Can Google React to a Code Red? Yeah, Sure, Jumping Right on It
December 22, 2022
The New York Times, The Guardian, and even the relentlessly innovative Business Insider have embraced the idea of Code Red. What is a Code Red? If you spent time at a cyber security conference a few years ago, Code Red was a snazzy name for computer worm. Have you spent quality time in a hospital in the US, preferably a smaller town? If so you may recall hearing “Code Red”. The idea was to alert the motivated, enthusiastic, and empathetic professionals that there was a barn burner of a fire raging around oxygen tanks adjacent intensive care, operating theaters, or recovery rooms. The term could also refer to bad weather, a billing opportunity’s arrival (aka patient), or something really bad happening like a grain silo explosion in Canton, Illinois, in which local farmers were blasted, burned, or gassed. (Yep, grain dust does go bang.) Code Red to some US Department of Defense types means — at least to some US Marines that the weather is more bad than the previous day’s weather. However, to some trained at Quantico, the term only suggests that the weather will be worse than it was yesterday.
For the “real news” professionals, the idea is that Code Red means emergency. Examples appear in a number of articles like this one: “Google’s Management Has Reportedly Issued a Code Red amid the Rising Popularity of the ChatGPT AI.” The idea is that Google’s estimated 90 percent share of the US and Western European online search market is now in jeopardy. You judge.
Here’s a passage from the write up:
Sundar Pichai, the CEO of Google’s parent company, Alphabet, participated in several meetings around Google’s AI strategy and has directed numerous groups in the company to refocus their efforts on addressing the threat that ChatGPT poses on its search engine business…In particular, teams in Google’s research, Trust and Safety division among other departments have been directed to switch gears to assist in the development and launch of new AI prototypes and products, the Times reported. Some employees have even been tasked to build AI products that generate art and graphics similar to OpenAI’s DALL-E used by millions of people…
Okay, meetings in the midst of holiday season. Perilously close to New Year’s festivities. Google Meet sessions with dogs barking or significant others saying, “Will you get off that call? Right now!”
The idea is that Google is going to face a challenge, maybe an existential threat! Google has to react immediately. Another grain silo will explode. That boom? Yeah, the emergency room oxygen tanks exploded. No one knows how many were injured or even killed. Horrible. More staff shortages! The sky is falling because our billing stream is blocked. Double Code Red!
Smash cut.
This image represents Google, courtesy of the free but legally ambiguous Craiyon.com:
Really original artwork courtesy of https://www.craiyon.com/
Yes, a fish bowl, not a frog. The fish takes the world’s data. I have heard that some pet fish watch television when an influencer is streaming to the big flat panel in the spacious 300 square foot apartment in Florham Park, New Jersey. This metaphorical fish is master of its universe; however, the leaking Russian ISS space capsule is not on its radar or the flaws of companies with “seeing stones” are not on its radar.
If we were to slowly heat the water in this fish’s bowl, our fish may discover too late that fleeing, transforming, or getting on a flight to Argentina are low percentage options. (Kiddies, please, do not test this theory and torture a fish unless you are a PhD student eager to work on live animal testing in a lab near Palo Alto.)
The key point is that until death has its paws on our fish, frantic action does not take place. Nothing stops the grim reaper from having a boiled fish appetizer.
May I share some of my unpopular, historically ignored observations about the Google? Oh, you say, “No.” Tough luck. Here I go:
- The Google of today understands its environment within its fish bowl. Like the fish, comprehension of the wider world is if not impossible or distorted due to the nature of the boundary between the watery world and the bigger outside world. Changing a world view ain’t gonna happen? Why? Business process momentum, perceptual acuity, and Googley thinking keep the systems doing what they do: Selling ads.
- Google engineers truly believe that their technology is THE BEST THING EVER. Keep in mind that invention can come via acquisition, unauthorized borrowing, or a late night Backrub discussion in a Stanford dorm. Today’s Google has substituted reasonably useful search of textual Web content for hard cash derived from monetizing user clicks. Executive compensation translates to “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it!”
- Google is chugging along, uncertain that the bright light some Googlers have noticed is a stream from Nadine Breaty or a fire in the room housing the fish bowl. From the fish’s perspective, there are no big problems in the fish bowl. Pay attention but carry on. Signals carry noise, so dig out the meaningful signal. Verify. Plan. Test. (Ooops. The fish is now dead. Bad. So sudden. It was a nice fish before it went Madison Avenue, of course.)
The chatter about ChatGPT is interesting to me. The technology is interesting, and its performance is getting useful tweaks. Use cases are emerging. Worriers are letting their worry gene influence their thinking. Entrepreneurs are entrepreneuring because getting rich quick on open source software may be a better idea than applying to be a carpetland dweller at the Twitter thing. Smart software will put lawyers, journalists, and — gasp! — blue chip consultants out of work.
But what’s this suggest about Google?
Keep in mind that I dubbed Google Googzilla in 2003. Big, ferocious, an icon of rapaciousness. True then and truer now. But big reptiles share a common characteristic with gold fish. Trapped in one ecosystem, the creatures don’t know what’s happening until it is too late. Then freneticism marks the onset of death. What’s a frightened, crazed Googzilla like?
We’re not there yet. I think of Google’s Code Red as the first stage of Google’s way of dying. I told you: Unpopular. Nothing new.
The Five Stages of Grief makes clear that Google is just now working through the denial stage. Next up is anger. Then deal making. Depression sweeps through the company. And finally — finally! — staff accept that the run of behavior without consequences has drawn to a close. Elisabeth Kubler Ross and David Kessler left out the final stage is the stuff of popular songs like memories. Tip: Newly minted OSINT experts, move beyond Google.
Stephen E Arnold, December 22, 2022
Google to Microsoft: We Are Trying to Be Helpful
December 16, 2022
Ah, those fun loving alleged monopolies are in the news again. Microsoft — famous in some circles for its interesting approach to security issues — allegedly has an Internet Explorer security problem. Wait! I thought the whole wide world was using Microsoft Edge, the new and improved solution to Web access.
According to “CVE-2022-41128: Type Confusion in Internet Explorer’s JScript9 Engine,” Internet Explorer after decades of continuous improvement and its replacement has a security vulnerability. Are you still using Internet Explorer? The answer may be, “Sure you are.”
With Internet Explorer following Bob down the trail of Microsoft’s most impressive software, the Redmond crowd the Microsoft Office application uses bits and pieces of Internet Explorer. Thrilling, right?
Google explains the Microsoft issue this way:
The JIT compiler generates code that will perform a type check on the variable
qat the entry of theboomfunction. The JIT compiler wrongly assumes the type will not change throughout the rest of the function. This assumption is broken whenqis changed fromd(anInt32Array) toe(anObject). When executingq[0] = 0x42424242, the compiled code still thinks it is dealing with the previousInt32Arrayand uses the corresponding offsets. In reality, it is writing to wherevere.epoints to in the case of a 32-bit process ore.din the case of a 64-bit process. Based on the patch, the bug seems to lie within a flawed check inGlobOpt::OptArraySrc, one of the optimization phases.GlobOpt::OptArraySrccallsShouldExpectConventionalArrayIndexValueand based on its return value will (in some cases wrongly) skip some code.
Got that.
The main idea is that Google is calling attention to the future great online game company’s approach to software engineering. In a word or two, “Poor to poorer.”
My view of the helpful announcement is that Microsoft Certified Professionals will have to explain this problem. Google’s sales team will happily point out this and other flaws in the Microsoft approach to enterprise software.
If you can’t trust a Web browser or remove flawed code from a widely used app, what’s the fix?
Ready for the answer: “Helpful cyber security revelations that make the online ad giant look like a friendly, fluffy Googzilla. Being helpful is the optimal way to conduct business.
Stephen E Arnold, December 16, 2022
Microsoft and the London Stock Exchange: Lock In Maybe?
December 12, 2022
I believe everything I read on the Internet. That’s one way I keep in touch with my inner GenZ self. Sometimes, however, stories ring true; for example, “Microsoft buys Near 4% Stake in London Stock Exchange As Part of 10 Year Cloud Deal.” I read the title via my dinobaby translation system and understood, “Yep, lock in, kiddo. Oh, Amazon AWS and Google Cloud professionals. Do not bother to call us. We will call you, okay.”
You may disagree with my dinobaby translator. That’s okay. I let many flowers bloom, unlike the London Stock Exchange which goes at life in what appear to be 10 year contracts. That’s a long time in techno-cloud land in my opinion.
The write up says:
Scott Guthrie, Microsoft’s executive vice president for the Cloud and AI Group, will be appointed as a non-executive director of LSEG.
I wonder if he will demo Microsoft Teams egames features and the security systems for Microsoft Exchange Server? Will he offer helpful inputs to those who might want to give an off the shelf AWS Sagemaker system a spin? What about the ever reliable Google VPN service which is super reliable and in demand right now?
The answer to these questions strike me as obvious. Azure is better, faster, cheaper, more reliable, and easier. I wonder if these benefits entered into the negotiation. (Personally I like the security angle and the cheaper plus.) My instinct has a tiny voice too. It is whispering to me, “Microsoft will deliver premier service to the London Stock Exchange when (which is unlikely) the system Azure system hiccups.
I noted this passage too:
Microsoft and LSEG will also work together in developing new professional collaboration tools. LSEG has developed a product called Workspace, a data and analytics platform. The two companies will be working on advancing this product and integrating it with Microsoft Teams, the firm’s messaging app.
I am tempted to reference the source of the stake, but I won’t. The parties involved make content marketing hay around the “trust” word.
I have a couple of observations:
- Microsoft has added a neon underline to the old marketing concept of “lock in.”
- The Redmond security giant can point to a big time financial customer and market its secure cloud solutions. Well, they are secure… at this time.
- The Amazon and Google cloud professionals will definitely find a way to respond.
Net net: Isn’t it wonderful that big tech innovation involves owning financial plumbing and access?
Stephen E Arnold, December 12, 2022
Google Dons a Super Hero Costume
December 9, 2022
Though one new social-media proprietor is actively dismantling mechanisms to fight disinformation, most online platforms still at least make a show of doing battle against it. For example, Mashable reports, “Google and YouTube Are Investing to Fight Misinformation.” This particular effort might actually help matters since, instead of (re)devising some in-house process, the company is directly funding third-party fact checkers. Reporter Meera Navlakha tells us Google is:
“… announcing a $13.2 million grant to the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN), a part of nonprofit media institute Poynter. The grant will fund the formation of the Global Fact Check Fund, to support a network of 135 fact-checking organizations, operating from 65 countries in over 80 languages. The money will go towards scaling existing operations and launch new initiatives to elevate information and reduce misinformation. The fund will open in 2023. This is Google and YouTube’s single largest grant toward fact-checking to date.”
That’s great! Independent fact checking organizations need all the funding they can get. Naturally, Google must position this grant as evidence it cares about its users. The post quotes:
“‘Google and YouTube remain dedicated to keep doing our part to help you find what you’re looking for and give you the context you need to make informed decisions about what you see online,’ reads the company statement.”
Dedicated is a strong word. Yes, the company has made some fact-checking efforts in Google News and on YouTube. But what about tools that would more directly let one decide what content is served up? The YouTube “dislike” feature is but an illusion. A way to specify ‘do not show this video to me again’ would be nice. But that would give users too much control. The advertisers, after all, are the real customers. And as long as misinformation successfully puts ads in front of eyeballs, there will only be so much done to fight it.
Cynthia Murrell, December 9, 2022
Alphabet, an Investor Is Grousing. Will That Person Be Assuaged?
December 7, 2022
Google’s parent company Alphabet is a multi-billion dollar corporation. Like any large corporation, it probably carries way too much fat, i.e. the books do not balance and it is because of the human ego. Google is a hot mess when it comes to human relations, but an activist investor believes Alphabet is a financial fiasco as well: “Investor Tells Google: Cut Costs Now And Stop Paying Staff So Much.”
TCI Fund Management is an activist investing firm and they suggested that Alphabet cut costs at the search engine giant. During the pandemic, Google had a hiring spree and TCI says the company now has too many employees and they are all too expensive. Google pays its employees 67% more than Microsoft people and 152% more than the top twenty US technology companies.
Alphabet’s profits are down to $13.91 billion compared to $18.936 billion in 2021. Alphabet is reviewing all its other companies. Some are doing well, while others like the Best Bets division are not. TCI Fund Management said Alphabet is not serving the shareholders:
“Alphabet’s ability to pursue M&A is limited due to ‘regulatory scrutiny’ so it should follow Apple’s capital allocation strategy and become “cash neutral over time through increased share repurchases.’ The group’s stock price is down 34 percent in the year to date, the share price is ‘cheap’ and buybacks could take advantage of this, TCI said.
It concluded: ‘In the era of slower revenue growth, aggressive cost management is essential. We look forward to your announcement in a clear action plan as a matter of urgency.’”
Google is not too big to fail, because tech geeks have huge egos and could run the company into the ground if they are not careful. Alphabet will probably ignore TCI’s suggestions, unless a former Google came up with them.
Whitney Grace, December 7, 2022
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 and Its Hard Data Approach to a Soft Skill: Firing People
December 5, 2022
Who knew that Google would embrace highly subjective methods such as performance reviews. Yep, a person provides input about another person. What could go wrong? Nothing because the data are Googley by definition. (Interesting how that works, isn’t it?)
The scoop on the method plus a somewhat less than enthusiastic comment are the guts of “Google’s Plan to Lay Off 10,000 Poor Performing Employees Is Based on a Big Lie: Can Performance Reviews Really Do the Trick.”
The Google approach appears to equate fewer employees with lower costs. Okay, sure. But why not focus on the core problem: For me, Google is losing its magnetism. The company like Apple is embracing more aggressive methods of generating revenue. Do you enjoy the promotions for Google’s spin on cable TV? I love them: Repetitive and invasive. What’s not to like.
Here’s the Google plan:
Reports indicate that performance reviews are rolling out companywide. Google leadership is turning to the reviews so that they can rely on supposedly hard data to maintain fairness, remove bias, protect against favoritism, and have something to point to when needing to justify their decision for which 10,000 get laid off.
But the information in the write up which caught my attention was this passage’s payload:
But, according to this Harvard professor, [the write up in the best tradition of Silicon Valley real news does not identify Tsedal Neeley as the expert who is calling Google’s method hogwash] it’s all one big lie. Many experts claim that the layoffs in big tech are the result of new corporate strategy, failed big bets coming out of the pandemic, and austerity measures entering the recession. This angers the public (not to mention the employees at these companies), because now the decision feels less objective — less fair.
My take on this is that Google’s multi-decade approach has been a high school science club approach to management. Now the company is embracing the ways of the dinobabies. Will this work? In my opinion, it will work like most of Google’s technology, in a way that is good enough.
Google’s personnel milestones include some notable, high profile events. My hunch is that 2023 will feature some newsworthy benchmarks as well; for example, fairness, equal treatment for those from certain backgrounds, and unbiased selection of those who can find their future elsewhere.
Worth watching because the Twitter email notification about termination may be an ideal fit for Gmail’s capabilities.
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
Google Revises Guest Speakers Rule to Avoid Future Controversy
December 2, 2022
Here’s another example of high school science club management in action. Free thinking and cultural sensitivity seem to be in a constant tug-of-war. Finding itself caught in the middle, “Google Fixes Rules for Inviting Guest Speakers to Its Offices After Recent Row Over Indian Speaker,” Gadgets 360 shares. Reuters explains:
“Alphabet’s Google this week introduced rules for inviting guest speakers to its offices, days after it canceled a talk by an Indian historian who has disparaged marginalised groups and their concerns, according to company emails seen by Reuters. The policy released Thursday is Google’s latest effort to preserve an open culture while addressing divisions that have emerged as its workforce has grown.
Workers at Google and other big tech companies in recent years have clashed and protested over politics and racial and gender equity. Also, Alphabet, Apple, and Amazon all face union organising drives whose demands include that the companies adopt progressive policies. The Google speaker rules, seen by Reuters, cite risk to the brand from certain talks and asks workers to ‘consider whether there’s a business reason for hosting the speaker and if the event directly supports our company goals.’ It calls for avoiding topics that could be ‘disruptive or undermine Google’s culture of belonging’ and reiterates that speakers are barred from advocacy of political candidates and ballot measures.”
This clarification follows months of complaints from workers about scheduled appearances by diametrically opposed authors Thenmozhi Soundararajan and Rajiv Malhotra. See the write-up for details on that dustup. Now potential speakers must be approved by a review team, meaning any request must be submitted at least 12 weeks ahead. So much for Googley spontaneity.
Cynthia Murrell, December 2, 2022
France and US Businesses: Semi Permanent Immiscibility?
November 30, 2022
Unlike a pendulum, the French government and two US high-technology poster kids don’t see eye to eye. However, governments, particularly those in France, are not impressed with the business practices of some US firms. The tried and true “Senator, thank you for the question” and assurances that the companies in questions are following the ethical precepts of respected French philosophers don’t work. “France Directs Schools to Stop Using Microsoft Office & Google Workspace” reports:
In a recent response to an interrogation by a Member of the Parliament, the French Minister of Education clarified that French schools should not use Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace. The reasons behind the Ministry’s position are twofold. First, the Ministry is concerned about the confidentiality and lawfulness of data transfers. Second, reliance on European providers is coherent with the government’s “cloud at the center” policy.
The write up explains that France’s view of privacy and the practices of Apple and Google are not in sync. Then there is the issue of the cloud and where data and information “are.” Given modern network and data center technology, the “there” is often quite tricky to pin down. Tricky is not a word the current French government feels comfortable using when talking about schools, teachers, students, and research conducted by French universities.
How will this play out? France will get its way. That’s why some chickens have labels which mean conformance. No label on that chicken, no deal.
Stephen E Arnold, November 30, 2022
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
