Why Present Bad Sites?

October 7, 2024

dino 10 19_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumbThis blog post did not require the use of smart software, just a dumb humanoid.

I read “Google Search Is Testing Blue Checkmark Feature That Helps Users Spot Genuine Websites.” I know this is a test, but I have a question: What’s genuine mean to Google and its smart software? I know that Google cannot answer this question without resorting to consulting nonsensicalness, but “genuine” is a word. I just don’t know what’s genuine to Google. Is a Web site that uses SEO trickery to appear in a results list? Is it a blog post written by a duplicitous PR person working at a large Google-type firm? Is it a PDF appearing on a “genuine” government’s Web site?

image

A programmer thinking about blue check marks. The obvious conclusion is to provide a free blue check mark. Then later one can charge for that sign of goodness. Thanks, Microsoft. Good enough. Just like that big Windows update. Good enough.

The write up reports:

Blue checkmarks have appeared next to certain websites on Google Search for some users. According to a report from The Verge, this is because Google is experimenting with a verification feature to let users know that sites aren’t fraudulent or scams.

Okay, what’s “fraudulent” and what’s a “scam”?

What does Google say? According to the write up:

A Google spokesperson confirmed the experiment, telling Mashable, “We regularly experiment with features that help shoppers identify trustworthy businesses online, and we are currently running a small experiment showing checkmarks next to certain businesses on Google.”

A couple of observations:

  1. Why not allow the user to NOT out these sites? Better yet, give the user a choice of seeing de-junked or fully junked sites? Wow, that’s too hard. Imagine. A Boolean operator.
  2. Why does Google bother to index these sites? Why not change the block list for the crawl? Wow, that’s too much work. Imagine a Googler editing a “do not crawl” list manually.
  3. Is Google admitting that it can identify problematic sites like those which push fake medications or the stolen software videos on YouTube? That’s pretty useful information for an attorney taking legal action against Google, isn’t it?

Net net: Google is unregulated and spouts baloney. Google needs to jack up its revenue. It has fines to pay and AI wizards to pay. Tough work.

Stephen E Arnold, October 7, 2024

Google Rear Ends Microsoft on an EU Information Highway

September 25, 2024

green-dino_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_t[2]_thumbThis essay is the work of a dumb dinobaby. No smart software required.

A couple of high-technology dinosaurs with big teeth and even bigger wallets are squabbling in a rather clever way. If the dispute escalates some of the smaller vehicles on the EU’s Information Superhighway are going to be affected by a remarkable collision. The orange newspaper published “Google Files Brussels Complaint against Microsoft Cloud Business.” On the surface, the story explains that “Google accuses Microsoft of locking customers into its Azure services, preventing them from easily switching to alternatives.”

image

Two very large and easily provoked dinosaurs are engaged in a contest in a court of law. Which will prevail, or will both end up with broken arms? Thanks, MSFT Copilot. I think you are the prettier dinosaur.

To put some bite into the allegation, Google aka Googzilla has:

filed an antitrust complaint in Brussels against Microsoft, alleging its Big Tech rival engages in unfair cloud computing practices that has led to a reduction in choice and an increase in prices… Google said Microsoft is “exploiting” its customers’ reliance on products such as its Windows software by imposing “steep penalties” on using rival cloud providers.

From my vantage point this looks like a rear ender; that is, Google — itself under considerable scrutiny by assorted governmental entities — has smacked into Microsoft, a veteran of EU regulatory penalties. Google explained to the monopoly officer that Microsoft was using discriminatory practices to prevent Google, AWS, and Alibaba from closing cloud computing deals.

In a conversation with some of my research team, several observations surfaced from what I would describe as a jaded group. Let me share several of these:

  1. Locking up business is precisely the “game” for US high-technology dinosaurs with big teeth and some China-affiliated outfit too. I believe the jargon for this business tactic is “lock in.” IBM allegedly found the play helpful when mainframes were the next big thing. Just try and move some government agencies or large financial institutions from their Big Iron to Chromebooks and see how the suggestion is greeted.,
  2. Google has called attention to the alleged illegal actions of Microsoft, bringing the Softies into the EU litigation gladiatorial arena.
  3. Information provided by Google may illustrate the alleged business practices so that when compared to the Google’s approach, Googzilla looks like the ideal golfing partner.
  4. Any question that US outfits like Google and Microsoft are just mom-and-pop businesses is definitively resolved.

My personal opinion is that Google wants to make certain that Microsoft is dragged into what will be expensive, slow, and probably business trajectory altering legal processes. Perhaps Satya and Sundar will testify as their mercenaries explain that both companies are not monopolies, not hindering competition, and love whales, small start ups, ethical behavior, and the rule of law.

Stephen E Arnold, September 25, 2024

YouTube Is Bringing More AI To Its Platform

September 20, 2024

AI-generated videos have already swarmed on YouTube. These videos range from fake Disney movie trailers to inappropriate content that missed being flagged. YouTube creators are already upset that their videos are being overlooked by the algorithm, but some are being hired for an AI project. Digital Trends explains more: “More AI May Be Coming To YouTube In A Big Way.”

Gemini AI is currently in beta testing across YouTube. Gemini AI is described as a tool for YouTubers to brainstorm video ideas, including titles, topics, and thumbnails. Only a select few YouTubers are testing Gemini AI and will share their feedback. The AI tool will eventually be located underneath the platform’s analytic menu, under the research tab. The tool could actually be helpful:

“This marks Google’s second foray into including AI assistance in YouTube users’ creative processes. In May, the company launched a content inspiration tool on YouTube Studio that provides tips and suggestions for future clip topics based on viewer trends. For most any given topic, the AI will highlight related videos you’ve already published, provide tips on themes to use, and generate a script outline for you to follow.”

The YouTubers are experimenting with both Gemini AI and the content inspiration tool. They’re doing A/B testing and their experiences will shape how AI is used on the video platform. YouTube does acknowledge that AI is a transformative creative tool, but viewers want to know if what they’re watching is real or fake. Is anyone imagining a AI warning or rating system?

Whitney Grace, September 20, 2024

Great Moments in Leadership: Drive an Uber

September 18, 2024

I was zipping through my newsfeed and spotted this item: “Ex-Sony Boss Tells Laid-Off Employees to Drive an Uber and Find a Cheap Place to Live.” In the article, the ex-Sony boss is quoted as allegedly saying:

I think it’s probably very painful for the managers, but I don’t think that having skill in this area is going to be a lifetime of poverty or limitation. It’s still where the action is, and it’s like the pandemic but now you’re going to have to take a few…figure out how to get through it, drive an Uber or whatever, go off to find a cheap place to live and go to the beach for a year.

I admit that I find the advice reasonably practical. However, it costs money to summon an Uber. The other titbit is that a person without a job should find a “cheap place to live.” Ah, ha, van life or moving in with a friend. Possibly one could become a homeless person dwelling near a beach. What if the terminated individual has a family? I suppose there are community food services.

From an employee’s point of view, this is “tough love” management. How effective is this approach? I have worked for a number of firms in my 50 plus year career prior to my retiring in 2013. I can honestly say that this Uber and move to a cheaper place to live is remarkable. It is novel. Possibly a breakthrough in management methods.

I look forward to a TED talk from this leader. When will the Harvard Business Review present a more in-depth look at the former Sony president’s ideas? Oh, right. “Former” is the operative word. Yep, former.

Stephen E Arnold, September 17, 2024

A Moment to Remember: Google Explains Its Competitive Posture

September 16, 2024

green-dino_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumbThis essay is the work of a dumb humanoid. No smart software required.

What happens when those with insight into the Google talk in a bar to friends? Answer: Complete indifference. Question: What happens when a former Google employee’s comments are captured in a form which can be discovered by the prosecution in a trial? Answer: A peak inside Googzilla’s kimono.

image

An observer is horrified by the site revealed when an ex-Google professional talks about what’s inside the Googzilla kimono. Thanks, MSFT Copilot. Good enough.

Ex-Google Exec Said Goal Was to Crush Competition, Trial Evidence Shows” reports that Google wanted to “crush” the competition. Google wanted a “monopoly.” Here’s what the Reuters’ article reports via its “trust” filter:

“We’ll be able to crush the other networks and that’s our goal,” David Rosenblatt, Google’s former president of display advertising, said of the company’s strategy in late 2008 or early 2009, according to notes shown in court…. “We’re both Goldman and NYSE,” he said, he said, according to the notes, referring to one of the world’s biggest stock exchanges at the time and one of its biggest market makers. “Google has created what’s comparable to the NYSE or London Stock Exchange; in other words, we’ll do to display what Google did to search,” Rosenblatt said.

On the surface, Mr. Rosenblatt is articulating what some folks have been asserting for years. Several observations:

  1. Google has been running free for a long time. Why?
  2. If true, the statement makes the outcome of EU litigation almost certain. Google will have to pay and change in ways which may be resisted by the nation-state of Google
  3. The comment reflects the machismo of the high tech US company and its hubris. Pride and vanity are believed by some to be a fundamental sin.

So what?

  1. Deconstructing what Google has built over the years may be quite difficult, maybe impossible. Well, that ends one line of retribution.
  2. If one breaks up Google and severs advertising, who can afford to buy it. Maybe the US should punt and nationalize the outfit. Why not let GSA run it? That would be exciting in my opinion.
  3. Google apologizes and keeps on doing what it has been doing for the last 25 years by filing appeals,  lobbying, and waiting out government lawyers who often come and go as Google says, “I was neither / Living nor dead, and I knew nothing.”

Net net: The Google is gonna Google no matter what.

Stephen E Arnold, September 18, 2024

The UK Says, “Okay, Google, Get Out Your Checkbook”

September 13, 2024

green-dino_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumbThis essay is the work of a dumb dinobaby. No smart software required.

I read “British Competition Regulator Objects to Google’s Ad Tech Practices.” The UK is expressing some direct discontent with the Google. The country is making clear that it is not thrilled with the “let ‘em do what they want, pardner” approach of US regulatory agencies. Not surprisingly, like the Netherlands, the government officials are putting the pedal to the metal. The write up reports:

In a statement, the Competition and Markets Authority alleged that the U.S. internet search titan “has harmed competition by using its dominance in online display advertising to favor its own ad tech services.”

I suppose to some the assertion that Google favors itself is not exactly a surprise. The write up continues:

Dan Taylor, Google’s vice president of Google Ads, said that the company disagreed with the CMA’s view and “will respond accordingly.” “Our advertising technology tools help websites and apps fund their content, and enable businesses of all sizes to effectively reach new customers,” Taylor said in an emailed statement. “Google remains committed to creating value for our publisher and advertiser partners in this highly competitive sector. The core of this case rests on flawed interpretations of the ad tech sector.”

image

Good enough illustration, MSFT Copilot.

The explanation from a Googler sounds familiar. Will the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority be convinced? My hunch is that the CMA will not be satisfied with Google’s posture on this hard metal chair. (Does that chair have electrodes attached to its frame and arm rests?)

The write up offers this statement:

In the CMA’s decision Friday, the watchdog said that, since 2015, Google has abused its dominant position as the operator of both ad buying tools “Google Ads” and “DV360,” and of a publisher ad server known as “DoubleClick For Publishers,” in order to strengthen the market position of its advertising exchange, AdX.

Oh, not quite a decade.

Why are European entities ramping up their legal actions? My opinions are:

  1. Google can produce cash. Ka-ching.
  2. The recent ruling that Google is a monopoly is essentially interpreted as a green light for other nation states to give the Google a go.
  3. Non-US regulators are fed up with Google’s largely unchecked behavior and have mustered up courage to try and stop a rolling underground car by standing in front of the massive conveyance and pushing with their bare hands to stop the momentum. (Good luck, folks.)

Net net: More Google pushback may be needed once the bold defiers of mass time velocity are pushed aside.

Stephen E Arnold, September 13, 2024

Brin Is Back and Working Every Day at Google: Will He Be Summoned to Appear and Testify?

September 11, 2024

green-dino_thumb_thumbThis essay is the work of a dumb humanoid. No smart software required.

I read some “real” news in the article “Sergey Brin Says He’s Working on AI at Google Pretty Much Every Day.” The write up does not provide specifics of his employment agreement, but the headline say “every day.” Does this mean that those dragging the Google into court will add him to their witness list? I am not an attorney, but I would be interested in finding out about the mechanisms for the alleged monopolistic lock in in the Google advertising system. Oh, well. I am equally intrigued to know if Mr. Brin will wear his roller blades to big meetings as he did with Viacom’s Big Dog.

My question is, “Can Mr. Brin go home again?” As Thomas Wolfe noted in his novel You Can’t Go Home Again”:

Every corner of our home has a story to tell.

image

I wonder if those dragging Alphabet Google YouTube into court will want to dig into that “story”?

Now what does the “real” news report other than Mr. Brin’s working every day? These items jumped off my screen and into my dinobaby mind:

  1. AI has tremendous value to humanity. I am not sure what this means when VCs, users, and assorted poohbahs point out that AI is burning cash, not generating it.
  2. AI is big and fast moving. Okay, but since the Microsoft AI marketing play with OpenAI, the flurry of activity has not translated to rapid fire next big things. In fact, progress on consumer-facing AI services has stalled. Even Google is reluctant to glue pizza to a crust if you know what I mean.
  3. The algorithms are demanding more “compute.” I think this means power, CPUs, and data. But Google is buying carbon credits, you say. Yeah, those are useful for PR, not for providing what Mr. Brin seems to suggest are needed to do AI.

Several thoughts crossed my mind:

First, most of the algorithms for smart software were presented in patent document form by Banjo, a Softbank company that ran into some headwinds. But the algorithms and numerical recipes were known and explained in Banjo’s patent documents. The missing piece was Google’s “transformer” method, which the company released as open source. Well, so what? The reason that large language models are becoming the same old same old. The Big Dogs of AI are using the same plumbing. Not much is new other than the hyperbole, right?

Second, where does Mr. Brin fit into the Google leadership set up. I am not sure he is in the cast of the Sundar & Prabhakar Comedy Show. What happens when he makes a suggestion? Who “approves” something he puts “wood” behind? Does his presence deliver entropy or chaos? Does he exist on the boundary, working his magic as he did with the Clever technology developed at IBM Almaden?

Third, how quickly will his working “pretty much every day” move him onto witness lists? Perhaps he will be asked to contribute to EU, US House, and US Senate hearings? How will Google work out the lingo of one of the original Googlers and the current “leadership”? The answer is meetings, scripting, and practicing. Aren’t these the things that motivated Mr. Brin to leave the company to pursue other interests. Now he wants

To sum up, just when I thought Google had reached peak dysfunction, I was wrong again.

Stephen E Arnold, September 11, 2024

Google Claims It Fixed Gemini’s “Degenerate” People

September 2, 2024

History revision is a problem. It’s been a problem for…well…since the start of recorded history. The Internet and mass media are infamous for being incorrect about historical facts, but image generating AI, like Google’s Gemini, is even worse. Tech Crunch explains what Google did to correct its inaccurate algorithm: “Google Says It’s Fixed Gemini’s People-Generating Feature.”

Google released Gemini in early 2023, then over a year later paused the chatbot for being too “woke,”“politically incorrect,” and “historically inaccurate.” The worst of Gemini’s offending actions was when it (for example) was asked to depict a Roman legion as ethnically diverse which fit the woke DEI agenda, while when it was asked to make an equally ethnically diverse Zulu warrior army Gemini only returned brown-skinned people. The latter is historically accurate, because Google doesn’t want to offend western ethnic minorities and, of course, Europe (where light skinned pink people originate) was ethnically diverse centuries ago.

Everything was A OK, until someone invoked Godwin’s Law by asking Gemini to generate (degenerate [sic]) an image of Nazis. Gemini returned an ethnically diverse picture with all types of Nazis, not the historically accurate light-skinned Germans-native to Europe.

Google claims it fixed Gemini and it took way longer than planned. The people generative feature is only available to paid Gemini plans. How does Google plan to make its AI people less degenerative? Here’s how:

“According to the company, Imagen 3, the latest image-generating model built into Gemini, contains mitigations to make the people images Gemini produces more “fair.” For example, Imagen 3 was trained on AI-generated captions designed to ‘improve the variety and diversity of concepts associated with images in [its] training data,’ according to a technical paper shared with TechCrunch. And the model’s training data was filtered for “safety,” plus ‘review[ed] … with consideration to fairness issues,’ claims Google…;We’ve significantly reduced the potential for undesirable responses through extensive internal and external red-teaming testing, collaborating with independent experts to ensure ongoing improvement,” the spokesperson continued. ‘Our focus has been on rigorously testing people generation before turning it back on.’”

Google will eventually make it work and the company is smart to limit Gemini’s usage to paid subscriptions. Limiting the user pool means Google can better control the chatbot and (if need be) turn it off. It will work until bad actors learn how to abuse the chatbot again for their own sheets and giggles.

Whitney Grace, September 2, 2024

Yelp Google Legal Matter: A Glimpse of What Is to Come

August 29, 2024

green-dino_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumbThis essay is the work of a dumb dinobaby. No smart software required.

Yelp.com is one of the surviving re-inventions of the Yellow Pages. The online guide includes snapshots of a business, user reviews, and conveniences like classifications of business types. The company has asserted that Google has made the finding services’ life difficult. “Yelp Sues Google in Wake of Landmark Antitrust Ruling on Search” reports:

Yelp has spoken out about what it considers to be Google’s anticompetitive conduct for well over a decade. But the timing of Yelp’s lawsuit, filed just weeks after a Washington federal judge ruled that Google illegally monopolized the search market through exclusive deals, suggests that more companies may be emboldened to take action against the search leader in the coming months.

image

Thanks, MSFT Copilot. Good enough.

Yelp, like other efforts to build a business in the shadow of Google’s monolith has pointed out that the online advertising giant has acted in a way that inhibited Yelp’s business. In the years prior to Judge Mehta’s ruling that Google was — hang on now, gentle reader — a monopoly, Yelp’s objections went nowhere. However, since Google learned that Judge Mehta decided against Google’s arguments that it was a mom and pop business too, Yelp is making another run at Googzilla.

The write up points out:

In its complaint, Yelp recounts how Google at first sought to move users off its search page and out onto the web as quickly as possible, giving rise to a thriving ecosystem of sites like Yelp that sought to provide the information consumers were seeking. But when Google saw just how lucrative it could be to help users find which plumber to hire or which pizza to order, it decided to enter the market itself, Yelp alleges.

What’s an example of Google’s behavior toward Yelp and presumably other competitors? The write up says:

In its complaint, Yelp recounts how Google at first sought to move users off its search page and out onto the web as quickly as possible, giving rise to a thriving ecosystem of sites like Yelp that sought to provide the information consumers were seeking. But when Google saw just how lucrative it could be to help users find which plumber to hire or which pizza to order, it decided to enter the market itself, Yelp alleges.

The Google has, it appears, used a relatively simple method of surfing on queries for Yelp content. The technique is “self preferencing”; that is, Google just lists its own results above Yelp hits.

Several observations:

  1. Yelp has acted quickly, using the information in Judge Mehta’s decision as a surfboard
  2. Other companies will monitor this Yelp Google matter. If Yelp prevails, other companies which perceive themselves as victims of Google’s business tactics may head to court as well
  3. Google finds itself in a number of similar legal dust ups which add operating friction to the online advertising vendor’s business processes.

Google, like Gulliver, may be pinned down, tied up, and neutralized the way Gulliver was in Lilliput. That was satirical fiction; Yelp is operating in actual life.

Stephen E Arnold, August 29, 2024

Google Microtransaction Enabler: Chrome Beefs Up Its Monetization Options

August 29, 2024

green-dino_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_t[1]_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumbThis essay is the work of a dumb dinobaby. No smart software required.

For its next trick, Google appears to be channeling rival Amazon. We learn from TechRadar that “Google Is Developing a New Web Monetization Feature for Chrome that Could Really Change the Way We Pay for Things Online.” Will this development distract anyone from the recent monopoly ruling?

Writer Kristina Terech explains how Web Monetization will work for commercial websites:

“In a new support document published on the Google Chrome Platform Status site, Google explains that Web Monetization is a new technology that will enable website owners ‘to receive micro payments from users as they interact with their content.’ Google states its intention is noble, writing that Web Monetization is designed to be a new option for webmasters and publishers to generate revenue in a direct manner that’s not reliant on ads or subscriptions. Google explains that with Web Monetization, users would pay for content while they consume it. It’s also added a new HTML link element for websites to add to their URL address to indicate to the Chrome browser that the website supports Web Monetization. If this is set correctly in the website’s URL, for websites that facilitate users setting up digital wallets on it, when a person visits that website, a new monetization session would be created (for that person) on the site. I’m immediately skeptical about monetizing people’s attention even further than it already is, but Google reassures us that visitors will have control over the whole process, like the choice of sites they want to reward in this way and how much money they want to spend.”

But like so many online “choices,” how many users will pay enough attention to make them? I share Terech’s distaste for attention monetization, but that ship has sailed. The danger here (or advantage, for merchants): Many users will increase their spending by barely noticeable amounts that add up to a hefty chunk in the end. On the other hand, the feature could reduce costly processing charges by eliminating per-payment fees for merchants. Whether end users see those savings, though, depends on whether vendors choose to pass them along.

Cynthia Murrell, August 29, 2024

« Previous PageNext Page »

  • Archives

  • Recent Posts

  • Meta