A Google Gem: Special Edition on 1-11-23
January 11, 2024
This essay is the work of a dumb dinobaby. No smart software required.
I learned that the Google has swished its tail and killed off some baby Googlers. Giant creatures can do that. Thomson Reuters (the trust outfit) reported the “real” news in “Google Lays Off Hundreds in Assistant, Hardware, Engineering Teams.” But why? The Google is pulsing with revenue, opportunity, technology, and management expertise. Thomson Reuters has the answer:
"Throughout second-half of 2023, a number of our teams made changes to become more efficient and work better, and to align their resources to their biggest product priorities. Some teams are continuing to make these kinds of organizational changes, which include some role eliminations globally," a spokesperson for Google told Reuters in a statement.
On YCombinator’s HackerNews, I spotted some interesting comments. Foofie asserted: “In the last quarter Alphabet reported "total revenues of $76.69bn, an increase of 11 percent year-on-year (YoY). Google Cloud alone grew 22%.”
A giant corporate creature plods forward. Is the big beastie mindful of those who are crushed in the process? Sure, sure. Thanks, MSFT Copilot Bing thing. Good enough.
BigPeopleAreOld observes: “As long as you can get another job and can get severance pay, a layoff feel like an achievement than a loss. That happened me in my last company, one that I was very attached to for what I now think was irrational reasons. I wanted to leave anyway, but having it just happen and getting a nice severance pay was a perk. I am treating my new job as the complete opposite and the feeling is cathartic, which allows me to focus better on my work instead of worrying about the maintaining the illusion of identity in the company I work for.”
Yahoo, that beacon of stability, tackled the human hedge trimming in “Google Lays Off Hundreds in Hardware, Voice Assistant Teams.” The Yahooligans report:
The reductions come as Google’s core search business feels the heat from rival artificial-intelligence offerings from Microsoft Corp. and ChatGPT-creator OpenAI. On calls with investors, Google executives pledged to scrutinize their operations to identify places where they can make cuts, and free up resources to invest in their biggest priorities.
I like the word “pledge.” I wonder what it means in the land of Googzilla.
And how did the Google RIF these non-essential wizards and wizardettes? According to 9to5Google.com:
This reorganization will see Google lay off a few hundred roles across Devices & Services, though the majority is happening within the first-party augmented reality hardware team. This downsizing suggests Google is no longer working on its own AR hardware and is fully committed to the OEM-partnership model. Employees will have the ability to apply to open roles within the company, and Google is offering its usual degree of support.
Several observations:
- Dumping employees reduces costs, improves efficiency, and delivers other MBA-identified goodies. Efficiency is logical.
- The competitive environment is more difficult than some perceive. Microsoft, OpenAI, and the many other smart software outfits are offering alternatives to Google search even when these firms are not trying to create problems for Google. Search sucks and millions are looking for an alternative. I sense fear among the Googlers.
- The regulatory net is becoming more and more difficult to avoid. The EU and other governmental entities see Google as a source of money. The formula seems to be to litigate, find guilty, and find. What’s not to like for cash strapped government entities?
- For more than a year, the Google has been struggling with its slip on sneakers. As a result, the Google conveys that it is not able to make a dash to the ad convenience store as it did when it was younger, friskier. Google looks old, and predators know that the old can become a snack.
See Google cares.
Stephen E Arnold, January 11, 2024
A Decision from the High School Science Club School of Management Excellence
January 11, 2024
This essay is the work of a dumb dinobaby. No smart software required.
I can’t resist writing about Inc. Magazine and its Google management articles. These are knee slappers for me. The write up causing me to chuckle is “Google’s CEO, Sundar Pichai, Says Laying Off 12,000 Workers Was the Worst Moment in the Company’s 25-Year History.” Zowie. A personnel decision coupled with late-night, anonymous termination notices — What’s not to like. What’s the “real” news write up have to say:
Google had to lay off 12,000 employees. That’s a lot of people who had been showing up to work, only to one day find out that they’re no longer getting a paycheck because the CEO made a bad bet, and they’re stuck paying for it.
“Well, that clever move worked when I was in my high school’s science club. Oh, well, I will create a word salad to distract from my decision making.Heh, heh, heh,” says the distinguished corporate leader to a “real” news publication’s writer. Thanks, MSFT Copilot Bing thing. Good enough.
I love the “had.”
The Inc. Magazine story continues:
Still, Pichai defends the layoffs as the right decision at the time, saying that the alternative would have been to put the company in a far worse position. “It became clear if we didn’t act, it would have been a worse decision down the line,” Pichai told employees. “It would have been a major overhang on the company. I think it would have made it very difficult in a year like this with such a big shift in the world to create the capacity to invest in areas.”
And Inc Magazine actually criticizes the Google! I noted:
To be clear, what Pichai is saying is that Google decided to spend money to hire employees that it later realized it needed to invest elsewhere. That’s a failure of management to plan and deliver on the right strategy. It’s an admission that the company’s top executives made a mistake, without actually acknowledging or apologizing for it.
From my point of view, let’s focus on the word “worst.” Are there other Google management decisions which might be considered in evaluating the Inc. Magazine and Sundar Pichai’s “worst.” Yep, I have a couple of items:
- A lawyer making babies in the Google legal department
- A Google VP dying with a contract worker on the Googler’s yacht as a result of an alleged substance subject to DEA scrutiny
- A Googler fond of being a glasshole giving up a wife and causing a soul mate to attempt suicide
- Firing Dr. Timnit Gebru and kicking off the stochastic parrot thing
- The presentation after Microsoft announced its ChatGPT initiative and the knee jerk Red Alert
- Proliferating duplicative products
- Sunsetting services with little or no notice
- The Google Map / Waze thing
- The messy Google Brain Deep Mind shebang
- The Googler who thought the Google AI was alive.
Wow, I am tired mentally.
But the reality is that I am not sure if anyone in Google management is particularly connected to the problems, issues, and challenges of losing a job in the midst of a Foosball game. But that’s the Google. High school science club management delivers outstanding decisions. I was in my high school science club, and I know the fine decision making our members made. One of those cost the life of one of our brightest stars. Stars make bad decisions, chatter, and leave some behind.
Stephen E Arnold, January 11, 2024
Cyber Security Software and AI: Man and Machine Hook Up
January 8, 2024
This essay is the work of a dumb dinobaby. No smart software required.
My hunch is that 2024 is going to be quite interesting with regards to cyber security. The race among policeware vendors to add “artificial intelligence” to their systems began shortly after Microsoft’s ChatGPT moment. Smart agents, predictive analytics coupled to text sources, real-time alerts from smart image monitoring systems are three application spaces getting AI boosts. The efforts are commendable if over-hyped. One high-profile firm’s online webinar presented jargon and buzzwords but zero evidence of the conviction or closure value of the smart enhancements.
The smart cyber security software system outputs alerts which the system manager cannot escape. Thanks, MSFT Copilot Bing thing. You produced a workable illustration without slapping my request across my face. Good enough too.
Let’s accept as a working presence that everyone from my French bulldog to my neighbor’s ex wife wants smart software to bring back the good old, pre-Covid, go-go days. Also, I stipulate that one should ignore the fact that smart software is a demonstration of how numerical recipes can output “good enough” data. Hallucinations, errors, and close-enough-for-horseshoes are part of the method. What’s the likelihood the door of a commercial aircraft would be removed from an aircraft in flight? Answer: Well, most flights don’t lose their doors. Stop worrying. Those are the rules for this essay.
Let’s look at “The I in LLM Stands for Intelligence.” I grant the title may not be the best one I have spotted this month, but here’s the main point of the article in my opinion. Writing about automated threat and security alerts, the essay opines:
When reports are made to look better and to appear to have a point, it takes a longer time for us to research and eventually discard it. Every security report has to have a human spend time to look at it and assess what it means. The better the crap, the longer time and the more energy we have to spend on the report until we close it. A crap report does not help the project at all. It instead takes away developer time and energy from something productive. Partly because security work is consider one of the most important areas so it tends to trump almost everything else.
The idea is that strapping on some smart software can increase the outputs from a security alerting system. Instead of helping the overworked and often reviled cyber security professional, the smart software makes it more difficult to figure out what a bad actor has done. The essay includes this blunt section heading: “Detecting AI Crap.” Enough said.
The idea is that more human expertise is needed. The smart software becomes a problem, not a solution.
I want to shift attention to the managers or the employee who caused a cyber security breach. In what is another zinger of a title, let’s look at this research report, “The Immediate Victims of the Con Would Rather Act As If the Con Never Happened. Instead, They’re Mad at the Outsiders Who Showed Them That They Were Being Fooled.” Okay, this is the ostrich method. Deny stuff by burying one’s head in digital sand like TikToks.
The write up explains:
The immediate victims of the con would rather act as if the con never happened. Instead, they’re mad at the outsiders who showed them that they were being fooled.
Let’s assume the data in this “Victims” write up are accurate, verifiable, and unbiased. (Yeah, I know that is a stretch.)
What do these two articles do to influence my view that cyber security will be an interesting topic in 2024? My answers are:
- Smart software will allegedly detect, alert, and warn of “issues.” The flow of “issues” may overwhelm or numb staff who must decide what’s real and what’s a fakeroo. Burdened staff can make errors, thus increasing security vulnerabilities or missing ones that are significant.
- Managers, like the staffer who lost a mobile phone, with company passwords in a plain text note file or an email called “passwords” will blame whoever blows the whistle. The result is the willful refusal to talk about what happened, why, and the consequences. Examples range from big libraries in the UK to can kicking hospitals in a flyover state like Kentucky.
- Marketers of remediation tools will have a banner year. Marketing collateral becomes a closed deal making the art history majors writing copy secure in their job at a cyber security company.
Will bad actors pay attention to smart software and the behavior of senior managers who want to protect share price or their own job? Yep. Close attention.
Stephen E Arnold, January 8, 2024
THE I IN LLM STANDS FOR INTELLIGENCE
xx
x
x
x
x
x
Quantum Management: The Google Method
December 27, 2023
This essay is the work of a dumb dinobaby. No smart software required.
I read a story (possibly sad or at least bittersweet) in Inc. Magazine. “Google Fired 12,000 Employees. A Year Later, the CEO Says It Was the Right Call, Just Done in the Wrong Way” asks an interesting question of a company which has triggered a number of employee-related actions. From protests to stochastic parrots, the Google struggles to tailor its management methods to the people it hires.
What happens when high school science club engineering is applied to modern tasks? Some projects fall down. Hello, San Francisco, do you have a problem with a certain big building? Thanks, MSFT Copilot. Good enough.
The story reports:
A few days ago, Google’s CEO Sundar Pichai openly acknowledged that the way Google managed the layoff of 12,000 employees, about 6 percent of its workforce, was not done right…. Initially, Google’s stance on the layoffs was presented as a strategic necessity, a move to streamline operations and focus on crucial business areas…. Pichai’s frank admission that the process could have been handled differently is a notable shift from the company’s earlier justifications??.
What I think this means is that Google’s esteemed leader made a somewhat typical decision for a person imbued with some of the philosophy of a non-Western culture. In 2023, Google has lurched from Red Alert to Red Alert. In January 2023, Microsoft seized the marketing initiative in the lucrative world of enterprise artificial intelligence. And what about some of Google’s AI demonstrations? Yeah, some were edited and tweaked to be more Googley. Then after a couple of high profile legal cases went against the company, Sundar Pichai has allegedly admitted that he has made some errors.
No kidding. Like the architect engineers of the Florida high rise which collapsed to ruin the day of a number of people, mistakes were made. I suppose San Francisco’s Millennium Tower could topple over the holidays. That event would pull some eyeballs off the online advertising company.
The sad reality is that Google’s senior management is pushing buttons and getting poor results. The Inc. Magazine article ends this way:
The key questions moving forward are: Will Google face any repercussions for the way it handled the layoffs? What concrete actions will the company take to improve communication and support for its employees, both those who were let go and those who remain? And, importantly, how will this experience shape Google’s, and potentially other companies’, approach to workforce management in the future?
Questions, just not the right one. In my opinion, Google’s Board of Directors may want to ask:
Is it time to big adieu to Sundar Pichai and his expensive hires? With the current team in place, Google’s core business model at risk from ChatGPT-type findability services, legal eagles hovering over the company, and now a public admission that firing 12,000 wizards by email was a mistake, I ask, “What’s next, Sundar?”
Net net: The company’s management method (which reminds me of how my high school science club solved problems) is showing signs of cracking and crumbling in my opinion.
Stephen E Arnold, December 27, 2023
Google Gobbles Apple Alums
December 27, 2023
This essay is the work of a dumb dinobaby. No smart software required.
Technology companies are notorious for poaching employees from one other. Stealing employees is so common that business experts have studied it for years. One of the more recent studies concentrates on the destination of ex-Apple associates as told by PC Magazine: “Apple Employees Leave For Google More Than Any Other Company.”
Switch on Business investigated LinkedIn data to determine which tech giants poach the industry’s best talent. All of the big names were surveyed: Uber, Intel, Adobe, Salesforce, Nvidia, Netflix, Oracles, Tesla, IBM, Microsoft, Meta, Apple, Amazon, and Google. The study mainly focused on employees working at the aforementioned names and if they switched to another listed company.
Meta had the highest proportion of any of the tech giants with 26.51% of employees having worked at rival. Google had the most talent by volume with 24.15%. IBM stole the least employees at 2.28%. Apple took 5.7% of its competitions’ talent and that comes with some drama. Apple used to purchase Intel chips for its products then the company recently decided to build its own chips. They hired 2000 people away from Intel.
The most interesting factoids are the patterns found in employee advancements:
“Potentially surprising is the fact that Apple employees are twice as likely to make the move to Google from Apple than the next biggest post-Apple destination, Amazon. After Amazon, Apple employees make the move to Meta, followed by Microsoft, Tesla, Nvidia, Salesforce, Adobe, Intel, and Oracle.
As for where Apple employees come from, new Apple employees are most likely to enter the company from Intel, followed by Microsoft, Amazon, Google, IBM, Oracle, Tesla, Nvidia, Adobe, and Meta.
While Apple employees are most often headed to Google, Google employees are most often headed to Meta, Microsoft, and Amazon, with Apple only making it to fourth on the list.”
It sounds like a hiring game of ring-around-the-rosy. Unless the employees retire, they’ll eventually make it back to their first company.
Whitney Grace, December 25, 2023
Amazon and the US Government: Doing Just Fine, Thanks
December 26, 2023
This essay is the work of a dumb dinobaby. No smart software required.
OSHA was established to protect workers from unsafe conditions. Big technology barons like Jeff Bezos with Amazon don’t give rat’s hind quarters about employee safety. They might project an image of caring and kindness but that’s from Amazon’s PR department. Amazon is charged with innumerable workplace violations, including micromanaging yawning to poor compensation. The Washington Posts details one of Amazon’s latest scandals, “A 20-Year-Old Amazon Employee Died At Work. Indiana Issued A $7000 Fine.”
Twenty-year old Caes Gruesbeck was clearing a blockage on an overhead conveyor belt at the Amazon distribution center in Fort Wayne, Indiana. He needed to use an elevated lift to reach the blockage. His head collided with the conveyor and became trapped. Gruesbeck later died from blunt force trauma.
Indiana safety officials investigated for eleven weeks and found that Amazon failed to ensure a safe work environment. Amazon was only cited and fined $7000. Amazon employees continue to be injured and the country’s second largest private employer is constantly scrutinized, but state and federal safety regulators are failing to enforce policies. They are failing because Amazon is a powerful corporation with a hefty legal department.
“‘Seven thousand dollars for the death of a 20-year-old? What’s that going to do to Amazon?’ said Stephen Wagner, an Indiana attorney who has advocated for more worker-friendly laws in the state. ‘There’s no real financial incentive for an employer like Amazon to change their working environment to make it more safe.’”
Federal and state governments are trying to make Amazon take responsibility through the current system but it’s slow. Safety regulators can’t inspect every Amazon complaint and building. They are instead working towards a sweeping company approach like the Family Dollar and Dollar Tree investigations about blocked fire exits. It took six years, resulting in $15 million in fines and a $1.35 million settlement.
Once companies are hit with large fines it changes how they do business. Amazon probably will be brought to justice but it will take a long time.
Whitney Grace, December 26, 2023
Quantum Supremacy in Management: A Google Incident
December 25, 2023
This essay is the work of a dumb dinobaby. No smart software required.
I spotted an interesting story about an online advertising company which has figured out how to get great PR in respected journals. But this maneuver is a 100 yard touchdown run for visibility. “Hundreds Gather at Google’s San Francisco Office to Protest $1.2 Billion Contract with Israel” reports:
More than 400 protesters gathered at Google’s San Francisco office on Thursday to demand the tech company cut ties with Israel’s government.
Some managers and techno wizards envy companies which have the knack for attracting crowds and getting free publicity. Thanks, MSFT Copilot. Close enough for horseshoes
The demonstration, according to the article, was a response to Google and its new BFF’s project for Israel. The SFGate article contains some interesting photographs. One is a pretend dead person wrapped in a shroud with the word “Genocide” in bright, cheerful Google log colors. I wanted to reproduce it, but I am not interested in having copyright trolls descend on me like a convocation of legal eagles. The “Project Nimbus” — nimbus is a type of cloud which I learned about in the fifth- or sixth-grade — “provides the country with local data centers and cloud computing services.”
The article contains words which cause OpenAI’s art generators to become uncooperative. That banned word is “genocide.” The news story adds some color to the fact of the protest on December 14, 2023:
Multiple speakers mentioned an article from The Intercept, which reported that Nimbus delivered Israel the technology for “facial detection, automated image categorization, object tracking, and even sentiment analysis.” Others referred to an NPR investigation reporting that Israel says it is using artificial intelligence to identify targets in Gaza, though the news outlet did not link the practice to Google’s technology.
Ah, ha. Cloud services plus useful technologies. (I wonder if the facial recognition system allegedly becoming available to the UK government is included in the deal?) The story added a bit of spice too:
For most of Thursday’s protest, two dozen people lay wrapped in sheets — reading “Genocide” in Google’s signature rainbow lettering — in a “die-in” performance. At the end, they stood to raise up white kites, as a speaker read Refaat Alareer’s “If I must die,” written just over a month before the Palestinian poet was killed by an Israeli airstrike.
The article included a statement from a spokesperson, possible from Google. This individual said:
“We have been very clear that the Nimbus contract is for workloads running on our commercial platform by Israeli government ministries such as finance, healthcare, transportation, and education,” she said. “Our work is not directed at highly sensitive or classified military workloads relevant to weapons or intelligence services.”
Does this sound a bit like an annoyed fifth- or sixth-grade teacher interrupted by a student who said out loud: “Clouds are hot air.” While not technically accurate, the student was sent to the principal’s office. What will happen in this situation?
Some organizations know how to capture users’ attention. Will the company be able to monetize it via a YouTube Short or a more lengthy video. Google is quite skilled at making videos which purport to show reality as Google wants it to be. The “real” reality maybe be different. Revenue is important, particularly as regulatory scrutiny remains popular in the EU and the US.
Stephen E Arnold, December 25, 2023
Cyber Security Crumbles When Staff Under Stress
December 22, 2023
This essay is the work of a dumb dinobaby. No smart software required.
How many times does society need to say that happy employees mean a better, more profitable company? The world is apparently not getting the memo, because employees, especially IT workers, are overworked, stressed, exhausted, and burnt out like blackened match. While zombie employees are bad for productivity, they’re even worse for cyber security. BetaNews reports on an Adarma, a detection and response specialist company, survey, “Stressed Staff Put Enterprises At Risk Of Cyberattack.”
The survey responders believe they’re at a greater risk of cyberattack due to the poor condition of their employees. Five hundred cybersecurity professionals from UK companies with over 2000 employees were studied and 51% believed their IT security are dead inside. This puts them at risk of digital danger. Over 40% of the cybersecurity leaders felt that their skills were limited to understand threats. An additional 43% had little or zero expertise to respond or detect threats to their enterprises.
IT people really love computers and technology but when they’re working in an office environment and dealing with people, stress happens:
“‘Cybersecurity professionals are typically highly passionate people, who feel a strong personal sense of duty to protect their organization and they’ll often go above and beyond in their roles. But, without the right support and access to resources in place, it’s easy to see how they can quickly become victims of their own passion. The pressure is high and security teams are often understaffed, so it is understandable that many cybersecurity professionals are reporting frustration, burnout, and unsustainable stress. As a result, the potential for mistakes being made that will negatively impact an organization increases. Business leaders should identify opportunities to ease these gaps, so that their teams can focus on the main task at hand, protecting the organization,’ says John Maynard, Adarma’s CEO.”
The survey demonstrates why it’s important to diversify the cybersecurity talent pool? Wait, is this in regard to ethnicity and biological sex? Is Adarma advocating for a DEI quota in cybersecurity or is the organization advocating for a diverse talent pool with varied experience to offer differ perspectives?
While it is important to have different education backgrounds and experience, hiring someone simply based on DEI quotas is stupid. It’s failing in the US and does more harm than good.
Whitney Grace, December 22, 2023
Stressed Staff Equals Security Headaches
December 14, 2023
This essay is the work of a dumb dinobaby. No smart software required.
How many times does society need to say that happy employees mean a better, more profitable company? The world is apparently not getting the memo, because employees, especially IT workers, are overworked, stressed, exhausted, and burnt out like blackened match. While zombie employees are bad for productivity, they’re even worse for cyber security. BetaNews reports on an Adarma, a detection and response specialist company, survey, “Stressed Staff Put Enterprises At Risk Of Cyberattack.”
The overworked IT person says, “Are these sticky notes your passwords?” The stressed out professional service worker replies, “Hey, buddy, did I ask you if your company’s security system actually worked? Yeah, you are one of those cyber security experts, right? Next!” Thanks, MSFT Copilot. I don’t think you had a human intervene to create this image like you know who.
The survey responders believe they’re at a greater risk of cyberattack due to the poor condition of their employees. Five hundred cybersecurity professionals from UK companies with over 2000 employees were studied and 51% believed their IT security are dead inside. This puts them at risk of digital danger. Over 40% of the cybersecurity leaders felt that their skills were limited to understand threats. An additional 43% had little or zero expertise to respond or detect threats to their enterprises.
IT people really love computers and technology but when they’re working in an office environment and dealing with people, stress happens:
“‘Cybersecurity professionals are typically highly passionate people, who feel a strong personal sense of duty to protect their organization and they’ll often go above and beyond in their roles. But, without the right support and access to resources in place, it’s easy to see how they can quickly become victims of their own passion. The pressure is high and security teams are often understaffed, so it is understandable that many cybersecurity professionals are reporting frustration, burnout, and unsustainable stress. As a result, the potential for mistakes being made that will negatively impact an organization increases. Business leaders should identify opportunities to ease these gaps, so that their teams can focus on the main task at hand, protecting the organization,’ says John Maynard, Adarma’s CEO.”
The survey demonstrates why it’s important to diversify the cybersecurity talent pool? Wait, is this in regard to ethnicity and biological sex? Is Adarma advocating for a DEI quota in cybersecurity or is the organization advocating for a diverse talent pool with varied experience to offer differ perspectives?
While it is important to have different education backgrounds and experience, hiring someone simply based on DEI quotas is stupid. It’s failing in the US and does more harm than good.
Whitney Grace, December 14, 2023
23andMe: Those Users and Their Passwords!
December 5, 2023
This essay is the work of a dumb dinobaby. No smart software required.
Silicon Valley and health are match fabricated in heaven. Not long ago, I learned about the estimable management of Theranos. Now I find out that “23andMe confirms hackers stole ancestry data on 6.9 million users.” If one follows the logic of some Silicon Valley outfits, the data loss is the fault of the users.
“We have the capability to provide the health data and bioinformation from our secure facility. We have designed our approach to emulate the protocols implemented by Jack Benny and his vault in his home in Beverly Hills,” says the enthusiastic marketing professional from a Silicon Valley success story. Thanks, MSFT Copilot. Not exactly Jack Benny, Ed, and the foghorn, but I have learned to live with “good enough.”
According to the peripatetic Lorenzo Franceschi-Bicchierai:
In disclosing the incident in October, 23andMe said the data breach was caused by customers reusing passwords, which allowed hackers to brute-force the victims’ accounts by using publicly known passwords released in other companies’ data breaches.
Users!
What’s more interesting is that 23andMe provided estimates of the number of customers (users) whose data somehow magically flowed from the firm into the hands of bad actors. In fact, the numbers, when added up, totaled almost seven million users, not the original estimate of 14,000 23andMe customers.
I find the leak estimate inflation interesting for three reasons:
- Smart people in Silicon Valley appear to struggle with simple concepts like adding and subtracting numbers. This gap in one’s education becomes notable when the discrepancy is off by millions. I think “close enough for horse shoes” is a concept which is wearing out my patience. The difference between 14,000 and almost 17 million is not horse shoe scoring.
- The concept of “security” continues to suffer some set backs. “Security,” one may ask?
- The intentional dribbling of information reflects another facet of what I call high school science club management methods. The logic in the case of 23andMe in my opinion is, “Maybe no one will notice?”
Net net: Time for some regulation, perhaps? Oh, right, it’s the users’ responsibility.
Stephen E Arnold, December 5, 2023
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
