India: Breaking Search via Censorship
February 13, 2012
Oh, boy, more censorship momentum. Reuters reports, “Internet Giants Pull Content After Warning in India Courts.” Google and Facebook have caved to India’s demands that they remove content considered offensive to Hindus, Muslims, and/or Christians. The government is attempting to head off religious conflict, but is censorship in the world’s largest democracy really the best way to do so?
The Indian law passed last year gives companies three days to remove offensive content once they receive a complaint. The article notes that Google, Facebook, Yahoo, and Microsoft have appealed to the Delhi High Court in a case brought by journalist Vinay Rai. Writers Arup Roychoudhury and Harichandan Arakali informed us:
The High Court has yet to rule on their appeal, but the sitting judge warned in January they were responsible for content on their websites and said he could block sites ‘like China’ if they did not get their house in order. In the Rai case, the court ordered the companies to stand trial for offences relating to the distribution of obscene material to minors, after being shown images it said were offensive to Prophet Mohammed, Jesus and various Hindu gods and goddesses, as well as several political leaders.
Wait, political leaders? Ponder that one for a moment.
The judge may have threatened China-like measures, but India is actually a censorship lightweight compared to some nation states and companies which operate as nation states. Search is tough enough without information going missing and libraries getting marginalized.
Cynthia Murrell, February 13, 2012
Sponsored by Pandia.com
Survey Finds Trust in Governments Sharply Eroded
February 11, 2012
From the “we don’t know if this is accurate” department:
If you’re a government and need a reason for censorship, look no further than RT’s “People Let Down by Government Turning to Social Networks.” The write up reveals:
The Edelman Trust Barometer has found that people around the world have lost trust in their governments over the course of the last year. . . . Among the main causes for such a downturn, [Edlelman CDO Robert] Phillips said, is the dispersion of authority and the rise of social media.
The annual survey asks residents of 25 countries about their feelings on government, businesses, and non-governmental organizations. This is the sharpest drop in trust in the US and European governments the company has found since beginning these surveys a dozen years ago. Instead, folks are placing their confidence in peer networks.
Could social media be a threat to the untrusted? If so, perhaps censorship is a comin’ round the mountain. Yep, here she comes. And one cannot search if the information is not in the indexes, right?
Cynthia Murrell, February 11, 2012
Sponsored by Pandia.com
NASA and Innovation
February 6, 2012
Short honk: Navigate to “USA Kills Mars Missions.” Now NASA once suggested innovation, boldness, and a try-and-try-again approach to quality control. Remember O rings? If the news story is accurate, NASA is pulling out of another possibly bold adventure. The story said:
The American space agency looks set to pull the plug on its joint missions to Mars with the European Space Agency. Nasa has told Esa it is now highly unlikely it will be able to contribute to the endeavors, which envision an orbiting satellite and a big roving robot being sent to the Red Planet.
To make the story more important, there was a quote to note; to wit:
"I cannot pretend the situation is not grim," commented Dr David Parker, director of science, technology and exploration at the UK Space Agency (UKSA).
Now one must ask questions about other innovations; for example, the search and content processing system in use at NASA. Bold or mousey? The good news is that this pull out is an example of exogenous complexity, which dooms an action due to considerations beyond a manager’s control.
Stephen E Arnold, February 7, 2012
Sponsored by Pandia.com
NASA and Technical Information Search
February 2, 2012
I recall a Popular Science feature called “The Top 10 Failed NASA Missions.” I dug through my files and the story ran in March 2009. You can find a version of the article online, at least today, February 2, 2012, at 8 30 am Eastern. Tomorrow? Who knows.
A happy quack to The Doctor Weighs In.
Among the flops mentioned were:
- The Orbiting Carbon Observatory. I thought that the test lasted 17 minutes was interesting.
- Helios. This solar powered flying wing thing managed a 30 minute flight before crashing.
- Genesis. After catching “pieces of the sun” as Popular Science phrased it, the parachute did not open, but scientists were able to pick up pieces from the Utah desert. Progress!
- SBIRS. This was a passel of surveillance satellites. I don’t know much about SBIRS beyond the $10 billion cost overrun. According the Popular Science, one government official described SBIRS as a “useless ice cube.”
I was curious about post 2009 NASA activities. I could not locate a historical run down of alleged missteps, but I found “NASA Glory Mission Ends in Failure”, published by the BBC. The article asserted:
The Glory satellite lifted off from California on a quest to gather new data on factors that influence the climate. But about three minutes into the flight, telemetry indicated a problem. It appears the fairing – the part of the rocket which covers the satellite on top of the launcher – did not separate properly… Exactly the same problem befell NASA’s Orbiting Carbon Observatory (OCO) in 2009. It too launched on a Taurus XL rocket from the Vandenberg Air Force Base, and again the fairing failed to separate properly.
Wow. Exactly the same failure. The “Mishap Investigation Board” tackled the problem and apparently failed to fix the flop. I did a bit of poking around, and I learned that the NASA Safety Center analyzes system failures. In fact, there is a Web page called “System Failure Case Studies.” There are some interesting analyses, but I could not spot too many which focused on NASA’s own boo boos.
Curious about this apparent omission, I ran a query for NASA failure on www.usa.gov and www.science.gov. What did I learn? The top hit was from ASK magazine, a source which was new to me. The magazine’s “real” name is Ask the Academy, and it seems to be a Web site. What is interesting is that the top hit on USA.gov was “Success, Failure, and NASA Culture.” I read the article which was published originally in 2008. My hunch is that budget cuts are trimming the staff required to create original content. Recycling is a way to save some tax payer greenbacks I surmise. The 2008 write up republished on January 26, 2012 stated:
Improvement in system reliability came with increased bureaucracy, as systems engineering put a variety of crosschecks and reviews in place. System dependability improved, but these processes and technologies increased the cost of each vehicle. Eventually, and in response to pressures to decrease costs, engineers and managers cut back on safety and reliability measures.
The idea, I think, means that if something worked, then by eliminating the quality processes, the system which works is going to fail. I may not have that correct, but it seems that bureaucracy and efficiency help ensure failure. I never considered this management notion before, and frankly I am rejecting it.
In my experience, the processes which delivered success should be integrated into the work flow. Processes which do not contribute to success become the candidates for rationalization. In short, one engineers to deliver consistent success. One does not make decisions which deliver consistent failure.
The top hit on Science.gov was to “Failure Is Not an Option.” The hit was fascinating because it showed the Apollo 13 flight director in 1970. I did not recall this 1970 mission because I was indexing Latin sermons at some fourth rate university at the time. Wikipedia reminded me:
Apollo 13 was the seventh manned mission in the American Apollo space program and the third intended to land on the Moon. The craft was launched on April 11, 1970, at 13:13 CST. The lunar landing was aborted after an oxygen tank exploded two days later, crippling the service module upon which the Command Module depended. Despite great hardship caused by limited power, loss of cabin heat, shortage of potable water and the critical need to jury-rig the carbon dioxide removal system, the crew returned safely to Earth on April 17.
Okay, I suppose success means getting the crew back, which was a solid achievement in the midst of a mission failure.
So what?
Well, NASA is not exactly the government agency which resonates with consistent technology decisions. When it comes to search, much of the commercial scientific and technical search effort is a result of NASA’s need for an online index. That was in the 1970s, Apollo 13 time too.
Important developments in information access at NASA have been less frequent and, I would assert, few and far between. Today, NASA has a preference for Microsoft SharePoint, and we have learned has concluded its expensive procurement of an automated content indexing system. We are not sure which vendor is prepared to cope with exogenous complexity in the NASA environment.
We would assert that if NASA continues along its present course, successes will blended with some failures. One hopes that when it comes to search and retrieval, NASA makes informed decisions, not choices based on budget limitations, expediency, or overlooking exogenous factors such as complexity.
Stephen E Arnold, February 2, 2012
Sponsored by Pandia.com
Autonomy Serves US Government with Governance
February 2, 2012
It seems our nation is finally getting its records in digital order. The Sacramento Bee reports, “Autonomy Empowers U.S. to Meet President Obama’s New Memorandum on Government Records.” According to the Memorandum, government agencies must standardize their content policies and transfer relevant files to the U.S. National Archives and Records Administration. The press release presents Autonomy as the tool for the job:
Autonomy delivers a comprehensive suite of information governance solutions that addresses the broad and varying needs of enterprises and government agencies. With support for over 150 languages and access to over 1,000 file types through 400 pre-built connectors to disparate content sources, repositories and legacy systems, the Autonomy solutions can apply policy consistently to every information source in the enterprise simultaneously, while managing content in place and reducing duplicates across all enterprise repositories.
Autonomy, owned by HP, is a leader in the field of unstructured data management and serves prominent public and private organizations around the globe. The company was founded in 1996, and has made its fortune on the fruit of research originally performed at Cambridge University.
Cynthia Murrell, February 2, 2012
Sponsored by Pandia.com
Censorship Gains Momentum
February 1, 2012
Yep, I told readers that filtering and censorship were here to stay. Not much to add to my earlier prognostication. Navigate to Google’s “Why Does My Blog Redirect to a Country-Specific URL?” The answer, Pilgrim, is to make it possible to block content on a country-specific basis. There are other types of filtering in action, and I don’t want to spoil your vision of free and open access by diving into this subject. I covered it in my 2005 The Google Legacy. Let’s see. That was six years ago. Slow pressure can move a freight car in the rail yard. Same in the physics of information. Do you know how hard it is to stop a freight car moved by a single person’s pushing against the many-tonned beastie? Tip. Don’t stand in front of the slow moving freight car to push it with your hands. Censorship works the same way. How does one access filtered, censored, or blocked content? Get a job higher up the food chain. Works.
Stephen E Arnold, February 2, 2012
Sponsored by Pandia.com
Standing Up for Google in the UK
January 24, 2012
An imaginary conversation is at the heart of “The Google Dialogues: Search Neutrality” at ComputerWorldUK.
Writer Alec Muffet stands against censorship, and feels that attempts to control Google and its search algorithm fall into that realm. There are competing products out there, he points out; Google is not to blame if users eschew the alternatives.
Responding to criticisms of Google from PICTFOR, the UK’s Parliamentary Internet Communications and Technology Forum, Muffet envisions himself discussing search neutrality with such a critic. Here’s an excerpt:
“So why not create your own search engine that is better and promote that? Or use Bing? Or support Duck-Duck-Go which is tremendously ethical?
Because Google are here, they’re wrong and they need to be fixed.
Yes, you said that. So Google should listen to you regards how to order their search results?
Yes.
Why?
Because their ordering is not fair and it promotes their own content, such as Google+!
And… ?
…and we have to use Google because it’s a monopoly!
But it’s not really a monopoly. . . .”
. . .And on it goes. It’s an interesting thought experiment, and I recommend checking it out. The author’s point of view deserves some consideration.
Responses to Google’s great influence seem to be fluid and situational. It us no wonder, then, that the company continues to push at boundaries and venture into murky territory; they know their gains are likely to outweigh any punishments.
Cynthia Murrell, January 24, 2012
Sponsored by Pandia.com
Prediction Data Joins the Fight
January 12, 2012
It seems that prediction data could be joining the fight against terrorism. According to the Social Graph Paper article “Prediction Data As An API in 2012” some companies are working on developing prediction models that can be applied to terror prevention. The article mentions the company Palantir “they emphasize development of prediction models as applied to terror prevention, and consumed by non-technical field analysts.” Recorded Future is another company but they rely on “creating a ‘temporal index’, a big data/ semantic analysis problem, as a basis to predict future events.” Other companies that have been dabbling in big data/prediction modeling are Sense Networks, Digital Reasoning, BlueKai and Primal. The author theorizes that “There will be data-domain experts spanning the ability to make sense of unstructured data, aggregate from multiple sources, run prediction models on it, and make it available to various “application” providers.” Using data to predict the future seems a little farfetched but the technology is still new and not totally understood. Everyone does need to join the fight against terrorism but exactly how data prediction fits in remains to be seen.
April Holmes, January 12, 2012
Sponsored by Pandia.com
Big Data in 2012: Reliable Open-Source Software Required
January 11, 2012
Enthusiasm and optimism that Big Data as a concept is the next big thing. We are almost ready to board the Big Data bull dozer. The hoopla surrounding Big Data has not died down in 2012. Instead, the concept demonstrates the continuing environment of processing and analysis.
As businesses become aware that the Big Data trend is here to stay, publishers are looking for reliable support. The Apache Hadoop project develops open-source software for reliable, scalable, distributed computing. The company offers much in the way of dealing with unstructured data and is setting the pace for consolidation as well as personalization. I came across an interesting article, “State of the World IT: Big Data, An Offer That is Formed” (The original article is in French, but http://translate.google.com works well for this gosling). We learn:
As a recognition of the market in 2011, Hadoop has also attracted the top names in the IT industry who put this framework in the heart of their range of data processing volume. One reason: the cost mainly reminded us James Markarian, executive vice president and technical director of Informatica confirming that the framework ‘helped to change the economic model of the Big Data.’ Adding that flexibility… was as a criterion for adoption.
It is clear that the excess of data will only continue to grow by the minute. Generations of search, publishing, and consolidation will continue to emerge. I recommend staying informed of the products and the specific capabilities of each. However, Big Data which is filtered may pose some interesting problems; for example, will the outputs match the pre-filtered reality? Will predictive methods work when some data are no longer in the stream? So far the cheerleading is using chants from an older, pre-filtering era. Is this a good thing or a no-thing?
Andrea Hayden, January 11, 2012
Sponsored by Pandia.com
Search Engines May Take Action Against Pirate Web Sites
January 3, 2012
From the Sooner or Later Department:
Google has been in the news a lot lately for being biased when it comes to search result ranking. According to a the recent Telegraph article “Google May Give Pirate Sites Lower Ranking,” that bias may be leading to positive results. A new code will force Search engines to automatically rank pirate websites lower than official ones and give priority to those that were certified under a recognized scheme.
The article states:
According to research by the Publisher’s Association, Google searches for the 50 best-selling books in one week in March returned an average of four illegal links in the top 10 listings. The previous year that figure was closer to two.
Under the code, Google as well as other search engines would stop allowing illegal sites to advertise and would step up their efforts in delisting pirate websites as soon as they are flagged by legitimate rights holders.
While the search engines have yet to respond to the proposal, we believe that if this is policy goes into effect, there may be some unforeseen consequences. Exciting to be the one to define “pirate”.
Jasmine Ashton, January 3, 2012
Sponsored by Pandia.com
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
