Celebrity Net Worth: Misunderstanding the Google?
August 12, 2020
Navigate to this link to view the PDF of testimony from the founder of Celebrity Net Worth. Don’t you love it when Google hides urls? Try to find the document whose title appears in the next paragraph. Give up. It makes life so much easier for bad actors and people wondering “Where did that document come from?” and “Who puts this document online?” Helpful as ever. DarkCyber loves Google. Who needs to know provenance type information? Losers that’s who!
But I digress. Click here and read “Written Statement for the Record by Brian Warner for a hearing before The House Judiciary Subcommittee on Antitrust, Commercial and Administrative Law titled Online Platforms and Market Power, Part 2: Innovation and Entrepreneurship,” July 16, 2019.
The write up makes clear that Celebrity Net Worth misunderstood Google. Mr. Warner and others involved with Celebrity Net Worth believed one of the founders of Google who said in an S-1 document filed with the SEC in 2004:
“We want you to come to Google and quickly find what you want. Then we’re happy to send you to the other sites. In fact, that’s the point. The portal strategy tries to own all of the information … Most portals show their own content above content elsewhere on the web. We feel that’s a conflict of interest, analogous to taking money for search results … We want to get you out of Google and to the right place as fast as possible. It’s a very different model.” — Larry Page, co-founder of Google
The write up documents how Google scraped content from Celebrity Net Worth and displayed it on search results pages. Usage of Celebrity Net Worth dropped “20 percent.” By 2016, Celebrity Net Worth was no longer at the top of a search for celebrity net worth. Traffic dropped another “50 percent.” By 2019, traffic to Celebrity Net Worth was 80 percent lower than in 2014.
The write up includes these data:
In June 2019, search engine analyst Rand Fishkin put together a report about Google using data from web analytics firm Jumpshot . The data show that today an estimated 48.96% of all Google searches end with the searcher NOT clicking through to a website. The same report estimates that 7% of all search clicks go to a paid ad result and 12% go to properties owned by Google’s parent company Alphabet. Moreover, those stats do not even show the full extent of the problem because the data largely relied upon desktop devices and could not track searches that took users to a Google-owned app like the YouTube or Google Maps.
These data are highly suggestive. However, Google has to generate revenue, and it — like many other information finding services — does what’s best for itself. This self-interest is explained in terms of “user experience,” not in terms of making money, increasing information control, and ensuring that clicks benefit Google.
The misunderstanding is that individuals with good idea assumed that Mother Google wanted to be supportive, be friends, and do what some people would assume to be appropriate.
How’s that working out? That’s why DarkCyber loves Google. Just take the information provided and don’t think. Cuba Libre does not exist if it is not on a Google Map. The Auto Channel car reviews don’t exist if not in the Google search results. And Foundem? Who the heck runs that site? DarkCyber absolutely loves Google but sometimes one must embrace a Swiss Cow?
Stephen E Arnold, August 12, 2020
Bitcoin ATMs
August 5, 2020
Last year I was in Prague and I wanted to see if Bitcoin automatic teller machines were still in operation. I located three in 2016, and I was curious. There were some ATMs I could locate, but the 2016 gizmos were gone. According to CoinATMRadar, there are several in Louisville, Kentucky. I thought about digital currency after I read “Bitcoin ATM Locations Reaching 9,000 Worldwide.” The write up reports:
There are currently 8,947 crypto currency ATMs and 211,239 non-ATM locations you can buy or sell crypto currencies at across 71 countries, according to crypto currency ATM tracking website Coinatmradar. In July, the number of crypto ATMs rose from 8,490 to 8,919, the site revealed Monday. While there were 544 new bitcoin ATMs, 115 machines were shut down during the month, leaving a net growth of 429 machines. The U.S. continues to lead in the number of bitcoin ATMs (BTMs). At the time of this writing, there are 6,879 machines in the U.S., most of which are located in Los Angeles, Chicago, Miami, Houston, Dallas, and Atlanta.
Several questions:
- If you had your taxes prepared by a CPA in the US, were you asked, “Do you have a digital currency account?”
- If you have a digital currency account, did you report the transactions per US tax regulations?
- Does possession of a digital currency account provide a signal about one’s honesty or dishonesty?
- What percentage of Bitcoin transactions are related to a criminal activity?
DarkCyber thinks that digital currency ATMs provides some helpful insight into the behaviors of their users.
Stephen E Arnold, August 5, 2020
Google: Buying Before Getting Regulated?
August 5, 2020
DarkCyber noted that Google is borrowing $10 billion. Yep, the Google. You can get some info in this article. The Google may be lined up to buy ADT, a home security outfit, and other acquisitions are likely to be in the works. Will the money be used to improve search and retrieval, invest in staff to reignite innovation, or wordsmithing.
DarkCyber noted that the online ad giant has spawned a new buzzword: Quantum AI. DarkCyber is not exactly sure what “quantum” means. DarkCyber is not exactly sure what “AI” or artificial intelligence means. That’s irrelevant.
According to “Google Scientist Hartmut Neven Coined the Term Quantum AI. This Year, He Achieved His Biggest Breakthrough Yet”:
The quantum project has posed new challenges, such as how to cool a processor to near absolute-zero temperatures using liquid helium. But Neven has always thrived on the edge. He was among the first to connect the AI revolution currently in full swing and quantum advances yet to come. “I’m guilty of having popularized the terms quantum machine learning and quantum AI,” he says. “Now there are whole sections of departments at universities that do quantum machine learning.”
Yep, Google’s ability to craft jargon and generate clicks has nosed ahead of relevance and organic innovation.
Amazon and Facebook are likely to be looking in their rearview mirrors to make sure Google’s headlights are still receding. Yep, Google is slowing down to gather up companies before the regulators put sleeping police on the information highway’s acquisition collectors.
Stephen E Arnold, August 5, 2020
Google Intern: Be Alone and Be Pushy. Charming Advice from a Digital Ms Manners
August 4, 2020
Working for the GOOG does not involve being “there.” Nor does working from the GOOG require getting paid anything or very much. What else does a Google intern have to do to be an apprentice?
“To Be a Google Intern in 2020” explains the Google’s blog that writing about being an intern is part of the deal. Thus, the explanation of working from home, over communicating, running a personal PR program, and demonstrating “initiative” are Google-certified ingredients.
The article explains how different Google interns experience interning. Among the highlights are:
- Friendliness. “Everyone is super friendly.”
- Video chat. “Sometimes a three minute video chat can be ore useful than… email.”
- Knowing “you.” According to an MBA intern, “Google really wants to get to know the full you.”
Are interns better than full time equivalents? Maybe. Since Alphabet Google has come in last in the financial horse race among Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and Google, interns may be the next big cost reduction thing at the online ad company. An intern at the Google can earn the equivalent of $80,000 per year, according to Business Insider.
Stephen E Arnold, August 4, 2020
Spotify: Implementing the Hapsburg Hustle
August 3, 2020
I read “Spotify CEO Daniel Ek Says Working Musicians May No Longer Be Able to Release Music Only Once Every Three to Four years.” I also read the comments in Hacker News related to this write up. The Fader article states:
Ek claimed that a “narrative fallacy” had been created and caused music fans to believe that Spotify doesn’t pay musicians enough for streams of their music. “Some artists that used to do well in the past may not do well in this future landscape,” Ek said, “where you can’t record music once every three to four years and think that’s going to be enough.”
Motivated by financial and psychological factors, the big M (Mozart) hit a fatal D minor in 1791. He was 35. DarkCyber’s view is that music MBAs want output.
Nothing new. Will Spotify Bach off? Unlikely. Content needed.
Stephen E Arnold, August 3, 2020
Disney and Face-Swapping: Real Actors Days Numbered
July 27, 2020
It took big bucks and a lot of time to insert virtual models of Carrie Fisher and Peter Cushing into 2016’s Rogue One: a Star Wars Story, but Disney may soon pull off similar tricks much more easily. The Verge tells us, “Disney’s Deepfakes Are Getting Closer to a Big-Screen Debut.” The studio presented the technology at the recent Eurographics Symposium on Rendering 2020 in London. The article shares Disney’s video illustrating the studio’s latest developments and contrasting them with earlier face-swapping technologies. It is well worth the investment of four minutes for anyone who is at all curious. Reporter James Vincent writes:
“The deepfakes you’ve probably seen to date may look impressive on your phone, but their flaws would be much more apparent on a larger screen. As an example, Disney’s researchers note that the maximum-resolution videos they could create from popular open-source deepfake model DeepFakeLab were just 256 x 256 pixels in size. By comparison, their model can produce video with a 1024 x 1024 resolution — a sizable increase. Apart from this, the functionality of Disney’s deepfake model is fairly conventional: it’s able to swap the appearances of two individuals while maintaining the target’s facial expressions. If you watch the video, though, note how technically constrained the output seems to be. It only produces deepfakes of well-lit individuals looking more or less straight at the camera. Challenging angles and lighting are still not on the agenda for this tech. As the researchers note, though, we are getting closer to creating deepfakes good enough for commercial projects.”
Left unmentioned are such projects’ darker possibilities—false video evidence of a crime, for example, or faked fodder for political scandal. Still, it is fascinating to watch this technology evolve. It is not surprising Disney’s financial motivations have gotten them this far.
Whitney Grace, July 27, 2020
A Twitch Tale: Modern Life, a Debit Card, and Cluelessness
July 21, 2020
DarkCyber spotted an item in one of our feeds because the word “fraud” appeared in the document. The content object was “Teenager Takes $20,000 of Parents’ Money, Gives It to Twitch Streamers.” The write up explains:
the minor spent years of savings in just 17 days using a debit card. The boy paid for subscriptions, which can go as high as $24.99 per month, bought Bits—virtual goods used to Cheer in chat messages—and made uncapped donations to various streamers. Speaker to Dot Esports, the mother said that $19,870.94 was charged to a debit card between June 14 and 30.
Banks view this type of activity as a type of chargeback fraud. A consumer makes a purchase and then requests a chargeback after receiving the product or service.
One question is, “What about those parents?” Another is, “Should Twitch have a more fine grained system in place to prevent those under a certain age from spending above a threshold?”
The Twitch question could be answered with an algorithm or a simple rule based system. The gain for the Twitchers who received some financial love from a follower is good news… for them. For the parents, bad news. Perhaps the alleged adults should look into the concept of a pre-paid debit card with a hard limit? For now, it is hasta la vista $20K. For the teen? Probably back online and absorbing video streams.
And Amazon Twitch? Just another day of “good enough” safeguards for users, their parents, and talent formerly known as Dr. Disrespect, whose name has a certain je ne sais quoi.
Stephen E Arnold, July 21, 2020
A Survey of Prices from the Dark Web
July 21, 2020
The Dark Web may not be the giant repository of badness that some popularizers of sci-fi assert, but it is a challenge for some enforcement professionals.
As important as our personal and financial information is to each of us, it can come as a surprise how cheaply some hacked data can be purchased on the Dark Web. After considerable research, Privacy Affairs illustrates this point in its “Dark Web Price Index 2020.” Reporter Miguel Gomez writes:
“The privacy offered by software such as TOR creates an environment where criminals can sell their wares on the dark web without the worry of law enforcement. What’s more, many will have heard the horror stories of people’s bank accounts being cleaned out, or their identity stolen and turning up in custody in Mexico. Again, not unjustified horror. You might be asking yourself, just how easy is it to obtain someone else’s personal information, documents, account details? We certainly were. Whilst there are many marketplaces on the dark web, there are even more forum posts warning of scammers. This makes verified prices difficult to obtain without ordering the items to find out, which of course we didn’t. Our methodology was to scan dark web marketplaces, forums, and websites, to create an index of the average prices for a range of specific products. We were only interested in products and services relating to personal data, counterfeit documents, and social media.”
The researchers compiled eye-opening lists of products and going rates; interested readers should navigate there to view the entire roster. A few examples: credit card details for an account with a balance of up to $5,000 for just 20 bucks; a hacked Twitter account for $49; a 24-hour-long DDoS attack against an unprotected website, at 10-50k requests per second, for $60. Considerably more expensive, though, are passports from the US, Canada, or Europe at $1,500 or quality malware attacks at 1,000 for $1,400 – $6,000.
The article includes a few interesting details alongside the prices, like the fact that vendors usually guaranteed 8 out of 10 stolen credit cards would pay off as advertised. Also, PayPal account details were very common and cheap, but actual transfers from a hacked account were more pricy. And apparently counterfeit bills are extremely common, with the highest quality ones costing about 30% of their fake value. They even come with a “UV pen test guarantee.” See the write-up for more curious, if concerning, details.
Cynthia Murrell, July 21, 2020
Need Global Financial Data? One Somewhat Useful Site
July 21, 2020
If you need a financial number, you may not have to dig through irrelevant free Web search results or use your Bloomberg terminal to find an “aggregate” function for the category in which you have an interest. Yippy.
Navigate to “All of the World’s Money and Markets in One Visualization.” As you know, my skepticism filter blinks when I encounter the logical Taser “all.” I also like to know where, when, how, and why certain data are obtained. The mechanism for normalizing the data is important to me as well. Well, forget most of those questions.
Look at the Web page. Pick a category. Boom. You have your number.
Accurate? Timely? Verifiable?
Not on the site. But in a “good enough” era of Zoom meetings, a number is available. Just in a picture.
Stephen E Arnold, July 21, 2020
Google May Want to Spin Up Some New Jargon
July 20, 2020
Marketwatch published “Barr Blasts Apple and Google As All Too Willing to Cooperate with China.” The report states:
The criticism of U.S. companies came amid a broad speech on China, in which Barr said the Chinese Communist Party was seeking to “make the world safe for dictatorship” and accused China of waging an “economic blitzkrieg” against the U.S. in a bid for global dominance.
How has Google responded? We noted “Google’s Mission Is to Get Technology to More People: Sundar Pichai”, which is a short video. The article stated:
Google and Jio “would work together to increase internet access for millions of Indians, who do not currently have a smartphone, while improving the mobile experience for all.”
With testimony looming before Congress, Google’s alleged “fraternizing” with a country on the radar of the Attorney General and positioning investments in India as a way to improve “the mobile experience for all” does not capture several nuances about the 21st century of the Google:
- Google needs eyeballs to sell ads in order to keep Wall Street and stakeholders content. So “advertising.”
- Google appears to be keen on finding some way to generate revenue directly or on the periphery of the “China market.” So a country Google suggested change cannot kick the habit of thinking about revenue from the world’s largest market.
- Google seems somewhat disconnected from the increased scrutiny individuals like Mr. Barr are giving the company with the great booth give away: A Googley mouse pad.
Net net: A different PR spin may be needed. Hint: “For all” may connote Google advertising.
Stephen E Arnold, July 20, 2020
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
