Blue Chip Outfits: Clumsy Cheaters?
March 1, 2022
I read that one of the big blue chip accounting / consulting firms revealed the jib of its ethical sails. The information appears in “PwC Fined Over Exam Cheating Involving 1,100 of Its Auditors.” [You will have to pay to read this interesting “real” news report.] I learned from the odd orange newspaper:
PwC Canada has been fined more than $900,000 by Canadian and US accounting regulators over exam cheating involving 1,100 of its auditors. The watchdogs found that the Big Four firm failed to spot that staff were sharing answers in exams between 2016 and 2020 because of shortcomings in its internal standards and test supervision.
What does this suggest about the notion of “quality,” “oversight,” and “integrity” when these words are applied to a blue chip outfit like PwC? PwC says on its About Us page:
Our values define the expectations we have for working with each other and our clients. Although we come from different backgrounds and cultures across the firm, our values are what we have in common. They capture our shared aspirations and expectations, and guide how we make decisions and treat others—they’re what makes us, us.
Does this mean this is the logic used at PwC: We cheat and obviously are likely to perform just about any action because of “shortcomings” in standards? Is the logic, “Well, McKinsey did the opioid work, so we help 1,100 whiz kids ace an examination.” Is this the lesser of two possible inappropriate blue chip thought processes?
Keep in mind that when PwC “discovered” the cheating, the company “immediately opened an internal investigation.” So it is now 2022 and the question, “How long has PwC been cheating?” remains unanswered.
Stephen E Arnold, March 1, 2022
Stephen E Arnold,
Bloomberg and the Japan Times on the Plight of Man: A TikTok Video to Come?
February 18, 2022
I read “‘Sapiens’? Humans Aren’t Wise, Just Too Smart for Our Own Good.” Bloomberg is the firm providing the trading system to many of Wall Street’s brightest minds. Japan is the country which has created the management actions of Toshiba and the Toyota subscription to remote starting. What I noted in the write up was this passage:
The late B.K.S. Iyengar, a yogi, once said that intelligence, like money, is a good servant but a bad master. Even science has explored why and how smart people can be so foolish. In a nutshell, it comes down to a cocktail of egocentrism, narcissism and arrogance that overpowers everything else — or what the ancient Greeks called hubris.
From the assertion that spy chips were on motherboards to ways to make life interesting for automobile owners, it is interesting to think about hubris. And the yogi. Was he talking about those who think technology solves mankind’s problems?
Stephen E Arnold, February 18, 2022
What Does Go Bro Suggest for Software?
January 26, 2022
Traditionally IT workers and sports fans are traditionally represented by the stereotypical portrayals of nerds and jocks. The jocks are very buff, popular individuals while nerd are smart, socially awkward people. Since the advancement of computer science, the Internet, and videogames, the stereotypes have eroded. ReadWrite explains how the jock and nerd chasm is smaller in, “Why Software Product Development Is The Ultimate Team Sport.”
Teamwork is essential to a successful IT department and/or company. It is extremely important for software product development. Contrary to popular conceptions, programmers and their teams do not isolate themselves. Instead Programmers are part of a dynamic team effort comparable to how professional sports teams are managed.
Software product development teams should be carefully built and be allowed to discover their own work rapport:
“To a large extent, these teams should be able to work free of bureaucracy and politics, focusing entirely on the product at hand. To do that, the other stakeholders need to collaborate to ensure teams have the guidance, resources, and time they need to work with a high degree of independence.
Just as important as assembling the constituent parts and letting them operate autonomously is finding the right fit between them. Teams obviously need to have the right combination of skills to turn the software product development process into a functional, finished product. But they also need the right mix of personalities, clear roles for everyone involved, a cohesive leadership structure, and effective communication channels.”
Similar to sports teams, software development groups need to adapt to uncut, overcome persistent obstacles, create meaningful innovation, overcoming persistent obstacles, being able to repeat success. These are all situations that not only sports and software teams handle, but also all teams in all industries.
Whitney Grace, January 26, 2022
DarkCyber for January 18, 2022 Now Available : An Interview with Dr. Donna M. Ingram
January 18, 2022
The fourth series of DarkCyber videos kicks off with an interview. You can view the program on YouTube at this link. Dr. Donna M. Ingram is the author of a new book titled “Help Me Learn Statistics.” The book is available on the Apple ebook store and features interactive solutions to the problems used to reinforce important concepts explained in the text. In the interview, Dr. Ingram talks about sampling, synthetic data, and a method to reduce the errors which can creep into certain analyses. Dr. Ingram’s clients include financial institutions, manufacturing companies, legal subrogration customers, and specialized software companies.
Kenny Toth, January 18, 2022
The Use Case for Digital Currency
January 12, 2022
A question I have been asked by those in my law enforcement lectures is, “What’s digital currency good for?” This question is easy to answer, and I think the officers in my sessions know the answer. The question is designed to elicit my opinion as a student of intelware. The former world chess champion Gary Kasparov says that crypto means freedom. Why? Math protects you.
Okay, but the answer I give is, “Criminal activity.”
Sure, one can gild the lily and say that digital currency offers an alternative to traditional legal tender. Digital currency is a way to work around the traditional banking system. Digital currency is a way to automate many financial transactions via smart contracts.
The reality is that digital currency solves one big problem for bad actors: Keeping otherwise noticeable financial transactions less visible to government entities and financial institutions.
What’s the factual basis for my view?
Navigate to “Crypto Crime Trends for 2022: Illicit Transaction Activity Reaches All-Time High in Value, All-Time Low in Share of All Cryptocurrency Activity.” Here’s the relevant statement:
Cryptocurrency-based crime hit a new all-time high in 2021, with illicit addresses receiving $14 billion over the course of the year, up from $7.8 billion in 2020.
The write up adds:
Cryptocurrency usage is growing faster than ever before. Across all cryptocurrencies tracked by Chainalysis, total transaction volume grew to $15.8 trillion in 2021, up 567% from 2020’s totals. Given that roaring adoption, it’s no surprise that more cybercriminals are using cryptocurrency. But the fact that the increase was just 79% — nearly an order of magnitude lower than overall adoption — might be the biggest surprise of all.
The answer to the question, in my opinion, is, “Criminal activity.”
Stephen E Arnold, January 11, 2022
The Fast Descent to Mediocrity Revealed
January 12, 2022
I read “Google’s Director of Engineering Hiring Test.” I love these inside looks at what Google thinks is important to the company’s success. I email several questions from the decades of GLAT to a Fancy Dan financial whiz. He was unable to make sense of any of the wonky questions. Since the whiz kid and Google are wallowing in financial oceans filled with molecules of money, I am not sure there is much value in certain types of smart filters.
Tucked into the questions and answers, however, is considerable insight into what the company thinks is funny like the GLAT or why a firm is accelerating its ski slope ride to meh. Here’s the statement that caught my attention:
Hiring people that know things that you don’t know helps more than hiring people who merely know what everybody knows.
My hunch is that the issues at Google — for instance, the new phone that doesn’t do phone stuff — is an example of making assumptions about what’s right. Apply this to super duper automated content indexing for machine learning training sets and what happens? Perhaps you get a variation of the phones that don’t do phone stuff? Smart software may end up learning what it already knows. Great for cost reduction but not so great for finding one’s way through a snow storm near Tahoe.
Stephen E Arnold, January 12, 2022
Amazon: Emulating the Big Apple
December 23, 2021
I love the idea that giant technology companies operate in a space untethered from too many conventions, regulatory constraints, and ethical meshes. Apple I have heard entered into a two-buck deal with China. Okay, okay, the dollar amount was closer to US$ 3 billion. What’s the big deal?
Now it seems that Amazon has channeled its inner apple core. “Amazon Partnered with China Propaganda Arm” reports in a truthy and trustworthy way:
That [once confidential Amazon] briefing document, and interviews with more than two dozen people who have been involved in Amazon’s China operation, reveal how the company has survived and thrived in China by helping to further the ruling Communist Party’s global economic and political agenda, while at times pushing back on some government demands. In a core element of this strategy, the internal document and interviews show, Amazon partnered with an arm of China’s propaganda apparatus to create a selling portal on the company’s U.S. site, Amazon.com – a project that came to be known as China Books. The venture – which eventually offered more than 90,000 publications for sale – hasn’t generated significant revenue. But the document shows that it was seen by Amazon as crucial to winning support in China as the company grew its Kindle electronic-book device, cloud-computing and e-commerce businesses.
Is it a surprise that China’s ruling elite told the dog outside the online bookstore to bite the digital hand of any human or bot daring to give a very special book a bad review.
What is the book, one might ask? It appears that the instant best seller and biographical high water mark is “Xi Jinping: The Governance of China.
The answer, one supposes, is money. The truthy and trustworthy report says:
Amazon Web Services, or AWS, is now one of the largest providers to Chinese companies globally, according to a report this year by analysis firm iResearch in China, and people who have worked for AWS.
Gee, Leader Xi can ping Amazon and Apple any time he chooses. Let’s make a TikTok on a mobile and a desktop too while dining at a TikTok restaurant. Endangered animal stir fry, anyone? It is called Kung Pao Democracy I think.
Stephen E Arnold, December 23, 2021
Meta Mark Gets an F from the British Medical Journal
December 20, 2021
I don’t know anything about Covid, medical data, or Facebook. I do recognize a failing “mark” when I see one. I noted “Researcher Blows the Whistle on Data Integrity Issues…” [Note: the editor has trimmed certain stop words because trigger warning software is a fascinating part of life these days.’’]
The Harvard drop out who has garnered a few dollars via a “friend”, “like”, and “social online” service is unlikely to be personally affected by the big red F.
The write up states:
We are aware that The BMJ is not the only high quality information provider to have been affected by the incompetence of Meta’s fact checking regime. To give one other example, we would highlight the treatment by Instagram (also owned by Meta) of Cochrane, the international provider of high quality systematic reviews of the medical evidence.[3] Rather than investing a proportion of Meta’s substantial profits to help ensure the accuracy of medical information shared through social media, you have apparently delegated responsibility to people incompetent in carrying out this crucial task. Fact checking has been a staple of good journalism for decades. What has happened in this instance should be of concern to anyone who values and relies on sources such as The BMJ. We hope you will act swiftly: specifically to correct the error relating to The BMJ’s article and to review the processes that led to the error; and generally to reconsider your investment in and approach to fact checking overall.
I was disappointed to see the letter’s close; that is, “best wishes.” A more British expression could have been “Excuse me.” But excusing a stupid “mark” is impolite.
Stephen E Arnold, December 20, 2021
Scientific Research Might Not Work The Second Time Around or the First Time Either
December 20, 2021
Scientific research is one way humanity advances, but Science Alert brings into question if studies’ results can be replicated: “Strenuous 8-Year Effort To Replicate Key Cancer Research Finds An Unwelcome Surprise.” Common sense and the scientific process tells that if results cannot be replicated a second time, then they are not going to work. Cancer research is facings a stigma about scientific studies being replicated:
“The research looked at 193 different experiments found in 53 cancer-related papers published in high-profile journals between 2010 and 2012, and found that none of the experiments could be set up again using only the information published. After getting help from the original study authors, 50 experiments from 23 papers were reproduced.
That only a quarter of the experiments could be rerun at all is concerning – some of the original authors never responded to requests for help – but the results showed that these reproduced tests showed effect sizes that were often smaller than what the original studies yielded.”
The findings of the replicated studies discovered that the evidence was weaker than the original experiments. This does not mean that findings are false, but further testing is needed. Furthermore, time, money, and resources are wasted in clinical trials on patients where drugs do not affect diseases. Demands for results shape cancer biology and other scientific research.
These mounting pressures hinder scientific research and delay eventual cancer cures. There is a saying, “Art for art’s sake,” so why cannot there not be “Research for research’s sake” in order to advance science? Plus one can make up data, fiddle the results, or contact colleagues for some STM SEO goodness.
Whitney Grace, December 20, 2021
Right or Wrong to Be Forgotten?
December 2, 2021
While it is still possible to disappear, it is nearly impossible to forget some past mistakes. In 2014, the Court of Justice of the European Union recognized the “right to be forgotten.” The Irish Times reported that Google has something to say on that law, “Google Should Not Get A Say In What Is To Be Forgotten.”
The EU Court of Justice ruled in favor of the “right to be forgotten” against Google’s Spanish subsidiary by Spain’s data protection agency AEPD and a Spanish citizen. The right to be forgotten forces Google to delist information in searches, but the AEPD argued it was in the public’s benefit for information to remain listed.
The biggest issue in question is the current case of the Quinn family against the Irish Bank Resolution Corporation. Should information related to ongoing litigation and national economic concern be removed from the Internet? There is an even bigger question:
“The more fundamental issue which these delistings have drawn attention to, however, is the power of a private company to decide when, and whether, an individual’s right to be forgotten can be enforced. At present, right-to-be-forgotten claims (such as those made in the Quinn case) are considered and decided on by employees of the search-engine operators to whom the request is made. While these search engines publish annual transparency reports which include statistics about how many right-to-be-forgotten applications are made – and how many are successful – these reports do not detail the content of the decisions in right-to-be-forgotten cases – or the factors used in reaching those decisions. The result is that private companies have the power not only to delist articles but to do so based on their own assessment of whether a legitimate right-to-be-forgotten claim exists, what public interest, if any, would require the item to continue appearing in search results, and how to balance any public interest with the data-protection rights of the requesting party.”
There are very few guidelines about how “right to be forgotten” law is applied. Private companies determine who has the right, but how and why do they make that decision?
It sounds like another case of where the present is going to make the standard by which the future will abide.
Whitney Grace, November December 2, 2021
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
