Xooglers Have Google DNA When It Comes to Search
March 22, 2021
I spotted this story: “Ex-Google Employees Come Up with Their Own Privacy-Focused Search Engine.” The hook is that two Xooglers (former Google employees) are beavering away on a new search engine. The details appear in the write up. What I noticed was that users will have to pay to play. Plus, in order to become a subscriber, certain personal information will be required. Here’s a selection of the data the “privacy focused search engine” will possess:
- Email address
- Phone number
- Location information
- Name
- User settings
- IP address
- Information you save in your ‘spaces.’
- Payment information
- The operating system or device
- Mailing address
- Cookie identifiers
- Information regarding your contacts
- The browser type and version you use
- Pages that you visit
You can take the Xooglers out of Google, but it seems you cannot take the Google out of Xooglers. I particularly like the useful information which can be extracted from these data and nifty analyses like cross correlation. And that browser history! Yep, very interesting.
The privacy focused phrase is tasty too.
Stephen E Arnold, March 22, 2021
Fruit of Tainted Tree: An Interesting Metaphor and a Challenge for Data Removal Methods
March 22, 2021
I am not legal eagle. In fact, legal eagles frighten me. I clutch my billfold, grab my sweater, and trundle away as fast as my 77 year old legs permit. I do read legal info which seems interesting. “FTC Says That One Cannot Retain the Fruit of the Tainted Tree.” That’s a flashy metaphor for lawyers, but the “tainted” thing is intriguing. If an apple is stolen and that apple is poisoned, what happens if someone makes apple sauce, serves it to the PTA, and a pride of parents die? Tainted, right?
The write up explains:
the FTC has found that the work product of ill-gotten data is no longer retainable by the developer.
Okay, let’s say a developer creates an application or service and uses information available on a public Web site. But those data were uploaded by a bad actor and made available as an act of spite. Then the intrepid developer recycles those data and the original owner of the data cries, “Foul.”
The developer now has to remove those data. But how does one remove what may be individual datum from a data storage system and a dynamic distributed, modern software component.
Deletions are not really removals. The deletion leaves the data, just makes it unfindable in the index. To remove an item of information, more computational work is required. Faced with many deletions, short cuts are needed. Explaining what deletions are and aren’t in a modern distributed system can be an interesting exercise.
Now back to the tainted tree. If the ruling sticks, exactly what data will have to be removed. Is a single datum a fruit. Years ago, Dun & Bradstreet learned that some of its data, collected then by actual humans talking to contacts in financial institutions or in gyms, could not be the property of the outstanding data aggregation company. A phone number is or used to be a matter of fact. Facts were not something an outfit could own unless they were organized in a work and even then I never understood exactly what the rules were. When I worked in the commercial database business, we tried to enter into agreements with sources. Tedious, yes, but we had a deal and were not los banditos.
Some questions crossed my mind:
- How exactly will tainted fruit (apples, baskets of apples, or the aforementioned apple sauce) be removed? How long will a vendor have to remove data? (The Google right to be forgotten method seems sluggish, but that’s just my perception of time, not the GOOG’s or the EC regulators’.)
- How will one determine if data have been removed? There are back up tapes and sys admins who can examine data tables with a hex editor to locate certain items of information.
- What is the legal exposure of a person who uses tainted fruit which is identified as tainted after reuse? What if the delay is in lawyer time; for example, a year or more later?
- What happens when outfits use allegedly public domain images to train an AI and an image is not really public domain? Does the AI system have to be dumped? (I am thinking about Facebook’s push into image recognition.)
Worth watching if this write up is spot on and how the legal eagles circle this “opportunity” for litigation.
Stephen E Arnold, March 22, 2021
Business Process Management Is The New Buzzword
March 21, 2021
How does one “fix” the SolarWinds’ misstep? BPM. GovWizely will present a webinar addressing remediation of SolarWinds’ issues on March 25, 2021. You can sign up at this url: https://www.govwizely.com/contact/. The program is free and pre-registration is required.
If you never heard about business process management (BPM) it means the practice of discovering and controlling an organization’s processes so they will align with business goals as the company evolves. BPM software is the next phase of business intelligence software for enterprises. CIO explains what to expect from BPM software in the article: “What Is Business Process Management? The Key To Enterprise Agility.”
BPM software maps definitions to existing processes, defines steps to carry out tasks, and tips for streamlining/improving practices. Organizations are constantly shifting to meet their goals and BPM is software is advertised as the best way to refine and control changing environments. All good BPM software should have the following: alignment of the firm’s resources, increase discipline in daily operations, and clarify on strategic direction. While most organizations want flexibility they lack it:
“A company can only be as flexible, efficient, and agile as the interaction of its business processes allow. Here’s the problem: Many companies develop business processes in isolation from other processes they interact with, or worse, they don’t “develop” business processes at all. In many cases, processes simply come into existence as “the way things have always been done,” or because software systems dictate them. As a result, many companies are hampered by their processes, and will continue to be so until those processes are optimized.”
When selecting a BPM software it should be capable of integrations, analytics, collaboration, form generation, have a business rules engine, and workflow managements.
BPM sounds like the next phase of big data, where hidden insights are uncovered in unstructured data. BPM takes these insights, then merges them with an organization’s goals. Business intelligence improves business processes, big data discovers insights, and BPM organizes all of it.
Whitney Grace, March 21, 2021
Google and Cookies: Crafting Quite Tasty Bait
March 19, 2021
I read “Alphabet: Five Things We Know about Google’s Ad Changes after Cookies.” I approached the write up with some interest. Cookies have been around for a long time. The reason? They allowed a number of interesting functions, including tracking, cross correlation of user actions, and a covert existence.
Now, no more Google cookies.
The write up explains what Google wants keen observers, real journalists, and thumbtypers to know; to wit:
- Privacy is really, really important to Google—now. Therefore, the GOOG won’t support third party cookies. Oh, shucks, what about cross site tracking? Yeah, what about it?
- Individuals can be targeted. Those with a rifle shot orientation have to provide data to the Google and use the Google software system called “customer match.” Yeah, ad narrowcasting lives.
- Google will draw some boundaries about its data leveraging for advertisers. But what about “publishers”? Hey, Google has some special rules. Yeah, a permeable membrane for certain folks.
- FLOC makes non-personalized ad targeting possible. I want to write, “You’ve been FLOC’ed” but I shall not. Yeah, FLOC. But you can always try FLEDGE. So “You’ve been FLEDGED” is a possibility.
How’s this work? The write up does not shed any light. Here’s a question for a “real news” outfit to tackle:
How many data points does a disambiguation system require to identify a name, location, and other personal details of a single individual?
Give up. Better not. Oh, the bait, pivoted cookies. Great for catching prospects I think.
Stephen E Arnold, March 19, 2021
Eschewing the Google: Career Suicide or Ethical Savvy?
March 19, 2021
I spotted an interested quote in Wired’s “The Departure of 2 Google AI Researchers Spurs More Fallout.” Here’s the quote:
“Google has shown an astounding lack of leadership and commitment to open science, ethics, and diversity in their treatment of the Ethical AI team.”
It’s been several months since the Google engaged in Gebru-gibberish; that is, the firm’s explanations about the departure of a PhD who wrote a research paper suggesting that the Google’s methods may not be a-okay.
The Google is pressing forward with smart software, which is, the future of the company. I thought online advertising was, but what do I know.
The article also mentions that a high profile AI researcher would not attend a Google AI event. The reason? Here’s what Wired reports:
Friday morning, Kress-Gazit emailed the event’s organizers to say she would not attend because she didn’t wish to be associated with Google research in any way. “Not only is the research process and integrity of Google tainted, but it is clear, by the way these women were treated, that all the diversity talk of the company is performative,” she wrote. Kress-Gazit says she didn’t expect her action to have much effect on Google, or her own future work, but she wanted to show solidarity with Gebru and Mitchell, their team, and their research agenda.
A few years ago, professionals would covet a Google tchotchke like a mouse pad or a flashing Google LED pin. (My tarnished and went dead years ago.) Now high profile academics are unfriending Messrs. Brin and Page online ad machine.
Interesting shift in attitude toward the high school science club company in a few pulses of Internet time.
Stephen E Arnold, March 19, 2021
AI Suffers the Slings and Arrow of Outrageous Marketing
March 19, 2021
I read “Loose Lips Sink AI Ships.” Amusing. The write up begins with a sentence designed to catch my attention:
Cognitive computing is not an IBM fraud. [Emphasis added. Editor.]
Imagine. IBM and fraud in the same sentence. Even more tasty is the phrase “cognitive computing.” The phrase evokes zeros and ones which think. The implication is that smart computers are as good as a mere mortal, perhaps even better at some things.
Fraud. Hmmm.
The write up explains that one naysayer is missing the boat. The naysayer took umbrage as a marketing person’s characterization of IBM Watson artificial intelligence platform being able to “outthink human brains in areas where finding insights and connections can be difficult due to the abundance of data.”
My goodness. A marketing person exaggerating. Plus the “abundance” word evokes the image of a tsunami of information. That’s an original metaphor too.
The write up explains that AI is a whiz bang deal. The case example is Covid research. I was hoping that the author would explain how IBM Watson was lashed to a gurney and wheeled into the parking lot at a major Houston, Texas, hospital. But no. The example was Covid.
The write up explains that AI is better with bigger and faster computers. That’s good news for some companies. Also, computer reasoning is “increasing quickly.” I like increased reasoning.
There is some less than sunny news too. What a surprise. For example, neural networks are clever, not intelligent. Clever was good enough for the Google, but not enough for real AI yet. And AI systems mimic human intelligence; the systems are not quite like your next door neighbor. (I think computers are quite like my next door neighbor, but I live in rural Kentucky. That’s a consideration.)
The write up seems to strive for balance if one relates to big data, big computers, and big marketing.
Let’s ask Watson? Well, maybe not.
Stephen E Arnold, March 19, 2021
Apple Confronts the Middle Kingdom: Another Joust between a High Tech Country and a Nation State
March 19, 2021
How did Australia fare in its head-to-head death match with Facebook? Readers of this blog know that I declared Facebook the winner over a mere country. Imagine. A country with kangaroos thinking it could win against the digital social kingdom. I declared Facebook the winner and pegged Australia as the equivalent of a company selling used RVs to residents of Silicon Valley who could not afford an apartment.
Now China finds itself in the midst of Apple peels because Chinese iPhone app developers are following Apple’s privacy guidelines. Imagine. Programmers in China have the daring do to veer outside the boundaries of the orchard owner.
“Apple Warns Chinese Apps Not to Dodge Its New Privacy Rules” explains:
But even before introducing the changes, Apple is facing problems in China, where tech companies are testing ways to beat the system and continue tracking users without prompting for their consent. Apple previously said it would reject from its App Store any apps that “are found to disregard the user’s choice”. On Thursday, Apple fired pre-emptive warnings to at least two Chinese apps, telling them to cease and desist after naming a dozen parameters such as “setDeviceName” that could be used “to create a unique identifier for the user’s device”.
The write up explains that Chinese developers are testing technology to put gates in the fence around the Apple app orchard. That’s not what Apple permits. The techniques referenced in the source article smack of breach techniques long in use by specialized software companies. Some of the methods were hinted at in some of the Snowden documents and in the public dump of the Hacking Team’s RCS. Certain government-supported intelware companies employ similar techniques in their solutions as well.
What’s ahead?
- Apple declares victory and makes changes as it did for Russia. Business is business, and the ethical issues are really super important unless the economic hit is a consideration
- Apple declares that China has ruined the apple orchard, so no more digital delicacies will be exported to the Middle Kingdom
- China demonstrates that it can influence behavior by pulling certain supply chain strings, suggesting tariff changes to countries in its orbit, and engaging in face-to-face discussions with Chinese nationals working for the Silicon Valley giant.
Surveillance operates on steroids when app developers have access to the treasure trove of data from users’ actions.
This is another distinctly 21st century issue: A mere country and some of its state backed developers finding that access to the abundance in the Apple orchard hindered.
Stephen E Arnold, March 19, 2021
The Duck Confronts Googzilla
March 18, 2021
You have heard of David and Goliath? What about the duck and Googzilla? No. Navigate to “DuckDuckGo Calls Out Google over User Data Collection.” The metasearch engine wants everyone to know that Google does not define “privacy” the way the duck crowd does. The write up states:
DuckDuckGo says Google tried its best to hide its data collection practices, until it was no longer possible for them to keep it private. ‘After months of stalling, Google finally revealed how much personal data they collect in Chrome and the Google app. No wonder they wanted to hide it,’ DuckDuckGo said in a series of tweets. ‘Spying on users has nothing to do with building a great web browser or search engine. We would know (our app is both in one).’
Everyone is entitled to an opinion.
However, it is interesting to consider the question, “What happens next?”
- Google can ignore the duck. Eric Schmidt is no longer explaining that Qwant keeps him awake at night because that service is a heck of a threat. So, meh.
- Google takes steps to make life slight more interesting for the DuckDuckGo. There are some possibilities which are fun to ponder; for example, hasta la vista to links from the GOOG to the duck or Google works its magic within its walled garden. There’s a lot of content that lives within the Google ecosystem and when it is blocked or gifted with added latency, the scope may be a surprise to some.
- Google goes on the offensive just as it has with Microsoft. Imagine Google’s CEO suggesting that Microsoft’s CEO is dragging red herrings to the monopoly party. What could Google’s minions identify as information of value about DuckDuckGo, its traffic, and its index coverage? Interesting to ponder.
The tale of David and Goliath is an enduring one. The duck versus Googzilla might lack legendary status of brave David, but the confrontation might be a surprising one. Ducks are fierce creatures, but may have to punch above their weight to cause Googzilla pain.
Stephen E Arnold, March 18, 2021
Dark Patterns: Fool Me Once, Fool Me Twice, Heck Fool Me for Decades
March 18, 2021
I find “dark patterns” interesting. Whether one is used by T-Mobile to make it almost impossible to opt out of the firm’s data slurping and selling biz or the Facebook trick of making “log out” tough to see. There are other, more ingenious methods; for example, if you want to read a super duper white paper, just provide a name and email address. The action flips the switch on spam and scam operations. (Who doesn’t enjoy cybersecurity solutions which cannot detect SolarWinds and Exchange type breaches for three, six, 12 months, or more.
I read “California Bans Dark Patterns That Trick Users into Giving Away Their Personal Data.” The write up reports:
The concept [Dark Patterns] was coined in 2010 but is slowly being addressed in US legislation, with California this week announcing that it is banning the use of dark patterns that stop users from opting out of the sale of their personal data.
The idea of tricking users began a long time ago. The fine P.T. Barnum said:
There’s a sucker born every minute.
How about those free online services?
The article makes clear that regulators are quick to act. Those using dark patterns have to mend their ways in 30 days.
Then what? Let’s use a free online service and free email to share ideas. I have a better idea. Let’s use Clubhouse to discuss options.
Stephen E Arnold, March 18, 2021
Change Is a Constant: Tech Biters Have Underslung Jaws and Hang On a While
March 18, 2021
I read “Tim Berners-Lee Says Fad of Internet Giants Will Pass.” The “inventor” of the World Wide Web is a very smart person. I am, however, not sure he can pick winners of the Kentucky Derby or know which Beeple art work to acquire as a string of code.
He states, according to the write up in Tech Central:
“I’m optimistic, because we’ve seen some dominant fads on the Internet before … and then things change,” he said in an interview, adding that people were pushing back against the use and abuse of personal data. “(There’s) great awareness that things need to change.”
The friction for change is that online functions coalesce and form digital black holes. These holes suck in users and cash. They emit services which alter one’s perception of reality. Yep, that’s right. Perception near a digital black holes follows some interesting “laws”.
Consequently, change is going to operate on a different time scale. Consider the tech biters.
F Facebook has been chugging along on an interesting founder insight: Get names and data. Get dates. Yes!
A Amazon powered forward by getting others to pay for the company’s infrastructure, thus making it possible for the Bezos bulldozer to rework business that way Walmart crushed Main Street stores. Yes!
A Apple won favor by chugging along with design oriented products and building a cult following with a walled garden, a high ticket price, and the power of upscale pretentions. Yes!
N Netflix won the hearts and minds of thumbtypers by making video grazing normcore with an escalating monthly fee. Yes!
G Google was sparked by Messrs. Brin and Page insight that search could be monetized via the Yahoo Overture GoTo “pay to play” model. Yes!
The problem is that a failure of government oversight and regulation has allowed the black holes of digital services to dominate the business universe.
Change will come, but how often does a black hole wink out or morph into a benign dead mass?
Not often.
The tech monopoly fad may have a long half life just like Pu-239. Centuries, not picoseconds.
Stephen E Arnold, March 18, 2021
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
