Australia: Harbinger for Tech Giants and Their Exposed Quite Weak Spot?
August 31, 2022
The US technology giants color many discussions. Facebook seems to want everyone to live and work in a computer graphics generated world. Google allegedly wants to improve search. Yada yada yada.
The weak spot for most of these outfits is the perception that online provides a haven for bad actors. Among bad actors, one of the least salubrious niches is CSAM, jargon for child sexual abuse material. For some bad actors, the last couple of decades have been the digital equivalent of a Burning Man devoted to the heavy metal life of shadows.
True or false?
It depends on whom one asks. If you ask me and my team, the big technology outfits as well as the feeder modules like shadow Internet Service Providers have not taken enough positive steps to address the CSAM issue.
“Australia Orders Tech Giants Apple, Microsoft, Snap and Meta to Step up Actions against Child Abuse Material” may be a harbinger of what’s coming from other countries in 2023. The article from the estimable Epoch Times reports:
Australian authorities have ordered global tech giants to report on the actions they have taken to stop the spread of child sexual exploitation materials on their platforms and will impose penalties on non-compliant companies.
What happens if New Zealand, the UK, Canada, the US, and other like minded companies follow in Australia’s footsteps?
CSAM is a problematic and troublesome issue. Why is Australia taking this action? The Wild West, “I apologize, senator” approach has worn thin.
CSAM is a weak spot, and big tech and its fellow travelers will have to do some fancy dancing in 2023 in my opinion. It’s time for the night club to close.
Stephen E Arnold, August 31, 2022
Here We Go Again: Google Claims To Improve Search Results
August 31, 2022
Google has been blamed for biased search results for years. Users claim that Google pushes paid links to the top of search results without identifying them Organic search results are consigned to the second and third pages. Despite having a monopoly on search and other parts of the tech sector, Google does deliver decent services and products. To maintain its market dominance, Google must continue offering good services. Engadget explores how “Google’s Search AI Now Looks For General Consensus To Highlight More Trustworthy Results.”
Google wants it “search snippets, “blocks of text that appear at the top of search results to answer questions,” to be more accurate. Google designed the Multitask Unified Model AI to search for consensus when selecting a snippet. The AI checks snippets against verified resources to determine a consensus of information. Some queries, such as false premises, should not have snippets, so Google’s AI reduces those by 40%.
Also Google is showing more citations:
“Google is now also making its “About this result” tool more accessible. That’s the panel that pops up when you click on the three dots next to a result, showing you details about the source website before you even visit. Starting later this year, it will be available in eight more languages, including Portuguese, French, Italian, German, Dutch, Spanish, Japanese, and Indonesian. It’s adding more information to the tool starting this week, as well, including how widely a publication is circulated, online reviews about a company, or whether a company is owned by another entity. They’re all pieces of information that could help you decide whether a particular source is trustworthy.”
Google search results with limited returns or do not have verified sources will contain content advisories encouraging users to conduct further research.
It is great that Google is turning itself into an academic database, now if they would only do that for Google Scholar.
Whitney Grace, August 31, 2022
Libraries and Google: Who Wins?
August 31, 2022
Google uses various ways to protect users’ accounts, such as authentication through a mobile phone or non-Gmail address. This is a problem for large portions of the American population who don’t have regular access to the Internet. These include ethnic minorities, people with low socioeconomic status, and the elderly. These groups usually rely on public libraries for Internet access. These groups also need welfare and other assistance programs for survival.
Shelly R., a librarian in the Free Library of Philadelphia System, wrote a letter to Google in 2021 about how their security authentication hurts these groups. The letter was picked up by Hacker News and it was meant to be private. Her description of the services her library system provides is typical of many places in the United States.
People say that libraries are obsolete, but the naysayers are not taking into account the people that need Internet access, help with technology literacy, applying for benefits and jobs, and more. Librarians have one of the most stressful jobs in the country, because they are forced into more roles than helping people research: teacher, therapist, babysitter, and more. It is ridiculous the amount of roles librarians fill, however, helping people in their community get access to technology is one thing they excel at.
Shelly R. makes a valiant point that many groups cannot afford expensive technology or know how to use it. They rely on community resources such as the public library for assistance, but security features like Google’s authentication system do not help them.
Online accounts must remain secure to protect users, but people without regular Internet access or technology literacy must be taken into account as well. The Internet is supposed to be a great equalizer, but it does not work when everyone does not have equal access.
Shelly R. updated the letter in August 2022, said she spoke with Google’s security team, and things were better for her job. Is that true? We hope so. If only Google would do more to help equalize Internet access. Hey Google, maybe you could donate money or resources to public libraries? You have the power and ability to do so, plus it would be a tax write-off.
Whitney Grace, August 31, 2022
Brain Bias Keeps People From Accepting Facts
August 31, 2022
Humans are confusing creatures and one of their most puzzling actions is when they refuse to accept cold, hard facts when they are confronted with them. History is scorched with how false information has hindered progress or harmed individuals. Did someone mention the Spanish Inquisition? The Conversation explains how this might be a neurological function: “Cognitive Bias And Brain Biology Help Explain Why Facts Don’t Change Minds.”
CNN claims that once facts are established people will form opinions. The opposite is true, because humans form opinions based on emotion and often do not change when confronted with facts. Cognitive bias is one reason this happens:
“Partly to blame is a cognitive bias that can kick in when people encounter evidence that runs counter to their beliefs. Instead of reevaluating what they’ve believed up until now, people tend to reject the incompatible evidence. Psychologists call this phenomenon belief perseverance. Everyone can fall prey to this ingrained way of thinking.
Being presented with facts – whether via the news, social media or one-on-one conversations – that suggest their current beliefs are wrong causes people to feel threatened. This reaction is particularly strong when the beliefs in question are aligned with your political and personal identities. It can feel like an attack on you if one of your strongly held beliefs is challenged.”
Confrontation with facts can lead to a “backfire effect,” where people’s beliefs are strengthened. Then there’s confirmation bias, where people search for information that supports their claims.
Brain neurology can unfortunately work against people. Brains are wired to protect which reinforces beliefs and opinions. Brains release endorphins during pleasurable activities or stress hormones during negative ones. High-stress situations also release cortisol that hinders executive brain functions and puts you in a fight-or-flight mode. It is why it is so difficult to get out of an angry thought pattern.
You can train your mind to be open. The best way is to read a lot of books, review therapeutic mindfulness patterns, and get life experience. Also never forget to question everything!
Cognitive bias is a problem, but it also begs the question is who controls information? Whoever does control information can determine the outcome of many things. As smart software becomes more brain-like, will the system manifest bias? Hmmm. Let’s ask IBM Watson or better yet Dr. Timnit Gebru.
Whitney Grace, August 31, 2022
A US Government Classification Wowza!
August 30, 2022
I read “What’s in a Classified Document?” The title is interesting because it suggests that classified information is like a cook book. The contents of the cook book are “known”; that is, step-by-step information about making grilled chicken. The write up explains:
Breakdowns of the various levels of information classification are available online, but they’re not that helpful out of context.
That makes sense: No context, no or limited understanding.
The write up continues:
Most classified materials, however, just aren’t all that sexy at first glance.
I noted this statement:
Technical and scientific documents, for instance, are almost always highly valuable.
And this caught my eye:
One of the greatest risks is that an adversary will learn how we’ve discovered their secrets.
I also put a check mark by this sentence:
Finally, it’s important to understand that, in many cases, what’s classified is not a particular set of facts but what the intelligence community thinks those facts mean.
Looking at the information about secrets, I think the obvious statements are okay. The point to me is that old fashioned methods of enforcing secrecy are probably better than the methods in use today.
Unfortunately the Information wants to be free and the Sharing is caring ideas are not in line with my views. The message I take away from this write up is that beliefs, ideas, and procedures have been eroded in the last decade or so.
But I am a dinobaby. What do I know? Well, enough to point out that the apparatus of secrecy might be a useful project for someone not in the lobbying business, not a Beltway Bandit, and not an individual preparing a flight path as a consultant.
Stephen E Arnold, August 30, 2022
Data and Dining: Yum Yum
August 30, 2022
Food and beverage companies hire consultants like Mike Kostyo to predict what dishes will soon be gracing menus. HuffPost describes the flavorful profession in the piece, “This Food Trendologist Knows What We’ll Be Eating Before Anyone Else.” As one might expect, the job involves traveling to many places and sampling many cuisines. But it also means analyzing a trove of data. Who knew? Writer Emily Laurence tells us:
“Kostyo explained that declaring something a trend requires actual data; it’s not done willy-nilly. A lot of his job is spent analyzing data to prepare food trend reports he and his team put together a few times a year. Some brands and companies use these trend reports to determine products they may want to create. ‘We have our eyes on all sorts of possible trends, with dedicated folders for each. Any time we come across a piece of data or anecdotal evidence related to a possible trend, we add it to the designated folder,’ Kostyo said, explaining that this allows them to see how a trend is building over time (or if it fizzles out, never actually turning into one). For example, he said he and his team use a tool that gives them access to more than 100,000 menus across the country. ‘We can use this tool to see what types of appetizers have grown the fastest in the past few years or what ingredients are being used more,’ Kostyo said.”
We would be curious to see that presumably proprietary data tool. For clients, the accuracy of these predictions can mean the difference between celebrating a profitable quarter and handing out pink slips. See the write-up for how one gets into this profession, factors that can affect food trends, and what Kostyo predicts diners will swallow next.
Cynthia Murrell, August 30, 2022
A Surprise: Newton Minnow Was Prescient
August 30, 2022
Social media is to blame for most misinformation spreading across the Internet faster than viral videos. Despite declining numbers, TV still plays a huge part in the polarization of the American populace. Ars Technica explains why: “It’s Just Not Social Media: Cable News Has Bigger Effect On Polarization.” While social media echo chambers exist, it is not at the huge scale we have been led to believe.
Researchers from Microsoft Researchers, Stanford University, and the University of Pennsylvania tracked TV consumption from thousands of American adults between 2016 to 2019. They discovered that selective news exposure did increase polarization, but it mostly came from TV. They found that 17% of American TV news watchers are politically polarized with a near-split average between left and right politics. That is three to four times higher than online news watchers.
TV watchers also do not change their viewing habits:
“Besides being more politically siloed on average, our research found that TV news consumers are much more likely than web consumers to maintain the same partisan news diets over time: after six months, left-leaning TV audiences are 10 times more likely to remain segregated than left-leaning online audiences, and right-leaning audiences are 4.5 times more likely than their online counterparts. While these figures may seem intimidating, it is important to keep in mind that even among TV viewers, about 70 percent of right-leaning viewers and about 80 percent of left-leaning viewers do switch their news diets within six months. To the extent that long-lasting echo chambers do exist, then, they include only about 4 percent of the population.”
Also depending on the TV viewers’ political leanings, they never stray too far from preferred news networks. The political imbalance is increasing among how audiences get their news, because more are shifting from broadcast news to cable.
This is not good, because it increases divisions among people rather than showing the commonalities everyone shares. It also makes news more sensational than it needs to be.
Whitney Grace, August 30, 2022
EU: Ahead of the US But Maybe Too Late Again
August 30, 2022
When making up for decades of inaction, just create more bureaucracy. That seems to be the approach behind the move revealed in Reuters‘ brief article, “EU Mulls New Unit with Antitrust Veterans to Enforce Tech Rules—Sources.” The European Commission seems to think it might be difficult to force tech giants to comply with the recently passed Digital Markets Act (DMA). Now where would they get that idea? The write-up tells us:
“The landmark rules, agreed in March, will go into force next year. They will bar the companies from setting their own products as preferences, forcing app developers to use their payment systems, and leveraging users’ data to push competing services. The new directorate at the Commission’s powerful antitrust arm may be headed by Alberto Bacchiega, director of information, communication and media, in charge of antitrust and merger cases involving the tech, media and consumer electronics industries, one of the people [familiar with the matter] said. Bacchiega could also be assisted by Thomas Kramler, head of the unit dealing with antitrust cases in e-commerce and data economy, and currently spearheading investigations into Apple and Amazon, the person said. Both officials are already liasing with those at the Commission’s Directorate-General for Communications Networks, Content and Technology which will jointly enforce the DMA, a third person said.”
Conveniently, both Bacchiega and Kramler were away on vacation and could not be reached for comment. A spokesperson stated the Commission is shuffling employees, assigning about 80 staff members to enforce the DMA. We wonder whether that is enough to counter Big Tech’s corporate resources, even with a pair of seasoned antitrust veterans at the helm.
Cynthia Murrell, August 29, 2022
Google Management: If True, a New Term Gains Currency
August 29, 2022
Caste bias. That’s a bound phrase with which I was not familiar. I grew up in Illinois, and when I was a wee lad in Illinois by the river gently flowing, castes and biases were not on my radar. Flash forward 77 years, and the concept remains outside the lingo of some people who live in Harrod’s Creek, Kentucky.
“Google Scrapped a Talk on Caste Bias Because Some Employees Felt It Was “Anti Hindu”, if accurate, provides another glimpse of the Google’s difficult situation with regard to different ethnicities, religions and cults, and other factors which humanoids manifest.
The issue of management is a tricky one. Google, as I pointed out in The Google Legacy (Infonortics Ltd, 2004), Google is a company with non traditional management methods. These embraced settling an intellectual property misunderstanding with Yahoo related to advertising systems and methods, permitting a wide range of somewhat adolescent behaviors such as sleeping in bean bags and playing Foosball at work, and ignoring some of the more interesting behaviors super duper wizards demonstrate as part of their equipment for living.
The cited Quartz India article states:
“I cannot find the words to express just how traumatic and discriminatory Google’s actions were towards its employees and myself…” Soundararajan [the terminated speaker who is executive director of the US-based social justice organization Equality Labs] said in the press release.
The Google wizard charged with explaining the termination of the lecture allegedly said:
While noting that caste discrimination had “no place” at Google, Shannon Newberry, Google’s spokesperson, said in a statement to The Washington Post, “We also made the decision to not move forward with the proposed talk which—rather than bringing our community together and raising awareness—was creating division and rancor.”
Observations? I would like to offer three:
- Who in charge at the Google? Does this individual harbor some biases? My experience suggests that it is very difficult for an individual to step outside of the self and judge in an objective manner what behaviors could trigger such remarkable management decisions, explanations, and reversals.
- The lingo used to explain the incident strikes me as classic Sillycon Valley: A statement designed not to address the core issue.
- I wonder how Dr. Timnit Gebru interprets the management decision making for the allegedly true Quartz described incident.
Yep, just part of the Google Legacy. “Caste bias” plus accompanying Google babble in my opinion.
Stephen E Arnold, August 29, 2022
Google: Errors Are Not Possible… Mostly
August 29, 2022
In my upcoming talk for a US government law enforcement meeting, I talk about some of the issues associated with wonky smart software. I spotted a fantastic example of one quasi-alleged monopoly deals with tough questions about zippy technology.
As I understand “Google Refuses to Reinstate Man’s Account after He Took Medical Images of Son’s Groin,” an online ad company does not make errors… mostly. The article, which appeared in a UK newspaper, stated:
Google has refused to reinstate a man’s account after it wrongly flagged medical images he took of his son’s groin as child sexual abuse material…
The Alphabet Google YouTube DeepMind entity has sophisticated AI/ML (artificial intelligence/machine learning) systems which flag inappropriate content. Like most digital watch dogs, zeros and ones are flawless… mostly even though Google humans help out the excellent software. The article reports:
When the photos were automatically uploaded to the cloud, Google’s system identified them as CSAM. Two days later, Mark’s Gmail and other Google accounts, including Google Fi, which provides his phone service, were disabled over “harmful content” that was “a severe violation of the company’s policies and might be illegal”, the Times reported, citing a message on his phone. He later found out that Google had flagged another video he had on his phone and that the San Francisco police department opened an investigation into him. Mark was cleared of any criminal wrongdoing, but Google has said it will stand by its decision.
The cited article quotes a person from the US American Civil Liberty Union, offering this observation:
“These systems can cause real problems for people.”
Several observations:
- Google is confident its smart software works; thus, Google is correct in its position on this misunderstanding.
- The real journalists and the father who tried to respond to a medical doctor to assist his son are not Googley; that is, their response to the fabulous screening methods will not be able to get hired at the Alphabet Google YouTube Alphabet construct as full time employees or contractors.
- The online ad company and would be emulator or TikTok provides many helpful services. Those services allow the company to control information flows to help out everyone every single day.
- More color for this uplifting story can be found here.
Net net: Mother Google is correct… mostly. That’s why the Google timer is back online. Just click here. The company cares… mostly.
Stephen E Arnold, August 23, 2022
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
