Innovation, economics, society at large – Page 41

The ‘Bucks logo, again

The @Starbucks logo once again, in an unsuspected place. Like, this:

[Haut Koenigsbourg castle indeed, in the Alsace]

Begging for some explanation. Why here, in/on a 190x rebuild of a medieval (origin) castle in the middle of (Western) Europe, no Norse sailor in sight? As previously mentioned, there’s more to it than some simple explanation. Hopefully.
E.g., any History grad student interested to write a thesis on this? Said coffee house might be found willing to provide a stipend …? ;-|

For this one’s exact location:
Bucks at Haut K
[I.e., in the very inner courtyard, where no Norseman ever arrived (back in the day)]

After last (mentioned, linked) post, the answer was inconclusive unless 50-50 is a conclusion… Let’s hope for better, this time…

Big Data as a sin

Not just any sin, the Original one. Eating from the ultimate source of Knowledge that Big, Totalitarian, All-Thinkable Data is, in the ideal (quod non).
We WEIRDS (White, Educated, Industrialised, Rich Democratic people), a.k.a. Westeners, know what that leads to. Forever we will toil on spurious correlations…

Golden oldie pic of the day

Yup, another one of those, maybe not so golden but really olden…:

Miss(ed), almost ..?

One might have easily missed one of the most valuable annual reports … but if you trust it (you can) or would want to dismiss it (you can, for various reasons like the management babble leading to a great many missed threats and ~levels as here, always of course, but still), it is an important item when you’re in InfoSec despite #ditchcyber! so you’d better study it.
Oh, yeah, this being the thing.

OK now. Plus:

[In “cyber”space (#ditchcyber once more), easily scaled. Haut Koenigsbourg again.]

Hoog op Flut!

Kan de gezamenlijke restaurantwereld in NL nou eens ophouden met die nonsens van “Hoog Op Smaak” en gewoon toegeven dat er door iedere gang een AKZO-jaaromzet zout gaat omdat de ingrediënten zó goedkoop moesten dat er geen enkele smaak aan zat ..?

[Edited to add: Nog erger als koks gaan beweren niet zo veel zout toe te voegen maar de smaak ‘umami’ maken. Een emmer MSG erbij gooien bedoelen ze dan. De betekenis en vertaling van ‘umami’ was tot voor kort ‘van alles veel’. Toch vreemd, dat we sinds de Romeinen vissaus kennen, vol van ‘umami’-glutamaten en afgeleiden, maar dat we nooit een woord ervoor hadden, of het als smaak bestempelden. Maar ja, het tikt vele receptoren aan hè? Dus het kan geen variant zijn van een van de vier basissmaken ..? Net als marsepein een aparte smaak is tenslotte, want naast heel veel zoet zit er ook een klein beetje andere smaak bij dus zoet op zich is marsepein niet ..?? Iemand een uitleg waar ‘basis’ voor staat in basissmaken ..?
En dat zout en ‘umami’ zo’n beetje hetzelfde effect hebben … Inderdaad, ze hebben beide het effect van smaakkoppoetsing door papillenactivering. Nou en?
Door met wat er al stond; lees aldaar dus MSG als :]
Heel triest om te zien dat ook vele ‘sterren’koks et al., zich er zo consequent aan bezondigen. Goede ingrediënten hebben geen volle Dode Zee / chemiefabriek (!) nodig om smaakvol te zijn. Die sterren zijn ze echt niet waard. Tot nu toe slechts zegge 1 (schrijve: één) (ja ik weet het, zucht) Michelin-ster tegengekomen (i.e., geproefd) die de ster ook echt waard was. De rest (t/m 3*!): Nee hoor; effectbejag met een over de hele dichtgepletterde poging tot ‘umami’ door alle eigenheid aan smaak van de ingrediënten weg te poetsen met 3651 vrachtwagenladingen natriumchloride. Waar waren die sterren ook alweer voor? Toch niet alleen om ze als zodanig te voelen, waar de zon nooit schijnt, na beschikbaarstelling aan de keurmeesters van die bandenleverancier? Want het keukenproduct … oh zo vaak middelmatig, zeer middelmatig.
Dit soort proletarische vervoosde degeneratie-decadentie staat natuurlijk naast natuurlijk een flink aantal niet-sterrententen die het begrepen hebben ‘maar daardoor geen ster halen’. Die gewoon weten hoe je de kwaliteit van ingrediënten kan halen zonder die te vernietigen, door te beginnen met goede ingrediënten en die geen geweld aan te doen. Als de (on)geachte cliëntèle dat niet proeft: Pech. Move over. Ga maar naar de Schotse keten, daar pep je de boel maar op met ketchup en mayo. Dá’s pas smaak, toch …!?

Zout kan je er niet uit halen, wel erin als je aan tafel zo nodig moet laten blijken te grof te zijn voor finesse.

Enfin, zo kan ik nog wel doorgaan. Rest, voor nu:

[Sombertjes; hoog daarboven, op de schouders/berg, een ruïne, beneden rest een zoete kledder (gemiddeld); Ribeauvillé]

Short Cross posting

… Not from anyone, not from anywhere. But crossing some book tips, and asking for comments.
Was reading the Good Book, when realizing that it, in conjunction with Bruce, could lead to some form of progress beyond the latter when absolutist totalitarian panopticon control frameworks might seem the only way out. In particular, when including this on the Pikettyan / Elyseym escape or not that serves only some but not the serfs. And then add some Mark Goodman (nomen est omen, qua author, and content?) and you can see where Bruce may have missed exponential crumbling of structures, and said escape might be by others than the current(ly known) 1% … Not all Boy Cried Wolfs will be wrong; on the contrary — Not Yet is very, very different from Never, but rather Soon Baby, Soon.

Not rejoicing, and:

[Nope, not safe here (Haut Koenigsbourg) either.]

Still, 3LD is the 4th leg

This, not as much a monster under the bed as it is a monster elsewhere; Three Lines of Defense (quod non).

I’ve discussed the utterly nonsensical, totalitarian bureaucratic, lie of its utility already over and over again, but the thought — through encounter in daily practice so often still — returns every now and then. And then, one realizes: Three Lines of ‘Defense’ (quod non) are not the third, but the fourth leg of a flipover stand. Yes, indeed, you hardly see that ever — for a reason: Where the third leg is flimsy already and certainly so compared to the stability provided by the first, essential, two legs, any fourth might impress but destroys stability of the whole!
Yes, as three ground point define a surface hence stable stance on any irregular surface (and, hence again, are completely sufficient), four such touch points are very hard to get stable, onto a plane surface. Therefore, the fourth leg destabilizes the whole shazam, undoes the effectiveness of the third. Now, two are bungling.

And no, not because a flipover has three legs does that reflect TLD; the first two legs are equally required and face us, thus giving the thing its purpose which is completely, fundamentally, different from TLD where there’s three lines behind each other that only ‘protect’ (quod non) against regulatory oversight by massaging all embarrassment away through ever more dubious language. When you don’t see the fundamental of that difference, you may or may not be hopeless. Stop dragging the IQ average of whatever group you consider yourself part of, down so low.

I now rest my case.

[‘Transparency’ and building material? We see right through that both, Chanel!
(PC Hooftstraat)]

Last night a … saved me (updated)

As @swiftonsecurity (and of course @meneer of #ditchcyber fame) and others may improve since the rhythm is only almost perfect, already this:

[To the music but outdated lyrics of Indeep — but what style …
(Hey @ESCIA is that you with the mic ..?)]

You gotta reboot ~~get up~~
You gotta reload ~~get on~~
You gotta restore ~~get down~~ girl
You know you drive me #DIV/0! ~~crazy~~ baby
You’ve got me turning to another OS ~~man~~
Called you on the VOIP ~~phone~~

No one’s pinging back ~~home~~
Baby why ya leave me all >dev/null ~~alone~~
And if it wasn’t for the endless GitHub surfing ~~music~~
I don’t know what I’d do

Last night an information risk / security management professional saved my desktop PC ~~life~~
Last night an information risk / security management professional saved my desktop PC ~~life~~ from a broken pipe ~~heart~~
Last night an information risk / security management professional saved my desktop PC ~~life~~
Last night an information risk / security management professional saved my desktop PC ~~life~~ with a patch ~~song~~

You know I hopped into my notepad ~~car~~
Didn’t need to leave the coffee shop ~~get very far no~~
Because I had you on my stash of data-breached X-rated pics ~~mind~~
Why only give you a ticket and secretly close it immediately ~~be so unkind~~?

You’ve got your hapless users ~~women~~ all around
All around this AD ~~town~~, boy
But I was trapped in the SLA from hell ~~love~~ with you
And I didn’t know what to do
But when I turned on my RTFManual ~~radio~~
I found out all I needed to key in ~~know~~
Run the diagnostics kit ~~Check it out~~

Hey listen up to your local information risk / security management professional
You better hear what he’s got to type so fast you can’t keep track ~~say~~
There’s not a problem that I can’t fix
Cause I can do it in the rogue exploit suite ~~mix~~
And if your crappy ol’ XP machine ~~man~~ gives you trouble
Just you step away from the keyboard ~~move~~ out on the double
And you don’t let it trouble your ‘brain’ ~~brain~~
Cause away goes PEBKAC ~~troubles~~
Down the drain
I said away goes PEBKAC ~~troubles~~
Down the drain

Last night an information risk / security management professional saved my desktop PC ~~life~~
There’s not a problem that I can’t fix
Cause I can do it in the rogue exploit suite ~~mix~~
There’s not a problem that I can’t fix
Cause I can do it in the rogue exploit suite ~~mix~~

Quite an improvement indeedp … And leaving you with, of course:

You must, you mustn’t

Strange. The last couple of weeks, months, have seen a resurgence of “Anything that is not explicitly forbidden, is allowed.”
Which was, well, true in only the most devolved, twisted (pejorative sense) means/ends ethics and morals discussions. And still is. But suddenly, there’s a new angle: All that aren’t involved in the spoils of such tactics (not being rich enough to have used Panama Paper style constructions, even when not aware as such vulgar ‘money’ things had been handled by sycophant minions (of mind, certainly)), want the overthrow of the said sad sentence, by including that all that is permitted, should not be done when (not if) the moral higher ground would forbid it, still.

I can agree. Being in the category of … well mostly having first-world problems and not (much) more. But then again, it strikes me as odd that somehow, we don’t have good handles to straighten out the wicked ones — bar revolution. Because our legal system doesn’t seem to be as strict as it once was; forbidding all that was not allowed for a proper functioning of society. There have been changes to society… Where theft is still impermissible if of physical stuff, but in many ways is perfectly good to go when by failure to act, like many 1%ers. Though Aristoteles (Ethica Nicomachea; read the damn thing!) rightly would frown upon such dimwittedness but there.
So, actually, law would have to change but hasn’t. The very ones to be controlled by it, of course, are the first through the escape vents. And, Pikettyan or Elysium style, might prevent catching up categorically.

We could discuss on and on. But prevalent is: Now what ..? So, for the time being:

[‘Coloured in, otherwise too bleak your future is’; The Hague]

I am Satoshi Nakamato

… If only to dilute the discussion. And to all be Spartacus. Let the Craigs be the fools (not even meant lightly; rather pejorative here) they are. The absolute hard-math sides of Bidkoyn coming full circle to the mysteries to be kept mysteries for the very sake of it for once you dumb.ss! of its origins.

To keep it real:

[Mining precedes, but the use side is in transport ..? <Think that one over> at Utrecht]