Which One Walks

12 12 2018

San Bruno, California

This also explains YT’s channel deletions, video deletions and video crazyaunting.  It’s all to pander to the big advertising accounts.

The fact that the 2018 Rewind video is on track to be the most disliked and downvoted YT video ever won’t matter a hill of beans to YT, Google or anyone.  Because we have the down button, the advertisers have money.  Guess which one walks and which one talks.

Advertisements




Who? Why?

24 11 2018

Washington, D.C.

The lines of official reasoning presented here ring somewhere north of hollow and south of shallow, considering other well known things happening:

The U.S. government has initiated an extraordinary outreach campaign to foreign allies, trying to persuade wireless and internet providers in these countries to avoid telecommunications equipment from China’s Huawei Technologies Co., according to people familiar with the situation.

Huawei?  Who?  Why?

American officials have briefed their government counterparts and telecom executives in friendly countries where Huawei equipment is already in wide use, including Germany, Italy and Japan, about what they see as cybersecurity risks, these people said.

Huawei EU is based in Brussels, and Huawei has a German liaison office, mentioned in this article, just up the road in Düsseldorf.

Germany?  Italy?  Does anybody remember Echelon?  That’s where the United States of America, a wholly owned subsidiary of Boeing, spied on Airbus.

One U.S. concern centers on the use of Chinese telecom equipment in countries that host American military bases, according to people familiar with the matter. The Defense Department has its own satellites and telecom network for especially sensitive communications, but most traffic at many military installations travels through commercial networks.

Concern about Chinese telecom equipment?  Got it.  Concern about Chinese immigration?  Crickets.  Disconcerting, especially since a “Chinese national or Chinese-American busted for military or corporate espionage back to Beijing” is a once a month or so story.

The international effort extends the battle lines of a U.S. campaign to keep Huawei electronics out of the U.S. Some officials see the initiative as part of a broader technological Cold War between U.S.-led allies and China for control of a world that is increasingly digitally connected—and thus increasingly vulnerable to surveillance and malfeasance.

It’s got to do with something else, but I’ll get to that after I refute a bunch of smoke and hot air.

U.S. officials say they worry about the prospect of Chinese telecom-equipment makers spying on or disabling connections to an exponentially growing universe of things, including components of manufacturing plants.

To put it another way, the American Empire is now officially worried about deplatforming.  A lot of people reading these words are calling their offices.

A core focus of the briefings is Beijing’s ability to force Chinese corporations to comply with government requests from government authorities, a U.S. official said.

Pot kettle black, perhaps?  I remember something about the FBI wanting to crack the iPhone’s encryption in order to make a case against a kiddie diddler.

Still, there is a big hitch to U.S. efforts to curb Huawei overseas: The company is already popular among carriers in allied countries, including some of America’s closest military partners. Some major carriers in these places say Huawei offers the most products and often customizes them to fit a carrier’s needs. They also cite lower costs and high quality.

Getting warmer.

In an effort to narrow that advantage in some countries, Washington is considering ways to increase funding from various U.S. government sources to subsidize the purchase and use of non-Chinese equipment, according to people familiar with the matter. Countries buying Chinese telecommunications equipment would be ineligible for such subsidies.

Getting red hot.

U.S. officials have briefed counterparts in Germany, which has signaled a new wariness toward Huawei, according to people familiar with the matter.

That’s what got me interested again in this serial news, even though I’ve been aware of it for a minute, and have had the same opinion all along, because this was news in the German media over the last few days.  Huawei Germany, being based here in The Region, the Region’s media have also made hay of it.

Enough deep diving.  Time for me to lay it all out for you.

We’re supposed to hate Who-Why and X-Vowel-Vowel-Vowel-Vowel-Vowel and ZTE for doing what Facebook, Google, Microsoft and Apple already do.  Europe is supposed to look sideways at China for information espionage, at the behest of a government that committed information espionage against Europe to help Boeing get an edge on Airbus.  We’re supposed to be worried about potential Beijing deplatforming when FB, Twitter, Instagram, YT, PayPal and all the cool social media kids actually do deplatforming in a yuge bigly way.  And like I wrote above, what use is it to worry about Chinese tech on American military bases when there are already many Chinese eyeballs there?  Then there’s the matter that a significant percentage of the “good guys'” physical equipment is made in China proper, yet nobody seems to be worried about the Chinese government prodding Foxconn to slip a little sumtin’ sumtin’ ET phone home to Beijing inside those iWhatevers.

This is nothing more than the American Empire issuing an imperial decree to all imperial subjects, vassals and protectorates to use hardware made by a company based in either the American Empire proper, or in one of its subjects, vassals or protectorates.  After all, spending money with Huawei, Xiaomi or ZTE means that some money that can’t possibly be turned around as tribute to the American Empire, i.e. purchase orders to Boeing.

This will be on the test.

Powerology class dismissed.

 





The Interesting Thing About Google Germany

12 11 2018

Berlin;  Hamburg

The story that Hard Right linked to as a comment.

I saw it earlier today, but didn’t think much about it.

But the more I think about it, the more I think of it.

Not so much for the content of this story.

Here’s the interesting thing about Google Germany:

It believes itself to be way more of a media business than a CSIT-STEM business.  The reason I can tell is that Google Germany overall is based in Hamburg, which is, among other things, a media town.  If it thought itself a CSIT-STEM business, it would have planted itself in a CSIT-STEM town, such as Dresden, Nuremberg or Aachen.





Dark Clouds

22 05 2018

Stockholm

Here’s the takeaway that next to nobody other than your ever-lovin’ blogmeister can discern:

The real danger here is cloud computing, cloud applications, cloud data storage.  To me, the Pro-Defamation League and the Poverty Palace are sideshows.





WRPT + TALA

27 04 2018

Scottsdale, Arizona

The story that sits at the intersectionality of the Wicked Racial Profiling Trick and They All Look Alike.

Oh boy.  I see where this is going.

Remember this?

Such as it is, we get “NAACP” in the third paragraph.

I had predicted not long after the official demand for cop body cams that the official demanders would do a 180 within ten years, and as it turned out, it didn’t even take three.  Now, to the extent there’s any enthusiasm left for body cams in the civil rights alphabet gang, this will totally end it.





Sail Foams

17 04 2018

Boston

Why did OLPC turn out to be a flop?

Don’t make it any more difficult than it needs to be.

Sail foams.  They got cheap and ubiquitous at just the right (or wrong) time relative to the OLPC project.

Also not helping were the internet viewing habits of certain African children.





In a Roundabout Way

21 03 2018

West Palm Beach, Florida

Rush, today:

So they’re bragging about it, 332 electoral votes, and they think that social media did it. You know, Jim Geraghty, our old buddy at National Review, he raised a great question about all this. Let me ask all of you sitting across the glass and all of you here in this esteemed audience. Brian, Dawn, and Mr. Snerdley, let’s just for the sake of it say that you’re on social media, that you’re using Twitter and Facebook, and you get one of these ads. And this ad is trying to persuade you to vote for Hillary in 2016. Is such an ad gonna work on you?

Three people are shaking their heads in there. The point being just how effective is this stuff anyway? There’s a dangerous downside to this that’s gonna lead to the government regulating even more of what you and I are able to know and access. Because that’s happening here is that the American people are being portrayed as a bunch of pure idiots, literal dolts, and they’re all out there playing around on social media. And they’re telling each other lies about how great their lives are and they’re bragging about this and bragging about that.

And here comes this Messina guy, and he says (paraphrasing), “Yeah, our campaign on social media garnered 332 electorate votes.” What they’re trying to say is that their brilliant campaign, their brilliant use of social media made people vote a certain way. And I ask you to go do the same thing. Talk to your friends who you know were just dyed-in-the-wool Trump supporters and you ask ’em if there would have been any ad that they saw — Facebook, Twitter, wherever — that would have changed their mind and made ’em vote for Hillary.

And I’ll guarantee you out of every 10 you’re not gonna have more than nine people tell you you’re full of it. It may even be a smaller ratio than that. The dangerous thing here is you got guys like Messina and all these other people that are bragging about Obama’s brilliant campaign like the New York Times wrote about in 2013, making it look like they were Svengalis, they were brilliant, and they had the unique ability to generate all of those votes.

Rush is, as millennialspeak goes, “throwing shade” on the very notion that the Obama 2012 data game really had any effect.

Which is Rush’s roundabout way of agreeing with me.

Remember my missive:  At first, I drank the kool-aid that Obama’s data game was effective.  But then as the months rolled on after re-election, we found out from credible high sample size exit survey data that the niche constituency groups that the Obama data game was supposed to appeal to turned out a bit less than and voted Obama slightly less than they did four years prior.  Strike one.  Then people who looked at deep level precinct data found that working class whites weren’t feeling ole Willard, and stayed home enough to change the outcomes of enough important states.  As we know, WCWs generally don’t respond to the data game, because they’re generally not that visible to internet social media.  Now, what the Obama 2012 people did do well when it came to WCWs using the kind of media they use, was engage in anti-Romney FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt), and that did keep their turnout down.  But that had nothing to do with Faceberg.  Strike two.  Then came the dagger:  In the summer of 2013, the Census Bureau surveys and data on actual voter turnout showed the middle aged and especially elderly black women turned out in record numbers, even higher than they did in 2008, and we know who they voted for.  And we know that elderly black women aren’t exactly a wheel house Faceberg using demographic.  Strike three, you’re out.

The Obama 2012 data game was, again, as millennialspeak goes, a fail.