Misunderstanding a Zuck Move
February 4, 2022
I read some posts — for instance, “Facebook Just Had Its Most Disappointing Quarter Ever. Mark Zuckerberg’s Response Is the 1 Thing No Leader Should Ever Do” — suggesting that Mark Zuckerberg is at fault for his company’s contrarian financial performance. The Zucker move is a standard operating procedure in a high school science club. When caught with evidence of misbehavior, in my high school science club in 1958, we blamed people in the band. We knew that blaming a mere athlete would result in a difficult situation in the boys’ locker room.
Thus it is obvious that the declining growth, the rise of the Chinese surveillance video machine, and the unfriended Tim Apple are responsible for which might be termed a zuck up. If this reminds you of a phrase used to characterize other snarls like the IRS pickle, you are not thinking the way I am. A “zuck up” is a management action which enables the world to join together. Think of the disparate groups who can find fellow travelers; for example, insecure teens who need mature guidance.
I found this comment out of step with the brilliance of the lean in behavior of Mr. Zuckerberg:
Ultimately, you don’t become more relevant by pointing to your competitors and blaming them for your performance. That’s the one thing no company–or leader–should ever do.
My reasoning is that Mr. Zuckerberg is a manipulator, a helmsman, if you will. Via programmatic methods, he achieved a remarkable blend of human pliability and cash extraction. He achieved success by clever disintermediation of some of his allegedly essential aides de camp. He achieved success by acquiring competitors and hooking these third party mechanisms into the Facebook engine room. He dominated because he understood the hot buttons of Wall Street.
I expect the Zuck, like the mythical phoenix (not the wonderful city in Arizona) to rise from the ashes of what others perceive as a failure. What the Zuck will do is use the brilliant techniques of the adolescent wizards in a high school science club to show “them” who is really smart.
Not a zuck up.
Stephen E Arnold, February 4, 2022
Cloud Computing: Is There a Free Lunch Paid for by Amazon, Google, and Microsoft?
February 3, 2022
What have those cloud computing giants done for organizations lately? Here are some thought starters:
- Argued that it is better, faster, and cheaper to outsource anything involving computing to the fluffy clouds?
- Pushed for low code and no code solutions so that anyone can create applications and not get involved with expensive, unreliable, and uncooperative technical employees who don’t understand what an MBA or art history major needs now?
- Offered free or low cost entry fees which bedazzle the customer who is unable to see the telecommunications-style pricing methods like “cross a threshold and pay twice the cost stated on Schedule C, subparagraph 4”?
- A false narrative about ease of use, the reliability of pre-packaged data sets, and off-the-shelf components anyone can configure while waiting for a latte at a Starbuck’s in Normal, Illinois?
Enough questions. Read “More Than a Third of Firms Hit by Unexpected Cloud Costs.” Here’s a sentence from the write up which I found interesting:
Lack of transparency among providers is consistently cited as a problem.
Is this a nice way of saying, “These cloud people are doing the Theranos thing?”
Do you answer yes or no? Companies have difficulty hiring, retaining, and managing technology people. Costs for technology are often uncontrollable by traditional mechanisms crafted in less-illuminated times. Sales are easy because some organizations are believing what the cloud vendors say.
I am in the yes camp.
Stephen E Arnold, February 2, 2022
Synthetic Data: The Future Because Real Data Is Too Inefficient
January 28, 2022
One of the biggest problems with AI advancement is the lack of comprehensive datasets. AI algorithms use datasets to learn how to interpret and understand information. The lack of datasets has resulted in biased aka faulty algorithms. The most notorious examples are “racist” photo recognition or light sensitivity algorithms that are unable to distinguish dark skin tones. VentureBeat shares that a new niche market has sprung up: “Synthetic Data Platform Mostly AI Lands $25M.”
Mostly AI is an Austria startup that specializes in synthetic data for AI model testing and training. The company recently acquired $25 million in funding from Molten Ventures with plans to invest the funds to accelerate the industry. Mostly AI plans to hire more employees, create unbiased algorithms, and increase their presence in Europe and North America.
It is difficult for AI developers to roundup comprehensive datasets, because of privacy concerns. There is tons of data available for AI got learn from, but it might not be anonymous and it could be biased from the get go.
Mostly AI simulates real datasets by replicating the information for data value chains but removing the personal data points. The synthetic data is described as “good as the real thing” without violating privacy laws. The synthetic data algorithm works like other algorithms:
“The solution works by leveraging a state-of-the-art generative deep neural network with an in-built privacy mechanism. It learns valuable statistical patterns, structures, and variations from the original data and recreates these patterns using a population of fictional characters to give out a synthetic copy that is privacy compliant, de-biased, and just as useful as the original dataset – reflecting behaviors and patterns with up to 99% accuracy.”
Mostly AI states that their platform also accelerates the time it takes to access the datasets. They claim their technology reduces the wait time by 90%.
Demands for synthetic data are growing as the AI industry burgeons and there is a need for information to advance the technology. Efficient, acceptable error rates, objective methods: What could go wrong?
Whitney Grace, January 27, 2022
Darktrace: He Said, She Said, and Probably They Said Too
January 20, 2022
The high flying cyber security sector suffered a headache when the SolarWinds’ misstep was disclosed. Since that time, the mass media have started paying attention to what a year or two ago was the content discussed at cyber security conferences and workshops. Now, everyone including most US government agencies, hundreds of start ups, and probably a grandmother or two in a Golden Years Long Term Care facility are talking about cyber security, ransomware, bad actors, the Dark Web, the Deep Web, bots, smart malware, and the equivalent of Crime as a Service or CaaS, the on demand resource for stealing financial data.
I read “Short Seller says Darktrace Targets Are a Pipe Dream”. The back and forth between the UK financial firm and the Darktrace cyber services firm is interesting.(Keep in mind that years ago I did some small project for Autonomy, but my experience was pretty good. Nevertheless, before some research-minded 20 something tweets about my consulting, you have been alerted.)
The write up hits three interesting points. I am not interested in Darktrace, however. I think these points apply to a large number of the companies closing deals, often for Palantir-scale invoices, for threat intelligence, cyber defenses, digital canaries, smart perimeters, yada yada.
What are those points?
- Projections are extremely optimistic. What cyber security firm thinks about running out of clients for six and seven figure license fees? Hint: Think of a number between minus one and one.
- Headcounts move around, change, and are disconnected from an old school GraybaR (circa 1869) organization chart
- Customers sign on and then bail out. Does this sound like a Theranos-type observation.
The write up states:
ShadowFall says Darktrace’s business is driven by “an aggressive, promotional, sales focus” and is unlikely to stand the test of time. British hedge fund ShadowFall has taken a short position against cybersecurity specialist Darktrace, calling its business “watery-thin”. The hedge fund is known in the City as the ‘dark destroyer’ for its practices of unpicking corporate reports and devaluing shares. While the fund paints its work as a public service, as a short seller its own business model relies on driving down the prices of companies it bets against.
What’s up here? I think Darktrace is like many cyber security vendors. Consequently, ShadowFall is probably getting the curling stone close to the scoring circle in the game of full body contact investment curling. However, the specific issues like the three I identified above are part of the Silicon Valley territory. I call this phenomenon of overstatement, misdirection, and management management magical misdirection part of the behavior I described a decade ago in my monograph “The Google Legacy.”
The cyber security sector is not doing a Tom Brady grade job protecting an organization’s data. Why? Breaches occur because careless or indifferent employees click on links which invite bad actors to come in and have a seat in the engineering meeting. Bad actors prowl message boards for an unhappy employee, pay that employee to insert a USB stick into a laptop, or exfiltrate log on credentials. Finally, giant companies don’t build software with security as Job One. Every day I learn about another flaw in either commercial software or open source libraries. Bad actors don’t have to worry too much. There are quite a few bright bad actors and an expanding pool of oligarchs responding to a business opportunity.
No cyber vendor can keep up. In fact, best of class outfits are selling to those outside of the cyber security National Honor Society and Phi Beta Kappa stratum. (Example: Recorded Future to a general service outfit.) There are too few top flight cyber security engineers to staff the companies building or needing these specialists. Yep, a people shortage exists.
The net net is that ShadowFall has diagnosed an industry wide problem. The write up, however, focuses on ShadowFall’s analysis of a single company. A more useful and fair analysis would take a good, hard look at other cyber security firms. A spectrum or league table of behaviors can be generated. Then a company in the cyber security business can be put into a performance context. I understand that in the UK Darktrace is news. That’s okay with me. There is a far more significant analysis job to do. Darktrace becomes a data point, and my experience suggests there are outfits which warrant a similar analysis and commercial enterprises for which there is more data available.
Where is this type of analysis? I have not seen one. The reason may be, “Who wants to kill the gold goose laying cyber threat eggs filled with money?”
Stephen E Arnold, January 20, 2022
A Small Reminder: Finding Accurate, Actionable Information Is More Than Marketing Hoo-hah
January 14, 2022
Information retrieval ignites many interesting discussions. In our global environment, factionalism is the soup du jour. Talking about search can triggering dysphagia if a foot is consumed or apoplexy if one’s emotions go ballistic.
To keep search chatter in balance, I recommend “Scoop: IBM Tries to Sell Watson Health Again.” The write up does an non-job of romping through the craziness of IBM Watson and assorted medical windmills. There is one telling passage in the write up which I wish to highlight; to wit:
Big Blue wants out of health care, after spending billions to stake its claim, just as rival Oracle is moving big into the sector via its $28 billion bet for Cerner.
What’s up with IBM Watson in general and health care in particular? Several observations from my snowy redoubt in rural Kentucky, a state which has failed to emulate the business success of Tennessee. Is it Mitch? I don’t know.
Now my thoughts:
- Answering questions about scientific, technical, and medical questions is less demanding than figuring out what a TikTok message means. Failing in STM is like tripping over a bottle cap in a deserted NFL stadium’s parking lot
- Watson and its cognitive assertions requires training. Training is expensive. Google is working hard to convince itself and others to embrace the Snorkelesque approach. Watson’s method is a bit behind the sail boat’s curve in my opinion. Maybe the training race is over and Watson is in dry dock.
- The crazy assertions that cancer doctors could work better, faster, and more cheaply with Watson by their side resulted in one major event. The flashy Houston medical center showed Watson where the Exit door was located.
What will happen when a group of money people buy Watson? Lots of meetings, some tax planning, and quite a few telephone calls to college friends. Then a flip.
Will Watson health emerge a winner? IBM missed its chance the first time around. Perhaps the company can team with other health care competitors and craft a revenue winner. Will IBM ring up the Google? Will IBM make a trip to Redmond, home of the OS/2 debacle?
Who knows? Perhaps the company will apply some effort to fixing up its lagging cloud business? Again, who knows? Let’s ask Watson.
Stephen E Arnold, January 14, 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
How about That Smart Software?
January 3, 2022
In the short cut world of training smart software, minor glitches are to be expected. When an OCR program delivers 95 percent accuracy, that works out to five mistakes in every 100 words. When Alexa tells a child to put a metal object into a home electrical outlet, what do you expert? This is close enough for horse shoes.
Now what about the Google Maps of today, a maps solution which I find almost unusable. “Google Maps May Have Led Tahoe Travelers Astray During Snowstorm” quoted a Tweet from a person who is obviously unaware of the role probabilities play in the magical world of Google. Here’s the Tweet:
This is an abject failure. You are sending people up a poorly maintained forest road to their death in a severe blizzard. Hire people who can address winter storms in your code (or maybe get some of your engineers who are stuck in Tahoe right now on it).
Big deal? Of course not, Amazon and Google are focused on the efficiencies of machine-centric methods for identifying relevant, on point information. The probability is that most of the Amazon and Google outputs will be on the money. Google Maps rarely misses on pizza or the location of March Madness basketball games.
Severely injured children? Well, that probably won’t happen. Individuals lost in a snow storm? Well, that probably won’t happen.
The flaw in these giant firms’ methods are correct from these companies’ point of view in the majority of cases. A terminated humanoid or a driver wondering if a friendly forest ranger will come along the logging road? Not a big deal.
What happens when these smart systems output decisions which have ever larger consequences? Autonomous weapons, anyone?
Stephen E Arnold, January 3, 2021
JPMorgan Chase: One Insignificant Question
December 24, 2021
Years ago I did some analysis for an upscale financial outfit which shall remain nameless in this post. I recall one question I was asked at lunch, at institution-sponsored conferences, and in hallways. The question? It was, “How do burner phones work?” The individuals asking often said, “I am just curious, of course.”
Of course.
I thought of these questions when I read “SEC Gives JPMorgan Chase Record Fine for Using WhatsApp to Conduct Business.” [If the link is dead, you are on your own, gentle reader.] The write up explains that some over achievers were sidestepping assorted rules, guidelines, recommendations, suggestions, and cultural norms to “conduct business” without being monitored. Here’s a passage I noted:
The SEC said the practice of using third-party communication apps was widespread at JPMorgan Chase. Another regulator, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, also said Friday that it fined JPMorgan $75 million for using unapproved communications.
Okay. WhatsApp.
But what about burner phones? Probably not a problem among the squash playing financial health fanatics. I am just curious, of course.
Stephen E Arnold, December 24, 2021
Amazon: Emulating the Big Apple
December 23, 2021
I love the idea that giant technology companies operate in a space untethered from too many conventions, regulatory constraints, and ethical meshes. Apple I have heard entered into a two-buck deal with China. Okay, okay, the dollar amount was closer to US$ 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
Silicon Valley: Morphing into Medieval Italy?
December 23, 2021
The historical precedents include Florence (Facebook), Genoa (Google), and Venice (a2z). Venice because it was mostly money people and secret ways of keeping track of who owed whom what, so that’s close enough to a2z for me. The city states had their own ways of ruling, punishing, and exerting influence. What’s a few skirmishes among those who speak the same language. Does this sound like the Silicon Valley we know and love and its giant technology companies? I thought about the golden age of Italian city states as I read a scribe’s retelling of a recent digital skirmish among a couple of these power houses.
“Jack Dorsey’s Hot Web3 Takes Are Apparently Too Much for Marc Andreessen to Handle” reveals that two Duchies are in sharp disagreement. No catapults, just PR. The write up from a modern day Giovanni Villani states:
Marc Andreessen decided to take the step of blocking @jack, and Dorsey responded by saying he’s been “banned from Web3.” That’s not an unfair statement either, as the former Netscape co-founder and co-founder of Andreessen Horowitz (a16z) is now a huge investor in Web3 startups, tossing money around on DeFi projects, metaverse sneakers, tokens, and anything else that catches his eye. According to its “Web3 reading list” (pdf) document from October, “a16z is the largest investor in this space.”
And other digital princes are aligning against the former guru of Twitter.
Are there other signs that the apparent coziness of the impactful environs of Silicon Valley are fraught with digital tension? Are these indicators?
-
- Google’s unhappiness with its trust score and human relations / people management department
- Apple’s once secret deal with a foreign power. What’s a quarter trillion dollars among friends?
- Intel’s apology to China issued in order to comply with US government requirements. What about those chip fabs in Arizona and the water hurdle?
- Amazon’s three consecutive outages and surging orders for pizza to fuel is “two pizza teams”. Isn’t it three strikes and you are out? No, this is no big deal, right Epic.
- Facebook’s alleged dominance of the worst US company rankings. This is unjust.
I don’t know. But unfollowing the guru of the Tweeter and the apparent fractures in a snug club house strike me as an important moment in the history of the technology revolution.
Are there coincidences? My little iTunes’ set up is playing the Beatles’ Revolution:
You say you got a real solution
Well, you know
We’d all love to see the plan
You ask me for a contribution
Well, you know
We’re all doing what we can
Yes, what’s the plan? Perhaps a Decoder to explain what’s happening?
Stephen E Arnold, December 23, 2021
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
