Facebook: What Is a Threat to the Company?
October 29, 2019
I spotted a headline on Techmeme. Rewriting headlines is part of the Techmeme approach to communication. The link to which the headline points is this New York Times article. Here is the NYT headline:
Dissent Erupts at Facebook Over Hands-Off Stance on Political Ads
This is the Techmeme headline:
Sources: over 250 Facebook employees have signed a letter visible on an internal forum that says letting politicians lie in ads is “a threat” to the company
The messages are almost the same: Staff push back is a problem. But isn’t it part of the current high-tech company ethos.
The threat is management’s inability to maintain control. Companies typically work toward a goal; for example, manufacturing video doorbells or selling asbestos free baby powder. (Okay, those a bad examples.)
Perhaps something larger is afoot?
The corrosion of a ethical fabric allows certain aspects of human behavior to move through a weakened judgmental membrane may be more significant. The problem is not Facebook’s alone.
Are there similarities between a company shipping baby powder with questionable ingredients and Facebook?
Interesting question.
Stephen E Arnold, October 29, 2019
Economists: The Borjes Approach
October 28, 2019
Now this is a source among sources: Epoch Times. DarkCyber is not equipped to identify the information in “Krugman Admits He and Mainstream Economists Got Globalization Wrong.” One point in the write up evoked memories of a college course when I was a callow youth; to wit:
the consensus economists failed to measure adequately and properly account for the impact of globalization on specific communities, some of which were disproportionately hit hard. This despite the fact that models predicted, and figures later showed, that free trade was a net gain in terms of both jobs and wages in the broader American economy. Generalized gain but localized pain.
There you go. Better for everyone. Not so good for some others.
In business, the technology magnets are doing fine. Local retail shops, not so fine. Some countries are chugging along. Others seems to be shifting into riot mode. Planning a trip to Bogota, Lima, or Paris for a three day week end soon?
What about that college economics class through which I sat asking such questions as, “What is this professor talking about?” and “Have I awakened in a short story by Jose Luis Borges?”
Maybe the Epoch Times is neither wrong nor right about Paul Krugman? Paradoxical thoughts have legs in the online world. What’s real and what’s fake? Think of those riders in the wasteland in front of what seems to be a mountain range. Borges did and look what that earned him.
Stephen E Arnold, October 28, 2019
Amazon: Specialist in Complexity
October 22, 2019
The word “complexification” is tailor made for Amazon. A couple of examples might be helpful, right?
- Third party sellers provide expired food. Something’s wrong it seems. Complexification of the vendor vetting, product vetting, and warehouse vetting processes might be a reason. (I am setting aside “profit at all costs” because who wants to rain on the Amazon bulldozer.
- AWS services. Really, who can name the different types of Amazon databases. There’s an Oracle killer, an unstructured data killer, there’s an Amazon blockchain solution that’s just perfect for Dubai. Can’t keep ‘em straight? Take a cheap course in how to speak Amazon, you dynamo, you.
- Return authorizations. Use Opera? Well, the labels don’t print correctly. Call a human? It is helpful to speak two or three languages other than English. English as she is spoken at Amazon is — well, let’s think about it this way — may not be what talking heads on CNBC speak.
But the most interesting complexity problem concerns Twitch. Twitch may be a problem for YouTube and — get this, gentle reader — Facebook.
The hitch in the git along was summarized this way by Verge’s interview with Emmett Shear, the big Twitcher. Here’s the passage I noted:
The changes are coming, Shear said, because the company didn’t think it was doing well enough when it talked to streamers about moderating their channels. There were streamers with teams that had everything working, but there were also streamers who felt overwhelmed and like they couldn’t figure out how to use all of Twitch’s moderation tools. “It popped as a problem,” Shear said. “We decided we had to do better. And I think it’s a big step in the right direction.” Twitch’s moderation philosophy, in general, comprises two parts: enforcement works on the level of the individual and on the level of the platform.
Okay, complexity, two tier moderation, and a lack of “transparency.” Transparency is an interesting word because it suggests making stuff clear. A lack of transparency means stuff is not clear.
Complexity?
Yes.
In my recent lecture at the TechnoSecurity & Digital Forensics Conference I offered a few examples of Twitch’s challenges:
- Streaming gambling with links to donate money to the gamblers and tips for getting an advantage
- SweetSaltyPeach’s soft excitement morphing into RachelKay’s really dull doing nothing but providing a momentary glimpse of the old formula for success
- A first run movie available via a stream.
Net net: Amazon’s fatal flaw may be its burgeoning complexity. Not even Bezos billions can make some things simple, clear, and easy to understand.
If Twitchers can’t figure out what to do, what will lesser mortals in government agencies achieve? Let’s watch Dubai for clues.
Stephen E Arnold, October 21, 2019
Oxford University and HobbyLobby: A Criminal Duo?
October 17, 2019
I have wandered around Oxford and its hallowed halls. Interesting place. Not much going on. I have also visited a HobbyLobby. Lots going on. My take: Oxford was snooty; HobbyLobby was crass.
I read “Oxford Professor Accused of selling Ancient Bible Fragments.” When I saw the headline, I thought about MIT and its tie up and cover up of its Jeffrey Epstein connection.
What’s with universities?
The write up states:
An Oxford University professor has been accused of selling ancient Bible fragments to a controversial US company that has been involved in several high-profile scandals related to its aggressive purchases of biblical artifacts.
DarkCyber noted:
Commenting after the statement on Monday, Nongbri [New Testament scholar],said: “The sale of the manuscripts and the attempt to cover it up by removing records is almost unbelievable. But the first thing to note are the words ‘so far’. We don’t yet know the full extent of this. More items may well have been sold to Hobby Lobby.”
No digital connection. No Dark Web. Just a prestigious institution and an outfit which sells stuff to people who create owl plaques in their ovens.
Remember. Just allegations.
Stephen E Arnold, October 17, 2019
IQ and Health: Maybe Plausible?
October 16, 2019
DarkCyber noted the Scientific American (is this an oxymoron now?) article “Bad News for the Highly Intelligent: Superior IQs Aare Associated with Mental and Physical Disorders, Research Suggests.” DarkCyber enjoys the waffling baked into to the phrase “research suggests.”
The write up states:
The survey of Mensa’s highly intelligent members found that they were more likely to suffer from a range of serious disorders.
The write up reports:
The biggest differences between the Mensa group and the general population were seen for mood disorders and anxiety disorders.
A reasonable question to pose is, “Why?” Well, there is an answer:
To explain their findings, Karpinski [the researcher] and her colleagues propose the hyper brain/hyper body theory. This theory holds that, for all of its advantages, being highly intelligent is associated with psychological and physiological “over excitabilities,” or OEs. A concept introduced by the Polish psychiatrist and psychologist Kazimierz Dabrowski in the 1960s, an OE is an unusually intense reaction to an environmental threat or insult. This can include anything from a startling sound to confrontation with another person.
We noted this paragraph:
Psychological OEs include a heighted tendency to ruminate and worry, whereas physiological OEs arise from the body’s response to stress. According to the hyper brain/hyper body theory, these two types of OEs are more common in highly intelligent people and interact with each other in a “vicious cycle” to cause both psychological and physiological dysfunction. For example, a highly intelligent person may overanalyze a disapproving comment made by a boss, imagining negative outcomes that simply wouldn’t occur to someone less intelligent. That may trigger the body’s stress response, which may make the person even more anxious.
Interesting. Over excitabilities. A more informal way to reach a similar conclusion is to attend a hacker conference, observe the employee (not contractor) dining facility at Google Mountain View, or watch an episode or two of Sharktank. One can also dip into history: Van Gogh’s ear, Michelangelo’s aversion to clean feet, and the fierce Prioritätsstreit between Newton and Leibnitz. (Leibnitz’s notation won. Take that, you first-year students.) Do you hear a really smart person laughing?
Stephen E Arnold, October 16, 2019
Robots: Not Animals?
October 9, 2019
The prevailing belief is that if Google declares something to be true, then it is considered a fact. The same can be said about YouTube, because if someone sees it on YouTube then, of course, it must be real. YouTube already has trouble determining what truly is questionable content. For example, YouTube does not flag white supremacy and related videos taken down. Another curious YouTube incident about flagged content concerns robot abuse, “YouTube Concedes Robot Fight Videos Are Not Actually Animal Cruelty After Removing Them By Mistake” from Gizmodo.
YouTube rules state that videos displaying animals suffering, such as dog and cock fights, cannot be posted on the streaming service. For some reason, videos and channels centered on robot fighting were cited and content was removed.
“…the takedowns were first noted by YouTube channel Maker’s Muse and affected several channels run by Battle Bots contenders, including Jamison Go of Team SawBlaze (who had nine videos taken down) and Sarah Pohorecky of Team Uppercut. Pohorecky told Motherboard she estimated some 10 to 15 builders had been affected, with some having had multiple videos removed. There didn’t appear to be any pattern in the titles of either the videos or the robots themselves, beyond some of the robots being named after animals, she added.”
YouTube’s algorithms make mistakes and robots knocking the gears and circuit boards out of each other was deemed violent, along the lines of “inflicting suffering.” YouTubers can appeal removal citations, so that content can be reviewed again.
Google humans doing human deciding. Interesting.
Whitney Grace, October 9, 2019
MIT Thinks the Ideas of US Attorney General Are Not Good
October 4, 2019
Let’s put this article “Facebook Is Being Asked to Give Access to Encrypted Messages. It’s a Bad Idea” is perspective. First, a number of countries have taken steps to deal with the unexpected consequences of encrypted real time messages. Example? Australia. The issues range from the application of a non slick coating to routine criminal misbehavior to larger-scale actions. Example: Paris night club bombing.
MIT, as you may recall, tried to push under a mattress in Baker House, some interesting information; specifically:
- Gifts from Jeffrey Epstein. You can read the MIT president’s explanation in “Preliminary Fact Finding about MIT and Jeffrey Epstein”
- The Boston Globe’s characterization of the MIT Epstein tie up as sordid
- The alleged cover up the esteemed institution used to disconnect MIT from the interesting person Jeffrey Epstein.
As a result, I am not sure I am convinced that the arguments set forth in the “Facebook Is Being Asked” write up is in alignment of with my 76 year old ethical compass.
There are some involved in law enforcement and intelligence activities seeking ways to deal with the threats — yes, threats — from bright-as-a-button engineers’ innovation machines.
The problem is that when an institution aligned with Jeffrey Epstein suggests that the US Attorney General has a bad idea, why not focus on the processes which created the MIT-Epstein tie up. Once that’s fixed, maybe — just maybe — I will view MIT’s and its instruments’ pronouncements as objective, credible, and in the best interests of dealing with certain problems certain bright-as-a-button innovators have created.
Stephen E Arnold, October 4, 2019
MIT and Mendacity
September 27, 2019
I am back from a fun series of locations. Nifty USSR style apartment blocks, big statues, and weird refrigerator magnets. I missed the thrill and excitement of MIT’s struggles with ethics and money. (Spoiler: Money won it seems.)
I noted this write up a few moments ago:
This MIT Press Reader article observes:
It isn’t possible for everyone to live on principle; as a practical matter, many of us must make compromises in asymmetrical relationships, without the control or consent for which we might wish. In those situations — everyday 21st-century life — there are still ways to carve out spaces of resistance, counterargument, and autonomy.
Good to know about the irrelevance of principle. MIT thinking in full bloom.
Embrace obfuscation; for example:
Obfuscation assumes that the signal can be spotted in some way and adds a plethora of related, similar, and pertinent signals — a crowd which an individual can mix, mingle, and, if only for a short time, hide.
You get the idea. Deception.
John Kenneth Galbraith was on the right track. He allegedly said:
Among all the world’s races, some obscure Bedouin tribes possibly apart, Americans are the most prone to misinformation. This is not the consequence of any special preference for mendacity, although at the higher levels of their public administration that tendency is impressive. It is rather that so much of what they themselves believe is wrong.
On my flight back to the US, I read “How an Élite University Research Center Concealed Its Relationship with Jeffrey Epstein.” The New Yorker makes clear that MIT’s attempts to cover up (obfuscate) its relationship with Mr. Epstein, the deceased person of interest with allegedly improper interests in young girls, did not work.
But there’s more. I read “M.I.T. Media Lab, Already Rattled by the Epstein Scandal, Has a New Worry” which stated in the typical New York Times manner:
Four researchers who worked on OpenAg said in interviews with The New York Times that Mr. Harper had made exaggerated or false claims about the project to its corporate sponsors, a group that included the retail giant Target, as well as in interviews with the news media.
Enough already.
How does one spell “mendacity”? Does it start with the letter “M”?
I wonder if top flight academic institutions are what they seem. Maybe some institutions are obfuscating but failing.
I wonder if there is a Bulgarian refrigerator magnet for doing the best one can under difficult circumstances.
Stephen E Arnold, September 27, 2019
Google: Managing Staff a Challenge
September 24, 2019
DarkCyber is not sure about the accuracy of “Exclusive: Google Insider Turns Over 950 Pages Of Docs And Laptop To DOJ.” The story appeared on Saraacarter.com (the second “a” is a middle initial). Ms. Carter’s about page states:
Sara A. Carter is a national and international award-winning investigative reporter whose stories have ranged from national security, terrorism, immigration and front line coverage of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Sara A. Carter is currently an investigative reporter and Fox News Contributor. Her stories can be found at saraacarter.com. She formerly worked as a senior national security correspondent for Circa News.
The write up asserts that:
A former Google insider claiming the company created algorithms to hide its political bias within artificial intelligence platforms – in effect targeting particular words, phrases and contexts to promote, alter, reference or manipulate perceptions of Internet content – delivered roughly 950 pages of documents to the Department of Justice’s Antitrust division Friday.
The story is dated August 13, 2019, and DarkCyber spotted the link on September 23, 2019. In August 2019, Project Veritas revealed that the alleged Google insider is / was Zachary Vorhies.
Project Veritas does have a Google Document Dump page. You can view the files and download them at this link. A representative document is “Algorithmic Discrimination from and Environmental Psychology Perspective: Str5ee-Inducing Differential Treatment.”
The write up is an academic review of findings which, upon reflection, are mostly common sense. Manipulation can be accomplished via stress causing and stress relieving.
What struck DarkCyber as interesting is that the cache of documents has not made much of a splash in the last few weeks.
Other observations include:
- Unlike the now long-offline Google research papers which I cited in my 2003 Google Legacy monograph, the documents in this cache are more touchy-feely.
- Google’s ability to control its confidential documents appears to have some gaps.
- The “insider” turned canary reveals that Google is not generating happy Xooglers.
Net net: The high school science club approach to management may need some upgrades.
Stephen E Arnold, September 24, 2019
Yeah, We Are Sorry. Very, Very Sorry
September 8, 2019
If you do not remember the name James Damore, he was a former Google employee who authored the Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber aka the Google memo that described Google’s diversity as an “ideological echo chamber,” where the company believes that disparities are caused by oppression and attempts to fix them through reverse discrimination. Google fired James Damore after the memo made the rounds inside and outside the company. One Redditor named TiredOfLying4Google posted, “I Helped Google Screw Over James Damore” in the James Damore subreddit.
TiredOfLying4Google started that he/she saw the memo internally a month before it went viral. Google human resources did nothing, except send the memo up the reporting chain as internal feedback. When Damore’s memo leaked, Google took action:
“Unfortunately, the memo started spreading within the company. The floodgates opened and previously silent employees started talking. To quell dissent, we: told executives to write to their employees condemning the memo; manipulated our internal Memegen to bias the ratings towards anti-Damore posts (the head of Memegen is an “ally” to the diversity cause); and gave every manager talking points on what to tell their reports about the memo. In all our communications, we concentrated on how hurt employees purportedly were and diverted attention from Google’s discriminatory employment practices and political hegemony, never mind the science.”
TiredOfLying4Google continued that the company wanted to make an example of Damore, so they spied on him and tried to find a reason to terminate his employment. They did not discover anything, but his devices became extremely slow and probably prevented him from rallying support. Upon his dismissal, Google employees were afraid to speak up. TiredOfLying4Google also said that Google’s reputation took a hit.
Damore apparently knew about Google’s dubious practices, including Dragonfly-the censored Chinese search engine. TiredOfLying4Google was surprised Damore did not report those secrets, claiming Damore probably cared about Google.
Google took more extreme measures by cancelling an employee town hall to address the controversy, placed the blame on “alt-right trolls”, planted information with journalists, and controlled the entirety of the NLRB case and class action lawsuit. Google used its money, influence, and power to create false information to support dismissing Damore and keeping their employees in line. Damore does not hold any power and Google will continue to hold sway.
Whitney Grace, September 8, 2019
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
