Ramadan Mubarak

As the holy month of Ramadan is approaching, I wish all Muslims a blessed Ramadan full of Health, Wealth, and Joy!

Ramadan Mubarak / Selamat Berpuasa / رمضان كريم

#ramadan2022 #ramadan #holymonth

Ucraina Ukraine

Non sono un esperto di geopolitica, come non sono un esperto di pandemie e quindi mediamente mi asterrò dal fare commenti (pur avendo idee precise in merito) su quello che stà avvenendo in Ucraina cosi come non commento le vicende pandemiche.

Ma so che la guerra fa schifo, fa male e può anche ammazzarti, e so che farà soffrire persone che conosco e a cui voglio bene.

Non posso che sperare per il meglio.

I am not an expert in geopolitics, just as I am not on pandemics. Therefore, I will refrain from making comments (despite having precise ideas about it) on what is happening in Ukraine as I do not comment on the pandemic events.

But I know that war sucks, hurts, and can even kill you, and I know it will hurt people I know and love.

I can only hope for the best.

😔

#ucraina #ukraine #ukrainecrisis #ukraineconflict

Happy Lunar New Year 2022

World Economic Forum on cybersecurity

World Economic Forum Risk Report 2022 is exciting reading.

Being aware of the risk is necessary to address them and understand the landscape we live in.

It is also a great way to see how risk perception changes year by year.

Looking at the short-term global risk picture, we can see we have weather and climate; economic risks are not top of mind. We have “infectious diseases” to remind us that a pandemic can happen, and we have, some years now, “Cyber Security failure.”

Since I work in the Cyber Security field, I have had, as evident, immediate interest in the cyber security section.

https://www.weforum.org/reports/global-risks-report-2022/in-full/chapter-3-digital-dependencies-and-cyber-vulnerabilities

Data from the report are interesting, but I think that we should understand what those data tell us, so let me do some examples:

“95% of cybersecurity issues can be traced to human error“

the global risk report 2022

Means: Train people, put the correct processes in place, put proper technology in place with a people-centric approach to address the “human” factor. If 95% of cybersecurity issues are related somehow to human error, we have to consider human behavior into the equation. This means that the technologies and processes we put in place should tell us the risk related to our people. People make mistakes, are attacked, are exposed to stakes that can hit our assets. Without understanding this, we will not address the overall risk we face in cybersecurity.

What to do: We have to properly raise awareness and protect communication channels used by people because there will be where a skilled attacker will try his\her move. But in an ever-changing landscape, this is not easy nor enough. For example, we should continually update awareness programs according to people’s current risks and train people based on their risk exposure. This means that our security technology should understand the user risk exposure. This information should be available for the awareness program, and the other security implemented technologies.

At the same time, a security awareness program should be able to monitor the understanding and knowledge of the users and use this information as a parameter not only to deploy the training needs for the specific set of users correctly but also to report the user vulnerability in the user risk rating.

Addressing 95% of cyber security issues caused by humans requires understanding why humans fail and what drives them to make mistakes. This does not require a boolean approach but a complex construction of the context of the risks in a holistic way.

“Insider threats (intentional or accidental) represent 43% of all breaches”

the global risk report 2022

Means: the risks do not come only from outside; the problem can be internal, you have to monitor where data goes, and data do not move by itself; people move data. Again people are the key.

What to do: Data are not all the same, and handling data can be a problem if the data express critical information. Sensitive data, Private data, Intellectual Property, there are dozen of reasons we should protect what makes our digital world “digital.”

But data should be kept alive. Otherwise, they are useless, so people have to access, manage, modify data. But we have to do it correctly and securely. Data does not move; people move it. Data does not change; people change it. And when handling data, people can do a series of actions that, considered an atomic action, are legit. Users can read, modify, move, copy, and delete data.

So how to understand the threats? We should realize the danger not by a single indicator but by the sequence of action performed on the data. And we should be able to do it in a simple way. Simple means I do not have to die to do this check, and I have to understand what sequence of action is potentially dangerous.

“Malware increased by 358% in 2020, while ransomware increased by 435%,

the global risk report 2022

Means: where do malware and ransomware come from? How is it activated?

What to do: Where does malware come from? If 95% of the cybersecurity issues can be traced to humans, I would probably assume that humans are the primary targets used to trigger malware and ransomware. There is the exploitation of vulnerabilities, the use of backdoors, and other fine technicalities, but, according to the report, those address 100% – 95% = 5%. But again, how do humans get in touch with malware or ransomware? How do they trigger it? Email and browsing are probably the most used channel. This consideration per se should address our security spending, focusing on Prevention (trying to stop things from arriving at users), remediation, and, yes, once again, education.

“There is an undersupply of cyber professionals—a gap of more than 3 million worldwide.“

the global risk report 2022

Means: When planning technology deployment, be sure it is easy to manage, provide information that is easy to be understood, give you context. You probably will not have dozens of skilled specialists, so make your investment effective otherwise, you’ll waste your money and security.

What to do: The undersupply of cyber professionals is a plague we will bring with us for some years more. The problem is that a cyber security professional has experience, knowledge, flexibility, and commitment. All those things are expensive and require time to be developed. This means it is not easy to foresee a solution that will quickly fill the gap. We can train more people, but we need to wait until they get the correct experience, and we have to incentivize people to pursue a career that requires constant learning, critical thinking, stress, and passion.

We will not have unlimited plenty of people at our service easily; this means that we need to ease the load of the cyberpeople providing tools, technologies, and consoles, that will make their lives easier, not harder. The easiest way is to plan your security investments, focusing on integration, automation, and visibility. Context and Threat Intelligence should be the way to understand what is going on and focus on the most dangerous threats.

Reading reports is not just reading cold numbers but is a way to understand the actual landscape and the close calls to action.

Happy reading.

Is CV transmitting my real experience?

Note: I am expanding here a post I wrote on linkedin some time ago:

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/antonioierano_cv-by-image-activity-6767487628494299136-wdlh

I often read on LinkedIn posts on recruiting and the relative difficulties bounded to typical idiosyncrasies’ Italian job market.

In my area of experience (and due to my age), one of the biggest obstacles is to make experiences and their value understood by your counterpart.

The counterpart can be a customer, your employer\manager, a hiring manager if you’re looking for a change or a Head Hunter…

How difficult is it to pass experiences from a CV?

CV is the main way you “talk” about your professional experience with the other world and nowadays is subject to an automatic ATS system that analyzes and sorts them.

I am not ashamed to say I do not like ATS. While I can understand the need for ATS products to explain how an “ATS-friendly curriculum” should be written is beyond my scope (and interests).

I will only notice here that writing a CV for an ATS means you’re trying to make your CV better indexed, which could not be the best way to express who you are. So at least you need to write 2 CVs, one for ATS, ob built for the eventual interview.

However well it can be written a CV, anyway, using it to demonstrate your real value is a titanic undertaking, the CV is dimensionless or at most one-dimensional (the timeline), and often the reader does not connect the dots (for sure this is not what an ATS do, lol)!

Your experience is not the simple sum of the things you have done, but the relationships these things have.

So I said to myself, what if I try to express my experiences differently?

To give a CV a different look from a sterile list of things can be tricky. It is necessary to remember that the length has to be short; otherwise, we go back to the hundreds of pages of CVs world. Who would read them? No one!

But if I can not use many words which are needed to express what I want to express, I can try to use a graphical approach: at the end, an image tells more than a thousand words.

I try below to show some dimensions that can be obtained from my CV in graphic form, there is not everything (and so has to be), but it was an interesting exercise that I recommend to anyone.

I suggest this exercise because it helps you better understand who you are and what you want people to know about you. In the end, if you don’t know yourself and don’t know how to express your value, hardly an external source will be able to understand it.

The required elements of this exercise are basically: what I want to highlight and how.

Maybe if you try the same exercise, you will find something about yourself as I did.

First of all, I asked myself, what would I like to highlight from my CV?

I chose three domains :

• what is the market I can address
• what I am knowledgeable on
• how international is my experience

The process of building the graphical interface was challenging because it implied a different way to express things, but the reward was a better understanding of who I am, how I am perceived, and in the end, what I would like to do when I grow up.

What is the market, I know?

Usually, a HH or hiring manager reads your cv quickly and then, if you’re lucky, will ask some questions…but he\she\it does not know what does not know, does not have nor your experience nor your knowledge of your strengths. So how to make clear what is your real market experience?

I chose this approach:

This was a surprise to me when I did it; I spanned more than I was conscious in my career (ok, I am old), which is a value if you want to sell yourself as a senior guy.

As arbitrary as the division I made is, looks quite clear I spanned my activities in several areas and different roles, companies, and market. This makes my experience broader and more open.

My goal was to show my layered experience graphically. The nested circles with the feeds were a simple solution; this is better understandable and way more readable than the standard written CV.

I am almost sure this can be represented in some other graphical forms; at the end is just an exercise, so I’m open to suggestions.

But even with the limit in this view, one of the values here is that there is no temporal line; the experience is represented for what I did not when.. from this point of view, this is way more interesting than the usual CV format.

One of the standard CV issues is that the temporal line does not express what you learned and introduces a reading bias that arbitrarily puts a reading key that undermines your potential value. Maybe your latest activity is not the most representative.

What can I do?

The second question that came to my mind when discussing my CV was: ok, what are the things I can do?

This is an exciting topic and requires a double view:

• what the other recognize in me.
• what I think I am good at (or want to highlight)

Working on the exercise, I realized that Linkedin could be the source for the first point since there is a dedicated section so, why do not leverage it?

The result required some stretched graphical activity on a slide, and the work should be better than mine. Still, the output can be useful to understand how people perceive you.

The hyperlinks point to the relative section on Linkedin, so any deep dive is even possible 🙂

The second point is a trade-off between what you think is needed to be presented and what you actually think of yourself.

If you want, this is where you put the things you want to highlight about yourself. It is the most challenging because it requires you to decide what you want to highlight.

It would not be a surprise you find out your strength points do not align with the world’s perception of you. As an example, my knowledge of GDPR was not reported in the LinkedIn skills, even if I am quite active on that. But since I do not want to be a DPO (read my linked article below )https://www.linkedin.com/embeds/publishingEmbed.html?articleId=8926452567889499751

I opted for “data protection” as a skill (and no GDPR is not about privacy, shame on you)

Why could there be this difference? This can be due to different reasons but would worth a little introspective analysis of how you communicate outside your vale (this is the first step, isn’t it? let’s work on this).

While there can be many other domains of your experience you would like to highlight (technical skills, certifications, or whatever), I focused on a specific one: how international is my experience, and how can I pass this domain?

How international is my experience?

Again a double exercise.

Work and family reasons expanded my understanding of the world; therefore, it is important to highlight both.

Addressing this point is crucial if you want to show that you can adapt and work in an international environment with different cultures.

Just on the cover, I made clear the breadth of roles I covered …

The map is useful to show what “world experience” means. This is something that can give even to a distracted eye a glance at what you’re talking about.

Here, the aim was to show the western experience (EU and USA), the APAC experience, and China one. Areas of the world with a dramatic difference in terms of perception, language, rules, behavior…

But this, per se, would not mark the fact I am familiar with different cultures at high degrees. This is why it was worth adding family ties that could make my counterpart aware of my familiarity with culture’s varying peculiarities.

Introducing some personal elements, which usually are not present in an ordinary CV, would enforce and clarify what is your confidence related to different cultures (in my case, span from Europe to Japan, covering North America, the United States, and Mexico, where Mexico also tells I am familiar with Latin countries.

NOTE: Mexico is in North America from a geographical point of view, so everyone who refers to Mexico as south or central America demonstrates not only to not be able to read a map but, worse, do not understand how offensive this can be perceived. And, by the way, this is also the offence that comes out when asian countries are considered as an homogeneous set of cultures.

So I did this exercise for myself, and I found it extremely useful to understand myself better, my experience, goals, and even the value I would like to transmit… It is a complementary tool to a standard CV that talks about yourself.

Maybe by doing it, you will learn as well to better express who you are 🙂

And how many dimensions do you have that you would like to show?

What is Democracy?

Belarus was on the news recently for the discussed reelections of its leader Alexander Lukashenko. Suspect that the election process was not honest and clear is not insignificant.

Malian coup d’etat is just one of the many we listen to periodically in several parts of the world.

I wrote recently on Trump threatening to not agree to leave his office in case he will lose the next 2020 elections.

Reading or listening news we can easily make a shortlist of how difficult it is to have in place and maintain such a thing known as democracy. In the Middle East and Africa, we have a lot of countries who have been struggling to land there for a long time now. But also in the old sweet Europe, some countries struggle to find an acceptable level of democracy, Poland, and Hungary, as an example, struggle between authoritarianism and European values.

Not to forget the various democracy leaking European parties that from time to time come out form some elections.

• Why democracy is such a hard habit to take?

• Do we really need a democratic system?

• And, even more important, what is Democracy?

What does Democracy mean?

Democracy is a form of government in which all eligible citizens (we should say people) participate equally—either directly or indirectly through elected representatives—in the proposal, development, and creation of laws.

The name was taken from the ancient Greek δημοκρατία (dēmokratía) “rule of the people” and comes from demos (δῆμος people) Kratos (κράτος rulespower) the term is an antonym to ἀριστοκρατία (aristokratia) “rule of an elite” although even Athens would not be considered a democracy in our time.

As a form of government the key points to consider are related to how we decide that a citizen is eligible, the form of the institutions that will be elected and the extension or limits we have in the proposal, development and creation of laws. Theoretically those points are, or should be, the main differentiators that allow us to choose our representatives.

All over the world, we have different ways to express those points. For example, a citizen is eligible because of some conditions as:

• is a citizen
• has reached a certain age
• has specific other condition like census or gender or criminal records and so on.

This seems quite easy, right?

Well, we should first ponder whether someone needs to be a citizen in the first place: in some countries, you are allowed to participate in some elections (usually local ones) even if you’re not a citizen but just a resident (or, at least, you have different levels of citizenships).

The idea of citizen is even not so easy: we could be citizens because of jus soli (right of soil) or jus sanguinis (right of blood) or a mix of both. We can be citizens because we, somehow, acquire this right. It is all quite variable. So in Germany, you’re not considered German if you do not have German blood (jus sanguinis) otherwise you would be an Ausländer (Gaijin in Japan), while in Italy it is enough to born inside the country or to have Italian blood.

And if we use age as criterion, well when someone could be considered mature enough? We in ol’Europe usually put this line at 18 years old, but it is not so everywhere. So the question is not barely easy even from a basic point of view.

In literature we find different kinds of democracy (liberal, oligarchy, direct, representative…) and different kinds of democratic forms of government: constitutional republics, such as France, Germany, India, Ireland, Italy, or the United States, or a constitutional monarchies, such as Japan, Spain, the Netherlands, Canada, or the United Kingdom. It may have a presidential system (Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, the United States), a semi-presidential system (France), or a parliamentary system (Australia, Canada, India, Italy, New Zealand, Poland, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom).

And then we should consider the other implications related to the term democracy; the assumption is so hard that philosopher Karl Popper “simplified” the question making the assumption that democracy is where there is not tyranny or dictatorship and people is able to change the people at the government without a revolution.

What a Democracy is not?

If defining and understanding democracy is so difficult then one could already see in that the reason why so many democracies look flawed. But somehow if we cannot say what is, we can still say what it is not.

Democracy is not “our way of life”

Do you think that yours is a democracy because you are used to do something? This is a slippery floor. Something you consider normal could be considered crazy in other places even if both the places are considered “democratic” by their respective citizens. So if in USA you have in the constitution the right to bring weapons with you (and consider this a sign of progress, justice and democracy) we in Europe think exactly the opposite, and few exception aside (like Switzerland), people holding a gun machine are not considered a portrait of freedom and rights.

The same can be told for other things: death penalty is considered a barbarian heritage here in Europe while China, USA, North Korea and some countries in the Middle East consider this a sign of civilization.

Democracy is not an economic model

Capitalism is not a synonym of Democracy, and communism is not an economical model but a social model with economic implications. I always think of poor Adam Smith turning in his grave in Scotland every time he is named to justify modern capitalism and radical economic liberalism. The most used tags of our last centuries are completely misunderstood or misrepresented. When mixing different things together you may well obtain a salad but not a coherent theory. An economic model does necessarily fit the purpose of democracy, and capitalism, as an example, has driven right wind dictatorships as well as western democracies.

Democracy is not “this religion”

While religious people have the right to be represented in a democratic system, in a theocracy this is not always the case. This is not to say that a “confessional” form of democracy cannot exist. Let’s consider Iran as an example. It is a “democratic” Islamic republic, which means that the corpus of the law was coming out from the religion and so most of the rules, but the representatives are “democratically” elected inside this system. As a matter of fact, the form IS a democratic system unless you believe that religion should be completely disjointed from the government and the law. This is the case of France, where all religions are respected but the government and its ethic are secular.

Democracy is not “against a religion”

The relationship between democracy and religion is not always easy and sometimes the different ethics and rules collide. But for sure the meaning of a democratic system could not be to fight a religion, even if the religion itself is “anti-democratic”. Besides I’m not aware of religions that are strictly antidemocratic.

Democracy and democratic are not synonymous

While there can be no democracy without a democratic system, a democratic system can be present in non-democracy governments. Democratic systems are based on a form of government in which the people choose leaders by voting. So even a monarchy can be democratic while not clearly a democracy. At the same time, religious-based systems that are managed through a “democratic” election can not be considered democracy at all. Iran is a critical example of a place where the laws and the rules depend on a not democratic source (the religious clergy circle guided by the ayatollah. Ayatollah is an honorific title for high-ranking Shia clergy in Iran that came into widespread usage in the 20th century.) but the form of the state require democratic elections.

Democracy is not the only government system that works

In different ages and different countries some systems have been more effective than others. And sometimes there have been changes. In ancient Rome they started with elected kings to move then to a Republic than move to different form of governments to end with the dictator, the emperor. Kings still exist in our age, and can be elective (as the Pope in Vatican) or by blood streams (UK, Spain, Sweden, Holland, Japan, Thailand …) , bound to a constitutional law or not. As a matter of fact a King in a modern constitutional monarchy is a dictator that more or less graciously passed some of hisher rights to the parliament. A dictatorship is just a form of government where the dictator is the ruler and the driver of its people. And the dictator can be elected even with democratic instrument as happened to Adolf Hitler in Germany. There can be different forms of dictatorship as in monarchical absolutism and theocracy. Even if nowadays dictatorship is usually related to authoritarianism and totalitarianism, those are not synonyms of dictatorship and authoritarian or totalitarian form of governments can be also be dressed with a republican or elective outfit.

So Democracy is not a lot of things we are used to consider as democratic. This does means that “freedom” and “democracy” are not the same things, but they could to coexist in a sound environment. Democracy is not either free of speech or religion, but they can be part of a modern democratic system. To be clear a “democratic” system can be something different form a democracy, and the electoral process does not identify a democracy per se.

Democracy is not Human Rights

Don’t be fooled by marketing, Human rights and democracy don’t go hand in hand. While a democracy (and any other system) should respect human rights the truth is that even the biggest democracies do not always accomplish it. Instruction, death penalty, personal rights, privacy, health, there are thousands of Human Right violation even in the modern democracies.

Democracy is not “We are the Good”

Just to be clear living in democracy can allow us also to make the wrong choices. The fact that the majority want something does not necessarily means that that “something” is good, right, ethical, moral or just simply sound. While democracy has implications in terms of some moral and ethical constrains (I will talk about some constrains below) that does not mean that a democracy have to be peaceful of working for the “greater good” of mankind. Democracies, like the other forms of government, tend primarily to promote and preserve themselves even if this require to overcome freedom or rights of external entities. Somehow justified by some “greater good” or “people need” or “national security” even the greatest democracies do not hesitate to use force and impositions against other countries to preserve their own benefits and interests.

Some clear democracy requirements

There are, anyway, some clear requirements to be able to implement a democracy. Requirements that seem obvious, may be, but not so universal:

1. There should be an elective procedure of some kind, ruled somehow and the voters should be able to move inside those rules without any external constrain. In other terms, people should be able to vote “freely” inside the set of rules that match specific democratic models.
2. A democracy should recognize the existence of different points of view, and this has some implications. In a democracy, there could be a majority, but for sure there will be minorities and those have to be protected by the system to avoid becoming a totalitarian one. Religious, political, cultural, ethnic, census minorities do have the right to be represented in some form. In democracy have to be implemented “super partes” controls that are needed to force the majority to respect rules and minorities.
3. In a democracy, all eligible people have the right to be informed to allow themselves to form an opinion.
4. In a democracy, all eligible people have the obligation to inform themselves in order to form an opinion.
5. The starting point of a democracy is the will of the people to live in such a system. By definition, democracy cannot be imposed, while can be imposed a democratic system that does not lead directly to democracy.

Those implications are mandatory and are bounded in the ethical and moral standard of a democracy.

The first point outline that cannot be a democracy without a democratic system. The key here is the respect of the rules, no matter what those rules are. It is not a specific rule (age, census, gender, religion …) that mark the difference, but the fact that the rules have to be the same for all the eligible ones. If for some reason a system adopts strategies to adjust the result of an election or force somehow people against its will then we have a great deficiency in terms of democracy. This is not a rhetorical point; when some party try to impose an arbitrary change of rule to target part of the eligible people to force them to modify their voting status, as in recent Unites Stated discussion over mail vote, democracy is threatened and the result questionable.

The “free” vote inside the rules also imply the existence of the third and forth points.

If for some reason we change rules in order to not allow a specific population to vote we are acting against democracy even if we played according to the local legislation. This is a typical example of a collision between law and ethical and moral standards. And this is not just a developing country issue, someone will remember all the democratic party rumors and complaints related to Florida when Republican Bush Jr. was elected for the 2nd mandate.

The second point contains the greatest number of unattended needs even in the so-called advanced democracies. Every system presents its soft spots and black holes, no country is immune. To mention old Europe think of Scotland, Ireland, the Basque region and Cataluna in Spain,.

The third and fourth points, on the right to have access to information, concerns me the most and are, in my opinion, crucial in all the democracies under construction.

If the whole point of democracy is being able to vote knowing what we are doing, we should be able to be as much knowledgeable as possible. The idea behind is that to be able to make a conscious choice we should be able to analyze and criticize what is proposed in order to make our opinion freely. Lack of information, knowledge, and ability to critically analyze it is a serious limitation in terms of democracy.

If you don’t know you cannot choose

Knowledge is the basis for any conscious choice, if we don’t know we have to trust more or less blindly. The problem here is to be able to find sources and verify facts. If we don’t do it we just simply make some act of faith and treat democracy as something that is not a religion. Democracy cannot be a religion because is a system that does not contain the truth inside, but just try to balance the different truths in the best effort way. A critical, and probably the biggest flawed, point is to be able to discuss and then decide. But, as someone may be remember, there is not a discussion without the assumption that we could even change our mind. If our starting point is “I am the truth” there will not be a discussion but a monologue, and so we will be right outside the democracy moral and ethical standards.

Knowledge is power, this is more real in a democracy where everyone is responsible for the free expressed vote, and its consequence. Basing a choice over an assumption like “you are wrong anyway” is just not the right thing.

Alas watching some scary threads on the various social networks remind me how little “critical thinking” is applied in nowadays political life. And I’m not talking of my country, but everywhere.

Numbers, historical facts, objective results are simply not considered. And sometimes to support a theory some “Dude, what are you talking about?” facts are presented as gospel even if have a little or no link with solid facts and history. And funny enough sometimes there would be plenty of good reason in support that are not even known or used.

Typical example is the worldwide obsession with immigrants. USA, Europe and even Asia and Africa are plenty of discussions based on dumb or untrue assumptions, wrong facts, tampered presented numbers and statistics. Follow a twitter thread to understand what I’m talking about. Very few times have I seen discussions based on fact.

They don’t want, they don’t know; why do you expect it works?

So let me recall: democracy is a very difficult environment that requires knowledge, will, application and sacrifice. There are specific needs that have to be respected and an overall agreement by all the involved parts.

Democracy is not a religion, does not have all the answers, ou contraire, is a system based on the assumption that the answers can be different and equally valuable.

It requires that all the part respect each other habits and ideas and will to discuss openly. On those assumption is quite understandable that implementing an election systems does not means to have introduced democracy in a country. By its nature democracy cannot be forced, because if you force someone to democracy there is not democracy at all, remember what Karl Popper say there is not democracy if to change the form of government you have to use a revolution.

The very pillars of democracy are will, knowledge and respect of the minorities, if a country is not ready to this every form of government will be less than a democracy, no matter if it is ….*

*Put the next country with elections you want where the dots are.

Buona Pasqua - Happy Easter

Buona Pasqua a tutti

Happy Easter to you all

Related articles

• 5 Gift Ideas for Easter (lakeside.com)
• Author Shares a New Perspective About Easter Traditions (prweb.com)
• Cute Easter Basket ideas (even for adults) (msn.com)
• 21 Easy Easter Recipes Anyone Can Make (msn.com)

I'm at Hong Kong International Airport (HKG) (香港國際機場)! July 05, 2016 at 11:08AM

http://4sq.com/5pc0U0
via IFTTT

I'm at Dubai International Airport (DXB) (مطار دبي الدولي)! July 04, 2016 at 10:32PM

http://4sq.com/4yTFgM
via IFTTT

I'm at Emirates Business Class Lounge! July 04, 2016 at 10:33PM

http://4sq.com/SqVZEh
via IFTTT

I'm at Emirates Lounge! Going to shenzhen July 04, 2016 at 11:37AM

http://4sq.com/14e62Ox
via IFTTT

I'm at Vistarino! June 30, 2016 at 03:53PM

http://4sq.com/1iPaRpw
via IFTTT

I'm at FASTWEB S.p.A.! June 30, 2016 at 10:59AM

http://4sq.com/bXfKl7
via IFTTT

I'm at Vistarino! June 28, 2016 at 11:38PM

http://4sq.com/1iPaRpw
via IFTTT

I'm at Dubai International Airport (DXB) (مطار دبي الدولي)! June 28, 2016 at 04:57AM

http://4sq.com/4yTFgM
via IFTTT

I'm at Emirates Business Class Lounge! June 28, 2016 at 04:56AM

http://4sq.com/SqVZEh
via IFTTT

I'm at Melbourne Airport (MEL)! June 27, 2016 at 11:58AM

http://4sq.com/6yEv3t
via IFTTT

I'm at Australia! June 27, 2016 at 11:59AM

http://4sq.com/fizqg8
via IFTTT

I'm at Auckland International Airport (AKL) (Auckland International Airport)! June 27, 2016 at 03:08AM

http://4sq.com/1jR9R7R
via IFTTT

I'm at Auckland! June 27, 2016 at 03:09AM

http://4sq.com/a5G71p
via IFTTT