IBM Hyperledger: A Doubter
June 8, 2019
Though the IBM-backed open-source project Hyperledger has been prominent on the blockchain scene since 2016, The Next Web declares, “IBM’s Hyperledger Isn’t a Real Blockchain—Here’s Why.” Kadena president, and writer, Stuart Popejoy tells us:
“A blockchain is a decentralized and distributed database, an immutable ledger of events or transactions where truth is determined by a consensus mechanism — such as participants voting to agree on what gets written — so that no central authority arbitrates what is true. IBM’s definition of blockchain captures the distributed and immutable elements of blockchain but conveniently leaves out decentralized consensus — that’s because IBM Hyperledger Fabric doesn’t require a true consensus mechanism at all.
We noted this statement as well:
“Instead, it suggests using an ‘ordering service’ called Kafka, but without enforced, democratized, cryptographically-secure voting between participants, you can’t really prove whether an agent tampers with the ledger. In effect, IBM’s ‘blockchain’ is nothing more than a glorified time-stamped list of entries. IBM’s architecture exposes numerous potential vulnerabilities that require a very small amount of malicious coordination. For instance, IBM introduces public-key cryptography ‘inside the network’ with validator signatures, which fundamentally invalidates the proven security model of Bitcoin and other real blockchains, where the network can never intermediate a user’s externally-provided public key signature.”
Then there are IBM’s approaches to architecture, security flaws, and smart contracts to consider, as well as misleading performance numbers. See the article for details on each of those criticisms. Popejoy concludes with the prediction that better blockchains are bound to be developed, alongside a more positive approach to technology in general, across society. Such optimism is refreshing. Watson, what do you think?
Cynthia Murrell, June 8, 2019
Google Makes Search, Mmmmm, Better
June 7, 2019
“First AR Objects Launch in Google Search with 3D Animals” reports that Google makes search better again. Search for an animal on a supported device while you are doing the Google Lens thing and you will see a three dimensional animal. I would be thrilled if a query returned relevant results. Plus, I am okay with relevant links directing me to a relevant document which may or may not contain an illustration. Ah, progress. What happens if Google reconnects with a robot company so that as one looks at an AR rendering of a tiger, a robot tiger comes to the user’s location and snarls. Relevant? Heck, yes.
Stephen E Arnold, June 7, 2019
Enterprise Search and Grease Management
June 7, 2019
I see some crazy stuff. Every once in a while, a really crazy item crosses my desk. The example I wish to highlight today is called “Enterprise Search Software Market to depict huge growth, Key Methodologies, Top Players: SharePoint, IBM, Lucidworks, Microsoft FAST, Oracle, Amazon CloudSearch, Apache Lucene, Attivio.” My hunch is that rolling in Amazon and Microsoft cloud revenues will make almost any market look like Popeye the Sailor Man. The reality is that enterprise search came and went in a blaze of litigation and embarrassment. Some of the exhaust seems to be emanating from the Hewlett Packard litigation related to the former medical device maker’s acquisition of an enterprise search vendor.
Enterprise search has overpromised and under delivered for about 50 years. Elsewhere I have recounted the adventures of services which most people don’t recall or simply knew nothing about. Remember InQuire, the service with forward truncation? A more recent fumble is the disappearance of those cheerful yellow Google Search Appliances, its staff, and the marketing collateral promising an end to the misery of traditional enterprise search solutions.
The buzz has not died down at at Reports Monitor. You can read their remarkable news release at this link. Forget the incredible hyperbole of “huge growth.” Hello, Reports Monitor, one can download a perfectly good enterprise search system from open source repositories. There are low cost systems available from outfits like Funnelback. You can get a next generation system from vendors of intelware. Don’t recognize the term? Don’t worry. These vendors don’t know what enterprise search means. And there are some companies which this report does not list as players. Want these names? Sorry, that’s information for which I charge a fee. Believe me. Reports Monitor and perhaps you, gentle reader, don’t know about these companies either.
What causes me to write about a report which is a bit on the wild side? How about this passage:
Key Insights:
- Complete in-depth analysis of the Grease Management in Commercial Kitchens
- Important changes in market dynamics.
- Segmentation analysis of the market.
- Emerging segments and regional markets.
- Historical, on-going, and projected market analysis based on volume and esteem.
- Assessment of niche industry players.
- Market share analysis.
- Key strategies of major players.
Yep, grease management. Now we’re getting to the heart of slippery data and even more slippery reports about enterprise search. The report provides region-wise data. Great stuff.
News flash: Enterprise search left the dock and took on water. Some outfits torpedoed their investors, customers, and partners. Others have tried to become business intelligence, analytics, even customer service support systems. Did not work too well.
Why?
Enterprise search is not a general purpose application. Significant work is necessary to make it possible for employees to find information in what are silos or in oddball lingo. Furthermore important people like lawyers, product researchers, and big wheels like to keep their information secret. An enterprise search system has failure baked in unless it is tailored to a quite specific problem. But at that point why not buy an eDiscovery system, a lab notebook system, or a niche solution for the eager beavers in marketing?
Maybe I am too harsh on the grease management angle. That may be closer to the truth than Reports Monitor realizes.
Stephen E Arnold, June 7, 2019
Frisky Language Aside: An Important Cloud Message
June 7, 2019
I don’t know much about Digital Ocean, droplets, Checkly, Raisup, “”or the other Fancy Dan technologies mentioned in the write up. I usually ignore articles with unpleasant language. I worked through this write up because in Myrtle Beach at the policeware conference, there was quite a bit of chatter about the move to the cloud by law enforcement entities of all shapes and sizes.
The title of the article is “Why the recent “Digital Ocean Killed My Company” incident Scares the [curse word] Out of Me.” The link to the story is here. The main idea is that a cloud provider relied on a monitoring system. The customer found that his account was killed. After some flim flam, the account was restored. There are other details, but the value of the write up resides in these points, often buried in the description of who shot John or Jane in the back on a stormy night near the digital corral.
ITEM 1: “I’m scared I could be hit by an out-of-control abuse algorithm and a broken customer service process. And I have zero Twitter clout or any other online notoriety.” DarkCyber’s comment: Yep, get used to the reality of engineers who either don’t know, don’t care, or who are trying to find a better job.
ITEM 2: “you can’t just shrug off basic service reliability and availability planning just because you’re a (small) startup. Consequently, that is the whole reason you are using a cloud service.” DarkCyber’s comment: Sorry, no free lunch.
ITEM 3: “You only have to be wrong once.” DarkCyber’s comment: Some folks are used to getting gold stars for trying hard. Nope, gold stars go to those who win the race, are the top student in math, and those who don’t make mistakes. Life is cruel for those who make errors.
ITEM 4: Do have some backups. DarkCyber’s comment. That’s good advice.
Stephen E Arnold, June 7, 2019
Microsoft and Oracle: Fear Helps Make New Friends
June 6, 2019
I found “Microsoft, Oracle Team Up on Cloud Services in Jab at Amazon” amusing. The real news outfit Thomson Reuters reported this unusual big company relationship when I was making my way through torrential rain in lovely West Virginia coal country. The mist did disguise the land renewal, but this Microsoft Oracle relationship is going to make for a nifty road trip video.
Imagine. The elegant Larry Ellison and the sleek Satya Nadella explaining how old school databases are the pajamas made for the cool cats. Amazon and Google will pay attention to this odd couple because it makes very visible the fear which both companies have for their database futures. Forget the cloud. We’re talking databases anywhere: On premises, hybrid, in the cloud, or residing in some wonky quantum storage thing yet to be made stable, affordable, and usable by a normal rocket scientist.
The news report does not wax poetic, nor does it offer much in the way of addressing the fear thing. I did note this statement:
The two companies said the high-speed link between their data centers would start with facilities in the eastern United States and spread to other regions. They will also work together to let joint users log into to services from either company with a single user name and get tech support from either company. The move comes as both Oracle and Microsoft are courting large businesses and government customers considering moving computing tasks currently handled in their own data centers to cloud providers.
I would point out that Oracle has chosen to add its legal pointy stick to its approach to database efficacy. Microsoft, on the other hand, is working overtime to explain that it is the solution to a range of data management issues. If one does not think about Microsoft’s struggles to update its Windows operating system, the PR sounds darned convincing.
I wish to offer a couple of observations:
First, Amazon and Google continue to capture the attention of the next generation of innovators. Oh, I know that there are clever Microsoft and Oracle wizards inventing the future at this very moment. But let’s be real: Amazon has an innovation ecosystem. Google may not have the perseverance to make its products work and then “put wood behind” some to make them competitive, but the Google does have a low cost phone and the ability to go off line because of configuration errors. Amazon, on the other hand, is evolving into an innovation platform. I am not sure the database technologies are what makes Amazon attractive to smaller firms and specialists, but Amazon is revving the bulldozer’s engine.
Second, Microsoft and Oracle are “look back” technology providers. I think both companies share many of the adorable traits of Hewlett Packard (any flavor) and IBM. In today’s business environment, which is similar to the weather around Oklahoma City, being old is not what I interpret as a plus.
Third, the two besties have somewhat different personalities. Microsoft wants to be a do gooder. Oracle wants to fly its fighter jet over the San Jose suburbs. Microsoft wants to be the big dog in Seattle. Oracle wants to be relevant. Microsoft wants to avoid the fate of Vista. Oracle wants to keep the myth of the structured query language alive. Amazon and Google, on the other hand, just want to avoid regulation and emulate the business success of pleasant people like JP Morgan, Andrew Carnegie, and a couple of other “good business men.”
To sum up, fear is tough to explain away. The exchange of fraternity rings and an appearance at the fraternity party or the high school reunion is in the future. Town & Country material I believe. Will the two parties dance each dance together at these shindigs?
Stephen E Arnold, June 6, 2019
Are There Technical Headaches in Google Rivet Setup?
June 6, 2019
An app that helps kids learn to read sounds like a great Googley idea. And (concerns about potential advertising to or tracking of minors aside) it would be—if only it were easy to access. One frustrated father at Ausdroid reports, “Google’s New Kid-Focused Reading App Revit is Incompatible with Their Kid-Focused Family Link Accounts.” After checking out the app for himself, writer Duncan Jaffrey decided it was worthy of setting up for his daughter. He had no problems using the parent-side setup from his Google account. But when he got to the tablet’s Family Link account, things went awry. He writes:
“Surely this app – an educational app for kids – should be able to work nicely with Family Link. Well, no, it doesn’t. It appears there’s no way for me to sign into Rivet using my Google account, using its authorisation process on an Android device running a kids Family Link profile, unless I happen to have a Google for Education account myself. Which I don’t.
We noted:
“So, I figure it’s a reading app, it’s not that bad if I just allow complete access for this app, so I try to sign into Rivet with my daughter’s Google Family Link account … you guessed it a child’s Family Link account is not allowed to be used to sign into Rivet. Agrahhhhhhh.
And this statement:
“So, what was I left with? I had to run the app not signed in, which means you’re not getting the progress and usage tracking, it also means that when your child accidentally hits the persistent LOG IN button that’s always on screen it pulls them out of the story their reading with the resulting tech-inspired outrage you’d expect from a child.”
Oh dear. Jaffrey does note that Rivet was created by one of Google’s labs, Area 120, which operates more or less independently. Perhaps, he grants, that is why the apps do not play well together? Whatever the reason, the author has asked Google about a work-around; there are no updates, though, as of this writing.
Cynthia Murrell, June 6, 2019
AT&T: A Job Creator. Wait, Job? Jobs?
June 6, 2019
Gee, why didn’t that work out as promised? We were told the administration’s tax cuts for big business would lead to more jobs, but here is the latest disappointment in that arena: BoingBoing reports, “AT&T Promised It Would Create 7,000 Jobs if Trump Went Through with Its $3B Tax-Cut, but They Cut 23,000 Jobs Instead.” The very brief but indignant write-up cites this Ars Technica piece, and summarizes:
“In 2017, AT&T CEO Randall Stephenson campaigned for Trump’s massive tax-cuts by promising that they would create 7,000 jobs with the $3,000,000,000 they stood to gain, as well as investing in new infrastructure: instead, the company has reduced its headcount by 23,328 workers (6,000 in the first three months of 2019!) while reducing capital expenditures by $1.4B (AT&T reduced capex by another $900m in Q1/2019). AT&T substantially increased executive bonuses over the same period.”
Of course the phone outfit did. AT&T acknowledges these findings by the Communications Workers of America (CWA), but blames the discrepancy on the fact that “technology is changing rapidly.” Was that a surprise? Perhaps high-tech companies should refrain from making promises they are not sure they can keep.
Cynthia Murrell, June 5, 2019
Googley Things
June 5, 2019
I wanted to write about Google’s recent outage. But the explanations were not exciting. That’s too bad. Configuration problems are what bedevil careless or inexperienced technicians. The fact that Google went down speaks volumes about what happens when the whizzy cloud technology is disrupted by the climate change Google faces. Are there storms gestating in Washington, DC?
The more interesting news, if it is indeed accurate in a boom time for the faux, appeared in “YouTube Says Homophobic Abuse Does Not Violate Harassment Rules.” The write up states:
In a compilation video Maza created of some of his mentions on Crowder’s show, the host attacks Maza as a “gay Mexican”, “lispy queer” and a “token Vox gay atheist sprite”.
DarkCyber assumes that Google has “data” to back up its decision. The company’s smart software and exceptional engineers do not make judgment calls without considering statistical analyses of clicks, word counts, and similar “hard” facts.
With these data, it seems to me that Google has put to rest any mewing and whimpering about the reason it was able to differentiate between abuse and debate.
This is the Google, not some liberal arts magnet. Logic is logic. Oh, about that outage and the quality of the Google technical talent? Well, that is just an outlier.
Stephen E Arnold, June 5, 2019
Google Management: Moving Forward One Promise at a Time
June 5, 2019
It looks like Google has made good on one of the promises it made after last year’s outcry from employees—“Google Updates Misconduct Reporting Amid Employee Discontent,” reports Phys.org. The company had already heeded calls to end mandatory arbitration and to modify benefit rules for some workers. Still, this is too little too late for some. Reporter Rachel Lerman writes:
“Google said Thursday it has updated the way it investigates misconduct claims—changes the company pledged to make after employees called for action last year. The company is simultaneously facing backlash from two employees who say they faced corporate retaliation after helping to organizing the November walkout protests.
We noted:
“Thursday’s changes are designed to make it simpler for employees to file complaints about sexual misconduct or other issues. Google also issued guidelines to tell employees what to expect during an investigation, and added a policy that allows workers to bring along a colleague for support during the reporting process. Google CEO Sundar Pichai promised to make these changes last fall after thousands of Google employees at company offices around the world briefly walked out to protest the company’s handling of sexual misconduct investigations and payouts to executives facing misconduct allegations.”
The charges of retaliation for spearheading last autumn’s walkout reached some employees via an email from those two organizers. One said she was commanded to stop her outside research into AI ethics, while the other says she was effectively demoted (until she brought in her own lawyer. Now she simply faces a “hostile” work environment, she says.) For its part, Google claims those actions had nothing to do with the protests. Naturally.
Cynthia Murrell, June 5, 2019
Reflecting about New Zealand
June 5, 2019
Following the recent attacks in two New Zealand mosques, during which a suspected terrorist successfully live-streamed horrific video of their onslaught for over a quarter-hour, many are asking why the AI tasked with keeping such content off social media failed us. As it turns out, context is key. CNN explains “Why AI Is Still Terrible at Spotting Violence Online.” Reporter Rachel Metz writes:
“A big reason is that whether it’s hateful written posts, pornography, or violent images or videos, artificial intelligence still isn’t great at spotting objectionable content online. That’s largely because, while humans are great at figuring out the context surrounding a status update or YouTube, context is a tricky thing for AI to grasp.”
Sites currently try to account for that shortfall with a combination of AI and human moderators, but they have trouble keeping up with the enormous influx of postings. For example, we’re told YouTube users alone upload more than 400 hours of video per minute. Without enough people to provide context, AI is simply at a loss. Metz notes:
“AI is not good at understanding things such as who’s writing or uploading an image, or what might be important in the surrounding social or cultural environment. … Comments may superficially sound very violent but actually be satire in protest of violence. Or they may sound benign but be identifiable as dangerous to someone with knowledge about recent news or the local culture in which they were created.
We also noted:
“… Even if violence appears to be shown in a video, it isn’t always so straightforward that a human — let alone a trained machine — can spot it or decide what best to do with it. A weapon might not be visible in a video or photo, or what appears to be violence could actually be a simulation.”
On top of that, factors that may not be apparent to human viewers, like lighting, background images, or even frames per seconds, complicate matters for AI. It appears it will be some time before we can rely on algorithms to shield social media from abhorrent content. Can platforms come up with some effective alternative in the meantime? The pressure is on.
Cynthia Murrell, June 5, 2019
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
