Useful Probability Wording from the UK Ministry of Defence
August 8, 2023
Note: This essay is the work of a real and still-alive dinobaby. No smart software involved, just a dumb humanoid.
“Have You Ever Wondered Why Defence Intelligence Uses Terms Like “Unlikely” or “Realistic Possibility” When We Assess Russia’s War in Ukraine?” provides two useful items of information. Many people will be familiar with the idea of a “probability yardstick.” Others — like some podcast pundits and YouTube yodas — may not have a firm grasp on the words and their meaning.
I have reproduced the Ministry of Defence’s Probability Yardstick, which appeared in February 2023 in the unclassified posting:
Some investment analysts and business consultants have adopted this or a similar “yardstick.” Many organizations have this type of visual representation of event likelihoods.
The article does not provide real-life examples of the use of the yardstick. That’s is a good decision. For those engaged in analysis and data crunching, the idea of converting “numbers” into a point on a yardstick facilitates the communication of risk.
Here’s one recent example. A question like the impact of streaming on US cable companies is presented in the article “As Cable TV is Losing Millions of Subscribers, YouTube TV Is Now The 5th Largest TV Provider & Could Soon Be The 4th Largest” does not communicate the type of information a senior executive wants; that is, how likely is it the trend will continue. Pegging the loss of subscribers on the yardstick in either the “likely or probable” or “highly likely” communicates quickly and without word salad. The “explanation” can, of course, be provided.
In fast-moving situations, the terminology of the probability yardstick and its presentation of what is a type of confidence score is often useful. By the way, in the cited Cable TV article, the future is sunny for Google and TikTok, but not so good for the traditional companies.
Stephen E Arnold, August 8, 2023
Research 2023: Is There a Methodology of Control via Mendacious Analysis
August 8, 2023
Note: This essay is the work of a real and still-alive dinobaby. No smart software involved, just a dumb humanoid.
I read “How Facebook Does (and Doesn’t) Shape Our Political Views.” I am not sure what to conclude from the analysis of four studies about Facebook (is it Zuckbook?) presumably completed with some cooperation from the social media giant itself. The message I carried away from the write up is that tainted research may be the principal result of these supervised studies.
The up and coming leader says to a research assistant, “I am telling you. Manipulate or make up the data. I want the results I wrote about supported by your analysis. If you don’t do what I say, there will be consequences.” MidJourney does know how to make a totally fake leader appear intense.
Consider the state of research in 2023. I have mentioned the problem with Stanford University’s president and his making up data. I want to link the Stanford president’s approach to research with Facebook (Meta). The university has had some effect on companies in the Silicon Valley region. And Facebook (Meta) employs a number of Stanford graduates. For me, then, it is logical to consider the approach of the university to objective research and the behavior of a company with some Stanford DNA to share certain characteristics.
“How Facebook Does (and Doesn’t) Shape Our Political Views” offers this observation based on “research”:
“… the findings are consistent with the idea that Facebook represents only one facet of the broader media ecosystem…”
The summary of the Facebook-chaperoned research cites an expert who correctly in my my identifies two challenges presented by the “research”:
- Researchers don’t know what questions to ask. I think this is part of the “don’t know what they don’t know.” I accept this idea because I have witnessed it. (Example: A reporter asking me about sources of third party data used to spy on Americans. I ignored the request for information and disconnected from the reporter’s call.)
- The research was done on Facebook’s “terms”. Yes, powerful people need control; otherwise, the risk of losing power is created. In this case, Facebook (Meta) wants to deflect criticism and try to make clear that the company’s hand was not on the control panel.
Are there parallels between what the fabricating president of Stanford did with data and what Facebook (Meta) has done with its research initiative? Shaping the truth is common to both examples.
In Stanford’s Ideal Destiny, William James said this about about Stanford:
It is the quality of its men that makes the quality of a university.
What links the actions of Stanford’s soon-to-be-former president and Facebook (Meta)? My answer would be, “Creating a false version of objective data is the name of the game.” Professor James, I surmise, would not be impressed.
Stephen E Arnold, August 8, 2023
Another High School Tactic: I Am Hurt, Coach
August 7, 2023
This is a rainy Monday (August 7, 2023). From my point of view, the content flowing across my monitoring terminal is not too exciting. More security issue, 50-50 financial rumor mongering, and adult Internet users may be monitored (the world is coming to an end!). But in the midst of this semi-news was an item called “Musk Says He May Need Surgery, Will Get MRI on Back and Neck.” Wow. The ageing icon of self-driving autos which can run over dinobabies like me has dipped into his management Book of Knowledge for a tactic to avoid a “cage match” with the lovable Zuck, master of Threads and beloved US high-technology social media king thing.
“What do you mean, your neck hurts? I need you for the big game on Saturday. Win and you will be more famous than any other wizard with smart cars, rockets, and a social media service.” says the assistant coach. Thanks MidJourney, you are a sport.
You can get the information from the cited story, which points out:
The world’s richest person said he will know this week whether surgery will be required, ahead of his proposed cage fight with Meta Platforms Inc. co-founder Mark Zuckerberg. He previously said he “might need an operation to strengthen the titanium plate holding my C5/C6 vertebrae together.”
Mr. Zuckerberg allegedly is revved and ready. The write up reports:
Zuckerberg posted Sunday on Threads that he suggested Aug. 26 for the match and he’s still awaiting confirmation. “I’m ready today,” he said. “Not holding my breath.”
From my point of view, the tactic is similar to “the dog ate my homework.” This variant — I couldn’t do my homework because I was sick — comes directly from the Guide to the High School Science Club Management Method, known internationally as GHSSCMM. The information in this well-known business manual has informed outstanding decision making in personnel methods (Dr. Timnit Gebru, late of Google), executives giving themselves more money before layoffs (too many companies to identify in a blog post like this), and appearing in US Congressional hearings (Thank you for the question. I don’t know. I will have the information delivered to your office).
Health problems can be problematic. Will the cage match take place? What if Mr. Musk says, “I can fight.” Will Mr. Zuckerberg respond, “I sprained my ankle”? What does the GHSSCMM suggest in a tit-for-tat dynamic?
Perhaps we should ask both Mr. Musk’s generative AI system and the tame Zuckerberg LLAMLA? That’s “real” news.
Stephen E Arnold, August 7, 2023
Self Driving Cars: Would You Run in Front of One?
August 7, 2023
I worked in what is called by some “Plastic Fantastic.” If you have not heard the phrase, you may have missed the quips which included this phrase in several high profile, big money companies in Silicon Valley. Oh, include Cupertino and a few other outposts. Walnut Creek, I am sorry for you.
If one were to live in Berkeley and have the thrilling option of driving over the Bay Bridge or taking a change with 92 skidoo, the idea of having a car which would drive itself at three miles per hour is obvious. Also, anyone with an opportunity to use 101 or the Foothills would have a similar thought. Why drive? Why not rig a car to creep along?
One bright driver says, “Self driving cars will solve this problem.” His passenger says, “Isn’t this a self driving car? Aren’t we going the wrong way on a one-way street?” MidJourney understands traffic jams because its guardrails are high.
And what do you know? The self driving car idea captured attention. How is that going after much money and many years of effort? And here’s a better question: Would you run in front of one? Would you encourage your child to stand in front of one to test the auto-braking function? Go to a dealership selling smart cars and ask the sales professional (if you can find one) to let you drive a vehicle toward the sales professional. I tried this at two dealerships and what do you know? No auto sales professional accepted this idea. One dealership had an orange cone which I could use to test auto breaking.
I read “America’s Most Tech-Forward City Has Doubts about Self-Driving Cars.” I do not want to be harsh, but cities do not have doubts. People do. The Murdoch “real” journalists report that people (not cities) will embrace the idea of letting a Silicon Valley inspired vehicle ferry them around without a bit of trepidation. Okay, fear. There I said it. How about the confidence a vehicle without a steering wheel or brake inspires?
If you want to read what is painfully obvious, navigate to the original story.
Oh, the writer is unlikely to be found standing on 101 testing the efficacy of the smart cars. Mr. Murdoch? Yeah, he might give it a whirl. My suggestion is to be confident in the land of Plastic Fantastic. It thrives on illusion. Reality can kill, crash, or just stall at a key intersection. AI can hallucinate and may overlook the squashed jogger. But whiz kids sitting on 101 envision a smarter world. Doesn’t everyone sit on highways like 101 every day?
Stephen E Arnold, August 7, 2023
IBM and Smart Software: Try and Try Again, Dear Watson with an X
August 7, 2023
Note: This essay is the work of a real and still-alive dinobaby. No smart software involved, just a dumb humanoid.
With high hopes, IBM is acquiring FinOps firm Apptio for $4.6 billion. As Horses for Sources puts it, “IBM’s Acquisition of Apptio Can Shine if IBM Software and IBM Consulting Work Together to Deliver Cost-Managed Innovation at Speed.” But that is a big “if”. The odds seem long from the standpoint of RedHat users unimpressed with both IBM’s approach and internal cooperation at the company.
The young, sincere child presages her future in a giant technology company, “Yes, I will try to stack blocks to make the big building you told me to create with the blocks I got from my friend, Apt Ti Oh.” MidJourney, you did let me down with your previous “frustrated kid” images. Sultry teens were not what I was after.
IBM intends to mix Apptio with several other acquisitions that have gone into the new Watsonx platform, like Turbonomic, Instana, and MyInvenio, to create a cohesive IT-management platform. Linking spending data with operational data should boost efficiency, save money, and facilitate effective planning. This vision, however, is met with some skepticism. Writers Tom Reuner and Phil Fersht tell us:
“Apptio never progressed beyond providing insights, while IBM needs to demonstrate the proof points for integrating its disparate capabilities as well as progress from insight to action and, ultimately, automation. IBM Software must work with IBM Consulting transformation more effectively. … In essence, if successful, the ability to act on – and ultimately automate – all those insights is pretty much the operational Holy Grail. Just for transparency, getting expansive spend management and FinOps capabilities in itself will be a solid asset for IBM. However, any new and bolder proposition aiming at the bigger transformation price must move beyond technology and include stakeholders and change management. The ambition could be a broader business assurance where spend data, operational insights, and governance get tied to business objectives. In our view, this provides a significant alignment opportunity with IBM Consulting as it seeks to differentiate itself from the likes of Accenture Operations and Genpact. Having a deep services alignment with Watsonx and Apptio will bridge together the ability to manage the cost and value of both cloud transformation and AI investments – provided it gets it right with its global talent base of technical and process domain specialists.”
So the objective is a platform that brings companies’ disparate parts together into a cohesive and efficient whole. But this process must involve humans as well as data. If IBM can figure out how to do so within its own company, perhaps it stands a chance of reaching the goal.
Cynthia Murrell, August 6, 2023
MBAs, Lawyers, and Sociology Majors Lose Another Employment Avenue
August 4, 2023
Note: Dinobaby here: This essay is the work of a real and still-alive dinobaby. No smart software involved, just a dumb humanoid. Services are now ejecting my cute little dinosaur gif. (´?_?`) Like my posts related to the Dark Web, the MidJourney art appears to offend someone’s sensibilities in the datasphere. If I were not 78, I might look into these interesting actions. But I am and I don’t really care.
Some days I find MBAs, lawyers, and sociology majors delightful. On others I fear for their future. One promising avenue of employment has now be cut off. What’s the job? Avocado peeler in an ethnic restaurant. Some hearty souls channeling Euell Gibbons may eat these as nature delivers them. Others prefer a toast delivery vehicle or maybe a dip to accompany a meal in an ethnic restaurant or while making a personal vlog about the stresses of modern life.
“Chipotle’s Autocado Robot Can Prep Avocados Twice as Fast as Humans” reports:
The robot is capable of peeling, seeding, and halving a case of avocados significantly faster than humans, and the company estimates it could cut its typical 50-minute guacamole prep time in half…
When an efficiency expert from a McKinsey-type firm or a second tier thinker from a mid-tier consulting firm reads this article, there is one obvious line of thought the wizard will follow: Replace some of the human avocado peelers with a robot. Projecting into the future while under the influence of spreadsheet fever, an upgrade to the robot’s software will enable it to perform other jobs in the restaurant or food preparation center; for example, taco filler or dip crafter.
Based on this actual factual write up, I have concluded that some MBAs, lawyers, and sociology majors will have to seek another pathway to their future. Yard sale organizer, pet sitter, and possibly the life of a hermit remain viable options. Oh, the hermit will have GoFundMe and BuyMeaCoffee pages. Perhaps a T shirt or a hat?
Stephen E Arnold, August 4, 2023
Llama Beans? Is That the LLM from Zuckbook?
August 4, 2023
Note: This essay is the work of a real and still-alive dinobaby. No smart software involved, just a dumb humanoid.
We love open-source projects. Camelids that masquerade as such, not so much. According to The Register, “Meta Can Call Llama 2 Open Source as Much as It Likes, but That Doesn’t Mean It Is.” The company asserts its new large language model is open source because it is freely available for research and (some) commercial use. Are Zuckerburg and his team of Meta marketers fuzzy on the definition of open source? Writer Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols builds his case with quotes from several open source authorities. First up:
“As Erica Brescia, a managing director at RedPoint, the open source-friendly venture capital firm, asked: ‘Can someone please explain to me how Meta and Microsoft can justify calling Llama 2 open source if it doesn’t actually use an OSI [Open Source Initiative]-approved license or comply with the OSD [Open Source Definition]? Are they intentionally challenging the definition of OSS [Open Source Software]?'”
Maybe they are trying. After all, open source is good for business. And being open to crowd-sourced improvements does help the product. However, as the post continues:
“The devil is in the details when it comes to open source. And there, Meta, with its Llama 2 Community License Agreement, falls on its face. As The Register noted earlier, the community agreement forbids the use of Llama 2 to train other language models; and if the technology is used in an app or service with more than 700 million monthly users, a special license is required from Meta. It’s also not on the Open Source Initiative’s list of open source licenses.”
Next, we learn OSI‘s executive director Stefano Maffulli directly states Llama 2 does not meet his organization’s definition of open source. The write-up quotes him:
“While I’m happy that Meta is pushing the bar of available access to powerful AI systems, I’m concerned about the confusion by some who celebrate Llama 2 as being open source: if it were, it wouldn’t have any restrictions on commercial use (points 5 and 6 of the Open Source Definition). As it is, the terms Meta has applied only allow some commercial use. The keyword is some.”
Maffulli further clarifies Meta’s license specifically states Amazon, Google, Microsoft, Bytedance, Alibaba, and any startup that grows too much may not use the LLM. Such a restriction is a no-no in actual open source projects. Finally, Software Freedom Conservancy executive Karen Sandler observes:
“It looks like Meta is trying to push a license that has some trappings of an open source license but, in fact, has the opposite result. Additionally, the Acceptable Use Policy, which the license requires adherence to, lists prohibited behaviors that are very expansively written and could be very subjectively applied.”
Perhaps most egregious for Sandler is the absence of a public drafting or comment process for the Llama 2 license. Llamas are not particularly speedy creatures.
Cynthia Murrell, August 4, 2023
Social Media Outputs: Aloft Like a Cooling Hot Air Balloon?
August 4, 2023
Note: This essay is the work of a real and still-alive dinobaby. No smart software involved, just a dumb humanoid.
I found the assertions in “”They Need Us. We Don’t Need Them: The Fall of Twitter Is Making the Trolls and Grifters Desperate” in line with my experience. The write up asserts:
The grifters that make up the troll-industrial complex are not okay.
If you want the political spin on this statement, please, navigate to the source document. I want to focus on the observation “They need us. We don’t need them.” I view social media companies and those who have risen to fame on clicks and hyperbole are going to try to inflate every more colorful balloons. Their hope is to be seen as rulers of the sky. F-35s, addled doctors flying Cessnas, and hobbyist drones are potential problems for the hot air crowd.
The colorful balloons compete for attention. What happens when the hot air source cools? MidJourney would not depict a balloon crash into a pre-school playground. Bummer.
Let’s go back in time. In the 1980s, there were two financially successful and highly regarded business information commercial databases. One of the two companies had the idea that it could generate more revenue by pulling out of the online distribution agreements upon which the commercial database ecosystem depended. I don’t expect anyone reading this essay to remember DataStar, Dialcom, ESA Quest, or the original LexisNexis service. The key factoid is that if one wanted to deliver an electronic business information product, the timesharing outfits were the enablers. Think of them as a proto-Google.
How did that work out?
After quite a bit of talking and thinking, the business information company resigned itself to the servitude under which it served. It was decades later that Web accessible content and paywalls began to make it possible for a handful of companies to generate without the old timesharing intermediaries.
Few know the names of these commercial databases which once were the cat’s pajamas.
The moral of the story, from my point of view, is that people or services which view themselves as important enough to operate outside of an ecosystem have to understand the ecosystem. Alas, too many individuals perceive themselves as being powerful magnets. Sure, these individuals or companies have a tiny bit of magnetic power. However, without the ecosystem and today’s enablers, the reality is that their “power” is not easily or economically amplified.
From my point of view, social media provided free, no friction amplification. For that reason, I want social media regulated and managed by responsible individuals. Editorial or content guidelines must be promulgated and enforced. The Wild West has be converted into a managed townhouse community. Keep in mind that I am a dinobaby, and I am not sure arguments about the “value” of social media will be processed by my aged mental equipment.
Just look around you in an objective manner. Nice environment, right? Now we have balloons of craziness drifting above in an effort to capture attention. What happens when the hot air source cools? Back down to earth and possibly without a gentle landing.
Stephen E Arnold, August 4, 2023
Google Relies on People Not Perceiving a Walled Garden
August 3, 2023
Note: This essay is the work of a real and still-alive dinobaby. No smart software involved, just a dumb humanoid.
I want to keep this brief. I have been, largely without effect, explaining Google’s foundational idea of a walled garden people will perceive as the digital world. Once in the garden, why leave?
A representation of the Hotel California’s walled garden. Why bother to leave? The walled garden is the entire digital world. I wish MidJourney would have included the neon sign spelling out “Hotel California” or “Googleplex.” But no, no, no. Smart software has guard rails.
Today (August 3, 2023), I want to point to two different write ups which explain bafflement at what Google is doing.
The first is a brief item from Mastodon labeled (I think) “A List of Recent Hostile Moves by Google’s Chrome Team.” The write up points out that Google’s attempt to become the gatekeeper for content. Another is content blocking. And action to undermine an image format. Hacker News presents several hundred comments which say to me, “Why is Google doing this? Google is supposed to be a good company.” Imagine. Read these comments at this link. Amazing, at least to me!
The second item is from a lawyer. The article is “Google’s Plan To DRM The Web Goes Against Everything Google Once Stood For.” Please, read the write up yourself. What’s remarkable is the point of view expressed in this phrase “everything Google once stood for.” Lawyers are a fascinating branch of professional advice givers. I am fearful of this type of thinking; therefore, I try to stay as far away from attorneys as I can.
Let’s step back.
In one of my monographs about Google (research funded by commercial enterprises) which contain some of the information my clients did not deep sensitive, I depicted Sergey Brin as a magician with fire in his hand. From the beginning of Google’s monetization via advertising misdirection and keeping the audience amazed were precepts of the company. Today’s Google is essentially running what is now a 25 year old game plan. Why not? Advertising “inspired” by Yahoo-GoTo-Overture’s pay-for-traffic model generates almost 70 percent of the company’s revenue. With advertising under pressure, the Google has to amp up its controls. Those relevant ads displayed to me for feminine-centric products reflect the efficacy of the precision ad matching, right?
Think about the walled garden metaphor. Think about the magician analogy. Now think about what Google will do to extend and influence the world around it. Exciting for young people who view the world through eyes which have only seen what the walled garden offers. If TikTok goes away, Google has its version with influencers and product placements. What’s not to like about Google News, Gmail, or Android? Most people find nothing untoward, and altering those perceptions may be difficult.
The long view is helpful when one extends control a free service at a time. And relevance of Google’s search results? The results are relevant because the objective is ad revenue and messaging on Googley things. An insect in the walled garden does not know much about other gardens and definitely nothing about an alternative.
Stephen E Arnold, August 3, 2023
What Will Smart Software Change?
August 3, 2023
Note: Dinobaby here: This essay is the work of a real and still-alive dinobaby. No smart software involved, just a dumb humanoid. Services are now ejecting my cute little dinosaur gif. (´?_?`) Like my posts related to the Dark Web, the MidJourney art appears to offend someone’s sensibilities in the datasphere. If I were not 78, I might look into these interesting actions. But I am and I don’t really care.
Today (July 27, 2023) a person told me about “Photographs of People Making Books at the Collins Factory in 1960s Glasgow.” The write up is less compelling than the photographs. The online article features workers who:
- Organize products for shipping
- Setting type slugs with a hammer and chisel
- A person stitching book folios together
- A living artist making a plate
- A real person putting monotype back in a case.
I mention this because I have seen articles which suggest that smart software will not cause humans to lose their jobs. It took little time for publishers to cut staff and embrace modern production methods. It took less time for writers to generate a PDF and use an Amazon-type service to promote, sell, and distribute a book. Now smart software is allegedly poised to eliminate writers.
Will AI really create more work for humans?
The 1960s photos suggest that technology eliminates jobs in my opinion as it disrupts established work procedures and vaporizes norms which glue social constructs together. Anyone you know have the expertise to seat metal type with a hammer and chisel? I suppose I should have asked, “Does anyone near you scroll TikToks?”
Stephen E Arnold, August 3, 2023
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
