Marketing Insight or Marketing Desperation?
January 6, 2021
A couple of weeks ago, I became aware of a shift in techno babble. Here are some examples and their sources:
Fire-and-forget. Shoot a missile and smart software does the rest… when necessary. Source: War News
Hyperedge replacement graph grammars (HRGs). A baffler. Source: Something called NEURIPS
Performative. I think this means go fast or complete a task in a better way. Source: Mashable
Proceleration. The Age of Earthquakes.
Tangential content. The idea is that information does not have to be related; for example, if you write about car polish for a living, including articles about zebras is a good thing. Source: Next Web
Transition from pets to cattle. Moving from the status of a beloved poodle to a single, soon to be eaten bovine. Source: Amazon AWS
Fascinating terminology. Time for digital detox and maybe red tagging. No, I don’t know what these terms means either. I assume that vendors of smart software which can learn without human fiddling knows these terms and many more because of experience intelligence platforms.
Stephen E Arnold, January 6, 2021
Factoids from Best Paper Awards in Computer Science
January 6, 2021
I noted “Best Paper Awards in Computer Science Since 1996.” The year caught my attention because that was the point in time at which software stagnation gained traction. See “The Great Software Stagnation” for the argument.
The Best Papers tally represents awards issued to the “best papers”. Hats off to the compiler Jeff Huang and his sources and helpers.
I zipped through the listings which contained dozens upon dozens of papers I knew absolutely zero about. I will probably be pushing up daisies before I work through these write ups.
I pulled out several observations which answered questions of interest to me.
First, the data illustrate the long tail thing. Stated another way, the data reveal that if an expert wants to win a prestigious award, it matters which institution issues one’s paycheck:
Second, what are the most prestigious “names” to which one should apply for employment in computer science? Here’s the list of the top 25. The others are interesting but not the Broadway stars of the digital world:
| 1 | Microsoft | 56.4 |
| 2 | University of Washington | 50.5 |
| 3 | Carnegie Mellon University | 47.1 |
| 4 | Stanford University | 43.3 |
| 5 | Massachusetts Institute of Technology | 40.2 |
| 6 | University of California, Berkeley | 29.2 |
| 7 | University of Michigan | 20.6 |
| 8 | University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign | 18.5 |
| 9 | Cornell University | 17.4 |
| 10 | 16.8 | |
| 11 | University of Toronto | 15.8 |
| 12 | University of Texas at Austin | 14.5 |
| 13 | IBM | 13.7 |
| 14 | University of British Columbia | 12.4 |
| 15 | University of Massachusetts Amherst | 11.2 |
| 16 | Georgia Institute of Technology | 10.3 |
| 17 | École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne | 10.1 |
| 18 | University of Oxford | 9.6 |
| 19 | University of California, Irvine | 9.4 |
| 20 | Princeton University | 9.1 |
| 21 | University of Maryland | 8.9 |
| 22 | University of California, San Diego | 8.7 |
| 23 | University of Cambridge | 8.6 |
| 24 | University of Wisconsin–Madison | 8 |
| 25 | Yahoo | 7.9 |
Note that Microsoft, the once proud Death Star of the North, is number one. For comparison, the Google is number 10. But the delta in average “bests” is an intriguing 39.6 papers. The ever innovative IBM is number 13, and the estimable Yahoo Oath Verizon confection is number 25.
I did not spot a Chinese University. A quick scan of the authors reveals that quite a few Chinese wizards labor in the research vineyards at these research-oriented institutions. Short of manual counting and analysis of names, I decided to to calculate authors by nationality. I think that’s a good task for you, gentle reader.
What about search as a research topic in this pool? I used a couple of online text analysis tools like Writewords, a tool on my system, and the Madeintext service. The counts varied slightly, which is standard operating procedure for counting tools like these. The 10 most frequently used words in the titles of the award winning papers are:
| data 63 times |
| based 56 times |
| learning 53 times |
| using 49 times |
| design 45 times |
| analysis 38 times |
| software 36 times |
| time 36 times |
| search 35 times |
| Web 30 times |
The surprise is that “search” was, based on my analysis of the counts I used, was the ninth most popular word in the papers’ titles. Who knew? Almost as surprising was “social” ranking a miserable 46th. Search, it seems, remains an area of interest. Now if that interest can be transformed into sustainable revenue and sufficient profit to fund research, bug fixes, and enhancements — life would be better in my opinion.
Stephen E Arnold, January 5, 2020
Oracle: Dons White Hat and Tries to Lasso the StreamScam Stallion
January 6, 2021
Oracle is only of passing interest to me. I paid attention to Oracle’s search efforts which I think once involved Applied Linguistics, TripleHop, Endeca, and a natural language processing company crafting smart software to replace trained human customer support types. Oh, I did check out Oracle SES. As I recall, the first “s” meant secure. The idea was that Oracle had discovered that most vendors of enterprise search provided systems which were not focused on security. Just getting these overhyped and jargon infused puppies to behave consumed quite a bit of developer, MBA, and ultimately CPA energy.
I read “Oracle Exposes largest CTV Ad Fraud Operation Ever” reminded me of the Oracle Secure Enterprise Search hook: Enterprise search vendors did not provide Oracle-grade security. That was, as it turned out, mostly true. The problem was that organizations purchasing enterprise search were not buying security. The organizations were trying to find a way to deal with the increasing flows of digital information. Prior to the implosion of Delphes, Entopia, and Fast Search & Transfer — tools were not widely available. Today, of course, an enterprising and enthusiastic developer can download or just use a variant of Lucene/Solr. Amazon and IBM support these open source solutions, and developers of proprietary systems like Coveo, Mindbreeze, and others have to put in extra hours on their sales Peloton’s to generate sustainable revenues. Oracle’s run at enterprise search as security disasters went nowhere.
Now Oracle has donned its white hat and is now lassoing or trying to lasso the online advertising sector. In my research, we have encountered numerous reports of online advertising fraud. Making the charges stick to the Google, its subsidiaries, outfits like Facebook, and the third party intermediaries has been difficult. Gobbledygook explanations and intentional complexity are designed to keep those advertising dollars flowing.
The StreamScam is probably the first in a series of oracular pronouncements about alleged fraud: Click, view time, reach, etc., etc. The write up states:
StreamScam perpetrators capitalized on vulnerabilities in the technology used to improve the video viewing experience in CTV. Known as Server-Side Ad Insertion (SSAI), the technology combines content and ads into a single video stream that can play seamlessly with no delays on end-user devices, such as Roku, AppleTV, and FireTV.
The idea is that advertisers don’t know if online advertising generates sales. Marketers emphasize misty notions of brand and reach. But what’s an advertiser to do? The answer is that newspaper, television, and radio have been replaced among certain desirable market segments by streaming, Twitter, and podcasts. Therefore, a device like a smart TV seems to straddle some of these technology. Put money into connected televisions, YouTube, Facebook, and maybe — just maybe — TikTok.
I agree with “CTV Ad Fraud Schemes Like the One Oracle Exposed Will Become More Common But That Won’t Affect Marketers’ Spend.” I would, however, add a caveat to this write up’s assertion about not impacting what marketers spend and where; to wit: What choice does an advertiser have? Old fashioned direct mail? When the post office worked, that was an option. How about telemarketing? Some desirable demographics don’t answer their mobile’s chirps. What about billboard advertising? Covid and work from home may have reduced the impact of these view enhancing objects of art.
With more and more GenX and millennials positioning themselves as experts in social media, online ads are necessary complements to influencer campaigns. The Google ad purveyors are reassuring and armed with data illustrating that online ads really do work. Don’t like the Google rep, check out the Facebook pitch with micro and nano targeting that really works better than Googzilla’s approach. Amazon, Apple, yes. Options.
Net net: Ad fraud is endemic. No one survives who documents it. But Oracle has a white hat and maybe will own TikTok some day. There’s gold at the end of the digital rainbow even though one end is in Beijing.
My take: “Whoa, StreamScam! The Lone Oracle is gonna break you down. Right, Don Quixote.” (Tonto is in Covid lockdown.)
Stephen E Arnold, January 6, 2021
DarkTrace: A Controversial View
January 6, 2021
I spotted that a post about Darktrace had been removed from Reddit. I became curious because the comment thread was on Reddit when I checked today (January 4, 2021). I located the original Darktrace post on the Archive.org site at this link. This content may be disappeared, and some of the points run counter to the rah rah write ups about the company. Here are some of the factoids and assertions which caught my attention:
- A Darktrace initial public offering is likely to take place in the near future
- 10 members of the Darktrace executive team allegedly had ties to Autonomy, the search and content management vendor acquired by HP
- Michael Lynch is part of an investment firm which funded Darktrace
- Goldman Sachs snubbed the Darktrace float.
None of the information in the Reddit post struck me as controversial. The data appear to come from a variety of open sources, including the Darktrace Web site, news reports, LinkedIn biographies, and public documents.
Why did I chase down the original post? The removal of the information from the threat sparked a number of interesting Reddit comments about Darktrace, the company’s business tactics, and the cyber security sector.
With the SolarWinds’ misstep still in the news cycle, it strikes me that cyber security related posts provide additional color about the products and services some of the higher profile vendors are offering.
Reddit obviously does not agree.
Stephen E Arnold, January 6, 2021
Greed, Security, and MBAs: Compromising Security for Yachts, Snazzy Cars, and Big Houses?
January 5, 2021
I read “How to Get Rich Sabotaging Nuclear Weapons Facilities.” The title is snappy. The blend of sabotage, nuclear weapons, and money is a spicy blend. I have been critical of cyber security firms’ marketing. I’ve mentioned their lingo, the nifty exhibits at law enforcement and intelligence conferences, and the endless reports about data for sale on the Dark Web.
I admit that I have focused on the flashier side of the business. I leave the specifics of repurposing open source software wrapped in scripts to others. I also have not linked obvious financial plays like the sale of 4iQ to Alto Analytics or the Recorded Future tie up with Insight Partners or any of the other mergers and roll ups emerging from the cyber security gold rush.
Why? I have been commenting about the craziness of MBAs for years, and — guess what? — no one cares. When I worked for some archetypal MBAs at assorted financial institutions, to a person the individuals agreed. I recall one flashy MBA as saying to me, “That’s right. I want money. Lots of money.” That fine individual asked me to pay for lunch because he left his wallet in his desk.
The write up about sabotage and nuclear weapons seems to be getting traction. In the aftermath of the SolarWinds’ misstep, this passage has more meaning to the average thumb typer and social media maven:
Cybersecurity is a very weird area, mostly out of sight yet potentially very deadly. Anonymous groups can turn off power plants, telecom grids, or disrupt weapons labs, as Israel did when it used a cyber-weapon to cripple Iranian nuclear facilities in 2010. Bank regulators have to now consult with top military leaders about whether deposit insurance covers incidents where hackers destroy all bank records, and what that would mean operationally. It’s not obvious whether this stuff is war or run-of-the-mill espionage, but everyone knows that the next war will be chock full of new tactics based on hacking the systems of one’s adversary, perhaps using code placed in those systems during peacetime.
The high-flying SolarWinds sparked this comment:
SolarWinds didn’t bother to hire a senior official to focus on security until 2017, and then only after it was forced to do so by European regulations. Even then, SolarWinds CEO, Kevin Thompson, ignored the risk. As the New York Times noted, one security “adviser at SolarWinds, said he warned management that year that unless it took a more proactive approach to its internal security, a cybersecurity episode would be “catastrophic.”
What was the root cause? The write up points the finger at a roll up specialist called Bravo. I learned:
After its IPO, SolarWinds followed Ellison’s advice, became a merger machine, buying a dozen companies from 2011-2014, including Pingdom, Confio and N-Able Technologies. In 2015, Thoma Bravo Partners (along with Silver Lake) bought the company, and loaded it up with $2 billion of debt to finance the purchase. (Yes, this was one of those purchases in which the private equity buyer bought the company with the company’s own money.) Under Bravo’s control, SolarWinds engaged in more mergers, buying companies who made threat monitoring software, email security, database performance monitoring, and IT support firms. SolarWinds sought to become a one-stop-shop in its niche, not particular good at quality, but with everything a customer might need. Of course, the Federal Trade Commission and the European Competition Commission allowed these deals; just a month before the hack was revealed, the FTC approved yet another acquisition by SolarWinds.
What happened?
The misstep. The write up points out:
But in some ways it’s not that complex; the problem isn’t that Russians are good at hacking and U.S. defenses are weak, it’s that financiers in America make more money by sabotaging key infrastructure than by building it.
The root cause, therefore, is that which generates revenue in an environment in which regulators are asleep at the switch, MBAs plot their next big deal, and those who assume that whiz bang, smart security systems actually work.
Stephen E Arnold, January 5, 2021
SolarWinds Are Gusting and Blowing Hard
January 5, 2021
Many pundits have reacted to the New York Times’ story “As Understanding of Russian Hacking Grows, So Does Alarm.” Work through those analyses. What’s missing? Quite a lot, but in this short blog post I want to address one issue that has mostly ignored.
At one time, there was a list on the SolarWinds’ Web site of the outfits which had been compromised. That list disappeared. I posted “Sun Spotting in the Solar Wind” on December 23, 2020. In that post, I reported three outfits which had been allegedly compromised by the SolarWinds’ misstep (and some of the information I used as a source remains online):
City of Barrie (Canada)
Newton Public Schools (US)
Regina Public Schools (Canada).
The question is, “Why are outfits like a municipality known as part of the Greater Golden Horseshoe, Newton’s public schools, and the Regina public schools? (I’ve been to Regina in the winter. Unforgettable is it.)
My research team and I discussed the alleged exploits taking up residence in these organizations; that is, allegedly, of course, of course.
Here’s what my team offered:
- A launch pad for secondary attacks. The idea is that the original compromise was like a rat carrying fleas infected with the bubonic plague (arguably more problematic than the Rona)
- A mechanism for placing malicious code on the computing devices of administrators, instructors, and students. As these individuals thumb typed away, these high trust individuals were infecting others in their social circle. If the infections were activated, downloads of tertiary malware could take place.
- Institutions like these would connect to other networks. Malware could be placed in server nodes serving other institutions; for example, big outfits like Rogers Communications, a government ministry or two, and possibly the cloud customers of the beloved Rogers as well as BCE (Bell Canada’s parent) and Telus.
The odd ducks in the list of compromised organization, just might not be so odd after all.
That’s the problem, isn’t it? No one knows exactly when the misstep took place, what primary and downstream actions were triggered, and where subsequent rats with fleas infected with bubonic plague have go to.
Net net: It’s great to read so many words about a misstep and not have signals that the issue is understood, not even by the Gray Lady herself.
Stephen E Arnold, January 6, 2020
Software: Evolving to Non Motility
January 5, 2021
I read a quite interesting essay called “The Great Software Stagnation.” The main idea is that software innovation has slowed. A number of programming languages were identified as examples of greater software innovation and some others as less innovative. The idea is that software has shifted from breakthroughs to incremental improvements.
However, the essay contains several statements which I found thought provoking; for instance:
- You can’t do research at a startup
- Megacorps only seem to be interested in solving their own problems in the least disruptive way possible
- “Maybe the reason progress stopped in 1996 is that we invented everything.”
What if this stagnation, motionless, or non motility is a characteristic of some sort of digital law; for example, the premise of zero gravity articulated by Steve Harmon?
Maybe Newton’s boring laws apply to the digital environment? Maybe there are more of these digital laws waiting to be articulated?
Stephen E Arnold, January 5, 2020
Artistic License Gives Way to Artistic Bias
January 5, 2021
It is a fact that AI facial recognition technology is skewed towards favoring white males. The algorithms misidentify non-white people and females. Facial technology is biased because the developers are generally white males and use their images as data to test the algorithms. A new trend in AI is making art from algorithms, but Venturebeat says there unintended biases in art too: “Researchers Find Race, Gender, And Style Biases In Art-Generating AI Systems.”
Fujitsu researchers discovered that AI art algorithms include socioeconomic impacts and have clear prejudices. The researchers covered a lot of ground for their study:
“In their work, the researchers surveyed academic papers, online platforms, and apps that generate art using AI, selecting examples that focused on simulating established art schools and styles. To investigate biases, they considered state-of-the-art AI systems trained on movements (e.g., Renaissance art, cubism, futurism, impressionism, expressionism, post-impressionism, and romanticism), genres (landscapes, portraits, battle paintings, sketches, and illustrations), materials (woodblock prints, engravings, paint), and artists (Clementine Hunter, Mary Cassatt, Vincent van Gogh, Gustave Doré, Gino Severini).”
The researchers discovered that when different artworks were translated into different styles or altered dark skin color was not preserved and long-haired men were confused for female. Also artwork from different style eras did not translate well to others. The problem comes from the same issues as facial recognition technology lack of diverse data and inconsistent labeling:
“The researchers peg the blame on imbalances in the datasets used to train generative AI models, which they note might be influenced by dataset curators’ preferences. One app referenced in the study, AI Portraits, was trained using 45,000 Renaissance portraits of mostly white people, for example. Another potential source of bias could be inconsistencies in the labeling process, or the process of annotating the datasets with labels from which the models learn, according to the researchers. Different annotators have different preferences, cultures, and beliefs that might be reflected in the labels that they create.”
The article ends with a warning that AI generated art could lead to “false perceptions about social, cultural, and political aspects of past times and hinder awareness about important historical events. For this reason, they urge AI researchers and practitioners to inspect the design choices and systems and the sociopolitical contexts that shape their use.”
There is no argument that diverse data is needed to perfect AI generated art, however, there is going to be a lack of it simply because it does not exist. These art movements, especially those from Europe will not be ethnically or sexually diverse. The art movements will be more sexually diverse than ethnically, because there were female artists and females were painted in a lot of pictures. Ethnically, however, Europe is where these art movements began and white people came from, so the data will be skewed in that favor.
Modern artists of all ethnicities and genders can imitate these art styles, but that does not make them authentic to the era. There exceptions to this rule, of course, but they are limited. It is similar to asking for a Chinese eye witness account to New World colonization or wanting to know how Beethoven was influenced by African music. They simply do not exist.
Instead of concentrating solely on European art movements, why not incorporate African, Asian, and aboriginal art from the same eras? It will provide diverse data from real era appropriate art with lots of different styles.
Whitney Grace, January 5, 2021
Alphabet Google Management Excitement
January 4, 2021
I read that Alphabet Google employees are into unionization. Does anyone remember the Pullman strike, the unrest, and the Federal troops? Sometimes I wonder if the Giant Science Club remembers history, even its own.
The news reports are flowing rapidly into my newsreader. “Google, Alphabet Employees Seek to Form a Union” is representative. I noted this statement in the write up:
“This is historic—the first union at a major tech company by and for all tech workers,” Dylan Baker, a software engineer at Google, said in a statement. “We will elect representatives, we will make decisions democratically, we will pay dues, and we will hire skilled organizers to ensure all workers at Google know they can work with us if they actually want to see their company reflect their values.”
For several years I have used the term “HSSCMM” which is shorthand for high school science club management method. The idea is that those “elite” in a high school science club were better, smarter, more charismatic, and worthy than someone who worked after school stacking paper in a distributor warehouse or who perspired in athletic practice. Shudder. Plebeians, modern day occupants on the lower rungs of the Great Chain of Being, and dumber humanoids. (Yes, I was a member of the high school science club, and I bought into this stuff but now I am slightly more mature. How much? To be frank, not too much.)
The scala naturae: You too can climb the staircase to the country club of science.
What’s happening at the Google is that the Googlers have not internalized the fact that Alphabet Google is set up like a medieval barony or a Silicon Valley caste system. With this understanding, which took more than two decades to gestate, may be a legal revolt. The mini revolt could mature into a putsch too. The plebeians are joining together. Like union actions of yore, a large number of Googlers can become quite problematic for those at the top of the Great Chain of Being.
One thing is clear: The HSSCMM is not to administrative device some of the club’s elite thought it would be. Is this why Messrs. Brin and Page exited before the Great Awakening?
Stephen E Arnold, January 4, 2021
Digital Humanities Is Data Analytics For English Majors
January 4, 2021
Computer science and the humanities are on separate ends of the education spectrum. The two disciplines do not often mix, but when they do wonderful things happen. The Economist shares a story about book and religious nerds using data analytics to uncover correlations in literature: “How Data Analysis Can Enrich The Humanities.”
The article explains how a Catholic priest and literary experts used data analysis technology from punch card systems to modern software to examine writing styles. The data scientists teamed with literary experts discovered correlations between authors, time periods, vocabulary, and character descriptions.
The discoveries point to how science and the humanities can team up to find new and amazing relationships in topics that have been picked to death by scholars. It creates new avenues for discussion. It also demonstrates how science can enhance the humanities, but it also provides much needed data for AI experimentation. One other thing is brings up is how there are disparities between the fields:
“However, little evidence yet exists that the burgeoning field of digital humanities is bankrupting the world of ink-stained books. Since the NEH set up an office for the discipline in 2008, it has received just $60m of its $1.6bn kitty. Indeed, reuniting the humanities with sciences might protect their future. Dame Marina Warner, president of the Royal Society of Literature in London, points out that part of the problem is that “we’ve driven a great barrier” between the arts and STEM subjects. This separation risks portraying the humanities as a trivial pursuit, rather than a necessary complement to scientific learning.”
It is important that science and the humanities cross over. In order for science to even start, people must imagine the impossible. Science makes imagination reality.
Whitney Grace, January 5, 2021
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
