Hot Take Resulting from Google Method
December 5, 2022
I read “Hot Take: Google Has a Company Strategy, Not a Product Strategy.” The write up explains that Google thinks like this:
Hire all the smart people and let them build. Hire all the smart people so they can’t work at a competitor. Hire all the smart people even if we don’t have something important for them to work on. Google acts like a venture capitalist, investing in promising people with the expectation that most will fail. They invest broadly in search of the idea that will deliver 100x. Let 1000 flowers bloom, and see which are the best.
You may agree or disagree with this statement. It is probably helpful if one has worked as an employee at Google or a consultant to the firm. But that does not stop Silicon Valley types from expressing their views of the world as information gleaned from an Egyptian ruler’s tomb.
I noted this statement in the comments to the article:
romwell said: Hot take: Google doesn’t have a strategy, period. Neither company, nor product.
In numerous articles and my monographs about Google, I have emphasized one point which, to me, encapsulates the company’s remarkable 25 year trajectory.
The firm made use of ideas developed at GoTo.com, Overture.com, and Yahoo.com. Those ideas converted Google from a mechanism for searching the content on the Web into a platform for advertising. By keeping one’s eye on the advertising ball, it’s clear that Alphabet YouTube Google DeepMind has been struggling to find a revenue winner.
Net net: As romwell said, “Google doesn’t have a strategy, period.” Had Yahoo not settled the court case for a $1 billion prior to the IPO, Google would have become another AllTheWeb.com, Lycos.com, or one of the many other outfits indexing problematic content.
Stephen E Arnold, December 5, 2022
Google: Is This Like a Radio Payola Event?
December 5, 2022
In a savvy marketing move, Google worked with iHeartMedia to have social media stars promote the Pixel 4. Just one problem—most of those paid to extoll the phone’s virtues had allegedly never used one. Engadget reports, “Google Sued by FTC and Seven States Over ‘Deceptive’ Pixel 4 Ads.” Writer Jon Fingas elaborates:
“Promos aired between 2019 and 2020 featured influencers that extolled the features of phones they reportedly didn’t own — Google didn’t even supply Pixels before most of the ads were recorded, officials said. iHeartMedia and 11 other radio networks ran the Pixel 4 ads in ten large markets. They aired about 29,000 times. It’s not clear how many people listened to the commercials. The FTC aims to bar Google and iHeartMedia from making any future misleading claims about ownership. It also asks both companies to prove their compliance through reports. The states, including Arizona, California, Georgia, Illinois, Massachusetts, New York and Texas, have also issued judgments demanding the firms pay $9.4 million in penalties.”
A Google spokesperson hastened to explain the company had settled with only six of the seven states. Oh is that all? Fingas reminds us phone companies have a habit of misrepresentation, from presenting stock DSLR photos as taken with their cameras to, yes, celebrities pretending to use their phones. He writes:
“However, the accusations here are more serious. The FTC and participating states are contending that Google set out to use false testimonials. It had a ‘blatant disrespect’ for truth-in-ads rules, according to FTC consumer protection director Samuel Levine. While the punishment is tiny compared to the antitrust penalties Google has faced so far, it could damage trust in the company’s campaigns for newer Pixels and other hardware.”
Perhaps. But are consumers paying attention?
Cynthia Murrell, December 5, 2022
Study Concludes Apple Privacy Promises a Sham, Lawsuit Follows
December 2, 2022
Apple would have us believe it is a bastion of privacy protection. Though it talks a good game, Techdirt reports, “Apple Sued After Another Study Finds Its Well-Hyped Privacy Standards Are Often Theatrical.” Researchers at software firm Mysk found Apple’s data tracking basically ignores privacy settings altogether. The study prompted a lawsuit (pdf) under the California Invasion of Privacy Act. Write Karl Bode notes:
“This isn’t the first time Apple’s new privacy features have been found to be a bit lacking. Several studies have also indicated that numerous app makers have been able to simply tap dancing around Apple’s heavily hyped do not track restrictions for some time, often without any penalty by Apple months after being contacted by reporters. That’s a notably different story than the one Apple has gotten many press outlets to tell. Apple desperately wants to differentiate its brand by a dedication to privacy (as you might have noticed from the endless billboards that simply say: ‘Privacy. That’s iPhone.’). And while the company may certainly be better on privacy than many other large tech giants, that’s simply not saying much.”
Good point. The lawsuit observes that details about app usage can be “intimate and potentially embarrassing.” Not to mention financially sensitive. This is why some of us have refused to bring our devices into every aspect of our lives; a suspicious nature pays off occasionally. Yep, Apple privacy… a bit lacking. No kidding?
Cynthia Murrell, December 2, 2022
Elephants Recognize One Another and When They Stomp Around, Grass Gets Trampled
December 1, 2022
I find the coverage of the Twitter, Apple, and Facebook hoe down a good example of self serving and possibly dysfunctional behavior.
What caught my attention in the midst of news about a Tim Apple and the Musker was this story “Zuckerberg Says Apple’s Policies Not Sustainable.” The write up reports as actual factual:
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg on Wednesday (November 30, 2022) added to the growing chorus of concerns about Apple, arguing that it’s “problematic that one company controls what happens on the device.” … Zuckerberg has been one of the loudest critics of Apple in Silicon Valley for the past two years. In the wake of Elon Musk’s attacks on Apple this week (third week of November 2022) , his concerns are being echoed more broadly by other industry leaders and Republican lawmakers….”I think the problem is that you get into it with the platform control, is that Apple obviously has their own interests…
Ah, Facebook with its interesting financial performance partially a result of Apple’s unilateral actions is probably not an objective observer. What about the Facebook Cambridge Analytic matter? Ancient history.
Much criticism is directed at the elected officials in the European Union for questioning the business methods of American companies. The interaction of Apple, Facebook, and Twitter will draw more attention to the management methods, the business procedures, and the motivation behind some words and deeds.
If I step back from the flood of tweets, Silicon Valley “real” news, and oracular (possibly self congratulatory write ups from conference organizers) what do I see:
- Activities illustrating what happens in a Wild West business environment
- Personalities looming larger than the ethical issues intertwined with their revenue generation methods
- Regulatory authorities’ inaction creating genuine concern among users, business partners, and employees.
Elephants can stomp around. Even when the beasts mean well, their sheer size puts smaller entities at risk. The shenanigans of big creatures are interesting. Are these creatures of magnitude sustainable or a positive for the datasphere? My view? Nope.
Stephen E Arnold, December 1, 2022
AI: Opaqueness ‘R Us Unless You Are Special
December 1, 2022
Humans design and make AI. Because humans design and make AI, we should know how they work. For some reason, humans do not know how AI works. Motherboard on Vice explains that, “Scientists Increasingly Can’t Explain How AI Works.” AI researchers are worried that AI developers focus too much on the end results of an algorithm than how and why it arrives at said results.
In other words, developers cannot explain how an AI algorithm works. AI algorithms are built from layers and layers of deep neural networks (DNNs). These networks are designed to replicate human neural pathways. They are almost like real neural pathways, because neurologists are unaware of how the entire brain works and AI developers do not know how AI algorithms work. AI developers are concerned with the inputs and outputs, but the in-between is the mythical black box. Because AI developers do not worry about how they receive the outputs, they cannot explain why they receive biased, polluted results.
“‘If all we have is a ‘black box’, it is impossible to understand causes of failure and improve system safety,’ Roman V. Yampolskiy, a professor of computer science at the University of Louisville, wrote in his paper titled “Unexplainability and Incomprehensibility of Artificial Intelligence.” ‘Additionally, if we grow accustomed to accepting AI’s answers without an explanation, essentially treating it as an Oracle system, we would not be able to tell if it begins providing wrong or manipulative answers.’”
It sounds like the Schrödinger’s cat of black boxes.
Developers’ results are driven by tight deadlines and small budgets so they concentrate on accuracy over explainability. Algorithms are also (supposedly) more accurate than humans, so it is easy to rely on them. Making the algorithms less biased is another black box, especially when the Internet is skewed one way:
“Debiasing the datasets that AI systems are trained on is near impossible in a society whose Internet reflects inherent, continuous human bias. Besides using smaller datasets, in which developers can have more control in deciding what appears in them, experts say a solution is to design with bias in mind, rather than feign impartiality.”
Couldn’t training an algorithm be like teaching a pet to do tricks with positive reinforcement? What would an algorithm consider a treat?
Whitney Grace, December 1, 2022
This Is Not About Message Bubbles. We Want Cash, Suggests Apple
November 30, 2022
Telegram is an encrypted message service that has avoided paying Apple fees, but according to TechRadar that has come to an end: “Telegram Forced To Crack Down On Paid Posts Because Apple Wasn’t Getting A Cut.”
Telegram used to allow users to set up paid content posts with third-party payment bots. This allowed content creators to avoid paying Apple’s fees and their fans paid them directly. Content creators received close to 100% of their fans’ donations without sending a chunk to Apple. Unfortunately, Apple wants its 30% and Telegram is forced to comply. If Telegram does not comply with Apple, then it will be removed from the App Store.
Apple has a monopoly in the app market and even other tech giants, like Elon Musk and Spotify, are saying 30% is too much. South Korea passed a law that allowed content creators to use third-party payment services other than Apple:
“You have the likes of Spotify calling the tech giant “anti-competitive” because of App Store rules that make buying an audiobook overly complicated. Newfound Twitter wrangler Elon Musk said back in May that 30 percent is “10 times higher than it should be” and South Korea thought so, too. Last year, the nation passed a law forcing Apple and Google to allow developers to use third-payment systems and not pay the hefty tax.”
Apple does not care that it charges 30%, because they have a monopoly and all its decisions are unilateral. That is what happens when they use an OS other than Windows.
Whitney Grace, November 30, 2022
Microsoft Fancy Dances When Activision Plays a Tune
November 29, 2022
In order to convince the European Commission it should be allowed to acquire Activision Blizzard, Microsoft is sampling some humble pie. Android Authority reports, “Microsoft Admits Xbox vs PlayStation War Is Over and It Lost.” Write Ryan McNeal tells us:
“The EU’s European Commission has announced in a press release that it has opened up an in-depth investigation into Microsoft’s proposed acquisition of Activision Blizzard. This investigation was activated after the proposed deadline EU regulators set back in September when the deal was first being looked into. According to the press release, the new inquiry now has 90 working days — until March 23, 2023 — to make a decision. The Commission claims that it is concerned Microsoft’s acquisition could upset the balance in the market, causing a reduction in competition.”
Specifically, the commission suspects Microsoft might make successful PlayStation games like “Call of Duty” into Xbox-only titles. Heavens no, the company insists, it promises to make games available on both platforms simultaneously. This is all about giving the people greater access to games, a representative asserts. And here we thought it was all about creating a distraction. McNeal continues:
“Since the first time it hit a snag with European regulators, Microsoft has attempted to utilize an underdog strategy to delegitimize Sony’s arguments against the deal. In response to today’s investigation announcement, Microsoft attempted to drive that talking point home by admitting that Sony is the market leader.”
Will this self-effacing logic work? We should find out by the end of March. Nota bene: Our team thinks that the push for Activision was possibly a way to deflect attention from some interesting Microsoft security issues. Games are big money, but the issue of Teams in Microsoft 365 may be an even more sensitive issue.
Cynthia Murrell, November 29, 2022
The Collision of Nation State Bias and High School Science Club Management
November 28, 2022
CNN offered some interesting pictures of the labor management misunderstanding in Zhengzhou, China. Even though I have been to China several times, I was not sure what made Zengzhou different from other “informed” cities struggling with what may be an ill-advised approach to Covid. In fact, the images of law enforcement and disgruntled individuals are not particularly unique. These images are more interesting when a blurry background of Apple and a Taiwanese company add a touch of chiaroscuro to the scenes.
What is interesting is that “Apple Has a Huge Problem with an iPhone Factory in China” mentions the “Taiwan contract manufacturing firm Foxconn.” CNN, however, does not offer any information about the involvement of individuals who want to create issues for Foxconn. China and Taiwan sort of coexist, but I am not certain that the Chinese provincial government either in Henan or the national government in Beijing are particularly concerned about what happens to either Apple of Foxconn.
The fact that workers suddenly became upset suggests that I have to exercise a willing suspension of disbelief and assume the dust up was spontaneous. Sorry, a “Hey, this just happened because of pay” or some similar dismissive comment won’t make me feel warm and fuzzy.
The write up asserts:
The Zhengzhou campus has been grappling with a Covid outbreak since mid-October that caused panic among its workers. Videos of people leaving Zhengzhou on foot went viral on Chinese social media in early November, forcing Foxconn to step up measures to get its staff back…. But on Tuesday [November 22, 2022] night, hundreds of workers, mostly new hires, began to protest against the terms of the payment packages offered to them and also about their living conditions. Scenes turned increasingly violent into the next day as workers clashed with a large number of security forces. By Wednesday [November 23] evening, the crowds had quieted, with protesters returning to their dormitories on the Foxconn campus after the company offered to pay the newly recruited workers 10,000 yuan ($1,400), or roughly two months of wages, to quit and leave the site altogether.
Seems straightforward. A confluence of issues culminated in a protest.
Now let’s think about the issue this way. These are my working hypotheses.
First, Foxconn may not perceive the complaints of its employees as important. Sure, the factory workers have to do their job, but these are Chinese factory workers. Foxconn has a Taiwan spin. This may translate into Chinese government passivity. Let the Taiwan managers deal with the problems.
Second, Apple is a US outfit and it embraces some of the tenets of the high school science club management method. The kernel of the HSSCMM is that science club members know best. Others do not; therefore, if something is not on the radar of the science club, that “something” is irrelevant, silly, or just plain annoying.
Third, the workers have some awareness of the financial resources of Foxconn and Apple. Thus, like workers from an Apple store to the quiet halls of the Apple core spaceship, money talks.
Fourth, Covid. Yep, not going away it seems.
What happens when China is not too interested in Foxconn, Foxconn is not too interested in Chinese workers, and Apple is busy inventing ways to prevent people from upgrading the Mac computers?
That’s what CNN understands. Protests, clashes, and violence. Toss in some Covid fear and one has the exciting story for consumers of CNN “real” news.
Is there are fix? For China and its attitude to Taiwanese businesses which allegedly exploit Chinese workers, sure. I won’t explore that solution. For Foxconn, sure, but it will take time for Foxconn to de-China its production operations. For Apple, not really. The company will follow the logic of the science club: Find some people who will work for less.
Net net: Apple and its HSSCMM will probably not find too many fans in the Middle Kingdom. And Foxconn? Do China and Apple care? Apple cares about money. China cares about the Middle Kingdom. Foxconn cares about what? Building plants in the US… soon?
Stephen E Arnold, November 28, 2022
Apple, What Does Significant Mean?
November 28, 2022
It is not a secret that advertising fees generate a large amount of profit on the Internet and they are increasing like rabbits in spring. Nobody likes dealing with ads, but big tech companies do not care because they only want to increase their bottom line. While Apple has revamped how ads are viewed in its App Store, 9 To 5 Mac says, “Report: Apple Currently Doesn’t Plan To ‘Significantly’ Increase Number Of Ads On iPhone.”
While Apple is currently satisfied with its net revenue from ads, there have been plans since 2018 to place more advertising on features in its products. Spotlight search was supposed to include ads, but that never happened. It appears that some Apple employees empathize with consumers:
“The report covers the tension of Apple product experience and advertising, describing an “antipathy” that some employees have toward the ad group. The Information says even some members of the ad team raised concerns with leadership that Apple was going too far. This is perhaps one reason why the plan to launch ads in Spotlight did not go ahead.”
App developers lashed back at Apple with the new changes to the App Store’s ad spots, because there were too many scams and gambling ads that appeared. Apple has paused showing certain controversial ad categories.
Apple has also angered third-party ad networks, because of its App Tacking Transparency policy that allows users to opt-out of sharing their personal information. User data is the key component in making the digital advertising world go round and the policy is viewed as Apple’s way to eliminate competition.
Apple continues to leverage its products and their features to build ad revenue. There are plans to add them to the Maps, Books, and Podcast apps. Ads might not appear on the iOS main screen yet, but given “significant” time it could happen.
Whitey Grace, November 28, 2022
Management Follies: High School Science Clubism at Scale!
November 22, 2022
Several years ago, I floated the idea of a “high school science club management method.” A big time “real” journalist said, “That’s wrong. There is a bro mafia management style.”
I said, “Yeah, you are right. I paid the coffee bill and vamoosed. I wanted to bide my time until I had a few rock solid cases of the HSSCMM or high school science club management method. I am speaking from experience because I was in my high school science club. I was one of the three musketeers who liberated the morning public address announcement with Jerry Lee Lewis’ “Great Balls of Fire.”
Yep, a half century ago a band of merry teens (both young men and a couple of young women) met weekly to do science like the PA address thing. Why? I have given this great thought over the last 64 years, and here are the three main reasons we pursued our high value projects.
- We believed that we were special because we earned top grades, accrued honors (one of our club’s members published a short article in a peer-reviewed astronomy journal and yours truly had a story published in the St. Louis Post Dispatch for which I was paid $10. Net net: We thought we were really smart.
- We believed that we knew exactly what to do in any circumstance life in a Midwestern corn and factory town could plop in our path. We have confidence, which I now understand is near fatal hubris.
- We conducted ourselves as if our world was the one, true world: Math, science, logic, etc. etc.
Over the years, I have interacted with a wide range of companies. I have watched the HSSCMM move from the weird world of immature and naïve teens into the mainstream of business, leadership, and — dare I say it — techno worship.
Now back to the real journalist dismissing HSSCMM. That bright individual was incorrect. The HSSCMM is the driving force of several fascinating business dramas now unfolding in real time. These are real people (still locked in the teen year immaturity hormone rush), and having a profound impact on families, children, culture, and the way people perceive the world.
Let’s take a look at the three modern dramas, which if we were in Athens in 440 BCE, would be the stuff for the modern version of Oedipus at Colonus called “Dorks of Silicon Valley” or a bop variant of Women of Trachis named “Bros of Business.”
The first is the Twitter hellscape and the space Karen calling the shots with HSSCMM spins. A Silicon Valley infused article in the Verge provides basic information of a consequence of an informed management decision. To keep the story short, lots of people are just quitting. So the lead Tweeter is shutting down the company for a cou8ple of days. Brilliant cost savings and publicity in one fell swoop. That’s a hallmark of the HSSCMM: Act without considering consequences.
The second is the FTX thing. The estimable Bloomberg has covered the story with slightly more thoroughness than the news organization did its story about fiddled motherboards. I am not going to review this case example because I am not sure about what’s fact and what’s fiction. It does seem as though adding some chemical compounds to a mathematical experiment produced consequential results. Ah, who lost their retirement savings? Too bad. The events appear to follow a path my science club took when we poured calcium carbine and concentrated hydrochloric acid into a lab table drain. Yep, someone ignited the resulting gas. Exciting and no one got expelled.
The third is the Amazon termination of a mere 10,000 humanoids. You can get a sense of what goes into a brilliant and logical decision to cut costs in a recent CNBC report. The reality is the science club or Amazon carpetland. Those not walking on squishy floor coverings cannot be expected to understand. A basic precept of the HSSCMM is that no one in the science club really, really cares.
I am tempted to step back and offer a few thoughts about the broader implications of allowing the HSSCMM to dominate a major part of current business. I won’t. If you read some of the 12,000 posts we have published in Beyond Search since 2008, you can figure out that the fixes are going to be difficult because no one wants to confront the naïve teener mentality which has implemented businesses which leave scorched earth and burned lives.
Yapping and hand waving won’t solve the problem. I am too old to care. I won’t even remind the big time “real” journalist that it is HSSCMM, not bro stuff.
Stephen E Arnold, November 22, 2022
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
