Tag Archives: UK

The dangers of appeasing

We all know it, we still do it, although most people tend to be cautious of the setting where and who they appease, but it still happens and for the most there is no impact. For the mot there are no consequences. Yet in some cases there are, yet are we aware? Are the appeased parties aware? Because that side still matters, the appeaser and appeased are often, nearly always going from a place of innocence, or at least not knowing what will happen. 

And today the BBC gives us one side. The article ‘Clearview AI fined in UK for illegally storing facial images’ (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-61550776) has a side to it, one that most are eagerly or unknowingly ignoring. 

We see “Clearview AI takes publicly posted pictures from Facebook, Instagram and other sources, usually without the knowledge of the platform or any permission. John Edwards, UK Information Commissioner, said: “The company not only enables identification of those people, but effectively monitors their behaviour and offers it as a commercial service. That is unacceptable.”” My initial answer is ‘And?’ This is a foundation of Facebook, it is granular data analyses and lets face it, the images were given to the internet and “but effectively monitors their behaviour” is merely the next step. You see, there is a side that we want to ignore. There is the setting of ‘publicly posted pictures’, it therefor becomes PUBLIC DOMAIN (in some cases), granted, not in all cases and there we need to ask Meta whether THEIR rules were broken. And then we get the whopper “People expect that their personal information will be respected, regardless of where in the world their data is being used.” Where is that set in stone? I mean, really. Where is the law that states that this has to happen? And then we get the part that matters “When Italy fined the firm €20m (£16.9m) earlier this year, Clearview hit back, saying it did not operate in any way that laid it under the jurisdiction of the EU privacy law the GDPR. Could it argue the same in the UK, where it also has no operations, customers or headquarters?” And now we see the setting “it did not operate in any way that laid it under the jurisdiction of the EU privacy law the GDPR” I am not debating or opposing, I am asking. Because if that is the case, if that is true, then the actions against Clearview are close to pointless and lets be clear Russia and China might be doing EXACTLY the same thing. It was on the internet and this is not new. To see that, we need to go back to September 7th 2021 when I wrote ‘As banks cut corners’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2021/09/07/as-banks-cut-corners/) there it was banks versus organised crime and the image (see below) remains the same, but now it is set in a commercial stage with connected images to boot.

The BBC article is less than an hour old. I wrote about similar settings out in the open 8 months ago. So when we get John Edwards, UK Information Commissioner stating “The company not only enables identification of those people, but effectively monitors their behaviour and offers it as a commercial service. That is unacceptable.” Consider the word “unacceptable”, he does not state that it is illegal, interesting is it not? So exactly what are these fines? On what legal transgression are they based? 

We see the data protection act parts when we are given:

use the information of people in the UK in a way that is fair and transparent
have a lawful reason for collecting people’s information
have a process in place to stop the data being retained indefinitely
meet the higher data protection standards required for biometric data

So what defines ‘fair and transparent’? I know what the words mean, but what do they mean here? Have a lawful reason? It is public domain, a collector has a perfectly valid reason, does he/she not? And when we get to the word indefinitely, we can set a stage of 100 years, because that is not indefinite, so where is the definition of indefinite given? As for biometric data, we accept that “physical characteristics — that can be used to identify individuals” there is however one side that is less clear. It is “used to identify individuals” what if the photo is not the identifying part, but the data is? I am merely stating a fact, most photo’s are not the greatest source of identification, for example (see below) how tall is Peter Dinklage? This photo will not give that away, will it? 

And this data protection act only works for the UK, if the British people were photographed outside of the UK, the photo is out of consideration, is it not? Consider ‘people in the UK’, what if they were in Rome, Amsterdam or Brazil. How would that rule apply? All questions that come up and there might be for a lot of them rules that stop certain part, but not all parts and Clearview has 20,000,000,000 images. We would need to check them all and that will take a group of 20,000 people months, if not a whole year. So who pays for that part? All whilst there are parts that rely on Public Domain. It is a dangerous setting. I get it, it is dangerous and my part of the banks, merely makes things worse, makes the dat more complete and that is not merely banks. Consider the data Dunnhumby has, the data collectors, the panel creators. Dozens of data agencies and consider that several are outside the UK and EU, what happens when that data is combined? This mess is a whole lot worse than anyone considers and it was not due to big tech, it was due to greed driven people seeking new currencies and people are currency. I am not stating that Clearview is innocent, but they got here because the laws were lacking for decades. Now that the data sources are there, it is already too late. Whatever music John Edwards, UK Information Commissioner is playing, it suits his ego and the ego of his friends. For the people it is largely too late and it has been for a while, a setting I saw a long time ago and I illustrated it last September. I knew this because I used to do this and I was good, very good at doing this. So I leave you to wonder just how protected you are, because you are not, but you will learn that soon enough.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Law, Media, Science

Restoring Redacted Recognisance

I have been in a bit of a trance, wondering on a few items that were nagging me, that is until I saw some flamboyant article. The article is a little too Simpson tainted to be taken seriously, but there was a grain of possibility there. My What if procedures started to crush the options. It did not make me happy, because for the most, I hate the ‘What If’ statement, it is something in second grade salespeople and telemarketers. As such I tend to avoid using it, but in this case there is almost no avoiding it. In a stage where there is an optional stage of revenue that could be anywhere between $400,000,000 and $17,500,000,000 the players Amazon and Google stay away? In the first it is more tailored to Amazon, but the stages include 5G, as such Google would be equally chomping at the bit.
Now the stage is about to move to Saudi Arabia, and I do not object. In two settings they have an advantage over the other two, but that is only in two of the settings. So I was puzzled, but then a few items from LA Times to UK papers hit me and the ‘What If’ setting came back. 

What If
So what if Google and Amazon just no longer have the manpower and the seniority to see what is about to escape them, it seemed so far fetched, but there was supporting evidence (of a sort) and there is no way in hell I would let Microsoft anywhere near it, I would accept a 35% payment from Saudi Arabia before I would consider a 175% from Microsoft, I am that disappointed and angry with them. And as I refocus towards Saudi Arabia I see a larger stage, one that could fir them taking a larger stake in either Amazon Luna or the Google Stadia, even as the Amazon Luna is a better fit, either will do and that solution alone should be worth well over $350,000,000, as such there is some benefit in having one buyer. Of course the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia might see that different, but that is not a given and as they get more options to diversification.

So we have an alternative stage, but the idea that the resources and brainpower of both Amazon and Google had dwindled to that degree is a little baffling. This has nothing to do with Covid. It has nothing to do with abilities. It dwindles down to two powerhouses, not taking a much better inventory of what is possible and letting it slip again and again until it is too late. Could that be the case? To be honest, I cannot tell, in the first because Sundar Pichai and Andy Jassy did not call me updating me on their HR woe’s and sorrows (and I never expect them to do that). So I am in the dark, but some others should not be and we have not heard from them have we? 

So what gives? Why would either player ignore that much revenue after getting hit to such a degree? It does not make sense, but that was before we see that they face a lot of grievance in the UK, EU and US. The Republicans are willing to slice Disney whilst destroying up to 60,000 small business owners with the attacks on Disney and their IP, Google has a few issues of their own to deal with, so a holding pattern is not the weirdest idea, but in this case revenue could go to China, Saudi Arabia and other players, how does that help any of them in the US, EU or UK? And that is before someone takes a hard look at Canada, with the top 10 of wealth being occupied by banks, but that is the hidden trap, without powerful businesses these banks will falter, time has shown that again and again, so what will be left when the redaction of recognisance is takin its toll? Restoration is the one path left, but that is a window with a limited timespan, I wonder if the UK and Canada realise that there is a point of no return and the US waited too long and now when there is a stage of restoration, the republican party is having a go at one of the most powerful IP holder in history, Disney. A setting that can have only one ending and it is not a good one, as such when Disney loses its protection, the cheap solution bringers in India and China will bring their options cheaper, not better but cheaper and all whilst well over 40,000 small business owners are left with nothing, because the IP kept their business safe and that is about to change, so when that happens and other resources do not grasp the business, what do you think will happen to that $25,000,000,000,000 debt? The interest alone will pull the entire US economy under with absolutely no options to restore any option to breathe. A setting I saw coming a mile away 5 years ago when there was an option, so when the US also losses its IP and more important the two powerhouses that create IP because they no longer have resources, what happens then? 

There is no what if setting here, we can just watch it unfold and I will be watching as well, because to be honest, I never expected these two players to have the IP resource lack they are currently showing. I honestly was caught be surprise (you see, it is possible to surprise me).

I wonder what Sunday brings, a hail Mary and a ZX Spectrum?

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Science

Retail 101

One of the oldest rules of retail 101 is that you buy cheap and sell as high as possible, that is how you create profit. Add to that the simple rule that you spend less than you earn and that will make you rich on the side. These rules are not new, they were old when the crusades started (ca.1095). 

So when the BBC (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-61188579) gives us ‘Oil prices have soared. Why won’t Opec bring them down?’ The setting of the American governmental license plate came to mind (Dee-You-Age). We get to see “Opec+ could also lower prices by putting more oil onto the market, which is what major importers like the US and UK want it to do.” Yes, and tarmac is made with liquorice. Opec+ has a good deal, there is a need for oil and they can set the price. The nations relying on oil have done pretty much ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to appease Saudi Arabia. We see the two largest suppliers (Russia and Saudi Arabia) but even though the US is not in that group, how much oil do they produce? 

And then we get “US President Joe Biden has repeatedly appealed to Saudi Arabia to increase its oil output, but to no avail. UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson also asked Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates to increase production. He too was rebuffed.” In this the first part was that the US played a stupid game.

  1. A journalist no one gives a fuck about goes missing and for weeks the gossip and speculations start, even the United Nations get involved with shoddy documentation (as I personally see it). Realism tells us that something happened. Yet no one and I say again no one produced clear evidence. None gave any clear evidence of what had happened and Turkey who was playing the Iranian game made things worse. The United Nation document had issues, several players were not held to account, but that did not matter, they all got to attack the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
  2. The Houthi attacks and again the Iranian factor in this was openly ignored by the media. The non Arabic nations were not informed on houthi attacks with Iranian support on Saudi civilian targets. Coalition events were exaggerated, Houthi attacks were trivialised. 
  3. Saudi and SAMI needs were stopped and Saudi defence settings were halted. Now, the west can do that, they are allowed to. Yet in that, the Saudi’s have absolutely no need to increase production, do they? If the west was so clear on their needs, they would have increased non-oil options two decades ago, but that did not really happen, did it?

Three clear events that are now biting the hands of the US and the UK, Saudi Arabia is willing to look after its friends, but these two have not really shown to be friends, have they?

And in all this Russia is enjoying what is happening, because they do not have to do anything else but watch the cost of living in the US, UK and EU to rise to almost impossible levels. A stage we never wanted and perhaps those tea ladies from the CAAT are now in a stage where they can afford the tea, but they can no longer afford the cookies. There is an opposing side to almost everything and the simple truth of protesting without understanding what was going on is now taking its toll. But the CAAT had its limelight shots in the newspapers. It is lovely to see those pictures, just too bad that the price of that limelight ended up costing some people billions and under those conditions the UK can pretty much kiss their cheaper oil goodbye.

In all this, I wonder what the CIA did last month, what they offered the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, because the current administration has pretty much destroyed whatever options they had. As I see it, by the rules of Retail 101, the US has only one option, to open whatever weapon sales it can get without restrictions and with a full service package. I reckon that alone is required to lower the oil prices by 10%, they need a lot more, but as such the players will have to offer more and they need to realise that the loud words of ‘no oil’ and ‘end petrol needs’ were merely that, words. It will happen, there is no doubt in my mind, but I doubt I will be alive to see those days, I reckon kids who were born after 2000 will have a decent chance to see the end of a petrol based economy whilst they are still alive. I doubt that it will happen before that. In this, the entire stage of the BBC article was to some degree needed, but they should have given the people a slightly better information ring. Like the interactions of OPEC and airlines. You see over the last 15 years we added a total of 41000 additional flights a day, why? There is also a lack of the American numbers, how much oil do they produce and why can they not produce more? Two simple elements in this equation missing, why is that? 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

At times I hate being right

To get that we have to take a trip into the past. To February 5th 2021. It was the day I wrote ‘Not a good thing’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2021/02/05/not-a-good-thing/). In the article I wrote about the energy shortage that certain players were certain to face. I also made reference to ‘Trillion Dollar Musk’ a story written on December 3rd 2020 (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2020/12/03/trillion-dollar-musk/). The important reference is “the UK has an increasing need for Scandinavian power and soon it cannot be met. I reckon that in the next 2-3 years that shortage will be close to systemic all over the EU”, with the added “now that the stage is here, Eon Musk has a massive opportunity and soon enough it will grow into Europe as well, I wonder who will cash in before the half baked solutions stir their ugly heads. Because the impact of that stage is not a good thing.” And now that we get the Dutch NOS making reference to “Companies that want to establish or expand, often cannot meet their energy needs. This applies, for example, to Royal Smilde Bakery in Edam, a retail company in bake-off products. The company cannot run at full capacity. “And that means we are not at the production capacity that the market demands,” says Andries Tuinenga. The grid operator has imposed a maximum on the company that may not be exceeded. And then the peak months are yet to come.” Now this setting comes early because of the Russian gas situation, but it gives a larger stage, the shortage is here now, consider the Netherlands going towards summer and if summer bites (a realistic chance) we see a nation with millions of AC units and no power to fuel them all. That is a realistic future this year and for two years they could have opted for discussions with Elon Musk and all his energy solutions but how many governments exactly have started this discussion? 

A stage I saw coming two years ago, so why isn’t anyone else? And the small laughable story by BBC Technology that gives us ‘Energy supplier counts cost of devices on standby’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-61235367) does not cut the mustard as I see it. Lets be clear, they are not wrong, but the setting is way too late for that. With the giggle moment supplied through “households would save around £55 per year by switching off all their devices when not in use. The organisation, which promotes sustainability and energy efficiency, did not give exact details of how it came to this figure.” I get it if everyone does that you do save, but at what cost? Larger changes have been needed for well over a year and the UK (EU too) are not ready. The age of ACDC is coming (hah, me making a funny yet again) and the saving will not operate the millions of households that want to enjoy the AC they have no matter how much DC it requires. I stated two years ago that energy changes were becoming essential, but it seems that governments has ego and ostrich issues. It seems that they all were willing to attack Elon Musk and too little of them would be ready to engage with him in serious conversation. Now that time is up they might all want him at the same time, as such it becomes a problem Anyway, should Elon Musk buy my IP, they get added hardship, because I can see that there are options (not big ones) to connect what I have to domotics and smart grids. So connect my IP to a smart grid and collect energy numbers from all the domotics around it. It is not what I had in mind, but it could work and the value of my IP goes up, so what do I care. 

The problem is that GOVERNMENTS should have been on this page in 2018, but are they? The fact that we see shortages now is not merely the impact of Russian choices, it was ALWAYS going to happen in this way, they merely got to this point faster in this way. So who will you blame? Will you have another go at Elon Musk, or will you start asking YOUR government for ignoring the painfully obvious for well over a year now?

I will let you decide. Have a really nice sunny not air-conditioned day today.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Politics, Science

Blackmail as premeditation

These is a side to everything. Peace, War and everything in-between is in the eye of the beholder, in the wake of political needs some will say, but that too is a side of a mere point of view. So when I saw the Bloomberg article (at https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-04-28/manchester-city-s-owner-helps-usher-more-russian-tycoons-to-uae) titled ‘Manchester City’s Owner Helps Usher More Russian Tycoons to UAE’ we see the side that many shy away from. It starts with “Sheikh Mansour also has a behind-the-scenes role that’s become increasingly important in recent months: Helping manage relationships with wealthy Russians looking to move money into the UAE, according to several people familiar with Abu Dhabi’s engagement with Russians, who requested anonymity as the information isn’t public.” With the added “Even as the U.S., EU and other countries have blitzed Russia with thousands of new financial restrictions, making it the world’s most-sanctioned nation, the UAE hasn’t imposed any. Officials in the Middle Eastern nation have taken the stance that Abu Dhabi respects international law but isn’t required to follow measures implemented by specific countries and that the UAE has the right to adopt its own policies, several people familiar with their thinking said.” It is supported by “That approach, though, has fuelled concern among some Western officials who are worried about holes in their own sanctions programs. Earlier this month, Deputy U.S. Treasury Secretary Wally Adeyemo voiced Washington’s worries about Russian tycoons moving assets to the UAE in a call with UAE officials, two people with knowledge of the discussions said”. You see, the setting is even more different from what we see. You see, some places cannot be touched, some ships are unattainable and other material matters cannot be touched as the owners identities are hidden from view. There are two parts in all this. 

In the first there is the matter of his highness Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan. He is from the UAE, he does what is best for the UAE, a Emiratian as it were (is that the right pronunciation?) The larger setting is not what he does, it is that there is no war with Russia in the UAE, more important, the blackmail grip on these oligarchs is not entirely legal. Lets look at the clear evidence. These oligarchs are Russians, they therefor embraced friendships with the ruler of that place (Vladimir Putin), this was never a crime. Then the Ukrainian issues started and the oligarchs were split in two teams (as Roman Arkadyevich Abramovich most likely would say) those who openly support Putin and those who do not. Take Roman Arkadyevich Abramovich he is also a philanthropist and the former owned of Chelsea FC (they might be the same). So are the acts against him valid? Consider what he did in the BEGINNING of the war. It casts a shadow over the acts against the oligarchs. And the demented statement by President Biden “We’re going to seize their yachts, their luxury homes, and other ill-begotten gains”, really? What laws were broken, what prosecution was not correctly made? I do not care either way, but there are laws and yes, Russia has to pay for EVERY kopek of damage that they created in Ukraine. But should the oligarchs? Perhaps those in Russia, but those abroad? Those who openly supported Putin’s war in Ukraine perhaps, the rest? I feel uncertain. 

And when we reconsider “some Western officials who are worried about holes in their own sanctions programs” we see the folly of their taxation laws, the holes are large enough to park a 500 feet yacht in. Failure after failure and the entire emotional setting does not help any, mainly because the emotional setting is not a legal one and now we see that Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan has a case to present to his nation. And if this works the UAE will see another wave of long term investments. Long after the US is deserted by too many players, the UAE will hold on. Is it fair? Fair does not come into it. These oligarchs are not involved in a war, they are not involved in bombing the Ukraine. That is the Russian government, the Russian army, navy and airforce. If an oligarch is part of those, then yes, he (or she) become fair game. And should the American government object, then perhaps they can pull the papers on a place called IG Farben and certain people that were given options in the US. So how come that BASF and Siemens were allowed to continue AFTER WW2? Did they not have factories in Auschwitz? As I see it, the US does not have a billionaire problem, it has a hypocrisy problem and the refusal to overhaul tax laws is pretty much a top 3 item in American economy. As I personally see it Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan found a way to propel his nation (as a citizen), is he to blame? I do not believe that he is. Yes, some people and a lot of Ukrainians have an issue with that and I accept that the Ukrainians are not happy, they have every right to be, but laws are laws and there is a dangerous line that the west is trying to avoid. It is a dangerous line as it leads to WW3 and these nations are either fully committed or they are not. I cannot judge here, because war is a dangerous play, a World War even more so and there could be nuclear repercussions, we need to accept that and that is the red line that a lot of nations are trying to avoid. It makes perfect sense. If there is on upside to all this (the UAE) it will be that the harbour that they hand the oligarchs is also the roof that stops them from becoming a nuclear target. It could be seen by some as premeditated blackmail. Can we blame them, or blame anyone for having that thought? The UAE must do what is best for the UAE and as I see it, that is exactly what Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan seems to be doing.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Military, Politics

Anger and Envy

The BBC gives us (at https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-61228552) ‘Anti-Semitism in worldwide surge, Israeli report says’ it also gives us “The report identifies the US, Canada, the UK, Germany and Australia as among countries where there was a sharp rise” yet what is the core of the problem? To see that we need to investigate the word ‘semite’ which means “a member of any of the peoples who speak or spoke a Semitic language, including in particular the Jews and Arabs.” Yet that is not all, when we look deeper into Semitic language we get “a language that belongs to a subfamily of the Afro-Asiatic language family including Hebrew, Aramaic, Arabic, and Ethiopic” It is a mess and yes, the Israelites see the strongest results, but let that not take away the mention of Arabic settings. 

The BBC then gives us:
In the US, which has the largest Jewish population outside of Israel, the number of anti-Jewish hate crimes recorded in both New York and Los Angeles were almost twice that of the previous year. And that is not all, anti Arabic sentiments are up by a lot. In this the media has its own role to play. As I personally see it, the exploitation of flames (for digital dollars), the one sided reporting on events are also a factor and they are all to please certain people, people that rely on stakeholders to propagate their agenda as I personally see it. 

In France, the number of recorded anti-Semitic incidents increased by almost 75% compared with 2020. I know too little about France, yet the amount of French Jews leaving France is staggering, and as an EU nation, the fact that Strasbourg does way too little gives rise that there is a larger EU problem. 

In Canada, a leading Jewish group reported a 40-year record in anti-Semitic physical violence in one month – August. In Canada anti semitism has been a problem for decades, the fact that it is becoming worse is not a good thing. 

In the UK, the number of recorded physical assaults against Jews increased by 78% compared with 2020. Too much details on YouTube and too little action or convictions. 

In Germany, anti-Semitic incidents recorded by police were up 29% compared with 2020, and 49% compared with 2019. Germany is perhaps in the best place of all, still not in a good place mind you, the fact that in this is is likely more about hatred of Arabs than Jews is speculation, but it might be the case. Germans still have an issue being painted Nazi and are more likely to leave Jews alone (with the neo-nazis as an obvious exemption)

Australia also experienced a sharp rise in recorded anti-Semitic incidents, with 88 in May alone – the highest monthly total ever. Yes there is a rather nasty Australian setting here, not the worst, but the most isolated giving Arabs and Jews less chance to avoid the problems. And for the most, there is a second tier here, the Palestinian violence actions in Australia against Jews do not get the visibility it should. The Australia media is somehow rather generic in this, I wonder why?

I believe that the transgressors (Christians) are getting more and more angry, taking it all out on Jews and Arabs fuelling anti-semite events. In all this the docile acts of churches is one factor, the setting increases when we take into account the events of 2017 when we were given “In move that Jewish community says rewards terror, court upholds Sydney council decision that house of prayer poses unacceptable security risk”, yes to avoid a fire, you can either get a fire brigade or destroy the wooden buildings. It seems that Sydney chose option 2. 

I believe that the article only highlights the tip of the iceberg. I believe that there is a religious polarisation going on and when that escalates the consequences will be enormous in several ways. How it will evolve, I do not know, but some areas will have to give way and the fallout will be a long lasting one. Consider the idea that Eastern Suburbs in Sydney only get 10% of the petrol option they get now. How do you think it falls out? What happens when the oil producing nations state that area’s of anti-semite concentrations will receive no further oil? It is not the weirdest idea. What happens next? These areas plead for oil with Russia and Iran? 

In a stage where resources are the currency of tomorrow, they will also become political pressure points, so several governments will need to consider what they will do. If the people in Bondi Junction will have to drive to Chatswood to get fuel, how long until things really take a turn for the absolute worst? It is fictive, it is speculation but it is not wholly impossible and at some stage it will happen to some degree. Good luck to the people in Manitoba and when those in Winnipeg need to drive 135Km to get to the US fuel pump, the picture changes a lot. It is a mere application of the have’s and the have not’s. A stage that was clearly given to us in the 90’s, we thought in one direction, but there are always other directions to consider. When any resource becomes the discriminant factor in any equation, the people who forgot about that will suddenly scream bloody murder on their rights. But what rights did they leave others? Anger and Envy might be the two most dangerous elements in that equation, and in all this let’s not ignore the pride of politicians (presumed) stating that this will never happen, how wrong have they been the last 5 years?

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Military, Politics, Religion

Bring out your CV

The CBC had two articles last night, the first one I dealt with in the previous tory. This one can be found (at https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/cse-candidates-hiring-cyber-1.6426275) ‘Ottawa needs more codebreakers — but spy agency says finding them isn’t easy’ and that is not even half the story. It is not a Canadian issue, it is a global issue. So when we see “Canada’s electronic spy agency, the Communications Security Establishment, is set to receive a large influx of funding to launch cyber operations and ward off attacks on government servers, power grids and hospitals.” It’s always nice to receive funding. But the reality is a little harder. I spoke about part of this in ‘Red flags’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2022/02/24/red-flags/) there were too many red flags and they are eager to charge a fair penny. Summits, courses and in some cases you do not even need an IT education, but a bachelor education is expected. It is a Wild Wild Cyber West out there and the problem is that there are too few stages where we can separate the good from the shallow. So when we see “CSE, which gathers and decodes signals intelligence and is also in charge of technology security for the government, says it receives 10,000 to 15,000 job applications per year. But only about one or two candidates out of 100 applicants go on to be hired after the skills testing and background security checks.” We see part of the problem. Have you seen it? It is seen in “about one or two candidates out of 100 applicants go on to be hired after the skills testing and background security checks”, the funnel needs inverting. Instead of seeking in the same place, seek somewhere else. Seek in the military and governmental technical support places. Seek in the places you overlook and hire these people. It is nice to hire that one bright light. We all want that, but who considered hiring the 20-50 that can overcome the ‘background security checks’ then start TEACHING them. Out of the 50 you educate whilst they are employed in several places you end up with 10-25 people ready to take the challenge instead of relying on the 1-2 candidates. When you need 1500 of them, my approach makes sense. Yes, you can try to get to the techies from the University of Toronto, but so is commercial land and they pay a lot better, so you need to hope to get the few with a calling, or you open the stage to a larger group and set them in all kinds of governmental fields, where there is a large shortage too. All sides that needs attending too and not all will end with the CSE, GCHQ or whatever Australia and New Zealand have, but all these governments have large shortages including their Cyber police and a few other places. It is time to change the way hiring is done all over the Commonwealth field because they are all coming up short and having different divisions that have shortages, so why are they not taking a hard look at what else is possible? If not these places will all end up in a bidding war like they saw in the 90’s and they will come up short again. Oh and whilst Amazon is desperately seeking 250,000 people and where do you think they will look next? The second plan (my crazy wild idea) gives the people a long term plan, long term employment and a larger setting of choice with one application instead of 5-15 applications. 

But this is only possible when some people take a long hard look at what they used to do and see what COULD be done. 750 application runs, or 60 application runs, what makes more sense? I will let you decide.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Law, Military, Science

The simplicity of a label

That is at times a setting, not the setting, but an option. You see it is easy to paint all the piggie’s pink, but at that time we end up with all the painted piggies and piglet. Yet is piglet the one we were looking for? That is one of the settings and my issue with ‘No 10 network targeted with spyware, says group’. The article (at https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-61142687) is not entirely wrong. But when I see “The Citizen Lab says it informed officials that suspected Pegasus spyware was discovered in 2020 and 2021, with the Downing Street incident linked to operators in the UAE.” My suspicious mind has questions. Now, I accept that the Citizen Lab has expertise and knowledge, I am not attacking that. It is the statement “The Citizen Lab, which tracks electronic surveillance, said in 2020 and 2021 it notified the UK government that networks belonging to both 10 Downing Street and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office were suspected to have been infected using Pegasus spyware.” You see, ‘suspected’ is all good and well, but were the suspicions properly investigated and confirmed, or is that all it was, a suspicion? And it does not get better when we see “in the UK a number of official phones were tested including those of the prime minister, but it was not possible to establish which device was infected or what – if any data – was taken”, as such there is a suspicion and a lack of confirmation of which device was infected, whether data was captured and what the outcome was. And it does not end there. The statement “the suspected Foreign Office infections were believed to be linked to operators of Pegasus in the United Arab Emirates, India, Cyprus and Jordan.” You see, not only is the method a problem (through lack of evidence), but how in the hell can it be fingered to operators from United Arab Emirates, India, Cyprus or Jordan? Sometimes the simplicity of a label also has the lack of clarity. 

Why Jeeves, why?
It is actually simple. These are a few names: EverC, Sentar, Ignitho, PhishLabs, AppDetex, CyberInt, CareMessage, and Geneca. Eight names, all competitors to the NSO group. They all have ‘their’ solutions, they all have their ways and they might not be as good as the NSO group, but these players are raking in the millions. It is not impossible that they planted NSO materials, or  use a ‘friend’ to infect NSO guided options to lead the trail away. All speculation and none may be true or factual, I accept that. Yet the article gives us nothing but suspicions, no facts, no evidence and it is all given weight by “linked to an investigation by the New Yorker magazine which looked at the targeting of individuals campaigning for Catalan independence from Spain”, so what does the New Yorker magazine have and how do the two matters connect (if they connect at all). Consider the price of an NSO infection (it is enough to buy a 2022 Ford Mustang 5.0L Fastback, shadow black) and as people tend to rate cars higher than any Catalan interest, the list of interested people grows short really fast, the sliver thin comparison makes me suspicious even more. And to complete matters “The Citizen Lab said it believed the Downing Street suspected infection was linked to the United Arab Emirates.” So not only is there no evidence that an infection took place, they have a suspect too?

All half way statements, all half baked evidence and the lack of evidence that shows some clarity. All whilst I found 8 options at the drop of a hat. And I can tell you right now. I have no evidence of ANY kind. Yet the writings of some lack evidence too. So what makes the press so hungry for alleged illumination of the NSO group and the UAE all whilst there is no clear evidence? 

Questions should be asked, but I believe that additional questions should be asked of people who have been linking certain events with the near total lack of evidence. And it matters, because if we see the allegations that No.10 network is infected (which would be interesting to ANY party with non-UK or anti-UK needs). So there is a drastic need for the minions of Ken McCallum to wake up and find out what is going on. It might be essential to get the GCHQ goblins active as well, it is a digital issue so GCHQ gets to be connected to this. 

Yet none of the parties have clear evidence and no one can prove that it was not a competitor, there are larger plays in actions and they cannot be identified with piggy pink. Yet the station is optionally served by paint and finding WHERE it leads could be beneficial, but that is merely my thought on the matter. So far the media I have seen tells me little and the accusations and links are a little too shoddy to my liking.

It stands to reason to state that I do not completely trust the BBC article, thee is nothing wrong there, but too little of it is right and does not sit well with me, but that is just me, and I do not trust anyone, a habit of the beast and thorough knowledge on knowing that the beast is a self serving entity in all this, it always has been.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Science

800,000,000 failures and a home-run

This is what I faced today, but the two are not connected, well not directly, optionally even indirectly. They are connected by the smallest sliver of thought. To start, the first part comes from the BBC. The article (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-61080536) gives us ‘Sanctioned Russian oligarchs linked to £800m worth of UK property’, which sounds nice, but lets take a deeper look. We get “Some of the individuals deny ownership of the mansions, which may mean they are beyond the reach of the sanctions. To get to the bottom of who owns what, we carried out a detailed trawl of leaked offshore documents, the Land Registry and court papers – as well as previous reporting.” It comes down to the first part. There we see “Because of the system of secrecy here in the UK and in relation to the Overseas Dependencies it’s really easy for people to hide their assets and their funds in the UK and not even the police necessarily have sight of where those assets are,” these people are skating around the central issue ‘What they did was perfectly legal’ a setting of creating actual tax laws is at the heart of this and this is decades overdue. It should have started in the age of Gordon Brown (2007), there is a stage where we could agree that Tony Blair (1997-2007) should have started it, but the pressure was not on for the UK at that point, the meltdown in the US should have been a clear signal, but from 1997 onwards NOTHING was done to rewrite tax laws into the laws the UK needed to have in 2010, and now a decade later we see “To get to the bottom of who owns what” and there hiding behind the Panama Papers is jut a farce. This should have been adjusted in the EU, UK and US by 2010 but none of them did ANYTHING to clear the waters. They merely pretended to do so to appease political friends, they all did. And now when we see the laughingly weak “We are coming for your ill-begotten gains” this implies that laws were broken, so is he just incompetent, stupid or both? And this matters, because it is all linked. 

Roman Abramovich, has a vast property portfolio in the UK with more than 50 luxury residences, most on Fulham Road in west London. Through his UK company Fordstam Limited, he owns dozens of apartments in Chelsea Village, plus the hotel and residential complex around Chelsea’s Stamford Bridge stadium, according to the Land Registry. On Roman Abramovich we see “He has a vast property portfolio in the UK with more than 50 luxury residences, most on Fulham Road in west London. Through his UK company Fordstam Limited, he owns dozens of apartments in Chelsea Village, plus the hotel and residential complex around Chelsea’s Stamford Bridge stadium, according to the Land Registry. His most expensive London property is a 15-bedroom house on a street that is nicknamed Billionaires Row. With its vast stucco-faced Italianate mansions, it is home to royalty and ambassadors – as well as oligarchs.” The one element missing (two actually) were any laws broken? More important we see sanctioned by UK and EU, not the US. Then we get to the main event. It is Alisher Usmanov, sanctioned by all three and the desert of all this is more than a Medovik. We are given “a spokesman for Mr Usmanov said most of the billionaire’s UK property, plus a $600m (£456m) yacht, had already been “transferred into irrevocable trusts”, potentially putting them beyond the reach of sanctions.” A stage that is perfectly legal and the laws were never rewritten making this a sliding scale of discrimination, a scale of injustice and no laws were broken. The law makers were too stupid, too lazy to do anything about it. In the UK, the US and the EU. The lawmakers appeased THEIR friends as I personally see it and the oligarchs merely used the laws available to THEM TOO. A stage we need to accept and respect if we are a nation of laws. More important, which of these oligarchs ACTIVELY supported the war by Putin? I am asking, I actually do not know and the media merely surrounds itself with emotional BS, not a fact in sight and it is time to call these media players out on that too. The BBC article is actually quite good, but where do we see ‘Laws were broken’? We see “Ravenmorrow Limited was set up in December last year and no individual is identified on UK company records as the beneficial owner.” A clear failure of UK Laws, a setting where it was allowed to do this and no one is to blame but British Parliament and the House of Lords. The BBC does not really state that do they? As. I see it I see not the acts of Oligarchs, I see the failures of governments not overhauling tax laws when they could and as I see it all parties are guilty (except the greens), unlike the others the green parties all over the world seem to be oblivious on what a rudder is or does, so they are going Hades knows where at a speed no one can predict to arrive at some location no one knows.

Home-run
Yes, like the side we saw before there is another side and it makes more of a case towards the end of Microsoft, all whilst Adobe is getting more and more in place of taking over 25% of their office business. It is depending on two elements, and when these elements are out I will happily hand them over what I have if Google or Amazon buy the other IP and give me permission to hand that over to Adobe, I will gladly do that, just to see Microsoft squirm a little more. 5 markets lost to stupidity, 5 markets lost to shortsightedness and Adobe will be one of the winners. The setting that comes has been out for a while and the lost sides (four at present) are things that Microsoft should have seen years ago, their inaction is now more than enough. If you are asleep at the wheel you lose the ship, it is that simple and unlike the Ever Given, others are not in the Suez Canal, we can go around this Microsoft vessel and let it sink. A home-run out in the open and Microsoft just will not wake up, well let them sleep, I reckon that Adobe is more than ready to take over a chunk of the Office users. Consider that after all this time and all these follies, people do not merely gain a program, they gain a suite of options to tantalise their creativity. 

There is no telling where the creative people are going to end, but it will be ahead of where Microsoft hoped they would be, a lag that only intensifies the losses they will face. The setting reminded me of an article I saw in LinkedIn. 

There we see a person objecting to the discrimination of scouting. There we see “The announcer labelled the boy scouts as ‘Future leaders of America’ and the girls scouts as a group that were ‘just having fun’” This is what we see as a setting for Adobe and Microsoft. Adobe instills and propagates creativity, whilst Microsoft merely sets a mediocre foundation of presenting. Yet if there is one thing I have seen from Adobe, it is a clear stage where presenters can create works of art, whilst Microsoft sets a stage of mediocre joyous presentations, but in this day and age presentations are serious business, it sets the tone for corporate stories, sales events, propagating new projects and products. Joy gets us nowhere and Microsoft joy is close to a decade old. Adobe is on the verge of setting the next generation of presenting tools. So where do YOU wanna be when your idea is ready to be shown to the world? At the edge of what is possible, or in a joyous looking meadow, one that we have seen a million times over? I will let you decide on where you want to be and be honest, do you really think that Microsoft has any serious relevance left?

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

Inclination of letters

We tend to act in certain ways. I am no exception (as you are about to find out). Yet, before we have a go at the BBC and another go at the ICIJ, lets take another look at how Microsoft has FAILED its audience. Now, this is not out in the open and I do not really reveal what has happened, but I am making a jab at it as it will set fortunes to Adobe and this is for their eyes only. So, there I was watching several presentations in the last 24 hours (from several sources) and something occurred to me, it was the third time when I heard something. My mind started to race and suddenly I wondered why Microsoft had left all this in the open, unsolved, unattended for a DECADE. It was so out in the open that I was wondering what on earth they were doing. Yes, their 365 solution is all about making sure their customers pay, and that I fine, but to leave gaps in their office solution out in the open for over a decade, how stupid is that. Yet, no fears. Adobe will fill up that hole nicely with their adjusted suite of programs which will start a new age in corporate needs and Microsoft will be looked at with the look of ‘How could you have been this stupid to such a degree?’ Yet I will not care, I will be giggling in a corner. Watching the wannabe’s seek jobs and seek solutions. 

So now we get to the main event. It is the BBC article ‘Hidden wealth of one of Putin’s ‘inner circle’ revealed’ (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-61028866). There is so much wrong here, I almost do not know where to start, so the beginning it is. 

We see from the start “They reveal how a Swiss tattoo artist was falsely named as owner of a company that transferred over $300m (£230m) to firms linked to Suleiman Kerimov. They also show how $700m of transactions – and the secret ownership of luxury properties – went undetected. The investigation exposes failures of the banking system and the obstacles impeding Western sanctions.” It sounds nice, it really does. But lets take a closer look, shall we? 

Transactions worth $700m linked to Suleiman Kerimov and his closest business associates were reported as suspicious by banks between 2010 and 2015” So was anything done? Were ACTUAL crimes committed? ‘Suspicious’ is merely a word that shows no side towards legality. Then we get “Swiss accountant Alexander Studhalter posed as owner of properties actually owned by Mr Kerimov” So were laws broken? Was anything illegal done? The BBC shows itself to be as big a loser as the ICIJ shown it is. And when we get “Mr Kerimov was the secret owner of properties on the French Riviera and in London, including the most expensive terraced property ever sold in the UK” we see again the small setting ‘If he was a real secret owner, how did they find out?’ But the larger stage is whether LAWS were broken. The BBC does not really inform us of this, do they? They merely illuminate how useless journalists have become. Who is Suleiman Kerimov? I actually do not care. He is not part of my life, I never expect that to happen. But the BBC, the player claiming to be so trustworthy, where are they? Where is the list of broken laws? Where is the EVIDENCE showing us that laws were broken in Switzerland, the UK, and France? We can grasp at the Oligarch foundation all we want, but if we are a nation of laws we need to be shown the laws that were optionally (and allegedly) transgressed upon. So when we are finally given “Experts say Western countries have a lot of work to do because, for years, they have taken a lax approach to the fight against dirty money and failed to hold banks to account.” We see a clear path to something I have been stating for DECADES. Internationally tax laws need to be overhauled and politicians were lax, politicians were all about inaction and now we see the BS tap turned open all whilst we are not given the real deal. What laws were transgressed upon? I reckon that the answer will be none. I cannot tell because I am not a lawyer, I am not a tax lawyer and I am not an attorney. I have my Master of Intellectual property and when (or if) Amazon (or Google) buys my IP, my ship will arrive and I can retire nicely. Yet in this I have questions and the BBC answers none of them, so when we are finally given “In 2020, Swiru Holding accepted its involvement in evading the tax and was fined €1.4m and made to pay another €10.3m to settle the case. Mr Kerimov’s lawyer put out a statement saying that the French courts had “officially dismissed the allegations made by the former Nice Prosecutor against Suleiman Kerimov of having carried out money-laundering operations.”” We basically see a fine less then €12,000,000 for avoiding a taxable amount of €127,000,000 so as it seems crime pays and that is the part we do get to see. So when we are given how $700m of transactions were seemingly ‘undetected’ were laws broken? We are shown the transgression of 20% which was dealt with, but we have no information on the large amount and whether laws were broken. How come? We are given “The transaction was just one in a series of wire transfers carried out from 2010 to 2015 totalling $700m reported to US authorities as suspicious”, yet there is a large gap between ‘suspicious’ and ‘criminal’ and neither the ICIJ or the BBC give us anything on that, merely the alleged indignation. So is the BBC as useless as the ICIJ is showing itself to be? That is my question and I feel that this is not on James Oliver, Nassos Stylianou or Steve Swann. I believe that it is Francesca Mary Unsworth, chief editor of BBC News that needs to come forward and do some explaining on what should be seen as reporting and what should be seen as trivial filtering of news. 

I will let you decide what is what, but I reckon that the entire ICIJ mess needs a long hard look by a few people in all kinds of business walks.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics