Should Scientific Collaboration Be Easier?
July 28, 2022
One of the Internet’s greatest benefits is that it offers scientists and other smart people the chance to collaborate across the globe. The United Nations and other researchers state that collaboration is essential to solving global warming, biodiversity loss, and curing pandemics. However, The Conversation says it is not that easy in the article, “It’s Getting Harder For Scientists To Collaborate Across Borders-That’s Bad When The World Faces Problems Like Pandemics And Climate Change.”
Collaboration with non-Western countries, such as the tuberculosis research network between South Africa, China, India, Russia, and Brazil led to advancements in basic and applied research. Unfortunately, Earth’s most powerful countries, increases in their nationalism, Russia’s war with Ukraine, and the COVID-19 pandemic have made it difficult for researchers to work together.
Russia has stopped working with all collaboration efforts from the arts to climate science in the Arctic. China has stopped working with the United States on projects involving quantum computing and microelectronics. Russia, China, and other countries have turned science into a tool for international politics.
Stopping international research collaboration is bad:
“But reducing or stopping international research comes with its own risks. It slows down the production of knowledge needed to address long-term global problems and reduces the potential for future scientific collaboration… First, the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 led to an increased openness in global scientific exchange. In particular, there was growth in the number of students from developing and non-Western countries going to universities in the West. This movement formed networks of researchers from many countries. Second, massively collaborative scientific efforts – such as the Human Genome Project – as well as the ever-growing importance of expensive, large research laboratories and instruments have fueled international collaboration. Finally, the digital revolution has made it much easier to communicate and share data across borders. This all resulted in collaborative and fruitful research in many fields including gene technology, climate science and artificial intelligence. While Western countries dominated the scientific landscape of the 20th century, globalization has benefited many non-Western countries.”
The European Union, China, and United States are competing for technological and scientific leadership. The US and European Union explained that the loss of scientific and technological leadership leads to fewer economic opportunities and threatens democracy.
The US does want to limit China’s international influence and scientific progress. The US launched a large anti-espionage effort called the China Initiative to uncover connections US-Chinese links in corporate and academic sectors. Nothing was substantiated, but three US-based scholars were convicted when they failed to disclose Chinese ties. The China Initiative was criticized, then President Biden ended it in 2022.
The US, however, still has trade sanctions on Chinese countries to curtail China’s science and technology industries. The European Union is doing the same. China wants its science, technology, and scholarly industries to serve its interests. All three powers are wary of any collaboration.
Scientists want to work together, but governments and dictators ruin the fun for everyone.
Whitney Grace, July 28, 2022
Ka-Ching: The Old Sound of New Revenue for the European Union
July 21, 2022
New billing cycle begins. Two benefits. The first is more revenue from fines on US big tech money spinners and the second is a good old school slide tackle with the cleats up. Ouch.
“DMA: Council Gives Final Approval to New Rules for Fair Competition Online” states:
The [Digital Marketing Act] DMA ensures a digital level playing field that establishes clear rights and rules for large online platforms (‘gatekeepers’) and makes sure that none of them abuses their position. Regulating the digital market at EU level will create a fair and competitive digital environment, allowing companies and consumers to benefit from digital opportunities.
And the bold face? That was part of the cited announcement. Ka-ching, slide, oh, broken shin, too bad, mon ami.
The write up elaborated that the Silicon Valley type of logical and efficiency centric companies will no longer be allowed to:
- rank their own products or services higher than those of others (self-preferencing)
- pre-install certain apps or software, or prevent users from easily un-installing these apps or software
- require the most important software (e.g. web browsers) to be installed by default when installing an operating system
- prevent developers from using third-party payment platforms for app sales
- reuse private data collected during a service for the purposes of another service.
Now the ka-ching part. Fines can be up to 20 percent of worldwide revenues. That means that the fines levied by Russia’s estimable agencies are small, brown, shriveled potatoes.
Then the slide tackle: The high tech “way above the clouds in self confidence and entitlement” will have to “inform the European Commission of their acquisitions and mergers.”
Well, so what? That’s an email, right?
Not so fast. A failure to “inform” means the 20 percent fee kicks in. A sluggishness, a bad attitude, and the old let’s apologize tactic will beget additional legislation.
What if the big dude-oids don’t follow the rules?
Just between you and me, okay, renting an apartment in France can be complicated. Now imagine how complicated it will become when the EU creates an environment in which regulatory authorities take a close interest in any touch point with a member. How about flying into Frankfort and being escorted to a return flight to the US? What about a private jet with a happy Silicon Valley-type logo on its tail being refused access to air space? What about some of those interesting employer-employee requirements: Lunch for a French staff in Paris is trivial to employment regulations not codified in a single law.
The write up resonates with that most musical sound: Ka-ching, ka-ching, ka-ching. Why? The agreement was adopted.
Stephen E Arnold, July 21, 2022
US Elected Officials Leap to the Aid of Consumers, Voters, and Those Who Have Not Spent Enough for Influence Peddlers
July 20, 2022
Over the years, I have enjoyed the very, very slow realization that search results are NOT objective, that user privacy is NOT a priority, and that Congressional investigations are NOT particularly rigorous. Remember those statements, “Senator, thank you for the question.” The statement is followed by jibber jabber that makes clear the person representing a giant firm does not know [a] much about what the business does, [b] is not sure about what the impact of those processes have, and [c] are mostly concerned with nest feathering and reputation grooming.
I thought about my past secret pleasures when I read “Internal Documents Show Facebook and Google Discussing Platform Strategies: The House Judiciary Committee Released New Documents Tuesday.” The write up reports as actual factual behavior:
The documents were obtained by the House Judiciary Committee as part of its lengthy investigation into anticompetitive behavior from Amazon, Apple, Google, and Facebook’s parent company Meta. The investigation wrapped up in 2020, but the newly published emails, memos, and reports provide new evidence backing the committee’s calls to advance tougher competition rules for the tech industry.
Okay, about a two year or more delay between having documents and fortuitously, sincerely, responsibly sharing the information.
Let’s see. I think the people releasing the documents in this expeditious manner affect high-tech companies. These are, in my opinion, exemplars of ethical capitalism which have contributed to [a] the destruction of small retail and service businesses, [b] fostered disunity with echo-chamber content recommendation scripts, [c] egregious management actions with regard to those who disagree or who generate babies in a legal department, [d] twisting procedures to create new revenue opportunities, and [e] just being all around great people at high school reunions, Aspen Institute gatherings, and at NCAA basketball playoff games.
If you want to read these documents, you can navigate to this page, live as of July 20, 2022: https://judiciary.house.gov/online-platforms-and-market-power/additional-documents.htm
My suggestion is that one should access the documents more quickly that the elected officials released them. Like information about the MIC, RAC, and ZPIC activities, data can disappear from a government Web site. Poof. Gone.
I am now officially laughing at this document dump and its timing. Ho ho ho. There are more Amazon documents than information from either Facebook or the Google. Lovable Amazon. Who knew?
Stephen E Arnold, July 20, 2022
NSO Group: Lobbying Is Often Helpful
July 20, 2022
More NSO Group news. “Pegasus Spyware Maker NSO Is Conducting a Lobbying Campaign to Get Off U.S. Blacklist.” The article states as actual factual:
NSO has invested hundreds of thousands of dollars in the past year in payments to lobbyists, public relations companies and law firms in the U.S., in the hope of reversing the Biden administration’s November decision, according to public records filed under the Foreign Agent Registration Act and conversations with people familiar with the effort. These firms have approached members of the U.S. House and Senate, as well as various media outlets and think tanks across the U.S., on NSO’s behalf.
Who knew? NSO Group has been able to attract media attention for months.
The write up points out:
NSO is trying to get the matter raised during a meeting between U.S. President Joe Biden and Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid when the former visits Israel this week. In addition, NSO lobbyists unsuccessfully tried to set up a meeting between representatives of the company and U.S. National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan, but it did not take place. Asked for comment, an NSO spokesperson declined to comment on the campaign but “thanked” Shomrim for publishing an article on its efforts, which he described as “supportive.”
Interesting. Why won’t world leaders do what a high tech outfit providing specialized services want?
NSO Group has been trying to explain its position; for example, the cited article notes:
In a different letter distributed by the firm this year, NSO states it has “developed a human rights governance compliance program,” saying it would conduct a review of all users to see whether they might use the technology used to “violate human rights.”
In my upcoming lecture for a law enforcement group, I point out that with each passing day it is increasingly difficult to figure out what information is “valid”. As a result, the utility of open source information is eroding. Perhaps the Golden Age of OSINT is darkened with weaponized information?
Interesting?
Stephen E Arnold, July 20, 2022
TikTok: Slipping and Dipping or Plotting and Planning?
July 15, 2022
I read “TikTok Aborts Europe, US Expansion Ambitions Shortly After US Senate Inquiry.” Surprising? Not really. TikTok and its ByteDance Ltd. “partner” is it appears rethinking how to capitalize on its popularity among the most avid, short attention span clickers. The article explains that TikTok is not too keen on selling via its baby super app. The reasons are, according to the cited article and the estimable orange newspaper, are “internal problems and failure to gain traction with consumers.”
With the management savvy of the Chinese government, it seems to me that resolving “internal problems” was a straightforward process. Identify the dissenter and let the re-education camps work their magic. The problem with “traction” is that I don’t see much hard evidence that a super app which bundles promoting, buying and selling is unpopular with consumers. The TikTok generation is pretty happy following an influencer and buying whatever the person pitches: Coffee, wellness stuff, makeup, and “so cute” gym clothes.
For me the news story is too far from the horseshoe stake of credibility. I think we have a PR play engineered to get people to say, “See, TikTok is a company which recognizes that it cannot do everything.”
I am skeptical. Here are three reasons I spelled out to my colleagues at lunch today:
- TikTok denizens are selling and are unlikely to stop. At some point, ByteDance is going to want a piece of the action.
- TikTok is becoming a super app. Its users will demand additional functionality. If it is not delivered, the clever little clickers will create add ins. Will ByteDance sit on its hands and fail to monetize enhancements and extensions to the TikTok app?
- TikTok does not want to be shut down; therefore, cooing and trying to avoid getting in trouble with US and European regulators is a high priority. Why? The data are priceless.
Net net: Will TikTok do the adulting to behave in a non capitalistic manner? Pick one: [a] No or [b] No. This is less of a company versus company action and more of a government playing Go against an opponent playing checkers.
Stephen E Arnold, July 15, 2022
UK Court Not into MI5, MI6, and GCHQ Methods
July 1, 2022
I read “After Landmark Legal Defeat MI5 Will Have to Get Authorization to Snoop.” In my recent lecture for the Massachusetts Association of Crime Analysts, I pointed out that the political environment for certain types of information collection was volatile. Furthermore, even open sources of information come in shades of gray. This means that information available on the Web could in some situations be deemed inappropriate for use by government authorities.
The write up states:
Liberty lawyer Megan Goulding said: “This judgment is a major victory in the fight against mass surveillance. The court has agreed that it’s too easy for the security services to get their hands on our data.
Some will be happy with this ruling; others will not be thrilled. What’s clear is that the “golden age” for certain types of information access is changing. Will the US, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand fall in line?
Stephen E Arnold, July 1, 2022
Indonesia: Good Actors and Bad Actors May Be Interested
June 30, 2022
I am not sure how the “new” visa described in “Indonesia Is Offering A Special Visa To Remote Workers, Allowing Them To Stay There For 5 Years Tax-Free, Including The Dream Destination, Bali.” The write up reports:
Freelancers and remote workers will soon be able to work tax-free in Indonesia, including the island of Bali, as the country’s tourism minister Sandiaga Uno announced the five-year ‘digital nomad visa’…
I did not know that Indonesia had a slogan; namely, “sun, sea and sand.” The proposed visa will shift the emphasis about 180 degrees to “serenity, spirituality and sustainability.” Got it? Sure.
The write up notes:
Living tax-free isn’t always a guarantee if you’re granted a digital nomad visa. For example, Americans will still have to file taxes if they’re granted one, because the US taxes citizens based on citizenship itself, rather than their residence.
The write up points out “there are snakes in Indonesia. If the visa plan becomes a reality, a few digital snakes may enliven daily life. Bad actors with a laptop may appear to be Silicon Valley wizards eager to avoid the rigors of work elsewhere. No Zooms when the surfs up.
Stephen E Arnold, June 30, 2022
NSO Group: The EU Parliament Has an Annoyed Committee
June 27, 2022
I almost made it through a week without another wild and crazy NSO Group Pegasus kerfuffle. Almost is not good enough. I read “EU Parliament’s Pegasus Committee Fires Against NSO Group.” Do committees tote kinetic weapons in Western Europe?
The write up states:
On Tuesday (21 June), the committee scrutinized the NSO Group by questioning Chaim Gelfand, the tech firm’s General Counsel and Chief Compliance Officer. The MEP and rapporteur Sophie in ‘t Veld said the way Gelfand responded to or declined to answer several questions was “an insult to our intelligence” and that there was a “complete disconnect between reality and what you are saying”.
Does this mean “dismissive”? Maybe “arrogant”? Possibly “exasperated”?
The write up includes a question from a Polish representative; to wit:
“Who and how was checking the governments of Hungary and Poland? How on earth could they be verified by you?”
Not surprisingly, NSO Group has yet to find the equivalent of Meta (Zuckbook’s spokes human). Perhaps NSO Group will find an individual who does not stimulate EU Parliament committee members to be more forceful?
Stephen E Arnold, June 27, 2022
Some Podcast Pundits Will Not Be Outputting from China
June 27, 2022
I read “China Bans Over 30 Live-Streaming Behaviors, Demands Qualifications to Discuss Law, Finance, Medicine.” (You will have to pay to read the full text of the story. Because… capitalism.) The main point of this story is that live streaming and probably any other digital outputting will be subject to scrutiny. Topics are tricky. In general, one must have “qualifications” beyond having worked for a “real news” outfit or graduated from a university which accepts bribes for non rowing crew members.
Other issues involve showing flashy goods and products or flouncing on a foam mattress whilst throwing cash money in the air.
The big point is that those outputting content have to have qualifications. And what are those qualifications? The article does suggest that the Chinese government is not providing that type of irrelevant detail. I assume that once a violator who chatters about law, medicine, money, or some similar minor subject, the full scope of the transgression will be addressed at re-education programs.
Pull off a deep fake like smart software telling Seinfeld jokes and you may get special attention. Have you ever heard about Chinese death vans? No. If you run into me at a conference, be sure to ask. I have a photo too.
Will podcasts and podcasters, streamers, and other assorted creator outputs be regulated in the US?
That’s a question to which I don’t have an answer. Digital remains a Wild West. No sheriffs, US marshals, or re-education camp directors in sight.
For now.
Stephen E Arnold, June 27, 2022
Singapore: How Disneyland with a Death Penalty Approaches Crypto
June 23, 2022
I read “Singapore Regulator Vows to Be Unrelentingly Hard on Crypto.” The approach seems to be a bit different from the control mechanisms used in the US. (You will have to pay to read the orange newspaper’s story.) The write up states:
Singapore will be “brutal and unrelentingly hard” on bad behavior in the crypto industry, according to its fintech policy chief, marking a stark shift in rhetoric after years of the city-state courting the sector.
The report suggests that Singapore sees value in a central bank digital currency and a “platform” for financial activities.
From my perspective, [a] Singapore understands the potential upsides and downsides of crypto currency and wants to be a player, [b] Singapore sees a void because certain leading nation states are dithering, and [c] there’s money to be made.
Money, control, and filling a void — Good reasons perhaps.
Stephen E Arnold, June xx, 2022
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
