Court Case Hunger? Judyrecords Is Available
November 24, 2020
Unable to pay the fee for LexisNexis-type commercial search systems? You are not alone. If you want information from court records, navigate to Judyrecords. Within the last couple of months, the system has added more than 35 million cases. Aren’t these data available for free elsewhere? Sure, if you like going through hoops like verification procedures. Judyrecords lets a user plug in the names of entities and view results. I ran one of my go to queries: “Palantir IBM.” Here are the results:
This may not be important to you, but for those who have to wade through for fee legal search systems, Judyrecords is helpful. But for how long? Yes, that is a good question. For now, however, give it a whirl. Keep in mind that US court systems without online technology or special arrangements for document access prevent the system from being comprehensive. Lawyers enjoy results which must be checked by billable professionals, however.
Stephen E Arnold, November 23, 2020
Deep Fakes Are Old
November 24, 2020
Better late than never, we suppose. The New York Post reports, “BBC Apologizes for Using Fake Bank Statements to Land Famous Princess Diana Interview.” Princess Diana being unavailable to receive the apology, the BBC apologized to her brother instead for luring her into the 1995 interview with counterfeit documentation. Writer Marisa Dellatto specifies:
“Network director-general Tim Davie wrote to Diana’s brother, Charles Spencer, to acknowledge the fraudulent actions of reporter Martin Bashir 25 years ago. Last month, the BBC finally admitted that Bashir showed Spencer bank statements doctored by a staff graphic designer. Spencer had alleged that Bashir told his sister ‘fantastical stories to win her trust’ and showed him fake bank records which reportedly helped land Bashir the interview. At the time, the princess was apparently deeply worried she was being spied on and that her staff was leaking information about her. Bashir’s ‘evidence’ allegedly made her confident to do the interview, one year after she and [Prince] Charles split.”
This is the interview in which Princess Di famously remarked that “there were three of us in this marriage, so it was a bit crowded,” and the couple filed for divorce in the weeks that followed. (For those who were not around or old enough to follow the story, her statement was a reference to Prince Charles’ ongoing relationship with Camila Parker Bowles, whom he subsequently married.)
For what it is worth, a BBC spokesperson insists this sort of deception would not pass the organization’s more stringent editorial processes now in place. Apparently, Bashir also intimidated the Princess with fake claims her phones had been tapped by the British Intelligence Service. Though it did issue the apology, the BBC does not plan to press the issue further because Bashir is now in poor health.
Cynthia Murrell, November 24, 2020
Useful Service or Email Collector?
November 16, 2020
Here is a possibly useful service—Please-unsubscribe.com does just what its name suggests: Unsubscribe clients from bothersome marketing emails for a small fee. The service’s entrepreneur reassures:
“Forward marketing emails to hey@please-unsubscribe.com and we will take care of the rest. Here is an example. … Each unsubscribe uses 1 Credit. Over time, you should need this service less and less 🙂 Fresh accounts start with 5 Credits. Credits are initially locked to the source email address. For example, if your email is john.smith@example.com, then your credits will only work with that email address. To change your source email address (or add a member), please message: support@please-unsubscribe.com. For example, you can add multiple members of your family or friends to share a single credit pool.”
One begins by simply forwarding any marketing email and the first five credits will be assigned. Once they are used up, the user will be asked to enroll through Stripe or PayPal. We’re told unsubscribe requests are usually processed within 24 hours, and users receive a monthly report describing the junk email that has been halted. The page, which is written in the tone of a casual conversation, ponders the value of moving to a weekly report vs. not cluttering its users’ inbox (when they were tasked to do just the opposite). Depending on how many credits one buys, the cost is between 20 and 50 cents per pesky sender. We are also told the service respects users’ privacy. It pledges to never sell data and to place processed emails into Google Workspace’s trash to be purged within 30 days.
We found this part interesting—For now, anyway, this service is not automated. The job is performed by an actual person. The page specifies:
“Currently, there is no automation. Oftentimes, these marketing emails contain hard-to-find, low-opacity links. But it’s nothing that a real human can’t tackle. At this time, the only processor is my high-school sister. I pay her $15/hour. In the future, automation might be worth it. But for right now, hiring a real human is a pretty good deal for the task.”
One wonders what will happen when and if the service becomes popular; the sister may soon become overwhelmed. Will please-unsubscribe turn to automation or hire more workers? We would be curious to learn the answer.
Cynthia Murrell, November 16, 2020
Contact Tracing Apps: A Road Map to Next Generation Methods
October 30, 2020
I read “Why Contact-Tracing Apps Haven’t Lived Up to Expectations.” The article explains that the idea of using a mobile phone and some software to figure out who has been exposed to Covid is not exactly a home run. The reasons range from people not trusting the app or the authorities pushing the app, crappy technology, and an implicit message that some humans don’t bother due to being human: Sloth, gluttony, etc.
The write up appears to overlook the lessons which have been learned from contact tracing applications.
- The tracers have to be baked into the devices
- The software has to be undetectable
- The operation has to be secure
- The monitoring has to be 24×7 unless the phone is destroyed or the power source cut off.
These lessons are not lost on some government officials.
What’s this mean? For some mobile phone operations, the insertion of tracers is chugging right along. Other countries may balk, but the trajectory of disease and other social activities indicated that these “beacon” and “transmit” functions are of considerable interest in certain circles.
Stephen E Arnold, October 30, 2020
Google Filtering: How Smart Is Software?
October 27, 2020
I included a screenshot illustrating YouTube search results which make it clear how to obtain without charge copy-protected commercial software. You can read that story and see the screen shot at this link. I want to document a Reuters’ report called “Italy’s Communications Watchdog Fines Google for Betting Ad.” The news item documents that Google was fined for running gambling ads. The DarkCyber research team has been monitoring some of the questionable video streaming sites. Advertisements are appearing on these sites in greater numbers. What vendors are providing these paid messages? At this time, there’s no open source information about the intermediaries involved.
Questions:
- Why doesn’t filtering by key word work for Google advertisements? Gambling seems to be a no brainer.
- Why are Google YouTube search results providing recently updated links to video content which appears to violate a number of rules and regulations? The word “crack” is like gambling a seemingly obvious yellow caution light.
- What are the names of the ad agency intermediaries providing advertisements to what appear to be illegal video streaming sites?
Interesting? The DarkCyber research team finds the subject engaging. Smart software seems to have some blind spots.
Stephen E Arnold, October 27, 2020
Pundit Wants Everyone Unplugged
October 21, 2020
Douglas Rushkuff is a prominent writer on technology, media, and the future. According to Coin Desk, Rushkuff believes that when it comes to the Internet’s development: “‘We Blew It.’ Douglas Rushkoff’s Take On The Future Of The Web.” Rushkoff does not like that the big tech companies, Google, Facebook, and Amazon, are monetizing our attention. He recommends that people unplug from screens and return to the world around us.
The interview focuses on Rushkuff’s experience writing about the Internet’s early days. He described the early days of the Internet as an altruistic, idealist time, when the Internet was viewed as a way to combat established powers and hierarchies. Rushkuff stated everything disappeared when:
“I think people sense the potential is still there. If we hadn’t weaponized this stuff against humanity in the name of increasing the Nasdaq stock exchange, what may have we gotten? Would we have saved – now it’s too late – civilization? That was the last moment at which we had the potential to change the world. But we decided it was more important to build up our 401(k)s.”
He believes that humanity might have passed a tipping point for civilization’s salvation. The biggest problems are climate change and more diseases. He notes that whenever a new technology is invented such as crypto currencies, people are not using them for their intended purpose. Instead they are being used to generate money and support the old power structures.
Rushkuff advises people to support mutual aid endeavors, where people cooperate and help each other for society’s benefit. Crypto currencies are a way to establish mutual aid and authenticate business transactions without relying on big business and/or banks.
In the 1990s, Rushkuff wrote of the dangers about teaching computers how to manipulate human behavior and thought. Based off how technology is advancing, computers will only get better at understanding humans. His views on the future are thinking, but he does offer some wise words:
“When you only look forward you don’t see your own exhaust. There’s a disconnect from the consequences of your actions.”
Hindsight is twenty-twenty when one rides the Google bus.
Whitney Grace, October 21, 2020
Freeware Tool GT4T for Translating Text
October 20, 2020
Here is a more efficient solution for those translating from one (human) language to another. Ghacks.net suggests we “Translate Microsoft Office Documents or Text from Any Word Editor and Get Dictionary Definitions Instantly with GT4T.” Writer Ashwin explores the freeware tool and takes us along for the ride with instructions and plenty of screenshots. He writes:
“Translating is no easy task, it requires precision, and you may be constantly looking up words that you don’t know or are unsure about. Opening up the browser every few seconds isn’t going to be productive either if you are working in desktop programs, e.g. Microsoft Word. GT4T is a freeware tool that can help translate text from any word editor quickly. The name stands for Google Translate for Translators, and obviously the program requires an internet connection to work. It does support other translation services, more on this later. The application doesn’t have a GUI window to work with. Instead, it runs in the background, you can access it using a couple of keyboard shortcuts.”
The write-up walks us through setting up the app with the languages one is working with and describes how to translate text in any program. One important caveat—GT4T replaces the original text (in the document and on the clipboard) with the translation, so users will want to save the original version separately. The tool supports the following services, and provides a way to switch between them: Google Neural, Microsoft Translator, Youdao, Yandex, Google Phrase Based, DeepL Pro, Baidu, Tencent, Sogou, CloudTranslation, NiuTrans, Systran, TradooIT, and Papago.
Ashwin describes the pop-up dictionary function and tells us how to create custom profiles with specified languages for different projects. GT4T is available for Mac and Windows, though it does not have a version tailored to mobile devices. Users may notice a “Snore Toast” shortcut in Windows’ Start menu—do not be alarmed, we’re advised, that is just to display toast notifications related to the tool.
Cynthia Murrell, October 20, 2020
After Decades of the Online Revolution: The Real Revolution Is Explained
October 9, 2020
Years ago I worked at a fancy, blue chip consulting firm. One of the keys to success in generating the verbiage needed to reassure clients was reading the Economist. The publication, positioned as a newspaper, sure looked like a magazine. I wondered about that marketing angle, and I was usually puzzled by the “insights” about a range of topics. Then an idea struck me: The magazine was a summarizer of data and verbiage for those in the “knowledge” business. I worked through the write ups, tried to recall the mellifluous turns of phrase, and stuff my “Data to Recycle” folder with clips from the publication.
I read “Faith in Government Declines When Mobile Internet Arrives: A New Study Finds That Incumbent Parties Lose Votes after Their Citizens Get Online.” [A paywall or an institutional subscription may be required to read about this obvious “insight.”] Readers of the esteemed publication will be launching Keynote or its equivalent and generating slide decks. These are often slide decks which will remain unfindable by an organization’s enterprise search system or in ineffectual online search systems. That may not be a bad thing.
The “new study” remains deliciously vague: No statistical niceties like who, when, how, etc. Just data and a killer insight:
A central (and disconcerting) implication is that governments that censor offline media could maintain public trust better if they restricted the internet too. But effective digital censorship requires technical expertise that many regimes lack.
The statements raise some interesting questions for experts to explain; for example, “Dictatorships may restore faith in governments.” That’s a topic for a Zoom meeting among one percenters.
Several observations seem to beg for dot pointing:
- The “online revolution” began about 50 years ago with a NASA program. What was the impact of those sluggy and buggy online systems like SDC’s? The answer is that information gatekeepers were eviscerated, slowly at first and then hasta la vista.
- Gatekeepers provided useful functions. One of these was filtering information and providing some aggregation functions. The recipient of information from the early-days online information systems was some speed up in information access but not enough to eliminate the need for old fashioned research and analysis. Real time is, by definition, not friendly to gatekeepers.
- With the development of commercial online infrastructure and commercial providers, the hunger or addiction to ever quicker online systems was evident. The “need for speed” seemed to be hard wired into those who worked in knowledge businesses. At least one online vendor reduces the past to a pattern and then looks at the “now” data to trigger conclusions. So much for time consuming deliberation of verifiable information.
The article cited above has discovered downstream consequences of behaviors (social and economic) which have been part of the online experience for many years.
The secondary consequences of online extend far beyond the mobile devices. TikTok exists for a reason, and that service may be one of the better examples of “knowledge work” today.
One more question: How can institutions, old fashioned knowledge, and prudent decision making survive in today’s datasphere? With Elon Musk’s implants, who will need a mobile phone?
Perhaps the next Economist write up will document that change, hopefully in a more timely manner.
Stephen E Arnold, October 9, 2020
TikTok: Maybe Some Useful Information?
September 19, 2020
US President Donald Trump banned Americans from using TikTok, because of potential information leaks to China. In an ironic twist, The Intercept explains “Leaked Documents Reveal What TikTok Shares With Authorities—In The U.S.” It is not a secret in the United States that social media platforms from TikTok to Facebook collect user data as ways to spy and sell products.
While the US monitors its citizens, it does not take the same censorship measures as China does with its people. It is alarming the amount of data TikTok gathers for the Chinese, but leaked documents show that the US also accesses that data. Data privacy has been a controversial topic for years within the United States and experts argue that TikTok collects the same type of information as Google, Amazon, and Facebook. The documents reveal that ByteDance, TikTok’s parent company, the FBI, and Department of Homeland Security monitored the platform.
Law enforcement officials use TikTok as a means to monitor social unrest related to the death of George Floyd. Floyd suffocated when a police officer cut off his oxygen attempting to restrain him during arrest. TikTok users post videos about Black Lives Matter, police protests, tips for disarming law enforcement, and even jokes about the US’s current upheaval. TikTok’s user agreement says it collects information and will share it with third parties. The third parties include law enforcement if TikTok feels there is an imminent danger.
TikTok, however, also censors videos, particularly those the Chinese government dislikes. These videos include political views, the Hong Kong protests, Uyghur internment camps, and people considered poor, disabled, or ugly.
Trump might try to make the US appear as the better country, but:
““The common concern, whether we’re talking about TikTok or Huawei, isn’t the intentions of that company necessarily but the framework within which it operates,” said Elsa Kania, an expert on Chinese technology at the Center for a New American Security. “You could criticize American companies for having an opaque relationship to the U.S. government, but there definitely is a different character to the ecosystem.” At the same time, she added, the Trump administration’s actions, including a handling of Portland protests that brought to mind the police crackdown in Hong Kong, have undercut official critiques of Chinese practices: “At a moment when we’re seeing attempts by the administration to draw a contrast in terms of values and ideology with China, these eerie parallels that keep recurring do really undermine that.”
The issue is contentious. Information does not have to be used at the time of collection. The actions of youth can be used to exert pressure at a future time. That may be the larger risk.
Whitney Grace, September 19, 2020
Amazon and Halliburton: A Tie Up to Watch? Yep
September 11, 2020
DarkCyber noted “Explor, Halliburton, AWS Collaborate to Achieve Breakthrough with Seismic Data Processing in the Cloud.” The write up explains that crunching massive seismic data sets works. Among the benchmarks reported by the online bookstore and the environmentally-aware engineering and services companies are:
- An 85% decrease in CDP sort order times: Tested by sorting 308 million traces comprising of 1.72 TB from shot domain to CDP domain, completing the flow in an hour.
- An 88% decrease in CDP FK Filtering times: Tested with a 57 million-trace subset of the data comprising 318 GB, completing the flow in less than 6 minutes.
- An 82% decrease in pre-stack time migration times: Tested on the full 165 million-trace dataset comprising of 922GB, completing the flow in 54 minutes.
What do these data suggest? Better, faster, and cheaper processing?
We noted this paragraph in the write up:
“The collaboration with AWS and Explor demonstrates the power of digital investments that Halliburton is making, in this instance to bring high-density surveys to market faster and more economically than ever before. By working with industry thought leaders like Explor and AWS, we have been able to demonstrate that digital transformation can deliver step-change improvements in the seismic processing market.” – Philip Norlund, Geophysics Domain Manager, Halliburton, Landmark
Keep in mind that these data are slightly more difficult to manipulate than a couple hundred thousand tweets.
Stephen E Arnold, September 11, 2020
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
