Tall(e)y facts

Yes, the Quote of the Day. Typically, one that had some ageing but has bettered, qua relevance, for it but may have better had some extra attention half a year ago: Since the masses are always eager to believe something, for their benefit nothing is so easy to arrange as facts.

By Charles Maurice de Talleyrand-Périgord, you know, of 1754-1838 stock. Which may or may not remind you of some current or, at time of publication of this post, past [one can hope, can’t one?] Chief of the Bookkeeping — as the position was intended and crafted at time of creation… Oh how devolved it has become, true-ing all fears that De Tocqueville may have had about it but that’s for another post.
One need not go further than to remind you old Talley of the Périgord-that-produces-some-decent-wines-today, lived through the French revolution (read Thomas Paine for a alternative-facts (sic) report on that) and the Napoléontic period(s) [what a bleeder they were. sorry pun had to be made] — apparently he had mastered the survival game.

Good for him, maybe. And:
[Hidden gem, tucked away in the bustle of today’s action, deserves much more attention; National Museum of the American Indian NY]

Leaking profiles

Got an attention raiser during an off-the-cuff discussion on data leakage. Qua, like, not getting the first thing about what privacy has been since Warren&Brandeis’ eloquent definition, and subsequent codification in pretty hard-core, straightforward laws.
The problem being, that no theory of firm (incl public) allows subsumption of employees into slavery, of mind or otherwise. Think Universal Declaration of Human Rights, article 12. Hence, tracking and tracing every keystroke of employees, i.e., treating them as suspect of e.g., data leakage before one has any a priori clue about everyone individually actually doing anything wrong, not having been granted any rights of surveillance in this jurisdiction, is a crime in itself.
And no, the comparison with street cameras that bother no-one and make everyone safer, is a lie on two counts. And, in many countries (the civilised ones; a criterion in reverse), such (total or partial) surveillance isn’t outlawed without reason.
So, your data leakage prevention by tracing everyone is an illegal act. Don’t.

No, your security concerns are not valid. Not the slightest, compared to the means you want to deploy. Stego to files of all kinds, when all are aware of its implementation, may help much better. And supplies you with the trace you want; not to your employee that you (but no-one else) suggest is rogue – (s)he knows about the traceabilitry so will be self-censored (ugch) into compliance – but to the third party that spilled the beans. Since stego-cleansing tools may exist, your mileage may vary. Encryption then, the destruction of content accessibility for those not authorised (through holding a password/token/~), will fail when anything you send out, might have to be read off a screen; the PrtScn disabling being undone by good ol’ cameras as present in your good ol’ S8 or P900 (though this at 0:50+ is probably the typical TLA stakeout vid/result).

Conclusion: Excepting very, very rare occasions, your data leakage prevention by employee surveillance will land you in prison. Other methods, might be legal but fail. Your thoughts now on outbound traffic keyword monitoring. [Extra credit when including European ‘human in the loop’ initiatives.]

And:
[No privacy in your prayers, or ..?? Baltimore Cathedral]

Tragic users

Isn’t it a tragedy that those that would most need full but fully inconspicuous, unnoticable security on socmed et al., are the ones that care the least?

This, both in careful scouring of legalese and practical settings, tools, and what have we, and qua effort to keep messaging (Email dies out hard, doesn’t it ..? Or doesn’t it due to very valid reasons..?) secure and data private ..?
On the other hand / end, not all ‘professionals’ practice what they preach to the hilt… And may do too little.
Flip side of “There exists no 100% security”: If you do only a little less, the huge costs aren’t worth it whereas if you do quite a bit less, you’re much more efficient. Hence, even reasoning from the other side, maximum security will leave gaping holes you (sic) will get caught in.

So, all are in an inverse Catch-22 of sorts… [there should be a name for that; suggestions?]

And:
Photo11[The one that checked water temp, wasn’t the one to go swimming…; Cyprus]

Hoog op Flut! Alweer, inclusief Laag op Nut

Onderstaande, alweer, nog steeds… Inclusief de toevoeging (sic; aan deze tekst) dat een en ander (of gewoon een) stevig wordt verergerd qua domweg (sic) On-gezond, door een stellend gebrek aan (NB) voldoende groente — reden? hooguit dat de Cock geen idee heeft hoe hij (…) daarmee moet omgaan terwijl dat bij de basics hoort, toch? Dan maar volgemieterd met nog een pak ..:

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. Er is ook een neveneffect

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:
DSC_0217
[Sombertjes; hoog daarboven, op de schouders/berg, een ruïne, beneden rest een zoete kledder (gemiddeld); Ribeauvillé]

White Mannism

The baby with the bath water.

Slate: “Glamour just published its first issue completely produced by women. It’s about time.” Meh. Check. Move on.
Some agency trying to find a diversity manager: Probably only non-white mentally and/or physically challenged LBGTQ ‘persons’ need apply ..?

Now the politics (mostly, of the PC kind; as completely isolated and locked up it was in its cultural-economic elite without real power) slowly finds that the Trumpists (or ~, fill in your European ‘OMG he (sic) doesn’t play by the over-ritualised pastel crayon coloured emptybabbletalk schemes’ overly-labeled-xenophobe polls-moonshooter) aren’t the Angry White Men that the (tell-tale) rushed qualification need (fear fo being found out not to have any insight, maybe?) had thought them to be,
it is time to also consider even more sobering. In the area of: No, I can’t help being a white man I’m just born that way. And raised, by the way, in an environment that worked towards imprinting penalty for that already. To think that I don’t know this, don’t notice, or unconsciously or consciously abuse the privilege because some have attached the idea that I have that to me, unwantingly, is a scam and demonstrates that those involved, in fact do NOT know me but it demonstrates as well their limited world view of trying to lock up all they meet (or not even) in extremely limited confines of classification. If that’s your need, you have other problems than your supposed underprivileged childhood so maybe use your lifetime trying to grow a pair (F/M)?
This translates into: If you care to hire such a diversity manager as mentioned above, you demonstrate to want a token woman. If you care that some women’s magazine (yeah, I do realise that, sigh.) is finally made by women only, you consider no man capable of understanding women ..? Are you helping by trying to avoid that? Did you check all suitable male candidates for their inability to deliver the quality you need? (My guess: at the printer’s, there’s quite a few men working there, by the way) Or do you care less for quality than for gender accidentally (!) fixed at birth or medical facility?
Again, being born white male, does that mean I’m less because I’m supposedly ‘privileged’ …? If the (medically) colourblind can’t tell red from green, are others privileged and discriminating (usually taken to mean the one and the other are inseparable somehow) and shouldn’t be allowed to ever use those colours?
(Apart from some, rare, groups seriously trying to undercut common superstitions; I like those — as far as they see the limits of their purpose and stretch)

Or do you want to change the world by practicing what you preach?

There’s anger for you. Anger for being told why one is supposedly stupid for reasons of not seeing and recognising one’s stupidity. There’s why the protests by voters (the ultimate source of power, it shows, and of authority in our world) are from all those not in command. Re-read Thomas Paine’s Rights of Man again; you’ll only have to add ‘self-righteous PC babbling airheads’ [disclaimer: I’m one, too] (in)to ‘government’ and you see where the current set of politicians went off the rails.
By the way, don’t be fooled by the tone of the above: I’m not even angry! Just sad and disappointed. And unhopeful about the future [ _ | for me ].

Now, there’s also the Age thing … like, this and you’re aiming for sheeple not experience…

Oh, plus:
DSC_0854
[Classical burden; this, for Heroes — Arlington]

A parachute to your Dutch granny budget

If you have no clue about the title, read on.
It’s about a Dutch ‘granny bike’. And about your bosses’ golden parachutes. And how to get budget for the playthings bare minimum tools you require.

First off: the biker part. Note that this has unsurpassably been written up here. On how crappy banger bikes, are locked with supremo but ridiculously expensive gear and how this out-of-all-proportion control-cost still makes sense. Reading is believing.
Second: These days, FUD is Real; à la the “Either you’ve been hacked or will be, soon” line and including the ever bigger transparency in the press. With a warning of impeding disaster for all your remotely involved (even if by negligence — wait did I write ‘if’ ..?) bosses and their tenure, as these days, too, a great many including CEOs get fired / are forced to quit / commit seppuko almost, when <youknowwhat> hits the fan and always runs downstream, hence getting a lot of you superiors their golden parachute. Their mileage may vary, but the threat finally (…!) is a believable one. Either they believe (wrongly) to be able to escape the gauntlet anyway but should then, officially, care about the parachutes’ cost to the company and take that as a clue about the (tenfold++) reputational damage to the company, or … they aim to take the money and run and go on disastering elsewhere, leaving said reputational damage and parachute costs to the laggerds left behind — you inform the odd superior here and there that their colleagues/peers are about to pull their leg and leave the sweeping up of the damage to the stayers.
Summing up to: At the cost side, the rationale is such that the ceiling of any of your proposals takes off to, at last, suitable levels. At the benefits side (cost-avoidance), suddenly the decision makers’ personal interest is there.

Combined, this should as written suffice to finally get sufficient budget for the playthings bare minimum tools you require. Or what.

I tell you what: The above even now may still not make sense to the … [expletive censored] bosses above you. Plus:
DSCN0770
[Harmless sea beggars on the Dutch coast; Bloemendaal]

Did / Did Not (Know Who Did)

Anyone still have an overview of where we (?) stand qua attribution of “cyber” attacks [ #ditchcyber, of course ] ..?? Apart from this

There’s so much development in attribution with or without proof, e.g., about hacking elections in some outer corner of the world’s population; was it truly hacks, was it some nation state, was it some scapegoat hackster, was it all a set-up, where are Wikileaks, Anonymous, [fill in your favourite Four Horsemen party and colour the pictures] … the possibilities are endless.

But there are indeed flashes like this and this, which spark some controversy whilst blurring the overall picture. And we’d want unblurred pics of hotel room showers oh wait not I.
And what with all the tools out there (remember, the FBI’s stash stolen and now on fire sale for 99% off the previous list price, right?), planting others’ fingerprints and DNA, so to speak (no, literally ..!), and have pictures and videos even that are near-indistinguishable from proof; what evidence if any is still admissible in courts? None …!? So, what attribution …!?

When others talk about “controlling the cyber battlefield” (no, not the FBI but the extraterritorial agency), isn’t there a protracted “cyber” [ #ditchcyber ] world war under way already ..? Just not as hot as the previous one, more like the Cold one, schlepping on ..?

Just accept all Peace For Our Time‘s … and:

hC467CB09

[The SocMed approach: Look! Moose babies!]

Ad Lib / Logic

About some ‘logic’ in an @bookingcom ad.

Where this, commonly well-regarded, travel site sent some spam: “Umbrella in hand, J, it’s raining deals!”
Which may or may not be true, but

  • If it’s deals that it’s raining, I wouldn’t necessarily want to shrug them off with an umbrella
  • If it’s deals, why associate them with bad weather which I may want to escape, through the deals
  • Can’t the deals be collected on some company web site or so; why should it rain into my Inbox?

So, methinks the ad is a wide-net phishing run. Right ..?

Oh, and:
000003 (8)
[Old analog pic; now there‘s deal weather …! Martinique — once was business travel location 😉 ]

Mumbling, much ..?

How come that almost (?) everyone (for sure) recognises the tune of this, but none know the lyrics — well, by heart, and able to sing somewhat proficiently…?

Just asking.

And:
dsc_0599
[Beautiful, but linked to tragedy; Prague — only need to straight the horizon…]

Quitting a club

Where some trade association of … drum roll … chartered (sic) IS auditors declared Cybersecurity is becoming an ever bigger problem. An IS auditor should need to keep informed of the latest developments as an argument to join in some CYBER ARRGHHH! lecture,
one better leaves. I did.

Sure, I’m member of some other, global, of the same trade and tricks one might say. But to list the other arguments to quit the local (i.e., Dutch; could have characterised them as ‘provincial’ but why) one, would take ten pages (yes I have them, spelled out including various legal trespassing of the vilest kind, far from complete after some this-years developments within the club…) and I don’t want to bother you with the water under the bridge.
And sure, I re-joined yet another trade association. And try to contribute in another way, as yet not yet disclosed. And #ditchcyber.

But I’m unsure about my discretion in leaving (behind the hopeless) and would be curious about your best advice when and how (that’s two) to quit a club. Thoughts?

Oh:
DSC_0804
[Not only T towers might need (sic) to be renamed…]

Maverisk / Étoiles du Nord