Amazon: Device Proliferation and One Interesting Use Case
September 21, 2018
The technology “real news” channels are stuffed with Amazon gizmo news. Interesting stuff if one considers that these devices may snap into the eCommerce company’s policeware subsystems.
Here in Harrod’s Creek, we noted one announcement almost lost in the flood of device announcements. “Skype Calling Coming to Amazon Alexa Devices Later This Year” indicates that the tension between the two companies may be lessening. Years ago Microsoft had database envy generated by the eCommerce giant’s innovations in data management and data wrangling. Then there were the skirmishes over staff and office space.
If the information in the ZDNet “real news” write up is accurate, this statement may be more interesting than using an Alexa gizmo as a telephone:
Alexa users will be able to make outgoing Skype voice and video calls, accept incoming Skype calls and make SkypeOut calls to most phone numbers around the world, according to Microsoft officials. Users will be able to say “Alexa, call Jimmy on Skype,” or to say “Alexa, answer” when a Skype call comes in.
But the “real news” continues with an admission from the author:
I have to admit at this point I am kind of lost as to how Microsoft hopes to differentiate and position Cortana. Granted, Microsoft execs said they want Cortana not to be just about convenience, but about built-in assistance, but Skype is a Microsoft service….
From my vantage point in Harrod’s Creek, the tie up in voice may be more than a test. In fact, the deal may signal another victim of the Amazon strategy. Microsoft may be losing without knowing that it is in a fight.
Stephen E Arnold, September 21, 2018
Deep Learning Helps Bing Spotlight Aggregate Breaking News
September 20, 2018
News aggregators sift through the vast number of news stories out there to focus on the content users want to see (and lead to filter bubbles, but that is another topic.) Now, Microsoft has built an aggregator for breaking content right into its browser. VentureBeat reports, “Bing Spotlight Uses AI to Highlight Developing News Stories.” Writer Kyle Wiggers informs us:
“A spokesperson told VentureBeat via email that Bing Spotlight is an ‘evolving feature,’ and that the team will evaluate options based on feedback. Bing Spotlight spots trending topics with the help of deep learning algorithms that ingest millions of search queries and news articles every day. Leaning on a web graph of ‘hundreds of millions’ of websites, it factors in signals such as browser logs, the number of publishers covering a story, and how prominently each publisher featured their respective stories on their sites.’ Articles have to be ‘original, readable, newsworthy, and transparent’ before they’re considered for a top spot, and must demonstrate ‘sound journalistic practices’ such as identify sources and authors, giving attribution, and labeling opinion and commentary.”
Wiggers reproduces a diagram that illustrates the sections of a Spotlight results page—a carousel at the top revolves through related stories; a section titled Perspectives offers various points of view on the topic; the Rundown presents the story’s development over time; and, of course, there’s a section that shares related social media posts. Notably, this development comes on the heels of a similar move from Google—that company recently retooled their Google News app for smartphones. I suppose all users must do is decide who they want assembling their news for them.
Cynthia Murrell, September 20, 2018
Google: Stomping Out Bad Music Types
September 20, 2018
Google has a lot of content to lord over. And with that responsibility comes the need to police that content when it is misused. Perhaps nowhere does this happen more often than YouTube. While they have clever tools for finding rule breakers, sometimes it fails. We learned more from a recent ARS Technica story, “Google: Sorry, Professor, Old Beethoven Recordings on YouTube Copyrighted.”
According to the story:
“ContentID is a system, developed by YouTube, which checks user-uploaded videos against databases of copyrighted content in order to curb copyright infringement. This system took millions of dollars to develop and is often pointed to as a working example of upload filters by rights holders and lawmakers who wish to make such technology mandatory for every website which hosts user content online.”
Despite following copyright laws, the author (also a music teacher) had several musical pieces removed from the platform, despite being public domain. Maybe the problem isn’t within the code of YouTube’s software, but rather its parent company’s loose attitude toward the topic. Take, for example, the time they recently tried to patent a public domain algorithm. We think that maybe the problem isn’t all digital, but the smash-and-grab mentality of Google.
Patrick Roland, September 20, 2018
IBM Lock In Approach Modified and Given New Life
September 20, 2018
I read “Alphabet Backs GitLab’s Quest to Surpass Microsoft’s GitHub.” The write up explains that Microsoft bought GitHub. Google invests in GitLab. Plus:
It’s the latest major deal in the so-called DevOps market. Broadcom Inc. agreed to buy CA Technologies for $19 billion earlier this year; Atlassian Corp. bought OpsGenie Inc. for $295 million; and Salesforce Inc. spent $6.5 billion to purchase MuleSoft Inc.
From my point of view, these are open source oriented deals.
These deals are part of a revitalization of the old school IBM type of vendor lock in. The way that once worked was:
Buy our big iron
Use our software
Use our preferred partners
Or
Good luck getting those mainframe puppies to behave.
Now the trajectory is to embrace open source, support anyone who codes something semi useful, add proprietary bits, and lock in the platform users.
In short, the lock in play is undergoing a renascence.
How about that open source credo? But where’s Amazon? If you want our take on Amazon’s tactics, contact benkent2020 at yahoo dot com and ask about our for fee briefing on this subject.
Stephen E Arnold, September 20, 2018
Amazon: Will Its Brick and Mortar Ambitions Succeed?
September 19, 2018
I read “The CEO of Macy’s Says It’s Harder for an E-commerce Giant to Conquer Offline Retail Than the Other Way Around.” The main idea is that Amazon will fail if it pushes forward with more book stores, more grocery stores, and more traditional retail store fronts. I learned in this allegedly accurate statement by Macy’s CEO, Jeff Gennette:
I think it’s more difficult for an internet star to go into brick and mortar than the other way around.
My research team has been chasing down information about Amazon’s policeware initiative. On that research path, we have noticed one aspect of Amazon’s approach to traditional store fronts; that is, Amazon first decimates traditional businesses and then selectively moves in. The examples which point to the future include Amazon book stores in Denver.
Amazon also is using a “buy and price cut” approach in its grocery business. One of my researchers wondered if the grocery delivery play was a way for Amazon to sucker outfits like Kroger into spending cash for a service which is ultimately a money pit. Time will tell.
A company like Macy’s may find itself in the same boat with JCPenny’s, Sears, and other old style retain businesses. Macy’s, for example, may struggle to match what might be called predatory pricing, bundling, ad hoc discounts on house brands and brand name products, and other sales techniques like “bought with” nudges used by the absolutely happy Amazon work force.
Perhaps Mr. Gennette is correct? His role at the company demands that he remain confident that he can take steps to keep Macy’s a bigly retail force. On the other hand, I wonder if anyone in his family uses Amazon?
Stephen E Arnold, September 19, 2018
Bing: No More Public URL Submissions
September 19, 2018
Ever wondered why some Web site content is not indexed? Heck, ever talk to a person who cannot find their Web site in a “free” Web index? I know that many people believe that “free” Web search services are comprehensive. Here’s a thought: The Web indexes are not comprehensive. The indexing is selective, disconnected from meaningful date and time stamps, and often limited to following links to a specified depth; for example, three levels down or fewer in many cases.
I thought about the perception of comprehensiveness when I read “Bing Is Removing Its Public URL Submission Tool.” The tool allowed a savvy SEO professional or an informed first time Web page creator to let Bing know that a site was online and ready for indexing.
No more.
How do “free” Web indexes find new sites? Now that’s a good question, and the answers range from “I don’t know” or “Bing and Google are just able to find these sites.”
A couple of thoughts:
- Editorial or spidering policies are not spelled out by most Web indexing outfits
- Users assume that if information is available online, that information is accurate
- “Free” Web indexing services are not set up to deliver results that are necessarily timely (indexed on a daily basis) or comprehensive.
Bing’s allegedly turning off public url submissions is a small thing. My question, “Who looked at these submissions and made a decision about what to index or exclude from indexing?” Perhaps the submission form operated like a thermostat control in a hotel room?
Stephen E Arnold, September 18, 2018
Factualities for September 18, 2018
September 19, 2018
Believe ‘em or not:
- Zero. The change in the average age of the IBM workforce after reductions in workforce. Source: Poughkeepsie Journal
- $115. The cost of a holiday pine tree from Amazon. Source: APNews
- $100. The expected cost of Sony’s forthcoming PlayStation Classic game device. Source: TechSpot
- 63 million. The number of Apple OSX mobile phones sold. Source: Bloomberg
- 621 miles. The distance a Google Loon balloon can beam an Internet connection. Source: Fortune
- 40 percent. The percentage of economic experiments and studies which cannot be replicated. Source: Science Magazine
- 14 percent. How much larger the font Times Newer Roman is than Times New Roman. Source: The Verge
- 15. The number of employers who advertised on Facebook for job candidates of a specific sex. Source: ProPublica
- $9 million US. Amount of new capital injected into the vegan food delivery service Allplants. Source: TechCrunch
Stephen E Arnold, September 19, 2018
Technical Debt: A Bit of a Misunderstanding of the Iron Maiden Effect
September 18, 2018
Let’s go back in time. It is 1979 and Lockheed Martin has nosed into the commercial database business. The system was designed around IBM mainframe technology and due to costs and other factors, the Dialog Information Services outfit embraced Hitachi plug compatible mainframes. Now it is 1982, what’s the technical situation?
The answer is, “Nowhere.”
In fact, one can data the slow degradation and eventual marginalizing of the Lockheed Martin operation and the original commercial online business from the early 1980s. The challenges boiled down to:
An inability to perform tasks customers wanted because the technical architecture made the “changes” to deliver what the customer wanted too expensive, too complex, too time consuming, and too different from what mainframe architectures could deliver. And what did customers want? Reports. Yep, a report that showed who used what database. The trick mainframe architecture managers use to discourage a customer from getting a report was to charge an outrageous fee. In fact, a signal that a technical architecture cannot be bent to the will of the customer is a wild and crazy charge for what seems a simple request.
This is an iron maiden. It doesn’t look like much. Put an MBA, accountant, or lawyer running a high technology company inside and suddenly the technology makes its point or points as it were.
A lack of cash and managerial willingness to recreate a business on a more modern computing architecture. For the mid 1980s, the switch would have been to slightly less restrictive computers from non mainframe manufacturers like Digital Equipment Corporation. The money part is easy to understand. Investing in the future would require abandoning a good but slowly growing line of business to confront the risky world of the start up. That’s because a technical shift is just a start up when stripped of the fancy PowerPoints.
A failure to listen to those who explained that a change was indeed necessary. I worked for a woman who carried this message of change to luminaries in the commercial online timesharing world. Although tolerated, the managers smiled and went about their day to day mainframe approach to commercial online services. There is no fix for a person’s lack of desire and inability to listen and comprehend the message.
Okay, so that’s my view of the built in problem with most online services oriented co9mpanies. Against this set of personal ideas, I read “Too Big to Survive: There Is No Bailout for Technical Debt.” The write up makes a good point; specifically:
The only difference between technical debt and financial debt is that costs are more often known in advance when taking on financial debt. Both types of debt are a tool when used intelligently with purpose and a plan to manage it, and both can take a devastating toll when used recklessly or imposed through misdirection or miscommunication.
However, the idea that a manager can avoid the problem I described with the commercial online services business in the mid 1980s strikes me as falsely optimistic. The recommendation that a person should go through the MBA hand waving when the problem is identified within an organization is not particularly useful. The problem resides within the usually small group of executives who have the most to lose when a major shift is required to survive.
To sum up, in my experience, technology based companies are not trapped in an innovator’s dilemma? High technology companies are victims of the technology used to build the business. Many business school students learn about the problem of the buggy whip manufacturer. I have a different view of a high technology company’s getting kicked to the side of the road only to die an agonizing death while waiting for a self driving Tesla to stop and offer the near death outfit a ride to a crowd funding meet up.
The high technology company does not want to get in the Tesla. The outfit’s management prefers to wait for a better offer. Maybe the better offer arrives. Maybe not.
The result is the same. High technology companies become disconnected from what’s happening around them. Examples range from the tone deaf actions of Facebook to the oddly skewed failure of Microsoft in its mobile device business to Google’s social failures like leaking and protesting employees. Amazon is allegedly mounting PR campaigns to explain how well employees fare in a giant warehouse where robots seem to have more fun at work.
My point is that when one creates a business based on a technology and that technology becomes increasingly complicated, the technology will resist being changed. The humans are essentially along for the ride, modifying their world view about change when the implications of failing to make a change are sensed.
In short, we are not dealing with technological debt. We are dealing with an inherent characteristic of technology which seems liberating at first and then becomes a digital iron maiden. When the door begins to close, the pain begins.
Those moving to the side of a road don’t need a lift from a Tesla driver. An emergency vehicle is a better bet, but the likelihood of survival decreases with time. That’s not debt, that’s a far more grim outcome. When one is inside a technology, the door closes. Point made, right?
Stephen E Arnold, September 18, 2018
Artificial Intelligence: Oversold?
September 18, 2018
I read “Big Tech Is Overselling AI As the Solution to Online Extremism.” Phys.org strikes me as a semi-reliable outfit. I cannot, however, overlook the write up’s failure to define “extremism.” Physicists these days cannot define dark matter, so I suppose I will have to accept the non definition.
Assuming that one can define extremism, Phys.org is holding “big tech” to a higher standard than it holds physicists who disagree that the undefined dark matter does not exist. I know it is a lazy rhetorical trick, but these folks are physicists and deal with uncertainty, in theory at least, every day.
Nevertheless, I found this statement in the Phys.org article thought provoking:
In 2017, 250 companies suspended advertising contracts with Google over its alleged failure to moderate YouTube’s extremist content. A year later, Google’s senior vice president of advertising and commerce, Sridhar Ramaswamy, says the company is making strong progress in platform safety to regain the lost confidence of its clients. However, a recent study by the NGO Counter Extremism Project refutes the effectiveness of the company’s effort to limit and delete extremist videos. More transparency and accountability from YouTube is needed, given that the study found that over 90 per cent of ISIS videos were uploaded more than once, with no action taken against the accounts that violated the company’s terms of service.
What’s at fault? The Google type outfits which cannot get software to figure out human utterance in a way that nails extremism, which if not defined, can be a tough task. Or is the problem that smart software does not work as some big tech folks assert and dearly hope is correct?
My hunch is that artificial intelligence is the equivalent of a cowboy throwing sand in the eyes of the gun toting bad guy who wants to shoot the person in the white hat. Note: the hat is a real Western thing, not a beanie with a propeller like those I spotted in a 2016 video recently.
I know that tech yip yap with mouthfuls of jargon can send some intellectual blood hounds chasing chimera.
You decide. I think I smell a red herring.
Stephen E Arnold, September 18, 2018
DarkCyber for September 18, 2018 Now Available
September 18, 2018
DarkCyber for September 18, 2018, is now available at www.arnoldit.com/wordpress and on Vimeo at https://vimeo.com/290147202 .
This week’s DarkCyber video news program covers … Bitfury’s deanonymization service and its unusual sales approach… the loss of UK law enforcement laptops… facial recognition for law enforcement challenged by tech company employees… and X1 and its eDiscovery system with Dark Web content support.
The first story explains that Bitfury, a UK company with an interesting staff line up, offers digital currency deanonymization services. The company’s approach to sales, however, is unusual. Specifically, the company refused to explain its services at a recent law enforcement conference. DarkCyber continues to recommend that agencies interested in digital currency deanonymization look at services available from Chainalysis and Elliptic, two companies which do explain their services to security and enforcement officials.
The second story reports that UK media pointed out that in one year, UK law enforcement lost 60 laptops. With tens of thousands of officers and operators, DarkCyber states that the alleged problem is blown out of proportion. Bad actors attempt to obtain laptops, mobiles, and other computing devices in order to compromise investigations. DarkCyber asserts that the loss of 60 laptops illustrates the good job UK authorities do with regard to preventing loss of laptops.
The third story describes the Amazon DeepLens system. In addition to explaining how this Amazon camera integrates with Amazon’s machine learning and analytics subsystems, DarkCyber reports that neither Amazon, IBM, or any other US company was able to sell their technology to Ecuador. That country purchased a state-of-the-art Chinese developed system. With employee pushback against their employers’ work for the US government, US facial recognition technology may find itself at a disadvantage with regard to technical development and system innovation.
The final story covers the X1 eDiscovery system for social content. The X1 technology can now acquire and process social media information as well as some Dark Web content. Instead of directly scraping Dark Web sites, the X1 method relies on the Tor2Web.org service. The new product costs about $2,000 per year. DarkCyber explains where to download a 14-day free trial.
Kenny Toth, September 18, 2018
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
