Search History: Mostly Forgotten and Definitely of Zero Interest to the Smart Software Crowd
July 10, 2020
There’s an interesting, if selective, write up about online information search and retrieval. Navigate to “The Bourne Collection: Online Search Is Older Than You Think.”
An interesting statement appears in the write up:
Founder Roger Summit had been part of Lockheed Missiles and Space Corporation’s mid-1960s Information Sciences Laboratory (1964). He had built his ideas about iterative search—a “dialog” between the user and the computer—into a separate online search division for Lockheed. (This was very different from the “take your best shot” approach of modern search engines, where you generally need to run a new search to refine irrelevant results). Dialog licensed access to leading databases in a variety of fields, which you could search with its powerful tools. While the overall amount of information was far smaller than on the modern web, it was far, far more relevant and better organized.
For the modern online experts, such a quaint, irrelevant, and inefficient concept.
Stephen E Arnold, July 10, 2020
Context Collapse Masks a Deeper, More Problematic Factor
July 6, 2020
“From Context Collapse to Content Collapse” appeared in January 2020. The author is the high profile pundit Nicholas Carr. Wikipedia tells me Mr. Carr “originally came to prominence with the 2003 Harvard Business Review article “IT Doesn’t Matter.”
The write up was in my files, and I looked it up after someone asked me if technology was changing the human brain. As it turned out, the person with whom I was speaking was an avid consumer of “real” news and information via the Vox publications, a zippy Silicon Valley type of information engine.
The blog post from January 2020 asserted:
Context collapse remains an important conceptual lens, but what’s becoming clear now is that a very different kind of collapse — content collapse — will be the more consequential legacy of social media. Content collapse, as I define it, is the tendency of social media to blur traditional distinctions among once distinct types of information — distinctions of form, register, sense, and importance. As social media becomes the main conduit for information of all sorts — personal correspondence, news and opinion, entertainment, art, instruction, and on and on — it homogenizes that information as well as our responses to it.
I agree. However, I think there is an importance aspect of digital information which is — forgive me, please — presented without context.
Specifically, when digital information flows, it operates in a manner akin to sand in a sandstorm. The abrasive nature of sand erodes and in some cases blasts surfaces. In other cases, a sandstorm in Saudi Arabia can lower the air quality in rural Kentucky.
The points, which are important to my work, are:
- Digital information is inherently corrosive; that is, digital information flows do not “build up”; digital information flows wear down. That’s where the Carr phrasing kicks in. The loss of context is a consequence of the nature of digital information flows.
- Content is not necessary for digital information to act as an abrasive. The Googley phrase “data exhaust” may be as or in some cases more important than the Instagram posts or TikTok videos. The “exhaust” provides the raw material for information manipulation, disinformation, misinformation, etc.
- Eroded structures can change their form and function. They can fall down like the collapse of the middle managers in an “informationized” organization. They can themselves become abrasive particles, a distinction I like to make when thinking about Facebook’s founder comments, the data Facebook gathers, and the behaviors regarding access to Facebook data.
For the now long gone US Office of Technology Assessment, I wrote “The Information Factory.” That monograph looked at Japan’s ambitious plans to become a leader in computing, databases, and other nifty technologies. I think we did the research in the early 1990s.
The point is that in the course of that research, the Japanese thinkers coined some words that I found more useful than some of the Japanese information investments; for instance:
Informationize. This words was used by MITI thinkers to describe what today is called “going digital” when a company uses new information technology to make a business more efficient.
Making the abstract noun “information” into a verb “to informationize” captured a mental mind set as well as the technical processes required to achieve the goal.
Mr. Carr’s insight and the question I was asked illustrate that it has taken more than 30 years to come to grips with the deeper implications of the “digital revolution.”
Collapse and loss of context are the visible consequences of flowing digital information. The underlying factor is, therefore, easily overlooked.
That underlying factor means that the train has left the station, and it if and when it returns, it will be changed in fundamental ways.
All aboard for the new normal. When the train pulls in if it ever does, the arrival will spark many TikTok videos.
Stephen E Arnold, July 6, 2020
What the Cancel Culture Implies for Online Information
July 1, 2020
I flipped through the “cancel” notices. These ranged from the bizarre like the Amazon Twitch Deep Sixing of Dr Disrespect (I know I had to look up this fellow as well) to Reddit’s decision to terminate The_Donald. I assume that India’s blocking of Chinese apps falls into the cancel category. Why not throw in the wacky Mixer Microsoft thing as well?
Several observations:
- When a person cannot locate information, for that person the payload of the information does not exist. Need to find Cuba Libre Restaurant in Washington? Not on the Google Map? Restaurant does not exist for some. The problem? Two of the DarkCyber research team were sitting in the Cuba Libre Restaurant.
- An uninformed person (any person for that matter) has a magical human mind. The mind, even when equipped with accurate, reasoned information, will fill in the blanks. Remove information, and the mind will kick into overdrive. Witches in Salem? No problem. Bigfoot in the woods? No problem. Ghosts in a run down B&B in Dorset? No problem. Fantasies can have interesting consequences.
- Online information — as I pointed out in my Eagleton Lecture more than 25 years ago — operates like chips of silicon in a sandstorm. One particle of sand is no big deal most of the time. When tons of sand carried forward by a wind with a weird nickname gets rolling, one thinks about sand in a different way. Plus that sand is inherently destructive: Force, small items, light occlusion, etc. Yep, that’s online information blasting along.
Cancelling is easy now. What about termination of information in other contexts? Hopefully some enthusiastic Gen Xer or Millennial will apply some digitally shaped brain cells to this question:
“Once cancelled, can the information be brought back?”
Let me know about the uncancellation thing, please.
Stephen E Arnold, July 1, 2020
A Moment of Irony: Microsoft and Facebook Ads
June 30, 2020
I recall reading a story about Microsoft’s purchasing a chunk of Facebook. Recode wrote about the deal in “It’s Been 10 Years Since Microsoft Invested in Facebook. Now Facebook Is Worth Almost As Much as Microsoft.”
I thought about this investment when I read “Microsoft Has Been Pausing Spending on Facebook, Instagram.”
The way I understand this is that Microsoft owns some Facebook shares. Facebook holds meetings for those who own stock. The meetings permit submission of questions from shareholders.
Some questions:
- Has Microsoft asked questions about Facebook’s ad practices at these meetings?
- Has Microsoft contacted Facebook management about its ad-related concerns?
- Has Microsoft management determined that selling its Facebook shares is a good or bad idea?
- Is the “pausing” virtue signaling or something more significant?
Hopefully one of the “real” news outfits will provide some information to help me answer these questions. If I were not so disinterested in Facebook, I could have one of the DarkCyber team jump in. And what about Microsoft’s financial thinking? Did Enron executives actually think about “energy”?
I do like the idea of a company which owns part of another company not liking the company’s policies. The action? Pausing. Yeah, maybe just another word for virtue signaling?
Stephen E Arnold, June 30, 2020
Yahoo Japan: Fighting Online Bullies with Digital Kung Fu
June 17, 2020
Yahoo Japan promises AI tools to “Bruce Lee” cyber bullying
Hateful messages can turn social media into a truly toxic environment. Prompted by a high-profile suicide, Yahoo Japan vows to provide stronger AI tools to thwart online bullying. Kyodo News reports, “Yahoo to Offer Social Media Firms AI Tech that Detects Abusive Posts.” Wow—will it work? It is hard to tell just yet, for the article is short on details. We’re told:
“Yahoo Japan Corp. said … it will provide social media firms with artificial intelligence technology that can detect abusive and other inappropriate online posts following the death of a Japanese professional wrestler and reality TV star that is believed to be linked to cyber-bullying. The internet portal site operator announced the measure after Hana Kimura, 22, a cast member of the popular reality show ‘Terrace House,’ was found dead in a suspected suicide late last month after becoming a target of hateful messages on social media. Following her death, the Japanese government is also considering revising a law to simplify procedures for identifying individuals who make defamatory online posts, aiming to compile draft legislation by the end of the year.”
The site already deletes about 20,000 out of 290,000 comments posted to its news portal each day, but that number includes both abusive posts and those that have low correlation with the source article. The company promises to step up its vetting, but it must first explore the legal issues around deleting posts. It plans to do so soon, we’re told. The one-inch punch of death will be delivered. Will it really kill? Nope.
Cynthia Murrell, June 17, 2020
Online Books
June 16, 2020
The Internet Archive has pulled in its digital tentacles. Are there collections of online books that will not attract law suits from increasingly stressed “real” publishers?
The answer is, “Sort of.”
For a listing of “over three million free books on the Web”, point your Mother Hen browser at “The Online Books Page.” Some exploration is needed. The categories are not exactly easy to use, but what online index is these days.
The “Search Our Listings” lets a user search by author’s last name and title. The problem is, as many grade school students know, is that an author’s name can return many listings. To see what I mean, plug in “Plato”. There you go. A list of books that will dissuade some from locating the old guy who argued with Socrates (not the football playing medical doctor from Brazil).
You can also access a feature called “Exclude extended shelves.” Despite the name, the NOT function delivers the goods. Why make Boolean into something that makes little sense?
The new listings option delivers an earthworm result. Like to browse, this is your Disneyland. Want magazines? Just click “Serials.” This page leads to more pages listing magazines. Some of the journals in the link to the Electronic Journals Library are not free. Well, free is relative, I suppose.
The effort to gather the information is admirable. Polishing, editorial control, and consistent presentation may arrive in the future.
Worth checking into an author with whom one is familiar. Browsing can be interesting. Years ago I told a former client that no firm had a comprehensive index of electronic books. That company’s young and confident managers did not believe me. Flash forward to 2020, the problem still exists. There you go.
Stephen E Arnold, June 16, 2020
What Type of Content Is Plentiful? Ever Been to a Cow Barn?
June 9, 2020
DarkCyber enjoyed “Most Tech Content Is Bullshit.” The write up explains:
I saw developers taking other people’s solutions for granted. Not thinking twice about the approach, not bothering about analyzing it.
When asked about the behavior, the article highlights four common behaviors:
- It was in some article.
- I copy-pasted it from X.
- I was doing it in my previous project.
- Someone told me so.
Unfortunately, these four points cover the bases for odd, wrong, and off base information.
The logical error is “appeal to authority.” Information issued from someone perceived as authoritative may be accepted readily. Today some people believe just about anything available online.
Why is this human failing taking place? The write up provides four reasons:
- We are lazy.
- We don’t have time.
- It’s comfortable.
- We don’t believe in ourselves.
The problem is unlikely to be resolved. There are some minor concerns: Money, the pandemic, civil disturbances, and international tensions. Plus, I want to make clear that search engine optimization and a desire to be perceived as an expert are darned significant factors.
Net net: There’s little likelihood of rapid change. Social distance, wait for a bailout check, and be confident in your children’s future. No big deal. And that online fix for sluggish DNS look ups. Not to worry.
Stephen E Arnold, June 9, 2020
Brave Browsing Sniping
June 9, 2020
DarkCyber noted “The Brave Web Browser Is Hijacking Links, and Inserting Affiliate Codes.” The write up explains that the Brave browser is behaving in a way that is unseemly. The point is that a free Web browser is pitching privacy and at the same time performs some underhanded actions to generate revenue. The explanation of the digital sleight of hand is interesting and illustrates that those “gee, stuff is free” online users assume one thing and may find something different. The write up includes this list and suggestions for accessing Web sites in a non-Brave way. We quote:
There is no good reason to use Brave. Use Chromium — the open-source core of Chrome — with the uBlock Origin ad blocker. [Chromium download, uBO Chrome]
Or use Firefox with uBlock Origin — ‘cos it blocks more ads than the Chromium framework will let anything block. [uBO Firefox]
Or, if you want a really cleaned-out Chrome — ungoogled-chromium, with uBlock Origin. [GitHub]
If you’re on Android, use Firefox with uBlock Origin, or the new Firefox Focus browser. [Mozilla]
Brave is a browser for suckers who want to keep getting played — so it’s a 100% crypto enterprise. As Eich’s pinned tweet still tells us: “Who gets paid? If not you, then you’re ‘product’.” [Twitter]
DarkCyber is not sure if this comment is as ominous as it sounded to one DarkCyber researcher:
Brendan Eich has responded to this post by claiming “David lies about us all the time.” I have pointed out that this is a prima facie defamatory statement, and asked him to detail these claimed lies. [Twitter, archive]
Mr. Eich is the alleged perpetrator of the Brave misdeeds. Online marketing and advertising are fascinating disciplines.
Stephen E Arnold, June 8, 2020
Technology TapsBrakes on Learning? Well, Well, Well
June 8, 2020
DarkCyber is often amused when friends and acquaintances explain that tablets, personal computers, and mobile phones make their children more intelligent. Living in a cloud of unknowing is a delightful mental condition. One can only imagine the disdain with which the information in “Harder to Learn about Science with Modern Technology – Astronomer Royal” will be greeted.
The person dubbed the Big Dog of Astronomy in the UK has some definite ideas; to wit:
“I think paradoxically our high-tech environments may actually be an impediment to sustaining useful enthusiasm in science,” Lord Rees said….
The gadgets that now pervade our lives, smartphones and such like, are baffling black boxes and pure magic to most people. “If you take them apart you find few clues to intricate miniaturize mechanisms and you certainly can’t put them together again. “So, the extreme sophistication of modern technology, wonderful though those benefits are, is ironically an impediment to engaging young people in the basics, with learning how things work.”
I think the summary is that dumbing down goes up as high-technology squeezes learning into an easily controlled digital experience.
This is a positive for some companies. Are you able to identify two or three?
Stephen E Arnold, June 8, 2020
Adulting at Facebook: Filtering Government Generated Content
June 5, 2020
Facebook may have realized that certain nation states are generating weaponized content. My goodness, what an insight, what a flash of brilliance, what a realization about the world of adults! DarkCyber noted “Facebook to Block Ads from State Controlled Media Entities in the U.S.” The write up reports:
Facebook said Thursday (June 5, 2020) it will begin blocking state-controlled media outlets from buying advertising in the U.S. this summer. It’s also rolling out a new set of labels to provide users with transparency around ads and posts from state-controlled outlets. Outlets that feel wrongly labeled can appeal the process.
Some government professionals in Sweden were hip to state actors using social media ads for state owned purposes about a decade ago. Facebook just got the memo maybe? The article adds:
The purpose of labeling these outlets is to give users transparency about any kind of potential bias a state-backed entity may have when providing information to U.S. users.
How many users of social media know that some content is “real,” and other content is “pay to play”? Not too many. DarkCyber has picked up hints that fewer than five percent of online content consumers can figure out provenance as a concept, let alone identify wonky information and data. Infographics? Hey, looks like real numbers, right?
The key point is that adulting is arriving a day late and a dollar short. Does anyone care? Sure, some people. But decades into the Wild West of weaponized content, information and data, slapping an index term on a content object is similar to watching the ocean liner sailing toward the horizon. Missing the boat? Yep.
Stephen E Arnold, June 6, 2020
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
