China Smart, US Dumb: The Fluid Mechanics Problem Solved
April 16, 2025
There are many puzzles that haven’t been solved, but with advanced technology and new ways of thinking some of them are finally getting answered. Two Chinese mathematicians working in the United States claim to have solved an old puzzle involving fluid mechanics says the South China Morning Post: “Chinese Mathematicians Say They Have Cracked Century-Old Fluid Mechanics Puzzle.”
Fluid mechanics is a study used in engineering and it is applied to aerodynamics, dams and bridges design, and hydraulic systems. The Chinese mathematicians are Deng Yu from the University of Chicago and Ma Xiao from the University of Michigan. They were joined by their international collaborator Zaher Hani also of the University of Michigan. They published a paper to arXiv-a platform that posts research papers before they are peer reviewed. The team said they found a solution to “Hilbert’s sixth problem.
What exactly did the mathematicians solve?
“At the intersection of physics and mathematics, researchers ask whether it is possible to establish physics as a rigorous branch of mathematics by taking microscopic laws as axioms and proving macroscopic laws as theorems. Axioms are mathematical statements that are assumed to be true, while a theorem is a logical consequence of axioms.
Hilbert’s sixth problem addresses that challenge, according to a post by Ma on Wednesday on Zhihu, a Quora-like Chinese online content platform.”
David Hilbert proposed this as one of twenty-three problems he presented in 1900 at the International Congress of Mathematicians. China is taking credit for these mathematicians and their work. China wants to point out how smart it is, while it likes to poke fun at the “dumb” United States. Let’s make our own point that these Chinese mathematicians are living and working in the United States.
Whitney Grace, April 16, 2025
Google Wears a Necklace and Sneakers with Flashing Blue LEDs. Snazzy.
April 15, 2025
No AI. Just an old dinobaby pointing out some exciting developments in the world “beyond search.”
I can still see the flashing blue light in Aisle 7. Yes, there goes the siren. K-Mart in Central Illinois was running a big sale on underwear. My mother loved those “blue light specials.” She would tell me as I covered my eyes and ears, “I don’t want to miss out.” Into the scrum she would go, emerging with two packages of purple boxer shorts for my father. He sat in the car while my mother shopped. I accompanied her because that’s what sons in Central Illinois do. I wonder if procurement officials are familiar with blue light specials. The sirens in DC wail 24×7.
Thanks, OpenAI. You produced a good enough illustration. A first!
I thought about K-Mart when I read “Google Slashes Business Software Prices for US Federal Agencies.” I see that flickering blue light as I type this short blog post. The trusted “real” news source reports:
Google will offer steep discounts to U.S. federal agencies for its business apps package as the company looks to capitalize on the Trump administration’s cost-cutting push and chip away at Microsoft’s longstanding grip on the government software market.
Yep, discounts. Now Microsoft has some traction in the US government. I cannot imagine what life would be like for aides to a senior Pentagon if he did not have nifty PowerPoint presentations. Perhaps offering a deal will get some Microsoft afficionados to learn to live without Excel and Word? I don’t know, but Google is giving the “discount” method a whirl.
What’s up with Google? I think someone told me that Gemini 2.5 was free. Now a discount on GSA listed services which could amount to $2 billion in savings … if — yes, that magic word — if the US government dumps the Softies’ outstanding products for the cloudy goodness of the Google’s way. Yep, “if.”
I have a cute anecdote about Google and the US government from the year 2000, but, alas, I cannot share it. Trust me. It is a knee slapper. And, no, it is not about Sergey wearing silver sparkle sneakers to meetings with US elected officials. Those were indeed eye catchers among shoes with toes that looked like potatoes.
Several observations:
- Google, like Amazon, is trying to obtain US government business. I think the flashing blue lights, if I were still working in the hallowed halls, would impair my vision. Price cutting seems to be the one true way right now.
- Will lower prices have an impact on US government procurement? I am not sure. The procurement process chugs along every day and in quite predictable ways. How long does it take to turn a battleship, assuming the captain can pull off the maneuver without striking a small fishing boat, of course.
- Google seems to think that slashing prices for its “products” will boost sales. My understanding of Google is that its sale to government agencies pivots on several characteristics; for example, [a] listening and understanding what government professionals say, [b] providing a modicum of customer support or at the very least answering a phone call from a government professional, and [c] delivering products that the aides, assistants, and contractors understand and can use to crank out documents with numbered lines, dense charts, and bullet points that mostly stay in place after a graphic is inserted.
To sum up, I find the idea of price cuts interesting. My initial reaction is that price cuts and procurement are not necessarily lined up procedurally. But I am a dinobaby. But after 50 years of “government” work I have a keen desire to see if the Google can shine enough blue lights to bedazzle people involved in purchasing software to keep the admirals happy. (I speak from a little experience working with the late Admiral Craig Hosmer, R-Calif. whom I thank for his service.)
Stephen E Arnold, April 15, 2025
Oracle: Pricked by a Rose and Still Bleeding
April 15, 2025
How disappointing. DoublePulsar documents a senior tech giant’s duplicity in, “Oracle Attempt to Hide Serious Cybersecurity Incident from Customers in Oracle SaaS Service.” Blogger Kevin Beaumont cites reporting by Bleeping Computer as he tells us someone going by rose87168 announced in March they had breached certain Oracle services. The hacker offered to remove individual companies’ data for a price. They also invited Oracle to email them to discuss the matter. The company, however, immediately denied there had been a breach. It should know better by now.
Rose87168 responded by releasing evidence of the breach, piece by piece. For example, they shared a recording of an internal Oracle meeting, with details later verified by Bleeping Computer and Hudson Rock. They also shared the code for Oracle configuration files, which proved to be current. Beaumont writes:
“In data released to a journalist for validation, it has now become 100% clear to me that there has been cybersecurity incident at Oracle, involving systems which processed customer data. … All the systems impacted are directly managed by Oracle. Some of the data provided to journalists is current, too. This is a serious cybersecurity incident which impacts customers, in a platform managed by Oracle. Oracle are attempting to wordsmith statements around Oracle Cloud and use very specific words to avoid responsibility. This is not okay. Oracle need to clearly, openly and publicly communicate what happened, how it impacts customers, and what they’re doing about it. This is a matter of trust and responsibility. Step up, Oracle — or customers should start stepping off.”
In an update to the original post, Beaumont notes some linguistic slight-of-hand employed by the company:
“Oracle rebadged old Oracle Cloud services to be Oracle Classic. Oracle Classic has the security incident. Oracle are denying it on ‘Oracle Cloud’ by using this scope — but it’s still Oracle cloud services that Oracle manage. That’s part of the wordplay.”
However, it seems the firm finally admitted the breach was real to at least some users. Just not in in black and white. We learn:
“Multiple Oracle cloud customers have reached out to me to say Oracle have now confirmed a breach of their services. They are only doing so verbally, they will not write anything down, so they’re setting up meetings with large customers who query. This is similar behavior to the breach of medical PII in the ongoing breach at Oracle Health, where they will only provide details verbally and not in writing.”
So much for transparency. Beaumont pledges to keep investigating the breach and Oracle’s response to it. He invites us to follow his Mastodon account for updates.
Cynthis Murrell, April 15, 2025
Blockchain: Adoption Lag Lies in the Implementation
April 15, 2025
Why haven’t cryptocurrencies taken over the financial world yet? The Observer shares some theories in, "Blockchain’s Billion-Dollar Blunder: How Finance’s Tech Revolution Became an Awkward Evolution." Writer Boris Bohrer-Bilowitzki believes the mistake was trying to reinvent the wheel, instead of augmenting it. He observes:
"For years, the strategy has been replacement rather than integration. We’ve attempted to create entirely new financial systems from scratch, expecting the world to abandon centuries of established infrastructure overnight. It hasn’t worked, and it won’t work. … This disconnect highlights our fundamental misunderstanding of how technological evolution works. Credit cards didn’t replace cash; they complemented it. They added a layer of convenience and security that made transactions easier while working within the existing financial framework. That’s the model blockchain has always needed to follow."
Gee, it makes sense when you put it that way. The write-up points to Swift as an organization that gets it. We learn:
"One of the most promising developments in this space is the international banking system SWIFT’s ongoing blockchain pilot program. In 2025, SWIFT will facilitate live trials, enabling central and commercial banks across North America, Europe and Asia to conduct digital asset transactions on its network. These trials aim to explore how blockchain can enhance payments, foreign exchange (FX), securities trading and trade finance without requiring banks to overhaul their systems."
That sounds promising. But what about consumers? Many are baffled by the very concept of cryptocurrency, never mind how to interact with it. Intuitive interfaces, Bohrer-Bilowitzki stresses, would remove that hurdle. After all, he notes, folks only embrace new technologies that make their lives easier.
Did the esteemed Observer overlook these blockchain downsides?
- Distributed autonomous organizations look more like Discord groups and club members
- Wonky reward layers
- Funding “hopes” is losing some traction
- Web3 seems to filled with janky STARs.
Novelty alone is not enough to drive large-scale adoption. Imagine that.
Cynthia Murrell, April 16, 2025
Stanford AI Report: Credible or Just Marketing?
April 14, 2025
No AI. Just a dinobaby sharing an observation about younger managers and their innocence.
I am not sure I believe reports or much of anything from Stanford University. Let me explain my skepticism. Here’s one of the snips a quick search provided:
I think it was William James said great things about Stanford University when he bumped into the distinguished outfit. If Billie was cranking out Substacks, he would probably be quite careful in using words like “leadership,” “ethical behavior,” and the moral sanctity of big thinkers. Presidents don’t get hired like a temporary worker in front of Home Depot. There is a process, and it quite clear the process and the people and cultural process at the university failed. Failed spectacularly.
Stanford hired and retained a cheater if the news reports are accurate.
Now let’s look at “The 2025 AI Index Report.”
The document’s tone is one of lofty pronouncements.
Stanford mixes comments about smart software with statements like “
Global AI optimism is rising—but deep regional divides remain.
Yep, I would submit that AI-equipped weapons are examples of “regional divides.”
I think this report is:
- Marketing for Stanford’s smart software activities
- A reminder that another country (China) is getting really capable in smart software and may zip right past the noodlers in the Gates Computer Science Building
- Stanford wants to be a thought leader which helps the “image” of the school, the students, the faculty, and the wretches in fund raising who face a tough slog in the years ahead.
For me personally, I think the “report” should be viewed with skepticism. Why? A university which hires a cheater makes quite clear that the silly notions of William James are irrelevant.
I am not sure they are.
Stephen E Arnold, April 14, 2025
Paragon: Specialized Software Revealed
April 14, 2025
It can be difficult to get information about spyware and the firms that produce it. That is why we welcome the report, “Virtue or Vice? A First Look at Paragon’s Proliferating Spyware Operations” from University of Toronto’s Citizen Lab. The detailed report gives a brief background on the company and a thorough map of its spyware infrastructure. Eye-opening. We learn about the effort by Meta and WhatsApp to thwart a Paragon zero-click exploit. The lab also shares details from its investigations into links between Paragon and the Italian and Canadian governments. See the article for all the details.
The report’s conclusion? “You Can’t Abuse-Proof Mercenary Spyware.” The authors emphasize:
“Paragon specifically courts media attention with claims that by only selling to a select group of governments, they can avoid the abuse scandals plaguing their peers. The implicit message: if you do not sell to autocrats, your product will not be used recklessly and in anti-democratic ways. History, however, shows us that this is not always the case. Many democratic states have histories of using secret surveillance powers and technologies against journalists and members of civil society. Mercenary spyware is no exception, with multiple democracies deploying spyware against journalists, human rights defenders, and other members of civil society. Indeed, organizations working against the proliferation and abuse of spyware, including the Citizen Lab, have warned that the temptation to use this technology in a rights-abusing way is so great that, even in democracies, it will be abused. Overall, the cases described in this report suggest that Paragon’s claims of having found an abuse-proof business model may not hold up to scrutiny. We acknowledge that this report does not seek to cover the totality of Paragon cases, but rather a set of cases where targets have chosen to come forward at this time and in our report. However, the pattern in these cases challenges Paragon’s marketing approach which has claimed that the company would only sell to clients that ‘abide by international norms and respect fundamental rights and freedoms.’”
Quite a surprise. The researchers are not stopping here. On the contrary, they describe this report as a first step. We look forward to hearing what they find next.
Cynthia Murrell, April 14, 2025
Programming in an AI World: Spruiked Again Like We Were Last Summer
April 14, 2025
Software engineers are, reasonably, concerned about losing their jobs to AI. Australian blogger Clinton Boys asks, "How Will LLMs Take Our Jobs?" After reading several posts by programmers using LLMs for side projects, he believes such accounts suggest where we are headed. He writes:
"The consensus seems to be that rather than a side project being some sort of idea you have, then spend a couple of hours on, maybe learn a few things, but quickly get distracted by life or a new side project, you can now just chuck your idea into the model and after a couple of hours of iterating you have a working project. To me, this all seems to point to the fact that we are currently in the middle of a significant paradigm shift, akin to the transition from writing assembly to compiled programming languages. A potential future is unfolding before our eyes in which programmers don’t write in programming languages anymore, but write in natural language, and generative AI handles the gruntwork of actually writing the code, the same way a compiler translates your C code into machine instructions."
Perhaps. But then, he ponders, will the job even fit the title of "engineer"? Will the challenges and creative potential many love about this career vanish? And what would they do then? Boys suggests several routes one might take, with the caveat that a realistic path forward would probably blend several of these. He recognizes one could simply give up and choose a different career entirely. An understandable choice, if one can afford to start over. If not, one might join the AI cavalcade by learning how to create LLMs and/or derive value from them. It may also be wise to climb the corporate ladder—managers should be safer longer, Boys expects. Then again one might play ostrich:
"You could also cross your fingers and hope it pans out differently — particularly if, like me you find the vision of the future spruiked by the most bullish LLM proponents a little ghoulish and offensive to our collective humanity."
Always an option, we suppose. I had to look up the Australian term "spruik." According to Wordsmith.org, it means "to make an elaborate speech, especially to attract customers." Fitting. Finally, Boys says, one could bet on software connoisseurs of the future. Much as some now pay more for hand-made pastries or small-batch IPAs, some clients may be willing to shell out for software crafted the old-fashioned way. One can hope.
Cynthia Murrell, April 14, 2025
Ad Blockers and a Googley Consequence
April 11, 2025
Another dinobaby blog post. Eight decades and still thrilled when I point out foibles.
Motivated individuals are acting in a manner usually associated with Cloudflare-type of outfits. The idea of a “man in the middle” is a good one. It works when one buys something from Amazon. The user wants convenience and does not take the time to hunt around for a better or cheaper version of a particular product.
“Block YouTube Ads on AppleTV by Decrypting and Stripping Ads from Profobuf” provides a recipe for dumping advertisements in some streaming services, but the spotlight is on the lovable Google and Apple’s streaming device. (Poor Apple. Like its misfiring AI and definitely interesting glasses, the company caught a bright person’s attention.)
Social media needs two things: Beacons that phone home and advertising because how else is a company going to push products and services. The write up provides step-by-step instructions for chopping out ads from two big outfits.
Here’s what I think will happen at the monopolies:
- At least two software people will tackle this “problem”: One from Apple and one from Google.
- One will come up with a “fix” to the work-around
- The “fix” will be shared with the company who did not come up with an enhancement first
- The modified method will be deployed
- The game begins again.
The cat-and-mouse sequence is little more than that von Neumann game theory just in real life with money at stake. It’s too bad Johnny and his pals (some of whom were quite quirky) are not around to work on ad blocking instead of nuclear weapons.
Well, Johnny isn’t around, and I think that game theory does not work when one battles multi billion dollar monopolies with lots of reasonably bright people around providing they aren’t veterans of the Apple AI team or the original Google Glass product.
The write up is interesting. I admire the effort the author put into the blocking. How long will it persist? Good question, but the next iteration will probably be designed to preserve the money flow. Ads and user tracking are the means to the end: Big revenue.
Stephen E Arnold, April 11, 2025
Trapped in the Cyber Security Gym with Broken Gear?
April 11, 2025
As an IT worker you can fall into more pitfalls than a road that needs repaving. Mac Chaffee shared a new trap on his blog, Mac’s Tech Blog and how he handled: “Avoid Building A Security Treadmill.” Chaffee wrote that he received a ticket that asked him to stop people from using a GPU service to mine cryptocurrencies. Chafee used Falco, an eBPF-powered agent that runs on the Kubernetes cluster, to monitor the spot and deactivate the digital mining.
Chaffee doesn’t mind the complexity of the solution. His biggest issue was with the “security treadmill” that he defines as:
“A security treadmill1 is a piece of software that, due to a weakness of design, requires constant patching to keep it secure. Isn’t that just all software? Honestly… kinda, yeah, but a true treadmill is self-inflicted. You bought it, assembled it, and put it in your spare bedroom; a device specifically designed to let you walk/run forever without making forward progress.”
One solution suggested to Chaffee was charging people to use the GPU. The idea was that if they charged people more to use the GPU than what they were making with cryptocurrencies than it would stop. That idea wasn’t followed of reasons Chaffee wasn’t told, so Falco was flown.
Unfortunately Falco only detects network traffic to host when its directly connected to the IP. The security treadmill was in full swing because users were bypassing the Internet filter monitored by Falco. Falco needs to be upgraded to catch new techniques that include a VPN or proxy.
Another way to block cryptocurrency mining is blocking all outbound traffic except for those an allowed-user list. It would also prevent malware attacks, command and control servers, and exfiltration attacks. Another problem Chaffee noted is that applications doesn’t need a full POSIX environment. To combat this he suggests:
“Perhaps free-tier users of these GPUs could have been restricted to running specific demos, or restrictive timeouts for GPU processing times, or denying disk write access to prevent downloading miners, or denying the ability to execute files outside of a read-only area.”
Chaffee declares it’s time to upgrade legacy applications or make them obsolete to avoid security treadmills. It sounds like there’s a niche to make a startup there. What a thought a Planet Fitness with one functioning treadmill.
Whitney Grace, April 11, 2025
The UK, the Postal Operation, and Computers
April 11, 2025
According to the Post Office Scandal, there’s a new amendment in Parliament that questions how machines work: “Proposed Amendment To Legal Presumption About The Reliability Of Computers.”
Journalist Tom Webb specializes in data protection and he informed author Nick Wallis about an amendment to the Data (Use and Access) Bill that is running through the British Parliament. The amendment questions:
“It concerns the legal presumption that “mechanical instruments” (which seems to be taken to include computer networks) are working properly if they look to the user like they’re working properly.”
Wallis has chronicled the problems associated with machines appearing to work properly since barrister Stephen Mason reported the issue to him. Barrister Mason is fighting on behalf of the British Post Office Scandal (which is another story) about the this flawed thinking and its legal implication. Here’s more on what the problem is:
“Although the “mechanical instruments” presumption has never, to the best of my knowledge, been quoted in any civil or criminal proceedings involving a Subpostmaster, it has been said to effectively reverse the burden of proof on anyone who might be convicted using digital evidence. The logic being if the courts are going to assume a computer was working fine at the time an offence allegedly occurred because it looked like it was working fine, it is then down to the defendant to prove that it was not working fine. This can be extremely difficult to do (per the Seema Misra/Lee Castleton cases).”
The proposed amendment uses legal jargon to do the following:
“This amendment overturns the current legal assumption that evidence from computers is always reliable which has contributed to miscarriages of justice including the Horizon Scandal. It enables courts to ask questions of those submitting computer evidence about its reliability.”
This explanation means that just because the little light is blinking and the machine is doing something, those lights do not mean the computer is working correctly. Remarkable.
Whitney Grace, April 11, 2025
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
