https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/white-house-installs-political-aides-at-cabinet-agencies-to-be-trumps-eyes-and-ears/2017/03/19/68419f0e-08da-11e7-93dc-00f9bdd74ed1_story.html?tid=sm_tw&utm_term=.66a77240a317
Study up on the what a Matrix Organization is and does with a review of these Google Search Links:
https://www.google.com/search?q=matrix+organizations&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:unofficial
During my navy career the Organization Chart was a key document describing structure and operation of the organizational entity. On a ship there were several Organizational Charts beyond the basic staffing structure of Departments and Divisions. The basic Organization Chart was flexible on a Case basis. It changed immediately in the Case of General Quarters. Less quickly and at a normal pace when setting the In Port Watch. In general, the Watch, Quarter and Station Bill dictated who went where and did what as well as reporting to whom. When the Battle Problem was lost at its conclusion, Abandon Ship was the last Case and organizational structure.
I loved my navy career and excelled in the evaluation of superiors. I stepped into every new assignment feeling I was in over my head and would not survive. Not just fail but be inadequate for the task and fail the mission as well as myself. I operated between a carrot and a stick for over 20 years. It was not one year of service 20 times over. Every year built on the shoulders of the previous year. The only thing that each year had in common was the feeling of getting a recruit haircut every year and continuing from that point to climb the mission ladder.
I learned from observing that the best performing officers would often begin a new assignment ashore with a study and restructure of the organization chart applicable to their assignment. Shore duty organization charts were a function of slow change over time. Often lagging in change to the mission, which also changed slowly. No full speed ahead case based mode ashore, at least not often but when it was required usually called a crises.
I was commissioned in 1965.
Early in my career I learned that most crises were usually addressed by what we called a "Tiger Team". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiger_team
"A 1964 paper entitled "Program Management in Design and Development" introduced tiger teams
and defined the term as "a team of undomesticated and uninhibited
technical specialists, selected for their experience, energy, and
imagination, and assigned to track down relentlessly every possible
source of failure in a spacecraft subsystem".[4]"
(I was commissioned in 1965).
"Tiger teams have seen extensive use in governmental organizations. They
are often used for assessment of compliance with and efficacy of
existing policies as well as creating proposals or recommendations for
future policies. In the United States, governmental tiger team
recommendations have directly influenced laws and policies in the
national government.[10]"
Ashore the Organization Chart ran the command mission. I normally had a civilian deputy that knew and performed the management of the established mission better than me. I perceived my mission as more of an agent of change for improved mission performance. I came up with new ideas and was tasked to implement them. The new ideas were sometimes internal to my own official scope of organizational responsibilities. They became increasingly focused on external relationships with other organizations and their related responsibilities.
At the culmination of my career I was in Washington DC. It was at that time in 1984 that I was tasked with an assignment for restructuring the supply support mission within a major navy Systems Command. A job so far above my ability all I had was a bottom of the sea idea of where the surface might be and which way to go to get there. It reminded me of Abandon Ship drills at sea. When the command was passed all we were given was the range and bearing of the nearest friendly land. "Lost at Sea" is both a literal and figurative expression. A compass is a raw idea of which way to go. How to get there is another.
How to get there, where the intention is to go, with the resources at hand was always the problem. The resources at hand were often like a tree to be climbed to get to the moon. At the top of the tree there was a great reliance of the art and skill of improvising. I learned that early in Damage Control Drills. What to do to put out the fire, stop the flow of water into a compartment. The observer watched the performance of the team and after each problem had been addressed by a corrective action would say: "OK, now what do you do if that does not work or if this happens?" We would do something. When it finally came to an end of things we could do and we had no answer the observer said: "OK, lay down and die unless you can find a shower drain to suck oxygen out of until someone comes to save your sorry asses!" It created an attitude about getting the job done. A lesson to be carried for a career.
At the end of my career I was managing information more than anything else. It was the early 1980's. The ultimate answer of what to do to achieve the mission was a step beyond the current structure. A step beyond a networked system with rigid pointers of relationships like an organizational chart or an analogous computer system of rigid network pointers to data data. It was a time of paradigm ship to flexible relational data and object programming from relatively rigid networked data and functional programming.
Stepping back two assignments before Washington DC I was working for Admiral Rickover. That brings me (finally) to my interest in the subject line of this blog entry. The nature of Matrix Organizations and how that might be applicable to what the Trump administration is (might well be) doing at the Cabinet and below level. I have seen this before. Rickover was an expert and matrix management was his method. He controlled far more than what was under his Organizational Chart.
Me and my Division was one of those things he controlled. Indirectly, officially. Very much directly in reality. It was called being "two hatted". I worked for two Admirals. The one in charge of my command on the official Organizational Chart. The Admiral I really worked for was outside of my official Organizational Chart but had within in his direct official Organization Chart an officer junior to me assigned to the command I worked for. Someone that reported on me, as well as my commanding officer, also an Admiral, to Admiral Rickover's people in high level positions.
It was a matrix of things and associated functions structured outside the traditional organizational bureaucratic tree. It was extremely effective then. Even more effective now that the old school organizational tree is still in existence for routine business but increasingly being displaced by a matrix structure that gets more important business of change done. Important as defined or directed by the one in charge....Trump.
Leverage is the key. Trump is a leverage guy. Study up on it:
https://www.google.com/search?q=leverage&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:unofficial
Rickover was a leverage guy. What they have in common is leveraging objects over which they do not have direct control to produce functions of the objects. Nuclear Power is a functional result of a system structure of physical object relationships that produce it. Political Power is the same. Grasp direct control of the objects involved and the functional outcome is owned. Grasp more or all of the objects is any domain and the function of the domain is owned.
I think the Rickover method of control was to have a agent, a spy, in every organization that related to the domain of nuclear power. The agent did not necessarily have to be in a dominant role in the organization. The power of the agent however was far greater than the position of the agent and the pay for the position. The motivation of the agent? The reward of loyalty, fear of being fired, dedication to the mission, the self serving satisfaction of the possession of power beyond the actual grade of the position assignment. Young and hungry junior agents slugging beyond their weight. A matrix of agents operating for Rickover installed in organizations associated with his mission. Agents of leverage.
I could go on with a number of stories about what it was like to be in the double hatted position I was in and be the one that the matrix agent of Admiral Rickover acted upon to put his program first and foremost for funding and performance in my own command far beyond its internal command mission priorities distributed among the divisions of the command. I got funding and staffing that others did not. Overall, the Nuclear Navy came first in a command that supported the fleet. That was totally consistent with the ideology priorities of Admiral Rickover and intentions to put his priorities first with a management method to accomplish that.
To a great extent there was a relationship to a higher order mission. That was the absolutely safe and reliable operation of nuclear power plants. If funding or any other resources were ever short for Rickover, and they never were in the end, that is the card he would play and hammer to use to get whatever was needed.
There was also a relationship to a high level of classified mission operations and secrecy. Won't go into that but the entire matter of secrecy involves many matrixed organizational entities.
Deep State: I see the Deep State as a Matrix organization. A 1% or more cross sector matrix that is the leverage key to control an vast and rigidly structured government. The 1% or more that can act swiftly depending on case or mode to address immediate requirements much like the the manner in which a navy ship is designed to perform its mission. That is the key to winning in battle.
I don't see as clearly exactly what Trump's battle space or mission winning objective is. Is he in control or the one being controlled?
Perhaps the answer is to be found in exactly who is the mastermind behind this plan to install a matrix of agent spies in cabinet level organizations reporting to controllers outside the various Cabinets. How far down the organizational level does this matrix reach. To maximize its effectiveness I would think only 3 levels covered by a total of 9 agents in each Cabinet Department.
Who is behind this pulling the strings?
Taking an even broader view of the effectiveness of Matrix Organizations is it really Trump's executive level staff behind this. It could just as well be that it originates elsewhere. Perhaps in a dominant Cabinet?
Hmmm....From the link at the beginning of this blog entry:
"These aides report not to the secretary, but to the Office of Cabinet
Affairs, which is overseen by Rick Dearborn, a White House deputy chief
of staff, according to administration officials. A top Dearborn aide,
John Mashburn, leads a weekly conference call with the advisers, who are
in constant contact with the White House."
http://www.ozy.com/politics-and-power/the-white-houses-man-in-the-middle/75927
Monday, March 20, 2017
Saturday, March 18, 2017
Federal Budget
https://www.nationalpriorities.org/
Populism:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Populism
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/03/17/republican-budget-experts-say-trump-budget-dropped-populism/99297530/
Trumps election was a function Populism. Sub-Category of Populism: Right Wing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_populism
Logically, if there is Right Wing Populism then there is Left Wing Populism:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_populism
Trump Populism Southern Strategy:
https://www.google.com/search?q=trump+populism+southern+strategy&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:unofficial
Bait and Switch:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bait-and-switch
"Let the Buyer Beware" is a sub category market model ambiguous rule related to the "Art of the Deal" that theoretically balances the market place but in practice should reasonably require the observance and compliance with an ethic value framework or mandatory compliance with a legal framework. Generally dis-regarded as a function of another rule: Dog eat Dog. Or Greed is Good. Or Survival of the Fittest. Generally considered to be un-ethical or even immoral but an excellent model for making money.
"Making Money" is a bottom line thing. Where the rubber meets the road as a function of (or in spite of) what went into prior design of entity relationships and implementation of functions among them called a sale or trade.
Fair Trade? That is a judgment thing that has a degree of ambiguity and a function Trust.
https://www.google.com/search?q=fair+trade%3F&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:unofficial#dobs=fair%20trade
Trump won the prize position of President as a function of what he offered to win it and who he offered what to whom and why it was attractive enough to win their support. Now that constituency is getting what they wanted and bargained for in return for their vote on emotional and other issues.
Trump wins on the bottom line of "Making Money". The general public gets a handful of beans. More money moves to the establishment, the small percent that make the most money. Less money moves to the people.
Nothing personal. It is just business. Might have been much the same result if Hillary had won.
I believe that there would not be so much slip between the bait and a slip if Bernie had won.
Where the money goes in the Federal Budget, or does not go, is the consummation of the "Deal".
We been had?
Most of us already knew that, the rest are beginning to see it. Enough to tip the balance...seriously.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-budget-republicans_us_58cc107fe4b0ec9d29dbb9ed?5oq2h4zwa5rk9&
The National Budget is where the Bait gets delivered....or switched! The ones that benefit from the switch...the few...must be very happy. The rest of We the People? Not so much.
The Federal Budget is not generally understood. The link at the beginning of this blog entry is educational. Yes it is but the challenge of education is convey learning of the education content to the target demographic entity. Every citizen in theory. Enough citizens in reality to give a majority of informed citizenry to swing the majority vote to favor the General Welfare of our democracy and the application programs that the democratic operating system supports. Or something good like that.
I repeat: The Federal Budget is not generally understood by the enough of the public to make it subject to the will of the majority. The lead link attempts to present the Federal Budget, and abstract structural entity in a fashion that can be understood. The following link presents a view on the sheer difficulty in doing that:
http://cepr.net/blogs/beat-the-press/the-public-is-clueless-about-the-federal-budget-and-it-s-the-new-york-times-fault
How in the world is it possible to reduce the complexity of human designed abstract social systems to simplicity that can be grasped by at least the majority of citizens to assure that assure that their vote on the operating system and its application programs result in the serving the common good? Extremely difficult when the foundation of the economic social system is each person acting freely and independently in their own self interest?
How can reduction of a complex abstract social system be reduced to simplicity so that the majority of citizens can exercise control of the top level entities of the system with assurance that applications of the system at lower levels where the rubber meets the road and does something are a directly linked function of the design intent and control built in at the top level where the levers of governance are in the hands of the people? Sufficiently in the hands of those who are governed that assure that those chosen to operate the governance system govern as intended?
Good question. Maybe the answer is taking the product of the past that has the abstract substance of a big marshmallow created by human minds on a trial and error methodology like nature and make it into a highly defined abstract operating system machine to run our social application programs on. A system founded on natural law of science but enhanced by our human intelligence that extends beyond science into the domain of belief. Beliefs that we choose to be self evident.
Intelligence does extend into the domain of belief beyond natural world science. In that domain a science based extension of our intelligent minds projects itself. So far so good, historically. To go farther we need to create an abstract machine intelligence to serve us. Artificial Intelligence.
Artificial Intelligence is the creation of abstracted computer machine based systems by the gifted few of us, scientists, engineers and builders to serve all of us. They know best in the complexity of their domains, private and public sectors. The public is a stakeholder with specification interest in their efforts, also a consumer of what they create.
Apply Artificial Intelligence design to the Federal Budget? A design that most can follow at the top level and be assured by trust in experts that the entire system serves us in application performance. Much like the Internet and World Wide Web. A Federal Budget System where each and every citizen could pull a thread that leads from them individually to the general performance of the entire system for the common good.
At the most granular level in the Federal Budget System is a single dollar. In an Artificial Intelligence Federal Budget System the unique dollar that is a uniquely identified granular level entity unit of the entire system is the end of the thread to be pulled that connects it to the effectiveness of all dollars in the system to serve us.
The Federal Budget is a top down breakdown of proposed spending of dollars.
Federal Budget execution is the actual application of a single uniquely identified unit dollar by the Federal Budget Operating System. Every single unique dollar applied must be traceable to compliance with the Operating System and the intentions of the Operating System design to serve the Common Good. All that is about as difficult to understand at the macro and micro levels of Operating System and Application Programs as the computer system of the Information Age.
Operating Systems and Application Programs of the Information Age serve me well. My email works. My bank accounts work. My Netflix works. My online shopping works. When they don't I can find out why and correct it or get it corrected. If my chosen provider of Information Age services does not work then I chose another provider. On a higher order level if a provider of major sectoral service does not provide adequate service then a new provider will find an opportunity. The Federal Budget works for me and should be no different. In the case of the Federal Budget not working for me individually as well as us collectively then a new Provider of the Federal Budget is collectively chosen.
Perhaps we the people should chose a new provider of the Federal Budget whenever there is a majority lack of confidence in the current provider, not on a schedule of every 4 years?
As a citizen I want to be able to pull the string on every single unique dollar of my choice chosen from all Federal Budget dollars spent to discover when it was spend, what it was spent for and who received it. I want that information on a micro dollar unit level as well as a macro level by Federal Budget category.
That requires the creation of a big system. No bigger than the system that they government has created to monitor all current information age systems and traffic for "security" purposes that have questionable actual security purposes. I would rather have all those resources dedicated to the creation of an Operating System and Application Programs applicable to the Federal Budget as well as the general Banking Monetary System using blockchain technology to assure without a doubt that our governance system is delivering for the common good.
Big information systems have a long history of development to serve users. This is an excellent story about the VA health care information system designed to serve users:
http://www.politico.com/agenda/story/2017/03/vista-computer-history-va-conspiracy-000367
Like the Federal Budget and our Banking Monetary System it has its granular unique system unit: the VA patient. The unit that can be traced in history about which all information is related. Analogous to the single dollar. The link is a fascinating story of development. If only the established Federal Budget System had such gifted and motivated people to change what was once a paper accounting system to an information age system.
It appears to me that the legacy Federal Budget System design was simply implemented on a computer without significant restructure to serve the needs of operating system Information Management and Control of its Application Programs. Application, What a Budget System does rather than what a Federal Budget System is continued to be secondary and what it does in Application Execution continued to be primary in system design.
Exactly like the Monetary system design. The Federal Budget System is a functional oriented design. Based primarily on what it does, Secondarily what it is and how it operates with a controlling Operating System to produce Application programs accomplishing what it is intended to do.
The old legacy story of function driven design vs Object Oriented design. Horse before the cart system design of old school functional design legacy systems that are so well entrenched but must die.
Finance is all design focus on function. Focus on what money does and creation of a functional oriented system of Application Programs. Finance is all Application Programs designed in accordance with the domination of the functional approach to serve and objective: Making money. Focus on what money is? That would create a different system. One that would overcome the failures of the legacy functional oriented debt money system. Another legacy Functional Design Based system that deserves to die. Since it will not evolve to a Object Oriented design it will die a catastrophic death it deserves. The chaos that causes is our greatest national security problem.
http://wolfstreet.com/2017/03/20/sp500-eps-stagnate-despite-share-buybacks-non-gaap-reporting/
"Financial Engineering" What a joke. Engineering is done in the operating system rules of the game, not the play on the field which is the function of the operating system rules. Finance wants no operating system rules except those of the "Market" which are all functional. Just like black magic. Total focus is on the action of the deal, the object nature properties of the medium of exchange involved are obviated by their debt nature. Debt is not an object at all. It is a Case situation.
Populism:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Populism
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/03/17/republican-budget-experts-say-trump-budget-dropped-populism/99297530/
Trumps election was a function Populism. Sub-Category of Populism: Right Wing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_populism
Logically, if there is Right Wing Populism then there is Left Wing Populism:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_populism
Trump Populism Southern Strategy:
https://www.google.com/search?q=trump+populism+southern+strategy&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:unofficial
Bait and Switch:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bait-and-switch
"Let the Buyer Beware" is a sub category market model ambiguous rule related to the "Art of the Deal" that theoretically balances the market place but in practice should reasonably require the observance and compliance with an ethic value framework or mandatory compliance with a legal framework. Generally dis-regarded as a function of another rule: Dog eat Dog. Or Greed is Good. Or Survival of the Fittest. Generally considered to be un-ethical or even immoral but an excellent model for making money.
"Making Money" is a bottom line thing. Where the rubber meets the road as a function of (or in spite of) what went into prior design of entity relationships and implementation of functions among them called a sale or trade.
Fair Trade? That is a judgment thing that has a degree of ambiguity and a function Trust.
https://www.google.com/search?q=fair+trade%3F&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:unofficial#dobs=fair%20trade
Trump won the prize position of President as a function of what he offered to win it and who he offered what to whom and why it was attractive enough to win their support. Now that constituency is getting what they wanted and bargained for in return for their vote on emotional and other issues.
Trump wins on the bottom line of "Making Money". The general public gets a handful of beans. More money moves to the establishment, the small percent that make the most money. Less money moves to the people.
Nothing personal. It is just business. Might have been much the same result if Hillary had won.
I believe that there would not be so much slip between the bait and a slip if Bernie had won.
Where the money goes in the Federal Budget, or does not go, is the consummation of the "Deal".
We been had?
Most of us already knew that, the rest are beginning to see it. Enough to tip the balance...seriously.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-budget-republicans_us_58cc107fe4b0ec9d29dbb9ed?5oq2h4zwa5rk9&
The National Budget is where the Bait gets delivered....or switched! The ones that benefit from the switch...the few...must be very happy. The rest of We the People? Not so much.
The Federal Budget is not generally understood. The link at the beginning of this blog entry is educational. Yes it is but the challenge of education is convey learning of the education content to the target demographic entity. Every citizen in theory. Enough citizens in reality to give a majority of informed citizenry to swing the majority vote to favor the General Welfare of our democracy and the application programs that the democratic operating system supports. Or something good like that.
I repeat: The Federal Budget is not generally understood by the enough of the public to make it subject to the will of the majority. The lead link attempts to present the Federal Budget, and abstract structural entity in a fashion that can be understood. The following link presents a view on the sheer difficulty in doing that:
http://cepr.net/blogs/beat-the-press/the-public-is-clueless-about-the-federal-budget-and-it-s-the-new-york-times-fault
How in the world is it possible to reduce the complexity of human designed abstract social systems to simplicity that can be grasped by at least the majority of citizens to assure that assure that their vote on the operating system and its application programs result in the serving the common good? Extremely difficult when the foundation of the economic social system is each person acting freely and independently in their own self interest?
How can reduction of a complex abstract social system be reduced to simplicity so that the majority of citizens can exercise control of the top level entities of the system with assurance that applications of the system at lower levels where the rubber meets the road and does something are a directly linked function of the design intent and control built in at the top level where the levers of governance are in the hands of the people? Sufficiently in the hands of those who are governed that assure that those chosen to operate the governance system govern as intended?
Good question. Maybe the answer is taking the product of the past that has the abstract substance of a big marshmallow created by human minds on a trial and error methodology like nature and make it into a highly defined abstract operating system machine to run our social application programs on. A system founded on natural law of science but enhanced by our human intelligence that extends beyond science into the domain of belief. Beliefs that we choose to be self evident.
Intelligence does extend into the domain of belief beyond natural world science. In that domain a science based extension of our intelligent minds projects itself. So far so good, historically. To go farther we need to create an abstract machine intelligence to serve us. Artificial Intelligence.
Artificial Intelligence is the creation of abstracted computer machine based systems by the gifted few of us, scientists, engineers and builders to serve all of us. They know best in the complexity of their domains, private and public sectors. The public is a stakeholder with specification interest in their efforts, also a consumer of what they create.
Apply Artificial Intelligence design to the Federal Budget? A design that most can follow at the top level and be assured by trust in experts that the entire system serves us in application performance. Much like the Internet and World Wide Web. A Federal Budget System where each and every citizen could pull a thread that leads from them individually to the general performance of the entire system for the common good.
At the most granular level in the Federal Budget System is a single dollar. In an Artificial Intelligence Federal Budget System the unique dollar that is a uniquely identified granular level entity unit of the entire system is the end of the thread to be pulled that connects it to the effectiveness of all dollars in the system to serve us.
The Federal Budget is a top down breakdown of proposed spending of dollars.
Federal Budget execution is the actual application of a single uniquely identified unit dollar by the Federal Budget Operating System. Every single unique dollar applied must be traceable to compliance with the Operating System and the intentions of the Operating System design to serve the Common Good. All that is about as difficult to understand at the macro and micro levels of Operating System and Application Programs as the computer system of the Information Age.
Operating Systems and Application Programs of the Information Age serve me well. My email works. My bank accounts work. My Netflix works. My online shopping works. When they don't I can find out why and correct it or get it corrected. If my chosen provider of Information Age services does not work then I chose another provider. On a higher order level if a provider of major sectoral service does not provide adequate service then a new provider will find an opportunity. The Federal Budget works for me and should be no different. In the case of the Federal Budget not working for me individually as well as us collectively then a new Provider of the Federal Budget is collectively chosen.
Perhaps we the people should chose a new provider of the Federal Budget whenever there is a majority lack of confidence in the current provider, not on a schedule of every 4 years?
As a citizen I want to be able to pull the string on every single unique dollar of my choice chosen from all Federal Budget dollars spent to discover when it was spend, what it was spent for and who received it. I want that information on a micro dollar unit level as well as a macro level by Federal Budget category.
That requires the creation of a big system. No bigger than the system that they government has created to monitor all current information age systems and traffic for "security" purposes that have questionable actual security purposes. I would rather have all those resources dedicated to the creation of an Operating System and Application Programs applicable to the Federal Budget as well as the general Banking Monetary System using blockchain technology to assure without a doubt that our governance system is delivering for the common good.
Big information systems have a long history of development to serve users. This is an excellent story about the VA health care information system designed to serve users:
http://www.politico.com/agenda/story/2017/03/vista-computer-history-va-conspiracy-000367
Like the Federal Budget and our Banking Monetary System it has its granular unique system unit: the VA patient. The unit that can be traced in history about which all information is related. Analogous to the single dollar. The link is a fascinating story of development. If only the established Federal Budget System had such gifted and motivated people to change what was once a paper accounting system to an information age system.
It appears to me that the legacy Federal Budget System design was simply implemented on a computer without significant restructure to serve the needs of operating system Information Management and Control of its Application Programs. Application, What a Budget System does rather than what a Federal Budget System is continued to be secondary and what it does in Application Execution continued to be primary in system design.
Exactly like the Monetary system design. The Federal Budget System is a functional oriented design. Based primarily on what it does, Secondarily what it is and how it operates with a controlling Operating System to produce Application programs accomplishing what it is intended to do.
The old legacy story of function driven design vs Object Oriented design. Horse before the cart system design of old school functional design legacy systems that are so well entrenched but must die.
Finance is all design focus on function. Focus on what money does and creation of a functional oriented system of Application Programs. Finance is all Application Programs designed in accordance with the domination of the functional approach to serve and objective: Making money. Focus on what money is? That would create a different system. One that would overcome the failures of the legacy functional oriented debt money system. Another legacy Functional Design Based system that deserves to die. Since it will not evolve to a Object Oriented design it will die a catastrophic death it deserves. The chaos that causes is our greatest national security problem.
http://wolfstreet.com/2017/03/20/sp500-eps-stagnate-despite-share-buybacks-non-gaap-reporting/
"Financial Engineering" What a joke. Engineering is done in the operating system rules of the game, not the play on the field which is the function of the operating system rules. Finance wants no operating system rules except those of the "Market" which are all functional. Just like black magic. Total focus is on the action of the deal, the object nature properties of the medium of exchange involved are obviated by their debt nature. Debt is not an object at all. It is a Case situation.
Friday, March 17, 2017
What Cities Work - Bend 2030 - Others.....Economic Development
https://whatworkscities.bloomberg.org/
Bend 2030:
http://www.orton.org/blog/a_tale_of_two_visions?gclid=CJist7Tu3dICFY17fgodITsGxQ
http://bend2030.org/
http://www.connectcentraloregon.org/agency/detail/?agency_id=14203
https://www.changemakers.com/strongcommunities/entries/bend-2030-vision-builds
$100K grant to Bend 2030
http://kbnd.com/kbnd-news/local-news-feed/294446
Opportunity Knocks
https://opp-knocks.org/
Tech Alliance of Central Oregon
https://startupbend.com/articles/tech-alliance-of-central-oregon-rebrands-refocuses-as-bendtech/
"Data Driven Cities" Google search results:
https://www.google.com/search?q=data+driven+cities&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:unofficial
Bend 2030:
http://www.orton.org/blog/a_tale_of_two_visions?gclid=CJist7Tu3dICFY17fgodITsGxQ
http://bend2030.org/
http://www.connectcentraloregon.org/agency/detail/?agency_id=14203
https://www.changemakers.com/strongcommunities/entries/bend-2030-vision-builds
$100K grant to Bend 2030
http://kbnd.com/kbnd-news/local-news-feed/294446
Opportunity Knocks
https://opp-knocks.org/
Tech Alliance of Central Oregon
https://startupbend.com/articles/tech-alliance-of-central-oregon-rebrands-refocuses-as-bendtech/
"Data Driven Cities" Google search results:
https://www.google.com/search?q=data+driven+cities&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:unofficial
Sunday, March 12, 2017
Market Function - Market Design
Market Function
Market Design
Natural things function to obey natural laws. Natural laws are built into the nature of things. It might be called the intelligence of things to express themselves in what they do. It might also be called Nature at Work.
There is no question of the order of things in nature. Properties of things came first. The function of things is the result of action to implement pre-existing properties of things to relate to each other to produce an outcome. Functions are secondary. Except perhaps for the Big Bang after which all else regarding function took back seat to the determinant of the properties of thing and means to relate to other things.
Markets are not natural entities. They are conceptual function based entities. They exist because of what they do. What they do comes first, what they are comes second as a function of what they do.
Designing a scheme of functional relationships to devise a entity called a market is entirely different approach to design than endowing objects with attributes that may relate in some functional manner to produce an outcome result.
Markets can be designed based on the function of what they do.
or
Markets can be designed based on what market entities are and how they relate by certain rules to produce functional results.
Functional oriented design is old school.
Object oriented design is new school.
Objects have the advantage of persistence over time and therefore system stability.
Functions come and go with high frequency and variability. A shell game focuses on the confusion of rapid action to the benefit of the person operating the game and basing it on action not object to be the the most important determinant of design increasing/decreasing two party risk. If the shell with the pea beneath it had a P on the shell there would be absolute risk as a function of object design relationship.
ObamaCare is an object oriented rules of the game designed to benefit the recipient of medical system care.
TrumpCare is a function oriented market design based on what it does not primarily for the recipient of medical care but third party market entities of the medical, insurance, medical related entities as well as the the sector called "rich".
It is ironic that those other than the recipients of medical service proclaim the glory of a functional market based system that more or less creates itself bases on the market action function but create object oriented design systems to reduce their risks and enhance their rewards.
Function oriented based market systems (free from imposition of rules) for thee, the recipient of medical services but object oriented based systems for me as the recipient of financial benefit (and reduction of risk) derived from or associated with providing health care. It is the Republican ideology.
Let the (function of) markets rule! We don't need no stinkin laws imposed by object oriented design rules that dictate, constrain or otherwise mess with functional designs.
Market Design
Natural things function to obey natural laws. Natural laws are built into the nature of things. It might be called the intelligence of things to express themselves in what they do. It might also be called Nature at Work.
There is no question of the order of things in nature. Properties of things came first. The function of things is the result of action to implement pre-existing properties of things to relate to each other to produce an outcome. Functions are secondary. Except perhaps for the Big Bang after which all else regarding function took back seat to the determinant of the properties of thing and means to relate to other things.
Markets are not natural entities. They are conceptual function based entities. They exist because of what they do. What they do comes first, what they are comes second as a function of what they do.
Designing a scheme of functional relationships to devise a entity called a market is entirely different approach to design than endowing objects with attributes that may relate in some functional manner to produce an outcome result.
Markets can be designed based on the function of what they do.
or
Markets can be designed based on what market entities are and how they relate by certain rules to produce functional results.
Functional oriented design is old school.
Object oriented design is new school.
Objects have the advantage of persistence over time and therefore system stability.
Functions come and go with high frequency and variability. A shell game focuses on the confusion of rapid action to the benefit of the person operating the game and basing it on action not object to be the the most important determinant of design increasing/decreasing two party risk. If the shell with the pea beneath it had a P on the shell there would be absolute risk as a function of object design relationship.
ObamaCare is an object oriented rules of the game designed to benefit the recipient of medical system care.
TrumpCare is a function oriented market design based on what it does not primarily for the recipient of medical care but third party market entities of the medical, insurance, medical related entities as well as the the sector called "rich".
It is ironic that those other than the recipients of medical service proclaim the glory of a functional market based system that more or less creates itself bases on the market action function but create object oriented design systems to reduce their risks and enhance their rewards.
Function oriented based market systems (free from imposition of rules) for thee, the recipient of medical services but object oriented based systems for me as the recipient of financial benefit (and reduction of risk) derived from or associated with providing health care. It is the Republican ideology.
Let the (function of) markets rule! We don't need no stinkin laws imposed by object oriented design rules that dictate, constrain or otherwise mess with functional designs.
Tuesday, March 7, 2017
Redhawk Security Network
http://www.ktvz.com/news/special-report-whos-watching/323224737
A hometown report on the local TV news.
Redhawk Security Network: https://www.redhawksecurity.com/
"Redhawk Network Security is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Potawatomi Business Development Corporation (PBDC)"
http://www.potawatomibdc.com/
http://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=28092336
http://www.bendbulletin.com/home/4836989-151/redhawk-consults-on-cybersecurity
https://www.redhawksecurity.com/services/Leadership.htm
Native Indian owned entities and government contracts:
https://www.google.com/search?q=government+contracts+indian+owned&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:unofficial
Women owned small business:
https://www.google.com/search?q=woman+owned+government+contracts&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:unofficial#q=women+owned+government+contracts&*
http://www.governing.com/topics/mgmt/gov-women-minority-contracting.html
Seattle and Austin Texas:
https://bendchamber.org/bend-business-edition/redhawk-promotes-from-within-to-complete-final-phase-of-acquisition/
Seattle: Based in Seattle, James Holland moves from senior sales manager to director of sales and marketing, leveraging over 16 years in solution sales for information technology and information security organizations.
Texas: 701 Brazos Street, Suite 1600
Austin, TX 78701
http://www.txmx.us
Red Hawk Security Network software:
https://www.manageengine.com/uk/pace/enterprise-nsam.html
Kerri Fry
https://www.manageengine.com/uk/me_partners.html
Woman owned business:
http://l8c.com/
A hometown report on the local TV news.
Redhawk Security Network: https://www.redhawksecurity.com/
"Redhawk Network Security is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Potawatomi Business Development Corporation (PBDC)"
http://www.potawatomibdc.com/
http://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=28092336
http://www.bendbulletin.com/home/4836989-151/redhawk-consults-on-cybersecurity
https://www.redhawksecurity.com/services/Leadership.htm
Native Indian owned entities and government contracts:
https://www.google.com/search?q=government+contracts+indian+owned&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:unofficial
Women owned small business:
https://www.google.com/search?q=woman+owned+government+contracts&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:unofficial#q=women+owned+government+contracts&*
http://www.governing.com/topics/mgmt/gov-women-minority-contracting.html
Seattle and Austin Texas:
https://bendchamber.org/bend-business-edition/redhawk-promotes-from-within-to-complete-final-phase-of-acquisition/
Seattle: Based in Seattle, James Holland moves from senior sales manager to director of sales and marketing, leveraging over 16 years in solution sales for information technology and information security organizations.
Texas: 701 Brazos Street, Suite 1600
Austin, TX 78701
http://www.txmx.us
Red Hawk Security Network software:
https://www.manageengine.com/uk/pace/enterprise-nsam.html
Kerri Fry
https://www.manageengine.com/uk/me_partners.html
Woman owned business:
http://l8c.com/
Sunday, March 5, 2017
Object Oriented Design
Sunday morning and nothing popped out of my morning review of favorite web sites that inspired me to dig into it with a blog entry. The default in this case is simply to think about some aspect of Object Orientation. My level of thought on OO is mainly at the OOD level. The Design Level that I call broad architecture. I don't know OO programming which is the grunt work building in accordance with the OOD plan to implement the relationships of Objects to do something.
I have not recently looked at what is currently available regarding OOD. This is a start. Obviously the state of the art in OOD has progressed to the establishment of basic patterns of object oriented design. The established building blocks of design:
http://www.oodesign.com/design-pattern-books/
I like the way it begins the presentation of design patterns with the "Singleton" . A unique instance of a Class. In my terms of reference the most granular level object component. Produced by a "Factory". It goes on to present top level abstract Classes of Objects with minimal reference to the Object Oriented programming implementing relationships in the Object Oriented System..
"Head First Design Patterns" was originally publish in 2004 but looking at the recent comments it remains a fundamental primary presentation on the OOD today.
Head First Object Oriented Analysis and Design is a follow on book.
Searching on OOD and related search terms gave me results that quickly went down the path to programming the OOD. Indeed the general orientation was that the Designer of the OO sytem was also a software programmer.
This is where I found some independence from going down the programming path to implement the OOD: The domain of Artificial Intelligence. In that domain the path goes in the direction of understanding Intelligence and then going down a path of designing Natural Intelligence into an Artificial non living entity. Only much further down the path of exploring Intelligence does actual programming come into play.
I think what I am looking for is the design of Intelligence expressed in terms of Object Oriented Design. For example: Select a Singleton instance of an living object entity with attributes of Intelligence. A human being is too complex as it develops to use as a simple example except for maybe its first few months of existence during which it shares acquisitions of attributes, messages and relationships with other objects. Perhaps a dog might be a better example displaying the development of Intelligence Design that does not go to the artificial language programming level but expresses in natural dog language.
Something like this: The instance of a Class named Dog created as a unique Singleton by a Factory Class composed of two Parents. Then follow the Object Oriented Design development of a Single instance of Dog through the acquisition of Intelligence and Behavior Design System and Use Cases.
What would a formal OOD description of a dog's object oriented attributes, methods and messages look like as it develops more focused Intelligence starting with the Factory that produced the Instance of a Class.
Nature is an OOD. Nature has Intelligent Design. I like the approach to use Nature as a model for OOD applied to higher level abstraction to Objects that are invested with "Artificial" Intelligence.
Once the Natural OOD of the creation of a Singleton Dog has been created and its relationships to other Single Instances and Classes has been described then the same design pattern could be applied to the creation of an Artificial Singleton Dog with Artificial Intelligence embodied in its Artificial programming language.
I have not recently looked at what is currently available regarding OOD. This is a start. Obviously the state of the art in OOD has progressed to the establishment of basic patterns of object oriented design. The established building blocks of design:
http://www.oodesign.com/design-pattern-books/
I like the way it begins the presentation of design patterns with the "Singleton" . A unique instance of a Class. In my terms of reference the most granular level object component. Produced by a "Factory". It goes on to present top level abstract Classes of Objects with minimal reference to the Object Oriented programming implementing relationships in the Object Oriented System..
"Head First Design Patterns" was originally publish in 2004 but looking at the recent comments it remains a fundamental primary presentation on the OOD today.
Head First Object Oriented Analysis and Design is a follow on book.
Searching on OOD and related search terms gave me results that quickly went down the path to programming the OOD. Indeed the general orientation was that the Designer of the OO sytem was also a software programmer.
This is where I found some independence from going down the programming path to implement the OOD: The domain of Artificial Intelligence. In that domain the path goes in the direction of understanding Intelligence and then going down a path of designing Natural Intelligence into an Artificial non living entity. Only much further down the path of exploring Intelligence does actual programming come into play.
I think what I am looking for is the design of Intelligence expressed in terms of Object Oriented Design. For example: Select a Singleton instance of an living object entity with attributes of Intelligence. A human being is too complex as it develops to use as a simple example except for maybe its first few months of existence during which it shares acquisitions of attributes, messages and relationships with other objects. Perhaps a dog might be a better example displaying the development of Intelligence Design that does not go to the artificial language programming level but expresses in natural dog language.
Something like this: The instance of a Class named Dog created as a unique Singleton by a Factory Class composed of two Parents. Then follow the Object Oriented Design development of a Single instance of Dog through the acquisition of Intelligence and Behavior Design System and Use Cases.
What would a formal OOD description of a dog's object oriented attributes, methods and messages look like as it develops more focused Intelligence starting with the Factory that produced the Instance of a Class.
Nature is an OOD. Nature has Intelligent Design. I like the approach to use Nature as a model for OOD applied to higher level abstraction to Objects that are invested with "Artificial" Intelligence.
Once the Natural OOD of the creation of a Singleton Dog has been created and its relationships to other Single Instances and Classes has been described then the same design pattern could be applied to the creation of an Artificial Singleton Dog with Artificial Intelligence embodied in its Artificial programming language.
Monday, February 27, 2017
Palantir
https://theintercept.com/2017/02/22/how-peter-thiels-palantir-helped-the-nsa-spy-on-the-whole-world/?comments=1#comments
It is Sunday morning. My favorite time to deep dive into a thing of interest to me. This link is where I dove. It takes some time to read and the comments add a great amount of perspective. I have previously commented in this blog about Palantir and those entities associated with it. Corporate, government, academic, as well as broad problem domains of Artificial Intelligence and, in general, (because it is my frame of looking at all things) the Object Oriented Approach to relating all these things in some kind of an over all high abstract level big picture Operating System and Application Programs
Palantir certainly has its hands in and on a vast amount of data! It has the tools to make some thing out of all that data producing information, and knowledge. It is a complicated domain that covers the problem of figuring all this out to distill a pure result for action application to accomplish purpose and objectives! The big picture is not hard see and does not require my use of a Palantir level data base or programs to see it.
One arbitrary point of entry just to get started with a big picture look is Information Asymmetry.
The advantage of having information that another entity does not. Information derived from data. Information that can be related in various ways leading to production of knowledge about the nature and content of a broad spectrum of information at a macro level that involve relationships among a number of problem domains.
Think of it like a doctor relating to the human body. A complex physical system of an instance of all human beings. It is studied from micro to macro level. What it is and what it does. Data about the structure and operation of a single person leads to information and knowledge. Aggregates of individuals leads to an expanded problem domain.
It is the Information Age. We have a window on it to extract information from data and to create knowledge that is the World Wide Web. Everything that the WWW is and does is available to us in a limited way but available in a controlled system in an unlimited fashion to those that have permissions to access it and/or create their own access methods and tools to get it.
Selective government agencies have various degrees of data access all the way up to unlimited. Their systems are all protected by security systems that hide their degree of access as well as how that access is used. The private sector has similar data access related to their commercial operations domains. Government Intelligence is simply called Business Intelligence on the private sector side. the Intelligence System is generally the product of public/private collaboration. Palantir is an excellent example. There are many other private enterprise entities operating in the same or closely related relate domain that Palantir operates. In addition many are operating in the public/private/academic relationship domain.
Open Systems expose an amazing amount of unrestricted data and information to the general public. The WWW also offers knowledge of how it all works from macro to micro levels. If anyone using the WWW can gather information about any chosen entity to create some degree of knowledge about the entity by integrating public information it is astounding to think about what public and private entities with special access beyond the WWW can gather and analyze using tools created for Intelligence gathering.
Anybody can gather a vast amount of information about anybody or any entity using the WWW. Anybody can put the information gathered together to create more information about anything to create knowledge about it. Anybody can be an information analyst. Anyone can do investigative research and discover interesting things about anything. It is something that I enjoy doing.
A google search on Palantir produces more information than I could analyze in a year and the information is dynamic over time as Palantir grows. Born in government Intelligence it has expanded to the private sector as it continues its leading edge advancement in the Intelligence sector of government agencies. The initial link in this blog entry gives a look at where Palantir is now.
One significant thing that is obvious by omission that Palantir must be involved in, or some other company like Palantir is Financial Information Intelligence. A tap or access into all financial transactions. Just imagine what can be learned from that access! Following the money is a source of Intelligence. Laws requiring the identification of beneficial owners would seem to open the door to gathering information that links specific individuals to their ownership of assets. I see laws that do that as beneficial and public information regarding who are the beneficial owners of anything as good.
Discovering beneficial ownership is an investigative challenge.
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2017/02/wolf-richter-much-money-laundering-going-housing-market-lot.html
Data resources such as available at the Palantir level of Intelligence operations would discover beneficial ownership quickly. Discovery would untangle the web that intends to hide beneficial ownership for tax evasion purposes and name names. Lots of names. The big names would of course be the most important to identify but the low level evaders are too numerous to deal with. I suppose that there may be some low level evaders right in my home town. How might they be discovered? Is there enough open source information available to discover them?
What nefarious things are going on in my home town that can be discovered by Open Source intelligence? What gross inefficiencies could be identified? I wish I had Palantir level access and ability to discover that!
It is Sunday morning. My favorite time to deep dive into a thing of interest to me. This link is where I dove. It takes some time to read and the comments add a great amount of perspective. I have previously commented in this blog about Palantir and those entities associated with it. Corporate, government, academic, as well as broad problem domains of Artificial Intelligence and, in general, (because it is my frame of looking at all things) the Object Oriented Approach to relating all these things in some kind of an over all high abstract level big picture Operating System and Application Programs
Palantir certainly has its hands in and on a vast amount of data! It has the tools to make some thing out of all that data producing information, and knowledge. It is a complicated domain that covers the problem of figuring all this out to distill a pure result for action application to accomplish purpose and objectives! The big picture is not hard see and does not require my use of a Palantir level data base or programs to see it.
One arbitrary point of entry just to get started with a big picture look is Information Asymmetry.
The advantage of having information that another entity does not. Information derived from data. Information that can be related in various ways leading to production of knowledge about the nature and content of a broad spectrum of information at a macro level that involve relationships among a number of problem domains.
Think of it like a doctor relating to the human body. A complex physical system of an instance of all human beings. It is studied from micro to macro level. What it is and what it does. Data about the structure and operation of a single person leads to information and knowledge. Aggregates of individuals leads to an expanded problem domain.
It is the Information Age. We have a window on it to extract information from data and to create knowledge that is the World Wide Web. Everything that the WWW is and does is available to us in a limited way but available in a controlled system in an unlimited fashion to those that have permissions to access it and/or create their own access methods and tools to get it.
Selective government agencies have various degrees of data access all the way up to unlimited. Their systems are all protected by security systems that hide their degree of access as well as how that access is used. The private sector has similar data access related to their commercial operations domains. Government Intelligence is simply called Business Intelligence on the private sector side. the Intelligence System is generally the product of public/private collaboration. Palantir is an excellent example. There are many other private enterprise entities operating in the same or closely related relate domain that Palantir operates. In addition many are operating in the public/private/academic relationship domain.
Open Systems expose an amazing amount of unrestricted data and information to the general public. The WWW also offers knowledge of how it all works from macro to micro levels. If anyone using the WWW can gather information about any chosen entity to create some degree of knowledge about the entity by integrating public information it is astounding to think about what public and private entities with special access beyond the WWW can gather and analyze using tools created for Intelligence gathering.
Anybody can gather a vast amount of information about anybody or any entity using the WWW. Anybody can put the information gathered together to create more information about anything to create knowledge about it. Anybody can be an information analyst. Anyone can do investigative research and discover interesting things about anything. It is something that I enjoy doing.
A google search on Palantir produces more information than I could analyze in a year and the information is dynamic over time as Palantir grows. Born in government Intelligence it has expanded to the private sector as it continues its leading edge advancement in the Intelligence sector of government agencies. The initial link in this blog entry gives a look at where Palantir is now.
One significant thing that is obvious by omission that Palantir must be involved in, or some other company like Palantir is Financial Information Intelligence. A tap or access into all financial transactions. Just imagine what can be learned from that access! Following the money is a source of Intelligence. Laws requiring the identification of beneficial owners would seem to open the door to gathering information that links specific individuals to their ownership of assets. I see laws that do that as beneficial and public information regarding who are the beneficial owners of anything as good.
Discovering beneficial ownership is an investigative challenge.
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2017/02/wolf-richter-much-money-laundering-going-housing-market-lot.html
Data resources such as available at the Palantir level of Intelligence operations would discover beneficial ownership quickly. Discovery would untangle the web that intends to hide beneficial ownership for tax evasion purposes and name names. Lots of names. The big names would of course be the most important to identify but the low level evaders are too numerous to deal with. I suppose that there may be some low level evaders right in my home town. How might they be discovered? Is there enough open source information available to discover them?
What nefarious things are going on in my home town that can be discovered by Open Source intelligence? What gross inefficiencies could be identified? I wish I had Palantir level access and ability to discover that!
Thursday, February 9, 2017
Cellebrite
Added 26 Feb 2018: https://www.cnet.com/news/feds-may-have-tool-to-break-into-any-iphone/
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/national-security/article131308584.html
This link presents info on Cellebrite. Why are so many Israeli companies involved as primary industry players at the leading edge of surveillance? Just seems like that researching links that so often go back to Israel. Perhaps it is related to our special friendship. Things can be done there that cannot be done here? Regardless, the link sheds light on Cellebrite.
This link also but in a general manner regarding Cellebrite and US police forces.
http://www.citylab.com/crime/2017/02/cellphone-spy-tools-have-flooded-local-police-departments/512543/?ncid=newsltushpmgnews
http://www.cellebrite.com/
Cellebrite is in the cell phone cracking business. iPhone 7 is hard to crack. How blatant is this news release:
http://www.cellebrite.com/Mobile-Lifecycle/News-Events/Press-Releases/cellebrite%E2%80%99s-mobile-lifecycle-supports-release-of-the-new-iphone-7-from-launch-day
Cellebrite supports release of the iPhone 7 in this manner:
Via Cellebrite’s in-store platforms, retail associates will be able to transfer a customer’s content from their old device to their new iPhone 7 handset. As part of the device lifecycle, operators and retailers will also be able to provide diagnostics for the new device.
What a nice service for the customer that is so ignorant that they can't transfer their info from an old phone to a new one! What does Cellebrite help themselves to in the process of helping customers? What is entailed in "providing diagnostics for the new device" Its new, out of the box!
"The iPhone 7, which is available in-store on 16 September, is one of some 7,000 mobile devices for which Cellebrite provides point-of-sale transfer solutions. Cellebrite technology empowers retail associates to deliver fast, consistent service across more than 75,000 retail service points globally."
In the process of providing all this wonderful service what kind of back doors does Cellebrite insert? Why must the FBI go to Cellebrite? Wow! This is really putting a lock on the business to which only Cellebrite has the key?
Amazingly obvious?
"The new device will also be supported by Cellebrite’s Hybrid Content Transfer whereby productivity essentials, such as contacts are immediately transferred at the point of sale, while the more time-intensive task of moving large volumes of multimedia data is subsequently completed via Cellebrite’s self-service mobile app." Click on that Content Transfer link (multi channel content transfer) and it goes to 404. Ooops, if we tell you what Content Transfer is then we would have to shoot you!
However this link: http://www.cellebrite.com/pt/Mobile-Lifecycle/Products/multi-channel-content-transfer goes to a website page in Spanish but on the page gives a English page option that does not give and English language page! Spain is also a player in this same field!
Spanish to English translation as follows:
Helping customers "Get everything running faster"The multichannel secure content transfer platform meets all the demands of mobile customers and in-store customersOur exuberant and hybrid content delivery delivery model allows for full or partial data transfers within the store or on the device, allowing for optimal personalized service in any situation to increase customer satisfaction, reduce in-store waiting times, and help Customers to "Quit with everything running faster."
IN THE STOREFull service content downloads via Cellebrite Touch or Desktop• When the store in the store allows• For customers who are not comfortable with self-service• For smartphones• As a premium service+IN SHOP + HOMEPartial in-store transfer completed at home• To enable customers to have their important data quickly• To manage the hours of intense movement inside the store• For customers with large amounts of data• To minimize in-store effort without reducing customer valueAT HOMETransfer via self-service using the Cellebrite P2P Transfer App• For technology savvy customers• For online purchases• For customers who can notOr do not want to wait for in-store service
Easy to use by store attendants!*****Connect the Select the Trans ra Provide the code
Phones contentApp activation
Easy to use by customers!Download the Pair the Select the Trans Ra content devices application
Key Benefits and Features
TransferTransfers between operating systems (Apple for Android, Android for Apple, etc.)
Unparalleled supportTransfer to and from phones and smartphonesWww.cellebrite.comSales@cellebrite.com© 2015 Cellebrite Mobile Synchronization LTD. All rights reserved.Connectivity optionsVia a wireless access point (WAP) or directly between phones, no need for WAP or cables
SDK AvailabilityFor operators / retailers who want to use Cellebrite technology in their own applicationSafeProtects customer privacy without storing any data, whether local or in a cloud serviceReduction of waiting timeAnd sciencePairing with autodetection and QR code simplifies synchronization
PromotionalAssignment of own and customizable brand
FlexibleControl of content transferred to manage the terms of service
in the store
Increases the capacity and productivity of store attendants, freeing them to sell more
About CellebriteCellebrite is a leading global provider of advanced mobile lifecycle solutions for Operators, Retailers and Outsourced Service Providers (AMS), to improve customer experience, improve customer satisfaction, reduce costs and generate revenue. With in-store, on-device and web-based distribution channels, cell phone retailers can take advantage of Cellebrite's complete suite of cell phone lifecycle solutions: diagnostics, content transfer between phones, backup, restore, and clean , Automated phone repurchase, and application and content distribution. In addition, Cellebrite provides retailers with the monitoring, statistics and analysis of all activities. Cellebrite's worldwide leadership is demonstrated with more than 150,000 units installed in more than 200 mobile operators and retailers worldwide, representing more than 100,000 stores that process hundreds of millions of transactions per year.Founded in 1999, Cellebrite is a subsidiary of Sun Corporation, a Japanese listed company (6736 / JQ).
End translation.
Cellebrite is a subsidiary of Sun Corporation?????
Yes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cellebrite
"Cellebrite has two business divisions: Cellebrite Wireless Carriers & Retailers and Cellebrite Mobile Forensics.
Cellebrite Wireless Carriers & Retailers produces hardware and software for phone-to-phone data transfer, backup, mobile applications electronic software distribution, and data analysis tools. Cellebrite Wireless Carriers & Retailers products are used by various mobile operators, and are deployed in wireless retail points of sale. Cellebrite works with handset manufacturers to ensure compatibility[clarification needed] before devices are released to the public.[2]
Cellebrite Mobile Forensics was established in 2007 and produces software and hardware for mobile forensics purposes used by federal, state, and local law enforcement; intelligence agencies; military branches; corporate security and investigations; law firms; and private digital forensic examiners.[2]
How convenient to operate on two sides of the fence. Retail sales and Spy upon what is sold! It is a terrific business model!
This link from 7 days ago shows that others have a lucrative business model also: Spy and counter-spy:
https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/hacker-dumps-ios-cracking-tools-allegedly-stolen-from-cellebrite
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/national-security/article131308584.html
This link presents info on Cellebrite. Why are so many Israeli companies involved as primary industry players at the leading edge of surveillance? Just seems like that researching links that so often go back to Israel. Perhaps it is related to our special friendship. Things can be done there that cannot be done here? Regardless, the link sheds light on Cellebrite.
This link also but in a general manner regarding Cellebrite and US police forces.
http://www.citylab.com/crime/2017/02/cellphone-spy-tools-have-flooded-local-police-departments/512543/?ncid=newsltushpmgnews
http://www.cellebrite.com/
Cellebrite is in the cell phone cracking business. iPhone 7 is hard to crack. How blatant is this news release:
http://www.cellebrite.com/Mobile-Lifecycle/News-Events/Press-Releases/cellebrite%E2%80%99s-mobile-lifecycle-supports-release-of-the-new-iphone-7-from-launch-day
Cellebrite supports release of the iPhone 7 in this manner:
Via Cellebrite’s in-store platforms, retail associates will be able to transfer a customer’s content from their old device to their new iPhone 7 handset. As part of the device lifecycle, operators and retailers will also be able to provide diagnostics for the new device.
What a nice service for the customer that is so ignorant that they can't transfer their info from an old phone to a new one! What does Cellebrite help themselves to in the process of helping customers? What is entailed in "providing diagnostics for the new device" Its new, out of the box!
"The iPhone 7, which is available in-store on 16 September, is one of some 7,000 mobile devices for which Cellebrite provides point-of-sale transfer solutions. Cellebrite technology empowers retail associates to deliver fast, consistent service across more than 75,000 retail service points globally."
In the process of providing all this wonderful service what kind of back doors does Cellebrite insert? Why must the FBI go to Cellebrite? Wow! This is really putting a lock on the business to which only Cellebrite has the key?
Amazingly obvious?
"The new device will also be supported by Cellebrite’s Hybrid Content Transfer whereby productivity essentials, such as contacts are immediately transferred at the point of sale, while the more time-intensive task of moving large volumes of multimedia data is subsequently completed via Cellebrite’s self-service mobile app." Click on that Content Transfer link (multi channel content transfer) and it goes to 404. Ooops, if we tell you what Content Transfer is then we would have to shoot you!
However this link: http://www.cellebrite.com/pt/Mobile-Lifecycle/Products/multi-channel-content-transfer goes to a website page in Spanish but on the page gives a English page option that does not give and English language page! Spain is also a player in this same field!
Spanish to English translation as follows:
Helping customers "Get everything running faster"The multichannel secure content transfer platform meets all the demands of mobile customers and in-store customersOur exuberant and hybrid content delivery delivery model allows for full or partial data transfers within the store or on the device, allowing for optimal personalized service in any situation to increase customer satisfaction, reduce in-store waiting times, and help Customers to "Quit with everything running faster."
IN THE STOREFull service content downloads via Cellebrite Touch or Desktop• When the store in the store allows• For customers who are not comfortable with self-service• For smartphones• As a premium service+IN SHOP + HOMEPartial in-store transfer completed at home• To enable customers to have their important data quickly• To manage the hours of intense movement inside the store• For customers with large amounts of data• To minimize in-store effort without reducing customer valueAT HOMETransfer via self-service using the Cellebrite P2P Transfer App• For technology savvy customers• For online purchases• For customers who can notOr do not want to wait for in-store service
Easy to use by store attendants!*****Connect the Select the Trans ra Provide the code
Phones contentApp activation
Easy to use by customers!Download the Pair the Select the Trans Ra content devices application
Key Benefits and Features
TransferTransfers between operating systems (Apple for Android, Android for Apple, etc.)
Unparalleled supportTransfer to and from phones and smartphonesWww.cellebrite.comSales@cellebrite.com© 2015 Cellebrite Mobile Synchronization LTD. All rights reserved.Connectivity optionsVia a wireless access point (WAP) or directly between phones, no need for WAP or cables
SDK AvailabilityFor operators / retailers who want to use Cellebrite technology in their own applicationSafeProtects customer privacy without storing any data, whether local or in a cloud serviceReduction of waiting timeAnd sciencePairing with autodetection and QR code simplifies synchronization
PromotionalAssignment of own and customizable brand
FlexibleControl of content transferred to manage the terms of service
in the store
Increases the capacity and productivity of store attendants, freeing them to sell more
About CellebriteCellebrite is a leading global provider of advanced mobile lifecycle solutions for Operators, Retailers and Outsourced Service Providers (AMS), to improve customer experience, improve customer satisfaction, reduce costs and generate revenue. With in-store, on-device and web-based distribution channels, cell phone retailers can take advantage of Cellebrite's complete suite of cell phone lifecycle solutions: diagnostics, content transfer between phones, backup, restore, and clean , Automated phone repurchase, and application and content distribution. In addition, Cellebrite provides retailers with the monitoring, statistics and analysis of all activities. Cellebrite's worldwide leadership is demonstrated with more than 150,000 units installed in more than 200 mobile operators and retailers worldwide, representing more than 100,000 stores that process hundreds of millions of transactions per year.Founded in 1999, Cellebrite is a subsidiary of Sun Corporation, a Japanese listed company (6736 / JQ).
End translation.
Cellebrite is a subsidiary of Sun Corporation?????
Yes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cellebrite
"Cellebrite has two business divisions: Cellebrite Wireless Carriers & Retailers and Cellebrite Mobile Forensics.
Cellebrite Wireless Carriers & Retailers produces hardware and software for phone-to-phone data transfer, backup, mobile applications electronic software distribution, and data analysis tools. Cellebrite Wireless Carriers & Retailers products are used by various mobile operators, and are deployed in wireless retail points of sale. Cellebrite works with handset manufacturers to ensure compatibility[clarification needed] before devices are released to the public.[2]
Cellebrite Mobile Forensics was established in 2007 and produces software and hardware for mobile forensics purposes used by federal, state, and local law enforcement; intelligence agencies; military branches; corporate security and investigations; law firms; and private digital forensic examiners.[2]
How convenient to operate on two sides of the fence. Retail sales and Spy upon what is sold! It is a terrific business model!
This link from 7 days ago shows that others have a lucrative business model also: Spy and counter-spy:
https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/hacker-dumps-ios-cracking-tools-allegedly-stolen-from-cellebrite
Wednesday, February 8, 2017
Genetics Is Giving Way to a New Science of Life - Astounding!
https://www.independentsciencenews.org/health/genetics-is-giving-way-to-a-new-science-of-life/
Jonathan Latham, PhD
Absolutely Astounding! It seems to contain so many of the concepts that find their way into this free range blog that I am compelled to write to find the relationship of things and their expression in what they do that i generally call an Object Oriented approach to the Problem domain. One of the more recent concepts that I have looked at in this blog that the link expresses is that the evolution of our understanding systems is going toward the driving nature of system development not being Imperative but Constraining.
The link also makes a passing reference to Nouns and Verbs. The nature of what a Thing Is and what a Thing Does which was the beginning foundation mystery that motivated this blog to discover their relationship. Originally I was going to call this blog "Nouns and Verbs" but then I focused the application of what a thing Is and what that thing Does to Money. Money is a thing that is perceived and structured dominantly on what it Does not what it is.
The current Monetary System is fallacious because it is premised on what it does almost to the exclusion of what it is. The trick of hiding what money Is and focus on what it does is that in getting to my final analysis of what money Is I conclude that what it is.....is: A thing created at a point of time in future time and brought in the present real time by birth as debt.
This view of the current monetary system foundation being a future point in time that makes its birthing Parent "Future" an action based verb founded action thing in the future is at the binary opposite end of the spectrum analogous to natural science that is object based noun founded birth existence of an object in the past.
At some point in the link the author expresses the idea that RNA is a single thing (like I view Money) simply having two different expressions? How do I explain that????? It looks and feels correct and a solid foundation for system development thought that springs almost from philosophy?
Natural systems nature and structure in the domain of natural science is probably the best model for the creation of our human conceptual systems structures. I can see that emerging as the object oriented structure of the Information Age advancing to be recognized as a better model for social systems we created in the past structured on what they are designed to do (and then call them anything we choose them to be) rather than what they are and by virtue of what they are they work to serve us, to perpetuate itself toward improved functionality.
https://bioscienceresource.org/about-us/our-staff/
Johnathan Latham applied his thinking about the fundamental natural system and order of things in the science of genetics to the nature and order of things in a social system structure. Gosh, looks like what I did to examine the fundamental nature of the physical world system and apply it as a model to conceptual world social systems we create.
https://www.independentsciencenews.org/health/why-the-food-movement-is-unstoppable/
Tinkering with Genetics to produce GMO is a problem. Perhaps a problem as I see it because there is a problem that may arise related to and originating from an even more fundamental thing in the systemic structure of genetic biology (like RNA or even something more fundamental than that) and its natural expression. Its natural expression being some sort of natural constraint on something else in the natural world.....like things called humans.
https://www.independentsciencenews.org/health/growing-doubt-a-scientists-experience-of-gmos/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bioscience_Resource_Project
http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/35871-god-s-red-pencil-crispr-and-the-three-myths-of-precise-genome-editing
Jonathan Latham, PhD
Absolutely Astounding! It seems to contain so many of the concepts that find their way into this free range blog that I am compelled to write to find the relationship of things and their expression in what they do that i generally call an Object Oriented approach to the Problem domain. One of the more recent concepts that I have looked at in this blog that the link expresses is that the evolution of our understanding systems is going toward the driving nature of system development not being Imperative but Constraining.
The link also makes a passing reference to Nouns and Verbs. The nature of what a Thing Is and what a Thing Does which was the beginning foundation mystery that motivated this blog to discover their relationship. Originally I was going to call this blog "Nouns and Verbs" but then I focused the application of what a thing Is and what that thing Does to Money. Money is a thing that is perceived and structured dominantly on what it Does not what it is.
The current Monetary System is fallacious because it is premised on what it does almost to the exclusion of what it is. The trick of hiding what money Is and focus on what it does is that in getting to my final analysis of what money Is I conclude that what it is.....is: A thing created at a point of time in future time and brought in the present real time by birth as debt.
This view of the current monetary system foundation being a future point in time that makes its birthing Parent "Future" an action based verb founded action thing in the future is at the binary opposite end of the spectrum analogous to natural science that is object based noun founded birth existence of an object in the past.
At some point in the link the author expresses the idea that RNA is a single thing (like I view Money) simply having two different expressions? How do I explain that????? It looks and feels correct and a solid foundation for system development thought that springs almost from philosophy?
Natural systems nature and structure in the domain of natural science is probably the best model for the creation of our human conceptual systems structures. I can see that emerging as the object oriented structure of the Information Age advancing to be recognized as a better model for social systems we created in the past structured on what they are designed to do (and then call them anything we choose them to be) rather than what they are and by virtue of what they are they work to serve us, to perpetuate itself toward improved functionality.
https://bioscienceresource.org/about-us/our-staff/
Johnathan Latham applied his thinking about the fundamental natural system and order of things in the science of genetics to the nature and order of things in a social system structure. Gosh, looks like what I did to examine the fundamental nature of the physical world system and apply it as a model to conceptual world social systems we create.
https://www.independentsciencenews.org/health/why-the-food-movement-is-unstoppable/
Tinkering with Genetics to produce GMO is a problem. Perhaps a problem as I see it because there is a problem that may arise related to and originating from an even more fundamental thing in the systemic structure of genetic biology (like RNA or even something more fundamental than that) and its natural expression. Its natural expression being some sort of natural constraint on something else in the natural world.....like things called humans.
https://www.independentsciencenews.org/health/growing-doubt-a-scientists-experience-of-gmos/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bioscience_Resource_Project
http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/35871-god-s-red-pencil-crispr-and-the-three-myths-of-precise-genome-editing
Tuesday, February 7, 2017
Another Data Harvest and Phone Home Stealth Method (Blue Tooth)
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/02/05/chrome_56_quietly_added_bluetooth_snitch_api/
On the heels of the prior blog entry. Phone Home Wack-A-Mole.
On the heels of the prior blog entry. Phone Home Wack-A-Mole.
My Vizio TV is Watching Me Watch - My Car Too?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/vizio-settlement_us_589962dee4b0c1284f27e534?
"According to a complaint filed by the FTC and the attorney general of New Jersey, Vizio began making TVs in 2014 that automatically tracked what people were watching. Older devices were retrofitted remotely through software updates, and all of the data was gathered without telling consumers and without their consent."
"Automatically tracked" Yes, Vizio did but how it was done and the scope is amazing as well as amazingly simple and doable. So Vizio did it and made money selling the information harvested on a grand scale.
From the link:
"The FTC detailed how the electronics giant used hidden tracking software to spy on its customers:
The methodology is obviously simple: Select a matrix size of pixels sufficiently large enough copy the matrix information and send it to Vizio. Probably every second whatever an adequate sample rate would be for the purpose. The variable pixel matrix size could be up to full frame every 30th or 60th of a second with any variable interval between full screen captures. If the programming is that simple and there it is certainly probable that it could be then the the potential magnitude and purpose of this method is truly astounding!
How to find a smart TV IP address:
If your TV is connected to internet, press the Menu button on your remote device and select the Network option. Select the Network Settings and then, select IP settings option. The existing IP address of your TV appears. It will be a private IP address if you are using router to connect to your ISP.
http://whatismyipaddress.com/private-ip explains how IP address works. A private IP address of a TV on a network conveys no user information itself. The IP address of the internet router it is connected to in a home or any other place is the identifier that is connected to a user, the user account and all information about the user that can be obtained or attributed to the user router IP address.
Amazing!
A smart TV is a computer. Essentially no different than the laptop I am using to write this blog entry. Any application program running on the computer could be coded to send a screen pixel matrix copy to any programmed address on the internet? A screen shot of what I am typing right now? What I am typing right now is being sent to Google in real time before I even publish this bog entry. Sent in either draft form or modifying an already posted form if I am editing it. Beyond that known real time Google monitoring -- for spell check purposes -- any other program on my computer could be sending a matrix screen capture to an address of the programmer's choice.
This is big: Not only sending a screen capture but a stealth audio capture or video capture. While the screen is always on when I am using the computer, sound capture microphone and video camera sound/video capture may not be on unless I am using (Hey Siri, FaceTime or Skype) them or they are turned on by stealth. A 60th of a second video frame screen capture is all that is necessary for any program to send the screen capture anywhere.
Deep Packet inspection is a spy method to find out what is being transmitted over the internet and to whom. Perhaps I need my own spyware program on my computer to spy on itself! The NSA could go into the App store business!
Of course Vizio phoning home turned on by default could be turned off by the user. That however is the "Reader Digest" turned on by default model used to scam people that are not aware that the default setting of on remains set until it is specifically turned off by the user. Money and/information continues to flow to the originator of the "on by default" setting.
The scope of Vizio pixel capture is even greater in the obvious situation that what is captured on the screen may not be related to media arriving via the internet. Arriving via a dvd for example or from my mac computer via Airplay. From my Photos on my mac computer being displayed on my Vizio. Yes, I do have a smart Vizio.
Ponder this: Face and object as well as audio recognition is a technological state of the art Artificial Intelligence fact. It merely requires video/audio analytical programs either incorporated in the transmitting device to selectively transmit or analytical programs applied to real time or history transmissions at the receiving end.
The conclusion: If the screen shot pixel matrix grabbed by Vizio do not match any media in its data base that is associated with customer having an interest in connection to a data base match then the screen shot still has commercial data mining value to discover a potential customer market. Match or not it is a win/win money maker to monetize the information. Contract with the NSA?
The potential for smart TV's to phone home data of interest to a recipient is immense.
For example: High frequency audio coded signals can be embedded in an audio stream to trigger an event or even transmit an audio code that can be translated into a video screen display object. Embed that high frequency coded signal into an audio recording stream and if that stream is played on any internet connected device and if the device is phoning home a detection of a high frequency range embedded audio code along with an associated UIC then bingo! A traceable connection! Apply that method to top secret level audio/video recording and security leaks can be identified and traced!
Speakers on the device playing the audio probably do not necessarily have the technical ability to process the high frequency range sound beyond the threshold of human hearing. That would not be necessary. It is likely that it could be in the digital audio sample that is computer processed.
Likewise a pixel matrix could be embedded in any video, like a video trademark, and the smart TV could be programmed to look for that pixel matrix. Perhaps it could be pixels or small matrices of pixels distributed across the screen image over a segment of frames over a segment of time or a single video frame. When detected....Phone Home.
The algorithms do all this are probably patented. Some company holds the patent. Maybe it was created in house by Vizio? Maybe the patent holder is selling it to anyone wanting it. Maybe it came from In-Q-tel? NSA would not even have to pay Vizio for the information. Simply get it for nothing by tapping into the Internet. That however has its Government Surveillance problems. Maybe better to pay a private business for it. NSA gets all the money it wants so why steal it and be on the hook? Let Vizio or any other entity using this methodology be on the hook.
Vizio is paying the price for being on the hook! Perhaps a customer contract with Vizio includes payments in the event that Vizio is caught? It is a cost analysis risk/reward thing.
From the top link:
"Aside from the monetary penalty, Vizio must also stop the tracking, delete most of the data it collected before March 1, 2016 and require consumers to give consent before collecting their information."
Yes, of course! But what about the data collected and sold to customers and their retention of collected data? That would require disclosure of any customers that bought the data. Maybe it is good for someone that the penalty not go that far?
Who else in the smart TV domain is doing this?
Is it being done in the general internet computer domain?
Who has the patent on this method of information capture?
We are Number 1. Vizio however sells to everyone below us. What have they done in their courts?
Picture this as a mild example scenario:
Closed door business briefing using a big screen Vizio TV to present proprietary business information. The same TV has an internet connection used for other conference room matters. Large matrix screen shots of the presentation are captured by Vizio. If the Vizio program detects no internet connection then the screen shots are stored for transmission when the internet is connected.
Insider information? Company secrets?
Surveillance for profit!
Here is a real kicker: Visio makes a router!
https://www.cnet.com/products/vizio-xwr100-dual-band-wireless-router/review/
What slick things can that do?
As I suspected the Vizio spyware was provided by a company that offers the product to Smart TV makers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inscape_Data_Services
"Inscape is a provider of ACR services to Smart TV OEMs.[1] The company was founded in 2009 as TV Interactive Systems later renamed Cognitive Media Networks Inc. On August 10, 2015, Vizio acquired Cognitive Media Networks and renamed it Inscape. On July 2016 Vizio announced Inscape will spin off and operate as a separate, privately owned company."
CEO Zeev Neumeier patents on the technology here:
https://www.linkedin.com/in/zeev-neumeier-38ab271
https://www.google.com/patents/US8930980
http://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=378233394
Could be one of the data aggregators that draws personal info from all sources to their data base for monetization. Maybe Vizio would not be a source since this is more of a tracing investigation oriented data base, not a marketing one which is BtoB. However an upper level aggregator might aggregate both?
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-05/this-company-has-built-a-profile-on-every-american-adult
http://ididata.com/solutions/idicore/
What is it about these "credentialed" PI agencies that gives them the privelges of signing up for this personal information in accordance with government privacy rules that any ordinary citizen cannot sign up for. It is probably only a check mark for the authorized credentialed agencies to check at the website that they agree to all the rules and regulations of use. Exactly like the one any citizen checks in the terms of agreement for access to anything on the internet.
Doctors for example have credentialed privileges associated with their professional ethics. PI's? What ethics do private snoops have? A license? Certification? A trench coat? Dues paying members?
https://www.toddington.com/resources/ is evidently draws from open sources, public, information but has a tool to search the open sourced data base that it sells. It appears to be a mixed bag of open, semi-fenced and fenced sources and tools free or available at a price.
What about the car watching us?
http://www.autoblog.com/2017/02/24/tv-vizio-privacy-car-data-listening-opinion/
"According to a complaint filed by the FTC and the attorney general of New Jersey, Vizio began making TVs in 2014 that automatically tracked what people were watching. Older devices were retrofitted remotely through software updates, and all of the data was gathered without telling consumers and without their consent."
"Automatically tracked" Yes, Vizio did but how it was done and the scope is amazing as well as amazingly simple and doable. So Vizio did it and made money selling the information harvested on a grand scale.
From the link:
"The FTC detailed how the electronics giant used hidden tracking software to spy on its customers:
Vizio selected a matrix of pixels large enough to match against a data base of digital media delivered to the TV screen via "cable or broadband service providers, set-top boxes, streaming devices, DVD players and over-the-air broadcasts."
On a second-by-second basis, Vizio collected a selection of pixels on the screen that it matched to a database of TV, movie and commercial content. What’s more, Vizio identified viewing data from cable or broadband service providers, set-top boxes, streaming devices, DVD players and over-the-air broadcasts. Add it all up and Vizio captured as many as 100 billion data points each day from millions of TVs.
...We’re not talking about summary information about national viewing trends. According to the complaint, Vizio got personal. The company provided consumers’ IP addresses to data aggregators, who then matched the address with an individual consumer or household. Vizio’s contracts with third parties prohibited the re-identification of consumers and households by name, but allowed a host of other personal details – for example, sex, age, income, marital status, household size, education and home ownership. And Vizio permitted these companies to track and target its consumers across devices."
The methodology is obviously simple: Select a matrix size of pixels sufficiently large enough copy the matrix information and send it to Vizio. Probably every second whatever an adequate sample rate would be for the purpose. The variable pixel matrix size could be up to full frame every 30th or 60th of a second with any variable interval between full screen captures. If the programming is that simple and there it is certainly probable that it could be then the the potential magnitude and purpose of this method is truly astounding!
How to find a smart TV IP address:
If your TV is connected to internet, press the Menu button on your remote device and select the Network option. Select the Network Settings and then, select IP settings option. The existing IP address of your TV appears. It will be a private IP address if you are using router to connect to your ISP.
http://whatismyipaddress.com/private-ip explains how IP address works. A private IP address of a TV on a network conveys no user information itself. The IP address of the internet router it is connected to in a home or any other place is the identifier that is connected to a user, the user account and all information about the user that can be obtained or attributed to the user router IP address.
Amazing!
A smart TV is a computer. Essentially no different than the laptop I am using to write this blog entry. Any application program running on the computer could be coded to send a screen pixel matrix copy to any programmed address on the internet? A screen shot of what I am typing right now? What I am typing right now is being sent to Google in real time before I even publish this bog entry. Sent in either draft form or modifying an already posted form if I am editing it. Beyond that known real time Google monitoring -- for spell check purposes -- any other program on my computer could be sending a matrix screen capture to an address of the programmer's choice.
This is big: Not only sending a screen capture but a stealth audio capture or video capture. While the screen is always on when I am using the computer, sound capture microphone and video camera sound/video capture may not be on unless I am using (Hey Siri, FaceTime or Skype) them or they are turned on by stealth. A 60th of a second video frame screen capture is all that is necessary for any program to send the screen capture anywhere.
Deep Packet inspection is a spy method to find out what is being transmitted over the internet and to whom. Perhaps I need my own spyware program on my computer to spy on itself! The NSA could go into the App store business!
Of course Vizio phoning home turned on by default could be turned off by the user. That however is the "Reader Digest" turned on by default model used to scam people that are not aware that the default setting of on remains set until it is specifically turned off by the user. Money and/information continues to flow to the originator of the "on by default" setting.
The scope of Vizio pixel capture is even greater in the obvious situation that what is captured on the screen may not be related to media arriving via the internet. Arriving via a dvd for example or from my mac computer via Airplay. From my Photos on my mac computer being displayed on my Vizio. Yes, I do have a smart Vizio.
Ponder this: Face and object as well as audio recognition is a technological state of the art Artificial Intelligence fact. It merely requires video/audio analytical programs either incorporated in the transmitting device to selectively transmit or analytical programs applied to real time or history transmissions at the receiving end.
The conclusion: If the screen shot pixel matrix grabbed by Vizio do not match any media in its data base that is associated with customer having an interest in connection to a data base match then the screen shot still has commercial data mining value to discover a potential customer market. Match or not it is a win/win money maker to monetize the information. Contract with the NSA?
The potential for smart TV's to phone home data of interest to a recipient is immense.
For example: High frequency audio coded signals can be embedded in an audio stream to trigger an event or even transmit an audio code that can be translated into a video screen display object. Embed that high frequency coded signal into an audio recording stream and if that stream is played on any internet connected device and if the device is phoning home a detection of a high frequency range embedded audio code along with an associated UIC then bingo! A traceable connection! Apply that method to top secret level audio/video recording and security leaks can be identified and traced!
Speakers on the device playing the audio probably do not necessarily have the technical ability to process the high frequency range sound beyond the threshold of human hearing. That would not be necessary. It is likely that it could be in the digital audio sample that is computer processed.
Likewise a pixel matrix could be embedded in any video, like a video trademark, and the smart TV could be programmed to look for that pixel matrix. Perhaps it could be pixels or small matrices of pixels distributed across the screen image over a segment of frames over a segment of time or a single video frame. When detected....Phone Home.
The algorithms do all this are probably patented. Some company holds the patent. Maybe it was created in house by Vizio? Maybe the patent holder is selling it to anyone wanting it. Maybe it came from In-Q-tel? NSA would not even have to pay Vizio for the information. Simply get it for nothing by tapping into the Internet. That however has its Government Surveillance problems. Maybe better to pay a private business for it. NSA gets all the money it wants so why steal it and be on the hook? Let Vizio or any other entity using this methodology be on the hook.
Vizio is paying the price for being on the hook! Perhaps a customer contract with Vizio includes payments in the event that Vizio is caught? It is a cost analysis risk/reward thing.
From the top link:
"Aside from the monetary penalty, Vizio must also stop the tracking, delete most of the data it collected before March 1, 2016 and require consumers to give consent before collecting their information."
Yes, of course! But what about the data collected and sold to customers and their retention of collected data? That would require disclosure of any customers that bought the data. Maybe it is good for someone that the penalty not go that far?
Who else in the smart TV domain is doing this?
Is it being done in the general internet computer domain?
Who has the patent on this method of information capture?
We are Number 1. Vizio however sells to everyone below us. What have they done in their courts?
Picture this as a mild example scenario:
Closed door business briefing using a big screen Vizio TV to present proprietary business information. The same TV has an internet connection used for other conference room matters. Large matrix screen shots of the presentation are captured by Vizio. If the Vizio program detects no internet connection then the screen shots are stored for transmission when the internet is connected.
Insider information? Company secrets?
Surveillance for profit!
Here is a real kicker: Visio makes a router!
https://www.cnet.com/products/vizio-xwr100-dual-band-wireless-router/review/
What slick things can that do?
As I suspected the Vizio spyware was provided by a company that offers the product to Smart TV makers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inscape_Data_Services
"Inscape is a provider of ACR services to Smart TV OEMs.[1] The company was founded in 2009 as TV Interactive Systems later renamed Cognitive Media Networks Inc. On August 10, 2015, Vizio acquired Cognitive Media Networks and renamed it Inscape. On July 2016 Vizio announced Inscape will spin off and operate as a separate, privately owned company."
CEO Zeev Neumeier patents on the technology here:
https://www.linkedin.com/in/zeev-neumeier-38ab271
https://www.google.com/patents/US8930980
http://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=378233394
Could be one of the data aggregators that draws personal info from all sources to their data base for monetization. Maybe Vizio would not be a source since this is more of a tracing investigation oriented data base, not a marketing one which is BtoB. However an upper level aggregator might aggregate both?
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-05/this-company-has-built-a-profile-on-every-american-adult
http://ididata.com/solutions/idicore/
What is it about these "credentialed" PI agencies that gives them the privelges of signing up for this personal information in accordance with government privacy rules that any ordinary citizen cannot sign up for. It is probably only a check mark for the authorized credentialed agencies to check at the website that they agree to all the rules and regulations of use. Exactly like the one any citizen checks in the terms of agreement for access to anything on the internet.
Doctors for example have credentialed privileges associated with their professional ethics. PI's? What ethics do private snoops have? A license? Certification? A trench coat? Dues paying members?
https://www.toddington.com/resources/ is evidently draws from open sources, public, information but has a tool to search the open sourced data base that it sells. It appears to be a mixed bag of open, semi-fenced and fenced sources and tools free or available at a price.
What about the car watching us?
http://www.autoblog.com/2017/02/24/tv-vizio-privacy-car-data-listening-opinion/
Sunday, February 5, 2017
National Watch List Rap Back
https://theintercept.com/2017/02/04/the-fbi-is-building-a-national-watchlist-that-gives-companies-real-time-updates-on-employees/
Placeholder for future comment here.....
Placeholder for future comment here.....
The Code Is Law! Coding the Code - And Copyrighting The Result!
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20170203/00341736620/federal-court-basically-says-okay-to-copyright-parts-our-laws.shtml#comments
I never know what I will find written on the wall on any given Sunday morning and launch me on a blog entry exploring it in my own way. This idea of this link was writ large. It's Yuuuge!....Really Big!
Code is Law: That means the Code of Laws of the United States of America is Law. Law with a big "L". Yuuuge I tell you!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Code
"The Code of Laws of the United States of America[1] (variously abbreviated to Code of Laws of the United States, United States Code, U.S. Code, or U.S.C.) is the official compilation and codification of the general and permanent federal statutes of the United States"
Did I tell you Yuuuge? To make it small and short but still Yuuge I will simply call it US Code.
US Code looks like public law to me. Public...yes, but there is private money to be made on giving it value added that can be sold by an owner that added value to public law and has a private protection on value added. Yuuuge money!
For example
"On a day-to-day basis, very few lawyers cross-reference the Code to the Statutes at Large. Attempting to capitalize on the possibility that the text of the United States Code can differ from the United States Statutes at Large, Bancroft-Whitney for many years published a series of volumes known as United States Code Service (USCS), which used the actual text of the United States Statutes at Large."
United States Statutes at Large, is now published by the government and available to the public for free in digital format. At a price paid to the government for a paper copy.
The preceding is background to this Yuugeness: There is Yuuuge money for private enterprise in monetizing things in the Public Domain sector of government publications. Monetized by some form of protected value added. This is simply a specific category of seizing or fencing public property for private gain.
Privatization of public assets is a business model that in application accomplishes privatization of public assets for private profit gain in a variety of very clever ways. The beginning link looks at specific clever way to get an exclusive private copyright on public law: US Code.
Very clever backdoor model method indeed. It is the backdoor model method that has Yuuuge potential.
Yuuge potential? Even Yuuger than the front door model of Privatizing the Public Office of POTUS (POPTUS) which will be a failed attempt that was great risk for great reward where risk will bite Trump severely in the ass in his attempt to grab a great amount of power.
Cutting to the chase:
The Yuuuge! potential financial return in privatizing the US Code. The really big, really big clever method of doing it is writing the US Code in Machine Language Code.
No small task! Translating the US Code from Natural English Language to Machine Language. It is a Yuuge long range plan with a logical progression in getting there even beyond the example of the government objective to put a man (or woman) on the moon.
Digital Governance Google search results cover a wide range of thought and design.
A business model aimed at carving out and fencing private interfaces with the public US Code for private profit gain is Yuuge in potential but so small in present scope of application that it flies under the radar. It will continue to do so as long as the private interface carve out and fencing by means of copyright remains expressed in Natural English Language as Business Standards.
The whole thing is a Public/Private partnership stealth transformation strategy. By design or default driven? Default driven if it is simply a function of how information tends to organize itself logically in the Information Age. By design to the extent that private enterprise or government agency is taking the lead on change. Probably private enterprise leading as a contractual agent to the government with revolving door privileges access.
Private standards are creeping into codification in law by extension/inclusion of those standards into US Code law and copyright protection of private entity rights to intellectual property.
That is first step creep.
When private enterprise copyright algorithms methodologies coded in machine language begin to be incorporated into the US Code as application extensions of US Code law like an API Application Program Interface then payments by the government are due to the copyright holder.
The initial link at the beginning of this blog entry focuses on private enterprise extensions to US Code coded in precise English Language it is a step up to coding extensions in a more precise coding language approaching an integration with nth generation machine language operating systems and application programs.
That is a Yuuge money making opportunity for a new market for private enterprise that always wanted to get into government business.
Federal Court Basically Says It's Okay To Copyright Parts Of Our Laws
Bottom line: The US Code of Law will not change. Only the language used will change to a more highly defined more systemically integrated and accurate dialect of the English language created and copyrighted by the next Big Business Information Age Enterprise that sees opportunity to transform a public domain government law system written in ambiguous and relatively unstructured English language to a more precise more machine like (copyrighted as Intellectual Property coding) code and systems in the emerging domain of Artificial Intelligence.
The 25th Amendment is a complicated algorithmic law written in English. Someone, some collection of extremely gifted analysts like lawyers Object Oriented system analysts and programmers could re-write the essence and intent of the 25th Amendment in a higher order language of English approaching the 5th or 6th generation coding the structure of an operating system and its application programs to say and do the same thing but much more accurately. Probably identifying a lot of disconnects and logic failures in existing amendment coded in English.
For example:
When the 25th Amendment get an application we will be wishing that the re-coding had already been done! Whatever business did it would get a big and well deserved copyright payment for their intellectual property.
The original creators never got paid.
I never know what I will find written on the wall on any given Sunday morning and launch me on a blog entry exploring it in my own way. This idea of this link was writ large. It's Yuuuge!....Really Big!
Code is Law: That means the Code of Laws of the United States of America is Law. Law with a big "L". Yuuuge I tell you!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Code
"The Code of Laws of the United States of America[1] (variously abbreviated to Code of Laws of the United States, United States Code, U.S. Code, or U.S.C.) is the official compilation and codification of the general and permanent federal statutes of the United States"
Did I tell you Yuuuge? To make it small and short but still Yuuge I will simply call it US Code.
US Code looks like public law to me. Public...yes, but there is private money to be made on giving it value added that can be sold by an owner that added value to public law and has a private protection on value added. Yuuuge money!
For example
"On a day-to-day basis, very few lawyers cross-reference the Code to the Statutes at Large. Attempting to capitalize on the possibility that the text of the United States Code can differ from the United States Statutes at Large, Bancroft-Whitney for many years published a series of volumes known as United States Code Service (USCS), which used the actual text of the United States Statutes at Large."
United States Statutes at Large, is now published by the government and available to the public for free in digital format. At a price paid to the government for a paper copy.
The preceding is background to this Yuugeness: There is Yuuuge money for private enterprise in monetizing things in the Public Domain sector of government publications. Monetized by some form of protected value added. This is simply a specific category of seizing or fencing public property for private gain.
Privatization of public assets is a business model that in application accomplishes privatization of public assets for private profit gain in a variety of very clever ways. The beginning link looks at specific clever way to get an exclusive private copyright on public law: US Code.
Very clever backdoor model method indeed. It is the backdoor model method that has Yuuuge potential.
Yuuge potential? Even Yuuger than the front door model of Privatizing the Public Office of POTUS (POPTUS) which will be a failed attempt that was great risk for great reward where risk will bite Trump severely in the ass in his attempt to grab a great amount of power.
Cutting to the chase:
The Yuuuge! potential financial return in privatizing the US Code. The really big, really big clever method of doing it is writing the US Code in Machine Language Code.
No small task! Translating the US Code from Natural English Language to Machine Language. It is a Yuuge long range plan with a logical progression in getting there even beyond the example of the government objective to put a man (or woman) on the moon.
Digital Governance Google search results cover a wide range of thought and design.
A business model aimed at carving out and fencing private interfaces with the public US Code for private profit gain is Yuuge in potential but so small in present scope of application that it flies under the radar. It will continue to do so as long as the private interface carve out and fencing by means of copyright remains expressed in Natural English Language as Business Standards.
The whole thing is a Public/Private partnership stealth transformation strategy. By design or default driven? Default driven if it is simply a function of how information tends to organize itself logically in the Information Age. By design to the extent that private enterprise or government agency is taking the lead on change. Probably private enterprise leading as a contractual agent to the government with revolving door privileges access.
Private standards are creeping into codification in law by extension/inclusion of those standards into US Code law and copyright protection of private entity rights to intellectual property.
That is first step creep.
When private enterprise copyright algorithms methodologies coded in machine language begin to be incorporated into the US Code as application extensions of US Code law like an API Application Program Interface then payments by the government are due to the copyright holder.
The initial link at the beginning of this blog entry focuses on private enterprise extensions to US Code coded in precise English Language it is a step up to coding extensions in a more precise coding language approaching an integration with nth generation machine language operating systems and application programs.
That is a Yuuge money making opportunity for a new market for private enterprise that always wanted to get into government business.
Federal Court Basically Says It's Okay To Copyright Parts Of Our Laws
Bottom line: The US Code of Law will not change. Only the language used will change to a more highly defined more systemically integrated and accurate dialect of the English language created and copyrighted by the next Big Business Information Age Enterprise that sees opportunity to transform a public domain government law system written in ambiguous and relatively unstructured English language to a more precise more machine like (copyrighted as Intellectual Property coding) code and systems in the emerging domain of Artificial Intelligence.
The 25th Amendment is a complicated algorithmic law written in English. Someone, some collection of extremely gifted analysts like lawyers Object Oriented system analysts and programmers could re-write the essence and intent of the 25th Amendment in a higher order language of English approaching the 5th or 6th generation coding the structure of an operating system and its application programs to say and do the same thing but much more accurately. Probably identifying a lot of disconnects and logic failures in existing amendment coded in English.
For example:
When the 25th Amendment get an application we will be wishing that the re-coding had already been done! Whatever business did it would get a big and well deserved copyright payment for their intellectual property.
The original creators never got paid.
Wednesday, February 1, 2017
Bitcoin Network - Physical and Concpetual Network Relationships
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-01-31/those-who-say-bitcoin-has-no-intrinsic-value-need-imbibe-gospel-true-education
The link addresses Bitcoin from a PointOfEntry:Value. The link's explanation of Bitcoin and bitcoin, two different things is the greater real value of the the link beyond the financial value it presents.
The real value? It is all about the model of the Internet and its Applications. What is the "intrinsic value" of the Internet. From what scheme of the relationship of Things does it derive an intrinsic value?
"Value:Intrinsic" is an ambiguous term. It has one foot in the real physical world and another in a purely conceptual world. The Thing:Object:Parent:Frame:Concept:Value is one of existence. If the thing "Concept:Value" (extracted from its full line of Parent/Child inheritance lineage for the sake of convenience of specific examination) is examined then the classic question of investigation analysis is: Value is the Object:Parent of what Objects:Children?
Sidebar note here: What if I had said: "Value is the Object:Parent of what ObjectOrObjects:Children of the Parent? But that question itself is not a fully clear and accurate logical statement in Object:Oriented thinking. A single Child of a Parent that has no other sibling children of that parent that differentiates the Children inherits all the attributes, methods and messages of its Object:Parent. It is the same as or equal to its parent. A sole single child of a Parent it redundant thinking. It is a clone of the Parent. It is the Parent.
Therefore to have conceptual difference meaning then AllThings must be Object:Children of at least two Parent Objects and that a sole single Object:Parent:Child has no logical meaning except as a null object at the ultimate SingleExclusiveParent:AllThingsChildren? At the other end of the spectrum there is another Object:Null.....The sole child of two Object:Parents.
In a circular way I seem to have gotten to the logical binary propositions on which computers and computing are based. Either/Or, True/False, Neither/Nor, Present/Absent, On/Off.
What are the two TopLevel Object:Parents giving birth to all Object:Children?
1. Physical Real (Domain:Physical)
2. Logical Conceptual (Domain Conceptual)
What is the sole single ObjectParent spawning these two Object:Children that are different in only one attribute? What is the sole single Object:Child ultimately spawned at the end of the entire ObjectOrientedUniverse That goes to where I will not go. The frame of my ObjectOrientedUniverse on a continuum from originating and ending with.......
Objects:ParentOrChild:AbsoluteMinimum=TwoDifferent
If:
The fundamental Object Oriented Partent/Child relationship structure of of EveryThing
Is between:
TheFirstOnlySoleSingleObject:Parent:FirstChildren:TwoOnly(OneReal/OneConceptual) from which all Object:Children descend.....
And:
TheLastOnlySoleSingleObject:Child that is the ultimate descendant of the FirstOnlySoleSingleObject:Patent?
Then:
From what common ParentSoleSingleObject:Thing do these beginning SingleParent and ending SoleChild descend?
Logical Conclusion Hypothesis:
Time!
At this point I return to thinking about the Bitcoin Network after taking the VeryLongWay around to SetDomainFrame for examination of the meaning of the originating Link.
To be continued as the BitcoinRabbit gets PulledFromHat.......
The link addresses Bitcoin from a PointOfEntry:Value. The link's explanation of Bitcoin and bitcoin, two different things is the greater real value of the the link beyond the financial value it presents.
The real value? It is all about the model of the Internet and its Applications. What is the "intrinsic value" of the Internet. From what scheme of the relationship of Things does it derive an intrinsic value?
"Value:Intrinsic" is an ambiguous term. It has one foot in the real physical world and another in a purely conceptual world. The Thing:Object:Parent:Frame:Concept:Value is one of existence. If the thing "Concept:Value" (extracted from its full line of Parent/Child inheritance lineage for the sake of convenience of specific examination) is examined then the classic question of investigation analysis is: Value is the Object:Parent of what Objects:Children?
Sidebar note here: What if I had said: "Value is the Object:Parent of what ObjectOrObjects:Children of the Parent? But that question itself is not a fully clear and accurate logical statement in Object:Oriented thinking. A single Child of a Parent that has no other sibling children of that parent that differentiates the Children inherits all the attributes, methods and messages of its Object:Parent. It is the same as or equal to its parent. A sole single child of a Parent it redundant thinking. It is a clone of the Parent. It is the Parent.
Therefore to have conceptual difference meaning then AllThings must be Object:Children of at least two Parent Objects and that a sole single Object:Parent:Child has no logical meaning except as a null object at the ultimate SingleExclusiveParent:AllThingsChildren? At the other end of the spectrum there is another Object:Null.....The sole child of two Object:Parents.
In a circular way I seem to have gotten to the logical binary propositions on which computers and computing are based. Either/Or, True/False, Neither/Nor, Present/Absent, On/Off.
What are the two TopLevel Object:Parents giving birth to all Object:Children?
1. Physical Real (Domain:Physical)
2. Logical Conceptual (Domain Conceptual)
What is the sole single ObjectParent spawning these two Object:Children that are different in only one attribute? What is the sole single Object:Child ultimately spawned at the end of the entire ObjectOrientedUniverse That goes to where I will not go. The frame of my ObjectOrientedUniverse on a continuum from originating and ending with.......
Objects:ParentOrChild:AbsoluteMinimum=TwoDifferent
If:
The fundamental Object Oriented Partent/Child relationship structure of of EveryThing
Is between:
TheFirstOnlySoleSingleObject:Parent:FirstChildren:TwoOnly(OneReal/OneConceptual) from which all Object:Children descend.....
And:
TheLastOnlySoleSingleObject:Child that is the ultimate descendant of the FirstOnlySoleSingleObject:Patent?
Then:
From what common ParentSoleSingleObject:Thing do these beginning SingleParent and ending SoleChild descend?
Logical Conclusion Hypothesis:
Time!
At this point I return to thinking about the Bitcoin Network after taking the VeryLongWay around to SetDomainFrame for examination of the meaning of the originating Link.
To be continued as the BitcoinRabbit gets PulledFromHat.......
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)