Google: Struggles with Curation
April 21, 2022
Should Google outsource Play store content curation to Amazon’s Mechanical Turk or Fiverr?
Sadly, one cannot assume that because an app is available through Google Play it is safe. Engadget reports, “Google Pulls Apps that May Have Harvested Data from Millions of Android Devices.” Writer S. Dent reveals:
“Google has pulled dozens of apps used by millions of users after finding that they covertly harvested data, The Wall Street Journal has reported. Researchers found weather apps, highway radar apps, QR scanners, prayer apps and others containing code that could harvest a user’s precise location, email, phone numbers and more. It was made by Measurement Systems, a company that’s reportedly linked to a Virginia defense contractor that does cyber-intelligence and more for US national-security agencies. It has denied the allegations.”
Naturally. We find it interesting that, according to the report, the firm was after data mainly from the Middle East, Central and Eastern Europe and Asia. The write-up continues:
“The code was discovered by researchers Serge Egelman from UC Berkeley and the University of Calgary’s Joel Reardon, who disclosed their findings to federal regulators and Google. It can ‘without a doubt be described as malware,’ Egelman told the WSJ. Measurement Systems reportedly paid developers to add their software development kits (SDKs) to apps. The developers would not only be paid, but receive detailed information about their user base. The SDK was present on apps downloaded to at least 60 million mobile devices. One app developer said it was told that the code was collecting data on behalf of ISPs along with financial service and energy companies.”
So how did these apps slip through the vetting process? Maybe the app review methods are flawed, not applied rigorously, not applied consistently. Or perhaps they are simply a bit of PR hogwash? We don’t know but the question is intriguing. Google has removed the apps from the Play store but of course they still lurk on millions of devices. In its email to the Wall Street Journal, Measurement Systems not only insists its apps are innocent, but it also asserts it is “not aware” of any connection between it and US defense contractors.
And what about the quantumly supreme Google smart software?
Cynthia Murrell, April 21, 2022
Google Web Search Quality
April 20, 2022
The cat is out of the bag. The Reddit threat “Does Anyone Else Think Google Search Quality Has Gone Downhill Fast?” provides an interesting series of comments about “quality.”
The notion of “search quality” in the good old days involved gathering a corpus of text. The text was indexed using a system; for example, Smart or maybe Personal Bibliographic software. Test queries would be created in order to determine how the system displayed search results. The research minded person would then examine the corpus and determine if the result set returned the best matches. There are tricks those skilled in the art could use to make the test queries perform. One would calculate precision and recall. Bingo metrics. Now here’s the good part. Another search system would be used to index the content; for example, something interesting like the “old” Sagemaker, the mainframe fave IBM STAIRS III, or Excalibur. The performance of the second system would be compared to the first system. One would do this over time and generate precision and recall scores which could be compared. We used to use a corpus of Google patents, and I remember that Perfect Search (remember that one, gentle reader) outperformed a number of higher profile and allegedly more advanced systems.
I am not sure Reddit posts are into precision and recall, but the responses to the question about degradation of Google search quality is fascinating. Those posting are not too happy with what Google delivers and how the present day Googley search and retrieval system works. Thank you, Prabhakar Raghavan, former search wizard executive at Verity (wow, that was outstanding) and the individual who argued with a Bear Stearns’ managing director and me about how much better Yahoo’s semantic technology was that Google’s. Raghavan was at Yahooooo then and we know how wonderful Yahoo search was!)
Hewer’s a rundown of some of the issues identified in the Reddit thread:
- From PizzaInteraction: “always laugh when I enter like 4 search terms and all the results focus on just one of the terms.”
- Healthy-Contest-1605: “Every algorithm is being gamed to have their trash come out in top.”
- Cl0udSurfer: “the usual tricks like adding quotes around required words, or putting a dash in front of words that should be excluded don’t work anymore.”
Net net: This is the Verity-Yahoo trajectory. Precision and recall? Ho ho ho. What about disclosing when a source was indexed and updated? What about Boolean operators? What about making as much money as possible so one can go to a high school reunion and explain the wonderfulness one’s cleverness? What happened to Louis Monier, Sanjay Ghemawat, and the Backrub crowd?
Stephen E Arnold, April 20, 2022
The Google: What Is the Problem? We Protect Puppies?
April 19, 2022
I read a paywalled write up with the title “A Former Employee at Google’s AI Lab DeepMind Says the Firm Seems Obsessed with Saving ITs Own Reputation after She Went Public with Claims of Sexual Harassment and Assault.” No talk about puppies, which Google wants to save. Now that’s a headline which tells the story in my opinion. So rather than summarizing the rather troubling allegations in the write up, I want to call attention to the management aspects of this alleged misstep.
One key point is the speed with which the Google responds to employee inputs. The article points out that the whistle blower found that the Google moved slowly. Google wants Web sites to respond quickly. Management appears to have a different time scale if the allegations are accurate. The managerial review process was “drawn out.”
Another interesting item is that after a management shuffle, the new Top Googler at DeepMind admitted that the “case” was “complex.” That’s not surprising. It is quite difficult to figure out why a query like “search and retrieval” returns information about “information retrieval.” I do not want information about “information.” With a fundamental issue with providing on point results to a simple query about a topic of interest to a company providing Web search results, Google misses the mark. Has the company missed the mark with personnel lingo? I noted that the management lingo in use at the Google is P&C which stands for people and culture. What? Does this mean personnel?
And finally, the write up includes this anecdote about a certain mobile phone whiz at the Google:
The New York Times had reported that Google had “protected” senior executives accused of misconduct over the past decade, such as Android creator Andy Rubin. Rubin denied the claims. Google subsequently changed its policies on dealing with sexual harassment claims.
Management change. No mention of an attempted suicide, baby making in the legal department, or the Dr. Timnit Gebru matter.
Net net: The management methods in use at Google are, to use a favorite word of the Google founders, “interesting.” This word is, however, less compelling than harassment, sexual violence, self-harm, and similar terms which add zest to the interactions of a manager and an employee. Alleged interactions, of course. P&C does not appear to be an acronym for politically correct at the Google. I associate P&C with other words, which I am not comfortable mentioning. Puppies? I am okay with puppies. So is the GOOG.
Stephen E Arnold, April 19, 2022
Being Googley: Is the Chrome Browser at Risk in Some SolarWinds?
April 15, 2022
I read “Google Issues Third Emergency Fix for Chrome This Year.” The main idea is that Google is pumping out software which appears to invite bad actors to a no-rules party. The article states:
The emergency updates the company issued this week impact the almost 3 billion users of its Chrome browser as well as those using other Chromium-based browsers, such as Microsoft Edge, Brave and Vivaldi. It is the third such emergency update Google has had to issue for Chrome this year.
Yeah, the browser thing.
Several observations:
- If a wildly popular Google output cannot be made secure, what about the services and software which are less engineer “rich”?
- Does Google deserve the scrutiny that Microsoft and other alleged monopolies attracts? Google has been “off the radar” compared with other companies in the last couple of years it seems.
- What will bad actors do with the signal that three security updates have been issued, and we have not made it to the summer solstice? My thought is that computer science students in some Eastern European countries will be getting some new homework assignments.
Like other large companies, making any security issue public poses risks: There are stakeholders, there are legal eagles, and there are those fresh faced, motivated students in countries which crank out capable programmers and engineers. Some of these individuals may find that exploit creation provides a way to spin up some extra cash.
How many of these individuals are available on gig work sites? What information is flowing through private Telegram groups? The limping Dark Web still has some interesting for a too.
Net net: What Googley vulnerabilities exist which have not been disclosed? How many weak spots exist in the Google just waiting for a bright person to exploit? We know what the article reports, and that information begs more difficult questions.
Stephen E Arnold, April 15, 2022
Google Hits Microsoft in the Nose: Alleges Security Issues
April 15, 2022
The Google wants to be the new Microsoft. Google wanted to be the big dog in social media. How did that turn out? Google wanted to diversify its revenue streams so that online advertising was not the main money gusher. How did that work out? Now there is a new dust up, and it will be more fun than watching the antics of coaches of Final Four teams. Go, Coach K!
The real news outfit NBC published “Attacking Rival, Google Says Microsoft’s Hold on Government Security Is a Problem.” The article presents as actual factual information:
Jeanette Manfra, director of risk and compliance for Google’s cloud services and a former top U.S. cybersecurity official, said Thursday that the government’s reliance on Microsoft — one of Google’s top business rivals — is an ongoing security threat. Manfra also said in a blog post published Thursday that a survey commissioned by Google found that a majority of federal employees believe that the government’s reliance on Microsoft products is a cybersecurity vulnerability.
There you go. A monoculture is vulnerable to parasites and other predations. So what’s the fix? Replace the existing monoculture with another one.
That’s a Googley point of view from Google’s cloud services unit.
And there are data to back up this assertion, at least data that NBC finds actual factual; for instance:
Last year, researchers discovered 21 “zero-days” — an industry term for a critical vulnerability that a company doesn’t have a ready solution for — actively in use against Microsoft products, compared to 16 against Google and 12 against Apple.
I don’t want to be a person who dismisses the value of my Google mouse pad, but I would offer:
- How are the anti ad fraud mechanisms working?
- What’s the issue with YouTube creators’ allegations of algorithmic oddity?
- What’s the issue with malware in approved Google Play apps?
- Are the incidents reported by Firewall Times resolved?
Microsoft has been reasonably successful in selling to the US government. How would the US military operate without PowerPoint slide decks?
From my point of view, Google’s aggressive security questions could be directed at itself? Does Google do the know thyself thing? Not when it comes to money is my answer. My view is that none of the Big Tech outfits are significantly different from one another.
Stephen E Arnold, April 15, 2022
StreetView AI Protects Privacy of Canadian Sasquatch Statue
April 15, 2022
Here is an amusing AI edge case that could have benefitted from a helping human hand. The Vernon Morning Star reports, “Sasquatch Censored? Harrison’s Landmark Carving is Camera Shy in Google StreetView’s Eyes.” Writer Adam Louis tells us:
“Local Facebook groups were amused by a quirk of the interactive map-making technology that normally blurs the faces of people pictured in StreetView pictures. According to an observation originally posted on Twitter from CBC Vancouver municipal affairs reporter Justin McElroy, it seems the face-hiding feature also works on large wooden statues; the grinning face of the iconic Sasquatch statue that sits outside the welcome sign at the entrance of Harrison Hot Springs has also been blurred.”
Of course, automatically blurring human faces is StreetView’s default policy. It could be considered a complement to the sculptor that their work fooled the algorithm. Though that unnamed artist or other Sasquatch enthusiasts may want to see the mistake reversed, it seems to be set in stone. The write-up notes:
“While there is a link that allows users to report items for additional blurring – whether it’s a car, house or person – there does not appear to be a way to request a person or object to be un-blurred. Answers in Google Maps Help forums largely agree that once blurring is done, it’s permanent and irreversible.”
Curious readers need not travel to the Harrison River Valley to view the statue’s face, however. As of this writing, a photo of is featured at the top of the Sasquatch Trail web page.
Cynthia Murrell, April 15, 2022
If True, This Google Story Is Like a Stuck 45 RPM Disc
April 8, 2022
I don’t know if the information in “DeepMind Accused of Mishandling Sexual Misconduct Allegations” is spot on. The source is supposed to be one of those unimpeachable bastions of high brow journalism. (I won’t hold the Endeca search implementation up as evidence of making interesting decisions.) You will have to pay to read the source article unless you have access at the local news stand to a fungible copy of the orange thing.
The main idea in the write up is like the old hit Rag Mop stuck in a groove. You know, Rag Mop, Rag Mop, R A G G M O P P, Rag Mop? An ear worm with piranha teeth. Not a Candiru, but nasty nevertheless.
I noted this assertion:
A former DeepMind employee has accused the artificial intelligence group’s leadership of mishandling multiple allegations of sexual misconduct and harassment, raising concerns over how grievances are dealt with at the Google-acquired company.
Juicy details are not included. The approach parallels the lack of color related to the attempted suicide by a Xoogler. This particular female hooked up with Google’s Icarus, burned a family, and suicidally unlatched her safety belt. Gravity, not the Thomas Pynchon type of rainbow, presented itself.
I spotted some hint of Google’s management tactics; to wit:
Julia [this is a fake name to protect the individual making the assertion of wonky behavior] has argued that there are major flaws in how grievances such as hers are handled at DeepMind. Alleged failures include extended delays in workplace investigations and insufficient safeguarding of sexual assault victims.
Are these characteristics of a Silicon Valley type company channeling the decision making of adolescent high school science club members?
The orange newspaper slipped in some thought provoking comments; for instance:
She was also emailed a six-page confessional document by the researcher, written in the third person, on August 18 2019. The document detailed suicidal tendencies, allusions to raping unconscious women, and sex addiction indicated by reference to a string of affairs with sex workers during work hours, and with colleagues on and off DeepMind premises. Another document sent to her on September 19 2019 included graphic and degrading sexual depictions of her.
I like the use of email by an alleged Google DeepMind individual. I wonder if this particular wizard understands the concept of legal discovery?
The write up includes some details about Google DeepMind’s administrative procedures and the alacrity which some issues are addressed. If I understand the source article, we’re not talking millisecond response time. Weeks seems to be the basic unit of time.
One may want to keep in mind that one of DeepMind’s founders moved on in the time period about which the Julia persona encountered some science club analyses of outlier work behavior.
Same repetitive phrases. Here’s an example my tin ear caught:
DeepMind said it was unable to comment on that latter case but added: “Any incident of sexual assault or harassment is abhorrent and it’s unacceptable that anyone at DeepMind or in the world should experience it.”
R A G G M O P P, Rag Mop. Do doo doo, dah dee ah dah Rag Mop.
Stephen E Arnold, April 8, 2022
Google YouTube Search Working the Way Alphabet Wants?
April 8, 2022
The online news service Mashable may be in gear for April’s Fool Day early. The story “YouTube Added 1,500 Free Movies, But Good Luck Finding Them” makes clear that Google YouTube search doesn’t work.
The write up reports:
YouTube has also made browsing its free titles much more annoying than it needed to be. The platform won’t just show you all its free titles and let you scroll through them to find your next binge watch. It certainly won’t let you filter them, so you can’t narrow your search to all of YouTube’s free action movies, or free romantic comedies. Rather, YouTube’s algorithm selects a few hundred ad-supported titles to show you in its “free to watch movies” section, hiding the rest.
The Mashable take is definitely not Googley. A new age, Silicon Valley like information service should be able to make sense of Google YouTube’s brilliant approach. A casual user will have access to some, smart software selected content. The desire for a way to browse a comprehensive result set is irrelevant. The Googley person will recognize:
- Paying for Google’s TV service delivers a better experience. Presumably that experience includes a listing of available content. On second thought, I am kidding myself. Smart software does not understand exceptions unless the system was trained to implement fine grained user classification.
- There are Google Dorks available to make quick work of narrowing Google result sets. Not familiar with Google Dorks? Well, certain individuals in Russia are and possibly a bright 12 year old near your home has this expertise.
- The results you see represent “all the world’s information.” The fact that you have knowledge which indicates a partial result set makes one point and only one point: You take what you get.
- Oh, those contractors and interns are enhancing the search experience again whilst doing no evil.
I hope this explains why Mashable does not understand the brilliant method Google uses to remain in close contact with its humanoid users.
Stephen E Arnold, April 8, 2022
Google: Who Makes the Tweaks? Smart Software or Humanoids?
April 7, 2022
I read “Google Tweaks Search and News Results to Direct People to Trusted Sources.” The main idea is that Google wants to do good. Instead of letting people read any old news, the Google “will offer information literacy tips and highlight widely cited source.” That was quick. Google News became available in 2002. Let’s see. My math is no too good, but that sure looks like more than a week ago.
How are the tweaks implemented? That’s a good question. The write up reports:
Since last June, the company has applied labels to results for “rapidly evolving topics,” which include things like breaking news and viral videos that are spreading quickly. It may suggest checking back later for more details as they become clearer. Starting in the US (in English) today, the labels will include some information literacy tips.
Right. Google and it. Are the changes implemented by Snorkelized software learns on the fly what news is not Google quality? Or, will actual Googlers peruse news and decide what’s okay and what needs to be designated l’ordure?
My bet is on one thing. Google’s many protestations that its algorithms do the heavy lifting is a useful way to put on a ghillie suit and disappear from the censorship, editing, and down checking of the inferior information.
If my assumption is incorrect, I can protest and look for my pen. I am 77 and prone to forgetfulness. Google has digital ghillies. Lucky outfit.
Stephen E Arnold, April 7, 2022
Google: Pesky Memories of the Past
April 7, 2022
We suppose some people will never understand or accept Googley ways of working. Namely European regulators. Similarly, Google may never accept the EU has any authority over its business practices. TechCrunch reports, “Google Sued in Europe for $2.4BN in Damages Over Shopping Antitrust Case.” Writer Natasha Lomas reveals:
“Google is being sued in Europe on competition grounds by price comparison service PriceRunner which is seeking at least €2.1 billion (~2.4 billion) in damages. The lawsuit accuses Google of continuing to breach a 2017 European Commission antitrust enforcement order against Google Shopping. As well as fining Google what was — at the time — a record-breaking antitrust penalty (€2.42 billion), the EU’s competition division ordered the search giant to cease illegal behaviors, after finding it Google giving prominent placement to its own shopping comparison service while simultaneously demoting rivals in organic search results.”
But cease those behaviors it did not, though it made a gesture or two in that direction. Meanwhile, according to Sky News, Google tried to sidestep the ruling with fake comparison sites packed with ads for their clients’ products running alongside the Google Shopping box. Very creative. The platform also continues to run product search ads alongside general search results. Apparently, PriceRunner decided five years of flouting the enforcement order was enough. The write-up continues:
“PriceRunner’s lawsuit alleges Google has continued to violate competition law in relation to product search, as well as seeking compensation for historical infringements that have allowed Google to reap revenue at rivals’ expense. To back up its allegations, the search comparison company points to a study conducted by accountancy company, Grant Thornton, which it says found prices for offers shown in Google’s own comparison shopping service can be 16-37% higher for popular categories like clothes and shoes, and between 12-14% higher for other types of products vs rival price comparison services.”
Many of our readers will not be surprised to learn Google search continues to dominate in Europe. It maintains a greater than 90% market share in most of the European Economic Area and in the U.K. Nevertheless, PriceRunner is prepared to fight for many years, if necessary, with help from litigation funder Nivalion. We shall see whether the suit gets anywhere, but either way we suspect Google will continue with business as usual.
Cynthia Murrell, April 7, 2022
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
