Battle of the Mid Tier Pundits: Smartwatch Sales
November 13, 2016
I love it when mid tier outfits do battle. Most blue chip consulting firms carve out unique niches and then create MBA lists and data designed to underscore the firms’ prescience and, dare I say it, brilliance. Not so with the mid tier outfits. These folks do the me to thing. Need to know what’s hoppin’ in 2017, just look at the flow of prognostications.
I read “Is the Smartwatch Market Tanking or on a Long, Slow Climb.” What makes this wonderful is that one of the mid tier outfits is or was affiliated with IDG, owner of Network World, the publication pointing out the discontinuities in estimates.
Hey, I love discontinuities. Think Brexit polls.
The write up points out without much irony or concern that
In late October, market research firm IDC said smartwatch shipments in the third quarter declined by 51% from the same quarter of 2015. The total shipped in the third quarter was 2.7 million, IDC said. By comparison, research firm Canalys on Thursday said smartwatch shipments were up 60% for the third quarter of 2016 compared with the same quarter a year ago. That resulted in 6.1 million units shipped in the latest quarter, Canalys said.
Hmmm. Separate universes or an example of bad sampling, lousy data, and former English majors getting into technology analysis? Who knows.
Now about that data about Apple smartwatches, which I think are sort of wonky. The write up revealed:
IDC said Apple shipped 1.1 million units, a decline of 71%. But Canalys said Apple shipped 2.8 million Apple Watches, nearly three times as many as IDC reported.
There you go. But the write up does not focus on:
- Verification
- Vetting
- Management quality control.
My hunch is that most professionals don’t care. The time constrained folks will just choose the result that supports their position. I love the brave new world of mid tier consulting firm data. Waves and hype cycles are another kettle of fish because they are so “metaphorical,” which is appropriate for a student of Chaucer.
Stephen E Arnold, November 13, 2016
Autonomy Software Executive Indicted
November 12, 2016
I used to pay reasonably close attention to Autonomy Software plc. The outfit was a leader in search and content processing. The methods were based on math, not human editors. Bayesian, LaPlacian, and Markovian methods created a take away happy family. Early customers included some big defense companies, government agencies, and some banks. Over the years, Autonomy generated millions in revenue from its Digital Reasoning Engine, Integrated Data Operating Layer, and other technologies.
In 2011, Hewlett Packard went to an automated teller machine, withdrew $11 billion dollars, and bought Autonomy. The deal brought patents, the products, assorted bits and pieces, and executives who had shepherded the search and content processing company from zero to somewhere in the neighborhood of $700 million in revenue. Oh, the Autonomy deal brought along the shrunken head of Fast Search & Transfer, one of the outfits to take on Autonomy only to find itself struggling with revenues and some rumors of financial fast dancing. Fast Search went to Redmond in 2008, and Autonomy cruised along until HP showed up with a tractor trailer filled with money.
After buying Autonomy, HP found that the Autonomy management team did not fit the Sillycon Valley pioneer’s life style. The founder of Autonomy quit and a handful of Autonomy executives tagged along. HP found out that it did not have a clue how to make money from search and content processing. HP also learned that its auditors, accountants, senior executives, and lawyers were in the dark when it came to generating money in a sector where dozens of companies have gone down the drain. What happened to the wizards from Delphes, Endeca, Fast Search, et al?
Well, one went to jail or was sentenced. Now, if the information in “HP Fight about $11 Billion Takeover Sees Former Autonomy Executive Indicted on Felony Charges” is accurate, HP wants to put Sushovan Hussain, Autonomy’s financial manager and a minivan filled with other Autonomy executives, into orange jump suits.
The write up reports:
The indictment charges that Sushovan Hussain, “together with others, engaged in a fraudulent scheme to deceive purchasers and sellers of Autonomy securities and HP about the true performance of Autonomy’s business, its financial condition, and its prospects for growth.”
The hammer dropped on November 10, 2016. The write up says:
… federal prosecutors indicted Hussain in U.S. District Court in San Francisco. He was charged with wire fraud and conspiracy to commit wire fraud. Wire fraud is financial fraud involving use of telecommunications or information technology. The charges carry a combined maximum prison sentence of 20 years. The federal government is seeking at least $7.7 million from Hussain, money it said was gained through crime.
Autonomy denies the allegations that Autonomy pumped up revenues and doctored assorted information. HP apparently was unaware of “alarms” about HP which surfaced in 2007. The newspaper article adds:
Daniel Mahoney, research director of forensic accounting firm CFRA, told this newspaper in 2012 that his company in 2007 started sounding alarms about Autonomy in reports to investor clients. Summarizing the beliefs of himself and other analysts, Mahoney said, “Our concern was the organic growth that Autonomy was reporting was overstated … it seemed like they were constantly moving things around in their financial statements to make things appear better than they are.”
Okay, 2007. HP bought Autonomy in 2001. Presumably HP reviewed Autonomy’s financials, talked to resellers, interviewed executives, consulted the mid tier firms specializing in search, and other research prior to deciding $11 billion was the right sized number for Autonomy.
If not, what caused HP to buy Autonomy? If HP did its homework, why did the company ignore the 2007 storm warnings?
The saga continues even though HP sold Autonomy earlier this year to Micro Focus for an alleged $8.8 billion. If that number is accurate, a $1.2 billion loss is important, but the real motivating factor may be the fact that HP’s approach to deal management may have been wobbly. To brush up on the Autonomy system, check out the free report at this link.
Excitement will ensue.
Stephen E Arnold, November 12, 2016
IBM Watson: Cruel, Cruel Caveats
November 12, 2016
There’s nothing like a cruel caveat applied to IBM Watson. Navigate to “Cognitive Computing Applications Present New Business Challenges.” These challenges are not “new”; what’s new is that naive smart software licensees are discovering that training software is difficult, time consuming, and expensive. Best of all, the training is not forever. Smart systems need to be retrained because language and data change.
The write up reports that an executive involved in smart software at Rabobank, a Dutch outfit, offered this observation at the World of Watson conference held at the end of October 2016 :
AI is everywhere, and people think it’s so fantastic. And these companies, including IBM, come in and then you go to do a project and see that it’s not really that great yet,” Serrurier Schepper said. “You have to train a model, and it takes time.”
The story continues:
After building a centralized AI unit, teams should look for quick wins and then publicize their success, Serrurier Schepper said. Models may take a long time to train, but once they’re delivering strong results, sharing this with the rest of the company can help build support for future initiatives.
Yep, time. Time is money, which is a statement any bank professional with Excel can understand.
How does one avoid failing? That’s easy. The write up reports:
Choosing the right use cases for cognitive computing applications is also important. There is a general notion that AI software can perform just about any task. And while that may be the ultimate goal of the technology, today’s tools are a ways off from that. Enterprises need to identify business problems where the technology is competent, and that’s not always a simple proposition.
The point is that no matter how generalized the perception that smart software like Watson can be, the licensee has to figure out exactly what problem to attack. The reason is that the time and cost of creating a model and then training the smart software will put the project deep into a swamp of red, mercury tinged muck.
But be prepared to spend money. The write up quotes another Watson aware executive as saying:
“If you get too hung up on ROI, you’ll never do anything.”
I disagree. Those involved in the project may have an opportunity to look for a new job. It’s the time and cost thing that creates these new horizons for some smart software champions.
Stephen E Arnold, November 12, 2016
Wake Up, DCGS: Peter Thiel Alert
November 11, 2016
I read a LinkedIn special write up titled “Peter Thiel to Join Trump Transition Team.” The main point of the write up was that Silicon Valley icon and founder of Palantir Technologies has allegedly just hopped on the Trump Transition Express. I learned:
Peter Thiel has agreed to join Donald Trump’s presidential transition team, according to multiple sources close to the situation.
I love those “multiple sources.” Verification is great especially when anonymized.
It strikes me that if the news is on the money, there are some interesting consequences of this decision. Let me pop several out of the microwave which is heating my Bob Evans sausage, egg, and cheese every day classic breakfast.
I start my day the health way: A Bob Evans microwave meal and news about the impact of a new technology voice in the new administration of the new president. Yummy.
First, based on my limited experience in the Washington presidential transition Beltway hoedowns, there may be an opportunity or two to chat up those involved in managing certain large defense and intelligence related projects. Now the conversations are informal, premature, fuzzy, and for sure non binding, but there just might be a few words exchanged about reducing billions in government waste with regard to certain high profile, contentious, over budget, and fractionalized projects. Maybe the Distributed Common Ground System will come up? Maybe providing Gotham to the entire transition team? Who knows? But a taste of Gotham’s manna may be just what the hard working commuters on the Transition Express need to perk up and open their eyes to what technology really can do.
Second, the hinges on the Alphabet Google special door to President Obama’s outfit may be wearing out. Palantir, which Mr. Thiel founded, has Google-type bright lads and lasses who can out Google the Google when it comes to heavy duty information analysis. War fighting “trumps” selling ads for Garcinia- Cambogia.
Some of Mr. Thiel’s inputs may rely on Palantir Gotham for data relevant to a decision taken by Transition Express fellow travelers. If Palantir’s approach shows answers, the Google results list looks — how can I phrase it? — dowdy, lame, old fashioned. Imagine the efficiency of the the new president’s advisors generating knock out visualizations for budgets, action items, and timelines with Gotham. Exciting, no? Yes?
Third, the established outfits like the Beltway outfits which have methods of communicating and influencing now have to rethink getting on the radar of the transition team. Those juicy, rock solid indefinite cost, open ended pipelines of money may have to make some navigational adjustments in real time. But what if Mr. Thiel just is involved in calculating the azimuth? How does a Beltway Top 100 firm make up for lost US government “to be” revenue? My answer, “With alacrity tinged with freneticism.”
If Mr. Thiel is on the transition team, there will be some capture teams worrying about [a] their bonus, [b] their new business plan, and [c] their résumés. The latter will be just super for LinkedIn’s secret job search service too. Who knows? Maybe some of these folks will post anonymous LinkedIn rumors which we enjoy here in Harrod’s Creek.
Stephen E Arnold, November 11, 2016
Why Search When You Can Discover
November 11, 2016
What’s next in search? My answer is, “No search at all. The system thinks for you.” Sounds like Utopia for the intellectual couch potato to me.
I read “The Latest in Search: New Services in the Content Discovery Marketplace.” The main point of the write up is to highlight three “discovery” services. A discovery service is one which offers “information users new avenues to the research literature.”
See, no search needed.
The three services highlighted are:
- Yewno, which is powered by an inference engine. (Does anyone remember the Inference search engine from days gone by?). The Yewno system uses “computational analysis and a concept map.” The problem is that it “supplements institutional discovery.” I don’t know what “institutional discovery” means, and my hunch is that folks living outside of rural Kentucky know what “institutional discovery” means. Sorry to be so ignorant.
- ScienceOpen, which delivers a service which “complements open Web discovery.” Okay. I assume that this means I run an old fashioned query and ScienceOpen helps me out.
- TrendMD, which “serves as a classic “onward journey tool” that aims to generate relevant recommendations serendipitously.”
I am okay with the notion of having tools to make it easier to locate information germane to a specific query. I am definitely happy with tools which can illustrate connections via concept maps, link analysis, and similar outputs. I understand that lawyers want to type in a phrase like “Panama deal” and get a set of documents related to this term so the mass of data can be chopped down by sending, recipient, time, etc.
But setting up discovery as a separate operation from keyword or entity based search seems a bit forced to me. The write up spins its lawn mower blades over the TrendMD service. That’s fine, but there are a number of ways to explore scientific, technical, and medical literature. Some are or were delightful like Grateful Med; others are less well known; for example, Mednar and Quertle.
Discovery means one thing to lawyers. It means another thing to me: A search add on.
Stephen E Arnold, November 11, 2016
Are Silicon Valley Problems Affecting Palantir Technologies?
November 11, 2016
I read “Silicon Valley Has Much Bigger Problems than Peter Thiel, Tech Investor Says.” The write up tackles Peter Thiel’s endorsement of a presidential candidate. Mr. Thiel is one of the founders of Palantir Technologies, and the company’s headquarters—the Shire—are in Palo Alto, the Delphi of Silicon Valley. I wondered if the maven upon which the write up pivots is talking less about Mr. Thiel and more about one of his companies; specifically, Palantir Technologies, vaquisher of the US Army.
I noted this passage:
Many entrepreneurs are now financially motivated, rather than by an optimism to take risks and improve the world, McNamee [Elevation Partners] said.
The write up reports:
“I think people in Silicon Valley are still open to change,” McNamee said. “But the things that they’re working on aren’t as valuable as the things people used to work on. And sadly, we’ve seen far more fraud in the past couple of years than I can remember any time in the 34 years I’ve been here. And so I think people just want to get rich now, and scams have become part of what goes on in Silicon valley and that troubles me deeply.”
The article includes this statement by the McNamee:
“People have stepped back, if anything,” McNamee said. “The Valley has a real misogyny problem …
If the Elevation Partners’ statement is accurate about Silicon Valley, is Palantir a company which has greed and misogyny problems? One can interpret the Elevation Partners’ comment as identifying systemic flaws affecting many companies in Silicon Valley.
The US Department of Labor has raised questions about Palantir’s hiring practices.
Stephen E Arnold, November 11, 2016
American Spies Are Using MapD This Season
November 11, 2016
Spies have cool gadgets to do their jobs. Since the advent of the digital age, their gadgets not only have gotten cooler, but more complex. Spy technology is built on the same software used in other non-intelligence-related industries. Datanmi shares the CIA’s next technology investment in, “Why America’s Spy Agencies Are Investing In MapD.”
Q-Tel heads the CIA technological venture and they decided to run their new innovations on MapD. The article makes an apt point that the CIA has fallen into the big data pool like the rest of the world, thus they are encountering many of the same problems as other industries. Some of these problems include too much data and not enough time, funds, or ways to interpret it.
One reason that Q-Tel has turned to MapD is that it uses GPUs. MapD is a very fast SQL database and, unlike many of its counterparts, it was specifically designed to run on GPUs. It also includes a visual analytics layer that allows users to interact with data.
The CIA wants to use MapD to speed up its technology, so it can process and interpret its data faster than before. It is straight forward why the CIA wants to use MapD.
Do not think this will be the last development from MapD this year. The young company has already rounded up investors:
MapD is still ramping up. The San Francisco-based company completed a $12-million round of financing earlier this year, which In-Q-Tel was a part of. The company has 30 employees, and a handful of customers (Mostak says “in the tens”) across various industries. The software is being used by oil and gas companies, banks, hedge funds, retailers, ad tech firms, and the U.S. Government, the CEO confirms.
MapD will power an entire generation of CIA intelligence technology. That is something you will not learn from the latest spy movie.
Whitney Grace, November 11, 2016
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
Three Deadlines in October and November Mark Three Strikes on Google
November 11, 2016
The article titled Google Is Getting Another Extension to Counter EU Antitrust Charges on Fortune begs the question, how many more times will the teacher accept the “I need more time” argument? With the potential for over a billion dollar penalty of Google is found guilty, the company is vying for all the time it can get before answering accusations of unfair treatment of rival shopping services through its search results. The article tell us,
The U.S. technology giant was due to respond to the accusations on Thursday but requested more time to prepare its defense. The company now has until Nov. 7, a European Commission spokesman said. “Google asked for additional time to review the documents in the case file. In line with normal practice, the commission analysed the reasons for the request and granted an extension allowing Google to fully exercise its rights of defense,” he said.
If anyone is counting at this point, the case is now 6 years old, meaning it has probably graduated kindergarten and moved into the First Grade. The article does not comment on how many extensions have been requested altogether, but it does mention that another pair of deadlines are looming in Google’s near future. October 26 and October 31 are the dates by which Google must respond to the charges of blocking competitor advertisements and using the Android operating system to suppress rivals.
Chelsea Kerwin, November 11, 2016
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
Yahoo: More Inspiring Management Examples
November 10, 2016
I thought that the Yahoot — sorry, I meant Yahoo — was behind us. I noted two interesting announcements about the Purple Haze machine. Business school case study writers have a gold mine with this Yahoot thing. Purple gym shoes might be the perfect fashion accessory when one thinks about the Xoogler’s management expertise manifested in an SEC filing. The extracts below come from the articles cited in this blog post.
A Yahoo fashion accessory like these New Balance sneakers can be a complement to deposition day fashion. Yahoot’s professionals can make themselves instantly recognizable with these stylish kicks.
The first write up comes from a trendy business newsletter in the form of a story with this title: “Yahoo Faces at Least 23 Lawsuits Over Its Massive Data Breach.” One lawsuit is too many. Twenty three is an embarrassment of riches. The write up reports:
the Company is cooperating with federal, state, and foreign governmental officials and agencies seeking information and/or documents about the Security Incident and related matters, including the U.S. Federal Trade Commission, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, a number of State Attorneys General, and the U.S. Attorney’s office for the Southern District of New York.
Cooperation is good. Tucked into the write up was this statement:
Although the company says it only spent $1 million related to the breach last quarter, it admitted that the breach may “cause users and customers to curtail or stop using our products and services.”
No kidding?
I also noted this article: “Yahoo Admits Some Employees Knew of Massive Hack in 2014.” Let’s see. That’s about two years ago. The write up points out:
“An Independent Committee of the Board, advised by independent counsel and a forensic expert, is investigating, among other things, the scope of knowledge within the Company in 2014 and thereafter regarding this access,” Yahoo said in its filing. But it wasn’t until its August probe that the company got confirmation of the extent of the breach, a source with knowledge of the investigation said.
The source for both of these articles is a Yahoo SEC filing.
Outstanding judgment on the part of the Yahoo management team to cooperate with authorities, contradict the date of the “alleged” breach, and perform these cartwheels as Verizon tries to figure out if Yahoot is a swatch of discolored purple fabric which can be converted into Yoga pants or a t shirt. Perhaps business school students at some time in the future can wear purple New Balance sneakers to their discussion group meetings about Yahoo?
Stephen E Arnold, November 10, 2016
IBM Watson Tactic: Cherry Picking
November 10, 2016
I read “IBM Buys Watson-Based Expert Personal Shopper.” The article may reveal IBM’s plan to make Watson profitable. According to the write up:
IBM’s Interactive Experience (IBM iX) unit acquired the Expert Personal Shopper (XPS) division of Fluid, a provider of digital customer experiences.
The idea is simple. Pump money into promising Watson applications created by other companies. Then when the third party’s product begins to show signs of life, IBM steps in to buy the product. IBM sales professionals now have a real product to sell, not just consulting.
The personal shopper, according to the write up:
is a dialogue-based product-recommendation platform developed by Fluid that uses IBM’s Watson cognitive computing system to personalize the customer experience and improve product discovery. XPS uses natural language to interact with and provide personalized shopping experiences for customers.
If this sounds like the dozens of other smart chat bots, it may be. The difference is that this chatbot is an application of some of Watson’s capabilities.
Is this a quick and low cost way to convert Watson’s smoke and mirrors to cash? It depends on one’s point of view. The write up says:
In 2014, IBM invested in Fluid, drawing from a $100 million fund Big Blue had set aside to invest in Watson-based businesses and applications. Earlier that year, the IBM Watson Group made its first investment in Welltok, developers of the Watson-based CaféWell Health Optimization Platform. Fluid was among the early partners IBM trotted out to showcase how Watson had become available to developers to build apps around. IBM and Fluid worked to accelerate development of XPS at the time.
Two years later and at an undisclosed purchase price, IBM Watson has a product. From the point of view of a large company, this is definitely efficient. From the vantage point of a long suffering IBM shareholder, the time and cost are probably one more example of why IBM’s quarterly revenues have reported declines for more than four years.
Stephen E Arnold, November 10, 2016
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
