convicted for fraud and end up well over 11 years in prison. Art might have prevented this (and created an actual solution). In that same setting it might be the flaw that created FTX and the $33,000,000,000 losses it ensued. 

I myself tend to grasp back to an old Market research credo. “The scientist, or mathematician will show you the course of best margins of profit, or best results. The presenter, or politician makes sure that you look forward to the attached invoice” it is a bit artsy but therefor not any less true. We need to realise that art and science are to sides of the same coin. Science made it circular and the artsy people gave it a nice image. We need another and there is one part we should all agree to, if Rishi Sunak wants to imbue a sense of science, he better be ready to imbue an equal measure of art in these people, because Simon Pegg is right about that part. Science without the art will have far reaching negative impacts. We need one another to see it, one shows us, one presents it and that has been the case from before that writer William Shakespeare became a reality. It goes back all the way to the outdoor Theatre of Dionysius where in 500BC Sophocles, Euripides, Aeschylus, and Aristophanes performed, but we forget that science created the stage for over 15,000 people to enjoy, that part was science, not art. And it was there centuries before Christianity became reality.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics, Science

BBC to the whatever

There was an issue from the start. I had reported on it before, so I initially decided to let it go. Yet then I remembered something. It is time to hold the BBC like other papers accountable for their fuck ups, and that includes the BBC as a media outlet. So lets take a look at the article (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-64109777) giving us ‘Twitter in data-protection probe after ‘400 million’ user details up for sale’. You see, it might be about Twitter but it is larger then Twitter. The first instance is “Ireland’s Data Protection Commission (DPC) says it “will examine Twitter’s compliance with data-protection law in relation to that security issue”. Twitter has not commented on the claim.” The second part is “The data is said to include phone numbers and emails, including those belonging to celebrities and politicians, but the purported size of the haul is not confirmed. Only a small “sample” has so far been made public.” Wo far it is very neat, the extent of lack of mentions is also a lot more clear. You see there are two issues. When it was gotten and how it was gotten (the how is given to some extent later on). There is a setting emerging, but I will mention it soon. Then we get “data of US Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was included in the sample of data published by the hacker. The data of broadcaster Piers Morgan, who recently had his Twitter account hacked, is also reported to be included. Twitter has so far not responded to press inquiries about the claimed breach. Chief executive Elon Musk did not reply to a tweeted request for comment from leading cyber-security reporter Brian Krebs – though the breach, as Mr Krebs notes, probably occurred before the Tesla boss took over.” The first gem is here. It is “probably occurred before the Tesla boss took over” and another stage where the media should have held Jack Dorsey to account, but it could not be bothered to do their bloody jobs. The media is showing to be as useless as a silent politician without the limelights. Then we get “While acknowledging the amount of data taken had not been verified, the firm’s chief technology officer, Alon Gal, told the BBC a number of clues appeared to support the hacker’s claim. The data did not appear to have been copied from an earlier breach in which details were published from 5.4 million Twitter accounts, Mr Gal said. Only 60 emails out of the sample of 1,000 provided by the hacker in the earlier incident appeared, “so we are confident that this breach is different and significantly bigger”, he said.

There are all kinds of issues here, but the fact that there is an earlier breach gives a larger rise that the media should have looked at the fares of Jack Dorsey, but they ignore that part. I wonder what Jack Dorsey has on the media, because that is the only part that makes sense to me. And there is no reliability with ‘Only 60 emails out of the sample of 1,000 provided by the hacker in the earlier incident appeared’ which is at best merely an alleged side of the matter. There are heaps of other sides (like alternative email address) but there remains an issue. Was it the same hack? There might not be reliable information there, so Jack Dorsey is back in the frame. But the media keeps him intentionally out, on at least 5 events and that is worrisome. That they report now makes sense, but the earlier absence of reporting does not and they pushed for a stage where Elon Musk paid well over twice the amount he should have, and the media is no longer a trustworthy institution, no matter what they claim on their websites. 

So when we see ““Ryushi” has said that it exploited a problem with a system that lets computer programmes connect with Twitter to compile the data. Twitter fixed the weakness in the system in 2022. But the flaw is also believed to have been used in the earlier breach affecting more than five million accounts.” There are several issues here, but the fact that it was fixed in 2022 indicates that he became the owner on October 27, 2022. That gives the hack 8 weeks at best and even shorter if it was fixed, as such there is another issue and the BBC is not clean on mentioning it and even less on the responsibilities by Jack Dorsey and that too is on the BBC (and other media). 

My issue with the article is that is was so cleanly written, to keep names out of it and to make sure that nothing hits Jack Dorsey, why not? They never had that issue before, so something is up and it is time the media is seen as the untrustworthy source it has been for too long. But I reckon they will decide not to do so and make claims to IPSO that they can police themselves. In the meantime there is now a too large an issue with the media. Perhaps it is whoring for digital dollars, perhaps it is something more and the course of the media to avoid Jack Dorsey all over the field makes me believe that there is more. I wonder when we get that part, if ever.

For me, I am having another beer, the first 5G IP went public on 4Chan 20 hours ago and I wonder who finds it and who registers it. I hate waiting, but that I all I can do at present. Such is life.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media

The unsettling realisation

There is a stage we all see, it is not the same for all. We see it, but the words do not completely come, there is a sort of disjointment between what we see, what we perceive and what we think is right. It was all over the field when it came to blow in my mind with a Reuters article. Weirdly enough they gave the pieces, the missing pieces to form the new image, an image I did relate to and as such the article becomes a reality.

The article in question is the article (at https://www.reuters.com/technology/elon-musks-twitter-suspension-journalists-draws-global-backlash-2022-12-16/) giving us ‘Elon Musk restores Twitter accounts of journalists but concerns persist’, you see, the elements start with “The reinstatements came after the unprecedented suspensions evoked stinging criticism from government officials, advocacy groups and journalism organisations from several parts of the globe on Friday, with some saying the microblogging platform was jeopardising press freedom” My initial response is that if these idiots did their job, their proper jobs, their credibility would not be on level -23. They did this to themselves. 

When you whore for digital dollars there in a consequence. In addition players like the NY Times print not properly vetted information (see one of my previous articles on the subject). The press does not bring freedom. It brings us filtered information. Information that is approved by share holders, stake holders and advertisers. So stop talking about the freedom of the press. Start doing your bloody jobs or become Uber drivers, they have a shortage at present. So when we get “A Reuters check showed the suspended accounts, which included journalists from the New York Times, CNN and the Washington Post, have been reinstated.” We do not get a clear picture on why certain issues happened, in case of the NY Times I could speculate but this is larger. These people REFUSED to do their jobs when there was time to openly ask Jack Dorsey for answers, there was time to give a clear response towards a stage where a company was overvalued by close to 100%, but you did not do ANYTHING, did you? 

And for the man blocking Elon Musk with a facial covering with license plate CJ82G38? Did you do anything, did you report on who the man was, was the car stolen, was there anything? No, you merely try to collect on digital dollars, didn’t you? 

In that same setting there is an issue with “The German Foreign Office warned Twitter that the ministry had a problem with moves that jeopardised press freedom.” We get that, but when the press isn’t taking its ‘responsibilities’ serious, should we give them any consideration? And with that we get the second part that rubbed ME the wrong way. It was “Melissa Fleming, head of communications for the United Nations, tweeted she was “deeply disturbed” by the suspensions and that “media freedom is not a toy.”” Well, see what pot is calling the kettle black. The UN made its own bed with stupid settings regarding Jeff Bezos (an anti-Saudi stage) and a few others. If the United Nations actually get things done and focussed on areas like Syria and Yemen and got communications on Houthi terrorist events started the people might get informed at some point. For example the Middle East Monitor gives us “The US Special Envoy for Yemen, Tim Lenderking, said on Wednesday that the Houthis’ “maximalist demands” had hindered UN efforts to renew a six-month truce in the country that ended in October.” As such, these so called ‘culled’ papers. How much did they expose to the public of this? I think that Miss Fleming has other problems and making sure that the Press covers the actual news might be a clear first. It comes with the stage where she claims that media freedom is not a toy and it applies to the media just as much, in case she forgot.

So, I got that off my chest. You see, I cannot see if Elon Musk is guilty of anything at all, because we keep on getting one sided news from the media and they have no credibility left (as I personally see it). 

I will let you consider who is correct and consider what you are shown, and what is trivialised by the media.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Military, Politics

Gaming Oscars, a chalice of achievement

I was looking for a simple list, but none of them gave it, a simple lit with the game and the amount of awards. None supplied it as far as I could tell and it is weird because the Oscars have done this for decades. The simple stage is that Elden Ring (not my choice) got the Game of the Year win. Don’t get me wrong, I believe that Elden Ring earned it, it really did, it is merely not my game. That does not make me angry, if anything it implies that gaming is bigger than me. The two games I had in that in that direction is the God of War: Ragnarok with Horizon Forbidden West as a second choice. 

So when we see GoW, we see that they won Narrative, Music, Audio design, Performance, Innovation, Action/Adventure, 6 wins in total. My second game Horizon Forbidden West didn’t get any, the competition was too fierce and too good. Elden Ring took home Game of the Year, Best game direction, Best Art direction, Best RPG, a total of 4 wins. Gran Turismo got a win too and a few others 11 wins for Sony, whilst Microsoft has 4 (Elden Ring is on both systems). 7 wins for Sony exclusives. It is a chalice of achievements and it was never in doubt. The exclusives are the system protectors and the system evangelists (if gaming was a religion). 

There we have the larger stage, the larger issue that Microsoft is spinning out of view. When it was all good, they were happy to announce it, now not so much. Even sales numbers are a combination of system S and system X. I reckon the numbers are basically that bad and they are getting worse. No amount of software house acquisition will fix that and the fact that Microsoft is spinning the numbers and hiding them is telling me more, in gaming Microsoft is done for. Not completely, they are the number one ruler in flight simulators and they earned that part, they truly do. Yet life is more than straight forward games. It is about the art and HFW and GoW clearly showed that, in 2023 Hogwarts legacy will show again that love of a subject and dedication to that love will make Hogwarts Legacy shine on any platform it appears on. I personally predict that Hogwarts Legacy will up the mark for achievements in a game by a fair bit. Yes, I saw “a Twitter user wrote: “Hogwarts Legacy got a VERY tepid reaction at The Game Awards… and also did not win.”” Yet that concern was not there for Bayonetta 3, was it? I missed out most of the Rowling debate, in the first because I do not care, in the second that people have personal views and they are entitled to them. If it offends you then crawl under your bed please. She wrote a series of books that captured the heart of two generations, in addition it inspired the creation of Hogwarts Legacy. We see all these people cluster around perfection whilst they have no idea what perfection looks like, perfection to them is anyone who agrees with them and that is the important part of the stage. Gaming is not that. This is why my view on Elden Ring matters. It is not my game, but I saw how amazing it looks and it was a clear competitor to the GOTY and they won, there is no negative thinking by me. Gaming is too big! I have shared my displeasure with Microsoft on many occasions, yet the Flight Simulator was a clear win and they won other items too and they will win more over time (until Microsoft is speculatively no more). You see the wins are not Sony, or Microsoft. These wins are made by dedicated people at Sony and Microsoft. Which Sony seemingly has more of at present. I like the reference to the Gaming Oscar’s, but there is a hidden flaw. A decade ago when Microsoft and Sony were on par, the games were better, now that is seemingly no longer the case. Microsoft games are too often makers like Ubisoft who are everywhere. Yet, we cannot discount Microsoft yet. With Fable, Starfield, The outer worlds 2 and an allegedly new Forza, there is every chance that Microsoft will win big in 2023. I like that idea, because it means that Sony will have to go full throttle in 2023 and 2024. When these two fight, the gamer wins and that is how I like it, gamers winning. So the chalice of achievement might be with Sony in 2022, but there is no assurance that they will get 2023 as well. It makes for great gaming years for all gamers, which is what I particularly like.

Leave a comment

Filed under Gaming, Media

Discrimination by media

It bugged me yesterday yet it it was Forbes with their BS. And now the Guardian most useless person and champion for discrimination (aka Stephanie Kirchgaessner) makes another anti-Saudi Arabia article. I wonder why the Guardian keeps Katharine Viner around. As I see it, she is as useless as some other person we might know. So lets have a look at the article that angers me so.  It is ‘Alarm on Capitol Hill over Saudi investment in Twitter’ (at https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/nov/03/saudi-twitter-investment-us-national-security-risk), yes it is 3 weeks old, but that was in this case intentional. It starts right off the bat “Possible access to users’ data could pose national security risk and could be used to target kingdom’s dissidents”. Well Stephanie (Katharine too)? You used ‘possible’ which is neither here nor their, which is not a yes or a no. You have had three weeks and the both of you get enough money to sort it out. Is it a yes or a no? And where is the national security? As such what ‘rights’ does an investor like Prince Alwaleed bin Talal have regarding Twitter and its data? And then when we look at it we see “his investment company, Kingdom Holding, which first invested in Twitter in 2011”, as such Prince Alwaleed bin Talal had been an investor in Twitter for 11 years and it took you this long to figure out that there was a national security issue. How fucking useless are you two? (Reference to Viner and Kirchgaessner) And after three weeks we still do not know anything, do we? I am not interested in these putzes Ron Wyden and Chris Murphy as I see it near useless politicians who seek the limelight and Kirchgaessner when it comes to anti-Saudi articles is happy to oblige. And then we get “The Twitter investment does not appear to offer either Alwaleed or the Saudi government any formal control over Twitter. Musk is now the company’s sole director. But the kingdom’s known use of the platform as a propaganda tool”, as such it has been three weeks, do they or do they not have any formal control? You have had three weeks to figure it out. We see no response of such questions from Twitter or its spokesperson either, do we?  And when we see “Rules surrounding such reviews by the US Committee on Foreign Investment (CFIUS), which has the power to unwind transactions if they are deemed to threaten US national security, have usually been triggered when the foreign entity (in this case, Saudi Arabia) has assumed control of a company or asset” but they weren’t were they? So do you have any evidence in the last three weeks that sheds light on any of this or are you as useless as I always have found you to be and in this case your editor in chief with you? 

I have no idea who Prince Alwaleed bin Talal is, but I have a mindset to sell him some of my 

iP just to piss you off. How about my 5G IP, should fetch me a pretty penny? Or perhaps an additional $6,000,000,000 in annual IT revenue for starters (it could grow). I am so sick and tired of your BS and unsubstantiated issues that go nowhere. First Forbes with its slapping of Elon Musk, never ending slapping, now another piece by you two (the editor in chief is guilty by association) and no one is looking into the partnership between Microsoft and Tencent, why is that? Or were the so called ‘animosity’ pieces by Microsoft stakeholders enough? But the indications are that the Tencent device is running Microsoft at the core, so is that true or is that false? I cannot tell, but it is not my job, it is yours and you aren’t doing yours.

It pisses me off to no end.

Leave a comment

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

The anger within

We all have it, something sets us off. It is not always fair and just, but to some extent, the buttons pushed are getting to us all, and I am no different. It all started (again) this morning with 

Here we see a retweeted Tweet. We get to see dozens a day and we cannot verify the truth on most of them, people with hatred of Elon Musk whilst no one is asking that procrastinating wanker (Jack Dorsey) to properly explain himself. If Musk has a case to fire thousands, then the previous custodians fucked up, they screwed it all up royally and it is all about floating the value of the company, but the media (with less credibility than a crack pusher) refused to set the stage of asking serious questions and it is the bulk of all media, the little who asked seemingly critical questions asked too little of them and they never followed up on them or reported on the simple fact that Jack Dorsey did not elaborate. His feigned apology was all we got and the media helped him massively. We still have no clear stage of the bots, a clear stage of fake accounts and hen this comes to light it will be too late, Dorsey took the billions and ran, with massive help from the media. Media is now slapping Elon Musk every chance he gets and he is waiting time on answering whilst setting the stage for a trimmed and optionally more profitable Twitter. This sinking ship came with a $45,000,000,000 cost. Did you think that it was a hand off to get Dorsey to buy a more luxurious coffin for himself? 

Then we get the Financial Times with the claim that Twitter use went up. OK, fair and also a lot seemingly (what I saw) based on people spouting negativity regarding Elon Musk and no one asking clear questions on the changes that came AFTER Dorsey left. Some things do not add up. Several accounts losing hundreds and some claim to have lost thousands. Why would changing the guards have such a setting? Yes, a few hundred might have bailed to an alternative, but when the alternative does not deliver, they will come back. Their ego’s will make them come back and then we will see the excuses of ‘Lets give him a chance’ all whilst that should have been the starting position. I get that some might create a Mastodon (or was that a Megaladon, sorry Jason Statham) account. Makes perfect sense, especially if that person is an influencer, they will go where the masses are, but the right influencer would have a Mastodon already. The stage of one person having a dozen accounts to butter the conversation are in a stage that they do not know where their ‘powers’ are going. That makes sense too, but I would need clear data to identify that part. I do know someone who has that but he is too busy looking after other things. 

I do not get the stupidity of the attacks on Elon Musk, even the clearly presented lies and misrepresentation. It goes nowhere, in the end we merely cut ourselves. It is clear that Twitter needs time to get itself on  a new path and the media seems very driven to not let this happen. Especially when you consider how much leeway they gave Jack Dorsey, months of reporting constitutes that evidence. You merely need to Google search ‘Twitter’ and see how much critical questions were asked of Jack Dorsey and how much non-accusation based questions were asked of Elon Musk, the numbers should scare you and most people  with their attack on Elon Musk are part of that trend. I? Well I do not know what will happen, so I will await until the dust settles and see what happens next. I will fall several steps as I see no need to buy a blue checkmark and more important will be reduced in the seek algorithm. I will not care, I will see the people I follow and I should see their tweets. Only if that fails will I consider moving. We need to take care who we follow with their loud mouths and their needs for attention with failing evidence. Yes there are parody accounts, but we either follow them or we might not care. The anger within is fuelled by the loud making statements that evidence does not support and why is that? It is their ego, or their need for attention as they try to become influencers. There is of course the singular person seeking the limelight for self, but they are seemingly a huge minority. Happy to see them go into the dusk of yesterday. Oh and that statement of government making statements regarding Twitter. I think we should seek these people and their links to Jack Dorsey. Because the loudness of that equation does not make sense, it only makes sense when we consider who they cater to, especially in the beginning of a new equation, they never did that in the age of smoking or anything else, only two hours past the 11th hour did we see the government react to smoking dangers. They had filled their pockets s much as they could and that is a dangerous stage, I get that. But to filter Elon Musk in hour 1 seems adversarial actions that seemingly have no foundation, especially as they never bothered asking Jack Dorsey several serious questions, but that is merely my speculative view on the matter. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media

MHW anyone?

Yes, it seems puzzling, but it is not. I have seen in the last 48 hours more than anyones share of hatred, the Musk Hatred Wave and I absolutely have had enough of this collaborated pile of bullshit. It is time to set the record straight. The first guilty party is the Media, these cocksucking stakeholder appeasing bunch of wannabe journo’s. Almost no one is asking serious questions towards Jack Dorsey and the hidden accounts of fake followers. Can someone please nail this joker to a bloody cross please? It is getting close to Christmas, so that solves one part. The Guardian goes on (t https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/nov/05/twitter-elon-musk-jack-dorsey-apology) by catering to all this with “I own the responsibility for why everyone is in this situation – I grew the company too quickly” as I personally see it when Elon Musk is forced to deal with “apologise for the state of the site, which has laid off thousands of workers” when the new person has to lay off thousands of people, you weren’t growing the company to quickly, you were orchestrating a stage and still the media is not asking the questions they should have asked for months. So when we get to see “At least one class-action lawsuit has been filed against Twitter on behalf of former employees who say they were not given adequate notice of their termination.” I need to wonder if this is actually the case, Elon Musk stated on Titter that these people were given TWICE the redundancy that a person is eligible for. I cannot state if that was indeed true, but the media gives us “Elon Musk has a history of violating California’s labor law” loading the stage against Elon Musk yet again. And true, a little later we see “Musk has defended the layoffs, tweeting that fired employees are receiving three months of severance as the company reportedly loses over $4m a day.” Another clear stage that gives us that someone needs to ask Jack Dorsey serious questions, but he is off with billions, so he will not care about any of this. It merely shows how useless the media has become. 

Then we see more and more hatred on Twitter with quotes like Justice giving us that Free Speech should not cost $8 month. 

My answer would be:

No Moron he is not charging $8 for free speech, he is planning to charge the blue checkmark. The sign that you are a real account. A sort of elite status that too many people enjoyed for the longest of times. The new owner states that this elite status comes at a price and most of them will do the math $96 a year or lose the mark. Plenty of those can hand that invoice as an expense to their TAX LAWYER.” 

Then we get loads of people stating they lost hundreds or thousands of followers. I am merely adding one example but there are legions out there. 

The question becomes were they really followers or are certain bots vacating the space in fear of exposure? In one week Musk cannot push for such larger changes to a working system with all these people losing their jobs. We could argue that some Twitter employees had scripts that fattened the accounts of their idols. I am not stating this happened, I am wondering if this could have been the case. And yes there are plenty of people whose hatred made them leave Twitter, that is their choice, but those followers stopped being followers too. There are many options, but we need data to prove or disprove some of these assumptions (read: presumptions).

The largest issue is the mass firing. The issues is not whether this is happening, but if proper procession is used. That is a case for California labour laws, I know too little about these, but considering the Jack Dorsey ‘apology’, I am willing to speculate that everything was done to give Elon Musk a stacked hand against him and with the media being as biased as it seems to be, when it comes to discrimination and a few other elements the media is every bit as guilty here. That is how I see it. When you get over the feigned anger, what are your thoughts? 

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Law, Media, Politics

That screwed up media

Here I was, relaxing, looking at tweets when suddenly a tweet Elon Musk passes by (see below). 

Now I had a hard time here. You see I do not trust the media, but the top shelf media (LA Times, SF Chronicle, Boston Globe, and Washington Post) were always above board. Actually there was one more, but it seems that the NY Times now joins the third tier newspapers right next to the Daily Mail (UK). How could any newspaper be so stupid to give us the article (see below). 

The idea that a newspaper does not properly vet the information they have is not new, but in the past the NY Times was always above board. Whether they hate Elon Musk, whether they have other needs (like towards former Twitter owners) or whatever the reason, not vetting information is a problem, it is one I have been talking about for years. When the media cannot differentiate between real news and fake news the media has a problem, they merely hand over the news to TikTokkers like the one claiming that there are a large number of UFO’s over Australia (a TikTok ad), so now you know.

Now what was one the huge and mighty NY Times is now a bringer of debatable fake news, which will deteriorate any other news they bring. Although, I do realise that if Elon Musk was not honest my goose is cooked. Yet Elon Musk has a lot more credibility than most media ever could hope to have, so I am presently siding with the E Musk group. I could not read the whole article because the subscription nag overlapped my article again and again, so there might be an ulterior reason for the NY Times.

In this day and age when we trust the media less and less, they need to bend over backwards to vet the information again and again and hiding behind a mention of Reuters no longer does the trick.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

No one wonders?

It all starts with a BBC article (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-63207771) where we are given ‘Chinese technology poses major risk – GCHQ Chief’, there are two settings here. The first one was the BS approach by the Yanks (that place between the Pacific and the Atlantic river, South of Canada) and the UK issues. The Americans basically called Huawei (China) evil and refused to hand over any evidence. The UK stated that no foreign nation should be in charge to a major infrastructure. The UK is setting the centre stage to policy and that is fair and decent. In the Netherlands that same policy was used by founders Rob Romein and Franz Hetzenauer to create Tulip computers and they got rich real quick. You say Potato, I say Tomato. But policy is a real issue and that is fair in any government. So today I get to see “China has deliberately and patiently set out to gain “strategic advantage by shaping the world’s technology ecosystem”, the head of the intelligence agency told an audience at the Royal United Service Institute for its annual security lecture. Sir Jeremy argued the Chinese Communist Party was aiming to manipulate the technology that underpins people’s lives to embed its influence at home and abroad and provide opportunities for surveillance”, OK that is a decent accusation and it will not be easy to prove that, or basically it will be a stretch to prove it. We then get “China’s development of the BeiDou satellite system – a rival to the established GPS network which he said had been built into exports to more than 120 countries. He claimed it could be used to track individuals or combined with plans to knock out other countries’ satellites in the event of a conflict”, which is one approach, but could the Chinese government not claim that GPS could do exactly the same thing? In addition we get “the intelligence chief said he would not stop children using TikTok – which is owned by Chinese firm ByteDance – although he said young people should be more aware of their personal data and how it could be shared”, OK fair point and awareness of personal data is a good thing, but doesn’t Facebook (and Meta) do he same things? I have seen advertisements on Facebook that should never have appeared, as such too many players are doing exactly the same thing, but for us China is red and evil, would they not claim the same thing regarding Facebook and YouTube? We are then given “He said the UK should continue to welcome students from China but “be really clear on the areas of technology where we will require additional safeguards”. Areas like artificial intelligence and quantum computing were particularly important, he told the audience”, which is a fair point. Although it is not out of the question that this should be a marker between commonwealth countries and any other country. In that regard places like Canada, Australia and New Zealand have to agree on similar settings. In this Sir Jeremy Fleming (a more dashing lookalike of Michael Andrew Gove) has a few issues on the table that make sense and although we wonder why the Americans are so easily accepted, they issues all make sense. It reflected for me how I am happy that I offered my IP to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and not to China, although the new partnership between China (Tencent Technologies) and Microsoft is not making any waves at all, funny ain’t it? I wonder if we are hitting a critical point of nationalism at this point, and where should the inventors sit? The fact that Google and Amazon are decently clueless on where I found the grounds of 50 million subscriptions will also hit Facebook at some point and I accidentally stumbled on this, the invention had a different foundation and direction, but as I aw where it could take me, I left it to these two titans to slug it out and Google dropping the Google Stadia implies that they are losing more than they reckoned on and that leaves Amazon (who is seemingly still in the dark), so now my hopes are that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia accepts my offer. But the underlying stage also exists. I still have my 5G hardware, a stage I saw two years ago and no one else is seeing this, they are all hoping that Facebook makes good on their Meta and they are all in some wait state that it comes for them, I designed my hardware with the view on Neom, as well as the changing stage of marketing, a stage that ill be very different from 2024 onwards (OK, it might be 2025). But those in a “wait-state” will lose out if they cannot adjust their course and I will (extremely hopefully) retire with a nicely filled bank account to sing out my retirement with good food and seeing nice places, I worked 40 years, so I feel entitled to my decently whistling wish. Yet between the lines there are battlefronts. The issue for the Commonwealth to find the right allies, to align with the proper parties and be decently neutral against the others. Yes, we all oppose Russia in the Ukraine stage and that is fine, but do not for one second believe that America is our ally, our friend. Their friendship changes election after election and in the end they are merely their own ally, so when America implodes, and it will, we should be aware and we should be willing to continue with true allies, one that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia could be, if we could for one minute stop listening to stakeholders, whose alliance is their wallets and their wallets alone. I tried to warn people for 3-5 years that stakeholders are corporate tools that releases the media as their goals see fit, I showed years of data in that direction and soon there will be no choice, if they get their wish, they fill their wallets, they say ‘Oops!’ And they walk away, and where we will we all be at that point? The larger issue is not why we were unaware, but where the media was when the elements were in view. The missing Iran reports regarding Yemen, the list of Pi Phone articles that are only now showing up, the serious questions that the media should have lobbed at Jack Dorsey and Twitter over the last few months and the list goes on, filtered information is not news, it is news founded on discrimination and that is the stage we face, but what else are we not given? Who knew on the partnerships between Chinese Tencent and Microsoft? Who asked the serious questions? I will let you seek and search that part yourself. 

So many question and no one wonders how a simple guy like me has the inside track on 50 million optional customers, you think Google would have dropped their Stadia if they could gain 50,000,000 optional customers? Figure it out and yes, some will consider the main point that I might be spreading that stuff that grows the grass in Texas, but I asked myself questions and also doubted myself. Stakeholders will not do that, they will merely proclaim that the other side does not exist (or is irrelevant). 

It is time for you to wonder what else they are missing and that is aimed at my 5G IP. A side of 5G none of them have. 

Enjoy the day, you should, preferably before the Russian decide to make all the Ukrainians glow in the dark.

 

Leave a comment

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

In doubt we trust

Yes, it is the most uncanny of statements and there is al kinds of opposition to it. For me this started yesterday when I saw the BBC article (at https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-63157632) titled ‘Molly Russell: Dad wants no further delay to online harm bill’ and I get it, he wants to do something and it all makes sense. But then we get “He also said online platforms must stop self-regulating their content” and there the trouble starts. In the first we have the UK, Canada, the US all having their version of freedom of speech and freedom of expression. And it get to be worse. The UK (like a well trained group of pussies) decided to largely ignore the Leveson report. The media CANNOT regulate themselves and even after Leveson we have seen several examples where the media is unable to police and regulate themselves, as such why hold tech players and online media to those standards? The second setting is that these players can move from place to place. It is too large a sewer to see any clear management done on any level. And I feel for Ian Russell, I really do. Yet when we see “The current government has said that they want the UK to be the safest place in the world to be online and yet we’re still here and we’re not regulating the platforms. I think it’s really important, firstly, that something that is illegal in the offline world must be illegal and we must be better protected when it’s found on the online world” we see the dream state, it is the best description. The man is not wrong, but with the cloud there is even less oversight. And it is a multi tiered prong we see. We go after regulating platforms but we do not go after the POSTERS. State per nations that any poster of social media is held responsible and make sure that the penalties are harsh. It will be a first hurdle and there are over a dozen to go. You see, when that hurdle is fixed, others will offer services on an international foundation and the problem starts again. His only real option is to make sure that EVERY poster of  certain materials are published with their real name and real address. That is when the game changes. Some will stop and hide under a rock, others will get more clever about matters and we are back at square one. For one Facebook adds “more than 300 million photos get uploaded per day. Every minute there are 510,000 comments posted and 293,000 statuses updated” Facebook tories are worse they are only there for 24 hours and can only be watched by a person twice. There is no policing or managing that. It is a life of its own and that is merely one source. Add Twitter, Snapchat, YouTube and half a dozen more and you see the scale of the matter. YouTube is the centre of 720,000 hours of material EVERY DAY. The scale cannot be managed and anyone who says different is lying to you. And that is only in places where some have oversight. With TikTok it becomes a much larger mess. So we might trust in doubt, but that doubt needs a formidable bat. Making the poster responsible and these media outlets reporting and having some  grasp of the posters is essential and that is a first. It will not make a huge dent, but it could give governments and people a handle of the poster of the harmful content and there is the first setting. These people want the limelight, but when their faces are on the news and they are being asked the hard questions, they will hide behind the freedom of speech and there is the real problem. The laws are centuries old and they never considered mass media and mass slander. These concepts did not even exist in those years. It is not bout regulation, it is about the laws being adjusted and there is also the problem, when that person places it on a server in Russia, India or China, can that person be prosecuted? 

It is a rather large mess and the law followed decades behind, so I reckon that a first solution will come to shine by 2035, which might make it no longer valid. 

It is merely my view and plenty will disagree, but look at what is now and how much could be regulated and do not rely on AI, it does not yet exist. In the mean time, I need to find a contact in Riyadh, the one in the Saudi Consulate seems to be non functioning (with the option of $500 million a month for their government), the levels of inaction are weird to say the least, but that is my problem, not yours. 

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Media, Science