How to Be Happy the Microsoft Way: Endorsed by the Harvard Business Review?
February 25, 2022
I read a fascinating article about being happy. “A Microsoft Exec Says Tech, Not People, Makes Employees Really Happy” recycles an article from the estimable Harvard Business Review published an article titled “In a Hybrid World, Your Tech Defines Employee Experience.” I want to be upfront. I find most of the information in the HBR focused on authors hawking some type of consulting expertise. The outputs in the HBR acted like a magnet on blue chip consulting firms. Getting an article in the HBR was the equivalent of getting Elvis Presley to throw a perspiration tinged scarf to an adoring fan.
According to the source recycling the HRB information about being happy, I noted these statements of Delphic grade insight minus the blood of a dove, a goat, and possibly a misbehaving acolyte.
- Employee experiences are defined by technology.
- Technology and workplace tools are the new workplace. [HBR apparently likes this type of repetition]
- “Technology is “becoming central in attracting and retaining new talent, fostering workplace culture, creating productivity, and more.”
I want to offer some of my personal happy experiences with Microsoft technology:
- Updates which kill functions; for example, a system cannot print. This makes me happy for sure.
- Posturing about security when the vulnerabilities spawned by Microsoft software thrill bad actors each and every day.
- Microsoft Word’s remarkable ability to move images in delightful ways.
- The shallow spidering of the just so wonderful Bing content processing system.
- Rumors and allegations about Bill Gates and his interesting interactions with other Microsoft professionals
- A foldable phone with weird performance characteristics for two-screeners with good eyes
- Microsoft WiFi hardware which a Softie told me, “Doesn’t work.”
- Meaningless features in a screen capture utility
- Did I mention Exchange Server vulnerabilities? Yeah.
- And Teams for those using a Mac without a Microsoft 365 subscription. That’s a thrill.
I recall one meeting at which a senior Softie took an iPhone from an employee in a meeting with lots of people in the audience. I recall the baffled looks on the faces of Microsoft Research experts when I asked for a show of hands for those who were familiar with Kolmogorov’s approach to probability. No hands went up. Bummer. I recall a mobile meeting in which I was told, “Mobiles will never have multiple radios.”
Ah, memories.
But the HBR write up explains that my experiences would make me happier via technology.
Yeah, right. Thoughts from the Microsoft person who pointed the finger at a 1,000 engineers directed by a nation state to compromise Citadel Windows. Yep, that person.
Stephen E Arnold, February 25, 2022
IBM Watson: Creative Re-Explaining
February 25, 2022
I read “IBM Charts New Brand Direction With Campaign Built Around Creativity.”
The article contains an interesting statement allegedly articulated by Jonathan Adashek, cco and svp of marketing and communications at IBM
Adashek said IBM has historically had trouble articulating a clear and unifying purpose for a business as sprawling and multifaceted as the 110-year-old enterprise giant has become. But with business moves like the Kyndryl spinoff helping to strengthen the company’s core focus on growth areas like artificial intelligence and hybrid cloud computing, IBM decided it was time to boil down its public-facing message.
Does this mean the Watson “anti creativity” has been left behind?
Nope. Here’s some evidence:
Ogilvy global chief creative officer Liz Taylor said the concept for the campaign evolved out of the idea that a certain type of creative thinking is central to the business projects that many IBM clients are attempting to tackle—and that the company’s range of enterprise tech and consulting services can help with that. “It really started in the sort of notion of this era of creativity is the defining currency of business,” Taylor said. “It’s not necessarily creativity in the way I might think of my job, but our audience is just increasingly responsible for creating and executing visions for how to compete in this new world.”
Yep, IBM is creative: Clever contracts related to a certain nation state in the good old WW2 era, addressing cancer and telling, “You are history”, and now a type of creative different from that delivered by Madison Avenue-types.
Yep, “not necessarily creativity in the way I might think of my job” which is to explain that IBM fuels creativity.
Logical? Not necessarily. Did you know that IBM’s creativity allowed it to acquire a Microsoft Azure consulting firm called Neudisic? Buying innovation and a revenue stream for a semi successful cloud provider? Yes. Creative? Sure.
Stephen E Arnold, February 25, 2022
Praise and PR for Google and Its AutoML Push
February 14, 2022
I read the explainer PR essay called “The Data Scientist of the Future, According to Google.” The author is not a real Googler. He/it/her is a Googley contractor. No skin in the game of course. A one sentence summary is:
Become and expert and use Google machine learning tools.
This is okay, but Google wants to make darn sure that squeaky wheels like those who criticize Google’s approach either get greased or changed at the next conference stop.
The write up says:
With Google’s investment in industry-leading products such as Vertex AI, I believe Google has demonstrated a realization in the value of coupling sophisticated Auto ML products with domain knowledge experts, and abstracting away much of the programming and statistics required by the Data Scientist of yesterday. Domain knowledge will rule the future. Understand the relationship between inputs and outputs in human-interpretable ways, and having the skills to communicate this knowledge is the most important input to predictive modeling.
PR or objective praise. Both share the two letters “PR.”
Stephen E Arnold, February 14, 2022
Tech Giants: Are There Reasons for Complaining about Tiny Component Vendors?
February 8, 2022
I read “Tiny chips, Big Headaches.” The write up is interesting and it comes at a time which follows [a] record earnings and [b] before the anti-trust cowboys begin their roundup. I found this paragraph notable:
But there is growing anxiety that as cloud-computing networks have become larger and more complex, they are still dependent, at the most basic level, on computer chips that are now less reliable and, in some cases, less predictable. In the past year, researchers at both Facebook and Google have published studies describing computer hardware failures whose causes have not been easy to identify. The problem, they argued, was not in the software — it was somewhere in the computer hardware made by various companies.
The write up concludes that fixes are “a little bit like changing an engine while an airplane is still flying.” This statement is attributed too Gary Smerdon, a wizard at TidalScale.
Let’s step back.
The alleged technology monopolies are eager to cement their market dominance. One way to do this is to become like AMD: Smart people paying other people to fabricate their silicon and assemble their gizmos. It stands to reason that really smart people like those at the tech giants want to gain control and be like Apple. Apple went its own direction and seems to have a lucrative allegedly monopoly and some fascinating deals with people like a certain online advertising outfit for search.
What’s the argument for becoming more like Henry Ford’s River Rouge operation. That’s the one that ingested iron ore at one end of the facility and output automobiles at the other end. Today the raw material is user clicks and the outputs are monetization of messages to the users or the crafting of subscription services that are tough to resist.
My take on the reasons for pointing the finger at third parties is more of the shifting blame. This method was evident when Mr. Zuckerberg said Apple’s “privacy” policy created some headwinds. Sure, the Zuckbook has other headwinds, but the point is that it is useful to focus blame elsewhere.
However, the write up advances a point which I found interesting. Here is the passage from the write up I noted:
In the past year, researchers at both Facebook and Google have published studies describing computer hardware failures whose causes have not been easy to identify. The problem, they argued, was not in the software — it was somewhere in the computer hardware made by various companies.
I want to direct your attention to this statement: “The problem… was not in the software.”
Now that is an interesting observation about software. The general rule is that software has flaws. Maybe Steve Gibson can generate “perfect” software for SpinRite, but how many at the alleged technology monopolies follow his practices? I would assert that many at the alleged technology monopolies know what his method is; therefore, if certain wizards don’t know something, it clearly is not worth knowing in the first place.
I interpreted the statement that “The problem … was not in the software.”
Hubris, thy manifestation is those who believe their software was not a problem.
Ho, ho, ho.
My concern is that presenting an argument that failures in uptime are someone else’s problem invites the conclusion, “Well, we will be more like Apple. Hasta la vista, Intel.”
Personally I don’t care what the alleged technology monopolies do. Trouble looms for these outfits regardless of the direction in which I look. What annoys me is that the Gray Lady is pretty happy telling the alleged technology monopolies’ story.
The problem is not the software. The problem is the human thing: Reformation, disinformation, and misinformation as stealth weapons in the battle for continued market dominance.
Stephen E Arnold, February 8, 2022
Google: Sunset for So So Programmers?
February 4, 2022
I read “DeepMind Says Its New AI Coding Engine Is As Good as an Average Human Programmer.” Okay, what’s “average”? What’s the baseline and the methods of measurement? How big was the sample? Is the test replicable by a third party?
Oh, right. These are questions backed by “real” data in the “real news” write up. I suppose I am to suspend disbelief and do the Kubla Khan thing in a Kode Xanadu.
The write up reports as “real” news this:
DeepMind has created an AI system named AlphaCode that it says “writes computer programs at a competitive level.” The Alphabet subsidiary tested its system against coding challenges used in human competitions and found that its program achieved an “estimated rank” placing it within the top 54 percent of human coders. The result is a significant step forward for autonomous coding, says DeepMind, though AlphaCode’s skills are not necessarily representative of the sort of programming tasks faced by the average coder.
Yep, Statistics 101 and marketing speak. I love autonomous coding. Colorful.
Several observations:
- Why do low code or no code when one can get out front with the implied outcome: No humans needed for certain coding tasks. Amazon, Facebook, and Microsoft will be eager to explain that their systems are better.
- Google’s desire to create a “quantum supremacy” claim reveals an insecurity at the core of the company. If the technology were the cat’s pajamas, why is the firm unable to generate substantive revenue from advertising?
- Why have Google’s most advanced technologies generated gushers of red ink, not marketing-dominating solutions which dwarf the firm’s advertising business?
From my vantage point Google is like the wealthy individual who made a fortune in B and lower motion pictures. This individual wanted to get into technology in order to go to a party and answer this question, “What business are you in?” This person, whom I knew prior to his demise, told me, “I don’t like saying dirty movies and girlie bars. I want to be in the technology business.”
Net net: Google wants to be perceived as the big dog in really advanced technology. Too bad. Just say, “We sell ads and we were inspired by the Yahoo, GoTo, Overture system. Of course, Yahoo had to fly eagles over the Googleplex, but, hey, we’re proud of our one money making system. But we also do no-human coding and are the quantum supremacists.“
I understand I think.
Stephen E Arnold, February 4, 2022
Has the Redmond Giant Marginalized Facezuck and Googzilla
February 3, 2022
I read an interview which seems to be part of the Financial Times (paywalled, of course) and Ars Technica (not paywalled). The article is “Satya Nadella: Microsoft has “Permission to Build the Next Internet.”
I am not sure about who did what to get the interview with the softest Microsoftie, but I think I spotted which colloquially might be termed a “dis”:
To me, just being great at game building gives us the permission to build this next platform, which is essentially the next Internet: the embodied presence.
Will Facezuck and Googzilla interpret the message as, “Microsoft will build the digital world from this day.” Is the permission granted by someone of global importance, or is the permission assumed like the security of Azure and Exchange Server. Maybe the permission is generated by Microsoft’s confidence resulting from regulators’ attention attracted to other bright, sparkling companies?
I like the permission and the prediction that the next Internet is engineered for “embodied presence.” How’s that work out in the real world; for example, homeless people in Seattle, the posturing in Washington, DC, and the genuine concern in many government agencies around the world that Microsoft’s systems and software are conduits for bad actors.
Yep, embodied. Permission. Prediction.
Stephen E Arnold, February 3, 2022
NSO Group: Media Pile On
February 3, 2022
A helpful person posted a link to a July 2021 story about NSO Group this weekend (January 29 – 30, 2022. The New York Times (that bustling digitally aware Gray Lady) published a New York Times Magazine story about NSO Group. But the killer item of PR appeared in Sputnik International (a favorite of some in Moscow) “India Bought Pegasus Spyware from Israel in an Alleged Deal Concerning Palestinians, Claims NYT.” I find this interesting because:
- The NSO Group continues to be a PR magnet. At this point, I am not sure the old adage “any publicity is good publicity.”
- Russian “real journalists” have wired together some click baity words: India, Israel, Palestinians, and the New York Times
- The intelware sector has a stiff upper lip, but the NSO Group – whether a viable business or not – has destabilized an entire industry sector.
Net net: A big problem which seems to be growing.
Stephen E Arnold, February 2, 2022
NordVPN: Mostly Ironclad Privacy
February 3, 2022
Panama-based VPN provider NordVPN swore in 2017 that it would refuse requests from any foreign government to release customer data. In the wake of what happened to VPNLab after its tussle with Europol, however, TechRadar Pro reports, “NordVPN Will Now Comply with Law Enforcement Data Requests.” The firm still promises privacy—unless and until the legal eagles appear. We learn NordVPN recently revised the original, 2017 blog post in which it promised unwavering privacy to reflect the new reality. Reporter Anthony Spadafora writes:
“Now though, the original blog post has been edited and the post now reads: ‘NordVPN operates under the jurisdiction of Panama and will only comply with requests from foreign governments and law enforcement agencies if these requests are delivered according to laws and regulations.’ [Emphasis mine.] The revised blog post also goes a bit further in regard to NordVPN’s zero-logs policy by explaining that the company will log a user’s VPN activity if there is a court order to do so: ‘We are 100% committed to our zero-logs policy – to ensure users’ ultimate privacy and security, we never log their activity unless ordered by a court in an appropriate, legal way.’ Meanwhile, the company updated its privacy policy back in July of last year with a new section that contains further details on information requests. A NordVPN spokesperson explained in an email to TechRadar Pro that the sole reason it changed its blog post in the first place was to dissociate its company from bad actors following PCMag’s original article on the matter.”
Spadafora points out the now shuttered VPNLab mostly catered to cybercriminals—a very different outfit from NordVPN. He also emphasizes that, despite the new language, NordVPN still offers a no-logs VPN, so there would be little to no pre-existing data for the company to relinquish even if law enforcement did come knocking. At this point, such a request is purely hypothetical—the firm notes it has yet to receive a single national security letter, gag order, or warrant from government organizations asking for user information since it was founded in 2012. We suspect they hope that streak continues.
Cynthia Murrell, February 2, 2022
Microsoft Defender: Are There Other Winners?
February 1, 2022
I believe everything I read on the Internet, of course. One of the fascinating aspects of being old and doing the 21st century equivalent of clipping coupons is coming across “real” research studies. I read “Still Think Microsoft Defender Is Bad? Think Again, Says AV-TEST.”
The write up in Make Use Of Dot Com believes in Windows Defender. It article states:
A recent report by AV-TEST revealed that not only does Microsoft Defender perform well, it actually outperforms many highly-recommended antiviruses
The article included a link to the AV-Test December 2021 Report, and I downloaded it. The AV Test outfit is “the independent IT security institute.” The investment firm Triton owns Swiss IT Security, which is the outfit which “owns” AV-Test.
What does Swiss IT Security Group AG do? Security, consulting, the cloud, and related services.
What does the SITS Group care about Microsoft and its assorted products? With Microsoft’s wide use in organizations, SITS Group probably has an above average keenness for the Redmond wizards’ constructs.
What does this mean for the victory of the Windows Defender system in the AV-TEST Report? For me, I formulated several hypotheses:
- Windows Defender is now able to deal with the assorted threats directed at Microsoft operating systems? Rest easy. Malware popping up on a Windows device is obviously something that is unlikely to occur. Thank goodness.
- Cheerleading for Windows Defender probably makes Microsoft’s security team feel warm and fuzzy which will allow their efforts to deal with Exchange Server issues a more pleasant experience.
- Bad actors will have to rethink how to compromise organizations with Microsoft software. Perhaps some of these individuals will give up criminal activity and join the Red Cross or its equivalent.
For me, institutes which do not reveal their ownership are interesting outfits. But how many antivirus vendors achieved the lofty rank of Windows Defender, according to the report dated December 2021? Here they are:
Avira
Bull Guard
ESET
F Secure
Kaspersky
McAfee
Norton 360
Total Security
Viper.
Windows Defender makes 10 “winners.”
Now of these 10 which is the one that will make SolarWinds, ransomware, compromised Outlook emails, and Azure Cosmos excitement a thing of the past? Another question: “Which of these sort of work in the real world?” And, “If there is a best, why do we need the nine others?”
These are questions one can ask Triton / Swiss IT Security Group AG / AV Test to answer?
Net net: Marketing.
Stephen E Arnold, February 1, 2022
NSO Group: Yes, Again with the PR Trigger
January 31, 2022
I have no idea if the write up “NSO’s Pegasus Spyware Used to Target a Senior Human Rights Watch Activist” is spot on. The validity of the report is a matter for other, more youthful and intelligent individuals. My thought when reading this statement in the article went in a different direction. Here’s the quote I noted:
In a tweet, Fakih showed a screenshot of a notification she received from Apple informing her she may have been the target of a state-sponsored attacker.
Okay, surveillance. Usually surveillance requires someone to identify something as warranting observation. the paragraph continues:
Though others versions of Pegasus software uses text messages embedded with malicious links to gain access to a target’s device, Fakih said she was the victim of a “zero-click attack” that is capable of infecting a device without the target ever clicking a link. Once a target is successfully infected, NSO’s Pegasus software allows the end-user to surveil the target’s photos, documents, and even encrypted messages without the target ever knowing.
The message is that NSO Group continues to get coverage in what might be called Silicon Valley real news media. Are there other systems which provide similar functionality? Why is a cloud service unable to filter problematic activities?
The public relations magnetism of the NSO Group appears to be growing, not attenuating. Other vendors of specialized software and services whose very existence was a secret a few years ago has emerged as the equivalent of the Coca-Cola logo, McDonald’s golden arches, or the Eiffel tower.
My view is that the downstream consequences of exposing specialized software and services may have some unexpected consequences. Example: See the Golden Arches. Crave a Big Mac. What’s the NSO Group trigger evoke? More coverage, more suspicions, and more interest in the methods used to snag personal and confidential information.
Stephen E Arnold, January 31, 2022
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
