Factualities, July 24, 2019
July 24, 2019
There were not too many facts for the DarkCyber team to extract from the Facebook Versa hearing. Bummer. We did find a few, including the craziest Factuality of the week.
$152 billion. Revenue from game streaming in 2019. Source: Fortune Magazine
Here are other numerical gems we spotted in the last week. Read on.
7. The number of stalkerware apps (downloaded 130,000 times by consumers) removed from the Google Play Store by Google itself. Source: 9to5 Google
10. Number of months Google’s blog management tool survived before termination with extreme prejudice. Source: Android Police
40. The increase in hate speech on 4chan in the last 12 months. Source: Vice
50. The percentage of time “older” Americans spend alone. (Note: No data about the presence of a mobile phone owned by this group.) Source: Pew Research
68. Percentage of information technology managers who cannot keep up with cyber attacks. Source: OodaLoop
1,000. Number of private conversations record via Google Assistant leaked. Source: CNBC
1,500. Number of digital textbooks Pearson (which once owned a wax museum) will be digital first. Source: BBC
3,200. Number of changes to “search” Google made in 2018. Source: Search Engine Roundtable
700,000. Number of podcasts available at this time. Source: New York Times
$1,800,000. Amount bad actors demand from a college compromised by ransomware. Source: Naked Security
$10,000,000. Amount a now-former Microsoft engineer stole via customer fraud. Source: The Register
13,000,000. Number of daily users of Microsoft’s Slack clone service. Source: Slashdot
63,000,000. Number of Amazon Prime members as of July 2019. Source: ZDNet
$301,000,000. Amount stolen per month via business email compromises. We find the “1” a nice touch. It communicates accuracy. Source: Bleeping Computer
1,000,000,000. Number of installs of Word on Android OS mobile phones. Source: MSPowerUser
$4,500,000,000. Size of Google Venture’s arm. Source: Business Insider
$14,300,000,000. Size of the consumer drone market in 2029. Note: This is one tenth the size of today’s game streaming market. Source: Reuters
$45,000,000,000. Cost of financial crime in 2018. Source: Dark Reading
We still admire the “one” in the estimate of losses from phishing. Precision is good, especially when a “one” is involved.
Stephen E Arnold, July 24, 2019
Data: Such a Flexible and Handy Marketing Tool
July 5, 2019
Love Big Data? Like New Age research? Enjoy studies funded by commercial enterprises? If you are nodding in agreement, head on over to ““Evidence-Based Medicine Has Been Hijacked: A Confession from John Ioannidis.”
Here’s a statement to ponder:
Since clinical research that can generate useful clinical evidence has fallen off the radar screen of many/most public funders, it is largely left up to the industry to support it. The sales and marketing departments in most companies are more powerful than their R&D departments. Hence, the design, conduct, reporting, and dissemination of this clinical evidence becomes an advertisement tool. As for “basic” research, as I explain in the paper, the current system favors PIs who make a primary focus of their career how to absorb more money. Success in obtaining (more) funding in a fiercely competitive world is what counts the most. Given that much “basic” research is justifiably unpredictable in terms of its yield, we are encouraging aggressive gamblers. Unfortunately, it is not gambling for getting major, high-risk discoveries (which would have been nice), it is gambling for simply getting more money.
Does this observation apply to the world of Big Data, online advertising, and the spreadsheet fever plaguing MBAs? Yep.
- People believe numbers and most do not ask, “Where did this number come from? What was the sample? How did you verify these data?”
- Outputs can be shaped. Check out your college class notes for Statistics 101; that is, I am assuming you kept your college notes. See anything about best practices? Validity tests?
- What about those thresholds? Many Bayesian methods are based upon guesses. Toss in some Monte Carlo? How representative of the outputs? What are the deltas between the current outputs and other available data?
Our next Factualities will appear in this blog on Wednesday. There are some special numbers in that round up.
A friend of mine who owns a successful online business said, “Nobody cares.”
Nobody cares?
Stephen E Arnold, July 5, 2019
Factualities for July 3, 2019
July 3, 2019
The rush toward the end of a numerically thrilling year is upon us. Some of the rock solid, outstanding numbers the DarkCyber team noted and believed by golly. Statistics 101 has not failed the productive and creative thinkers providing us real factualities, particularly some interesting pairs from different research wizards.
$1. Amount DoorDash pays for a trip. Source: Forbes
7. Number of years hackers have been stealing data from global cell networks. Source: TechDirt
11. The percentage of enterprise search users which find the technology “effective.” Source: CMSWire (Content management? What’s that?)
11. Number of steps required to reset a GE “smart” light bulb. Source: General Electric
20. The percent of IBM revenue which comes from “Asia.” Source: SCMP
22. The number of megatons (a megaton is equal to 1,000,000 tons) of carbon dioxide emissions produced by “Bitcoin”. Source: Eurekalert
22. The number of third party companies which provide technology to create dark patterns (that is, ways to trick site visitors) and be funneled to deceptive messages. Source: Princeton University
46. The percentage of those in a global study prefer a physical store. Source: Computer Weekly
46. The percentage of US adults who never use voice assistants. Source: Ecommerce Daily News
48.96. The quite precise percentage of Google search searches which ended with zero clicks. [ DarkCyber question: Does this mean the results were irrelevant?] Source: Sparktoo
66. Percent of those in a US sample want social networks to police offensive content. 69 percent have little or no confidence that social networks can correctly identify such content. Note that a leading legal eagle believe that he could spot offensive content when he could see it. Ah, the benefits of a legal education versus engineering expertise.
69. Number of police agencies using the zapping product once known as Taser. Source: New York Times
70. The percentage of unicorns (startups worth more than $1 billion) which are actually old products. Source: SaaSTR
110. The decibels produced by Dyson and Xcelerator hair and hand driers manufactured by these firms. Source: CBC
300. The percentage increase in the number of US taxi drivers since 2008.
300. The percentage increase in environmental “damage” jet contrails will do by 2050. Source: Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics
15,000. Number of users a for fee email service has. $33 million. The amount the company raised in venture capital. Source: New York Times
50,000. A nice round number reporting the number of plastic particles that you, gentle reader, consume each year. Source: The Guardian
432,000. Another nice round number representing the number of Macbook laptops recalled by Apple. Source: CBS News
$600,000. The amount a Florida city paid cyber criminals to regain access to its computer systems. Source: AP
11 million. The exact number of fake business listings in Google’s business listings. Source: Wall Street Journal
12.9 billion. The size of the threat intelligence market in 2023 or 48 months, whichever arrives first. Source: WAtech
Stephen E Arnold, July 3, 2019
Factualities for May 29, 2019
May 29, 2019
Numbers, particularly nice round ones, have been zipping around the interwebs in the last seven days. Here’s a tasty selection of some which caught our attention.
8. Number of people with whom a Google Duo user can chat simultaneously on one mobile phone screen. Source: Esquire
2,000. Number of Mannequin Challenge videos Google used to train its smart software. Source: Igyhaan
14. Number of years Google stored some customers’ passwords in plain text. Source: Next Web
3. Number of years to elapse before IBM commercializes quantum computing. Source: Interesting Engineering
$30 million. Palantir Technologies’ losses in 2018. Note: The company was founded in 2003. Source: Bloomberg
885 million. Number of customer records “exposed” online by a Fortune 500 insurance company named First American Financial. Source: Krebs on Security
71 percent. Percentage of student who would buy an Apple Mac computer if the students could afford the Apple product. Source: Tech Radar
50 percent. Percentage of businesses unable to handle cloud computing security. Source: IT Pro Portal
$425 million. How much money Google will not capture due to the Huawei ban. Source: Mr. Top Step
$2.5 billion. Dollar size of the cloud game market (aka online games) in 24 months. Source: IHS
120 minutes. The length of Microsoft’s E3 2019 press conference. Source: Game Rant
Stephen E Arnold, May 29, 2019
Mobile Phone: Tips for Addicts
May 28, 2019
Metro, a UK tabloid, reported about a study conducted at the University of Washington. The idea the researchers probed related to “triggers” which keep a person glued to his or her mobile device. “How to Resist the Four Triggers Which Keep You Addicted to Your Smartphone” reveals the tricks. The sample was 39 people aged from 14 to 64. Now I don’t want to get mathy, but the sample would get some frowns from an online Statistics 101 adjunct professor from a no name school in North Carolina. At a juicier institution, like the University of Washington, the sample is right sized.
With this cutting edge research, the secrets have been revealed; to wit:
- An unoccupied moment, the smartphone is there for you and me.
- As a break when one is working on a difficult task such as calculating or looking up in a table the sample size for a research project into “hooks” used to addict a person to a mobile phone.
- As a deflection action when an actual human who has taken several classes in statistics wants to engage a person like a researcher in a conversation about sample sizes.
- When one anticipates an email or other communication from an academic institution eager to hire a cracker jack researcher and data wrangler.
From my reading, I have gleaned some other information about the ways to make a person 14 to 64 become an addict. I offer these to suggest that the Metro’s summary of the research does not capture the scope of the subject. Here are some other addictive tricks:
- Approval from perceived “friends” or “persons whom one wishes to be a pal”
- Sex hook ups, images, etc.
- Rewards delivered via gameification
- Sex hook ups, images, etc.
- Desire to expand one’s contacts when looking for a job in statistics.
- Sex hook ups, images, etc.
Perhaps the team form the University of Washington will expand their research. On the other hand, why bother? A sample of 39 is just so right.
Oh, and the secret to breaking the addiction? Turn off the gizmo.
Stephen E Arnold, May 28, 2019
Ethicists Revealed
March 31, 2019
I did not want to release this item on April Fool’s Day. The story which caught my attention was “A Study of Ethicists Finds They’re No More Ethical Than the Rest of Us (and No Better at Calling Their Mothers).” I assume this article contains “real” facts and is “real” news. Here’s what I circled with my True Blue marker, the same one I used to annotate Kritik der Urteilskraft:
A study of 417 professors published last week in Philosophical Psychology found that, though the 151 ethics professors expressed stricter moral views, they were no better at behaving ethically.
Here’s an example of one finding:
Most people agreed that not calling one’s mother was poor form: 75% of non-philosophers, 70% of non-ethicists and 65% of ethicists thought that not doing so was immoral. And, when it came to following through, the majority did manage to contact their mothers at least twice a month: 87% of ethicists did so, alongside 81% of non-ethicist philosophers, and 89% of non-philosophers. As with most moral acts, the researchers found no clear link between ethical expertise and ethical behavior.
Remarkable information. Is it ethical to say that?
Stephen E Arnold, March 31, 2019
A Statistics Rebellion? One Can Only Hope
March 21, 2019
Yesterday I mentioned to a reporter than most smart software is “right” somewhere between 50 to 80 percent of the time. The reporter asked, “Does that mean results are incorrect half to one third of the time?”
My answer, “Probably worse.”
The reporter changed the subject. My hunch is that the hyperbole about the accuracy of smart software suggests that the systems are better than a human. Some may be better at some specific tasks.
In many cases, the number crunching chops down what a human must examine. In an age of data, chopping down what one has to examine is a very important task. For applications like online advertising, 70 percent accuracy is close enough to keep the advertiser semi happy and spending money to reach a target. For other applications like where will a bad actor commit a crime, the game is “close enough for horseshoes.”
Why talk about numbers? My observations, with which you are invited to disagree, are a prelude to my recommending that you read “Scientists Rise Up Against Statistical Significance.” Here a passage I underlined:
In 2016, the American Statistical Association released a statement in The American Statistician warning against the misuse of statistical significance and P values. The issue also included many commentaries on the subject. This month, a special issue in the same journal attempts to push these reforms further. It presents more than 40 papers on ‘Statistical inference in the 21st century: a world beyond P < 0.05’. The editors introduce the collection with the caution “don’t say ‘statistically significant’”. Another article with dozens of signatories also calls on authors and journal editors to disavow those terms. We agree, and call for the entire concept of statistical significance to be abandoned.
What if one is using a system which bakes in statistical procedures and locks them away from users? What if those procedures are introducing errors?
Tough questions for vendors of smart software.
Stephen E Arnold, March 21, 2019
Factualities for January 30, 2019
January 30, 2019
Numbers are everywhere. Believe these outputs or not.
- One. The number of autonomous vehicles required to output the same amount of data as 3,000 non autonomous humans. Source: The New York Times
- $21.2 million. The amount spent by Google on its DC centric lobbying in 2018. Source: Thomson Reuters
- 57 percent. The percentage of the population trusting non governmental organizations. Source ZDNet
- 90 percent. The percentage of VPN applications compromising user security and privacy. Source: Trusted Reviews which we trust, right?
- $3.1 million. Funding Google has provided to Wikipedia. Google’s total funding of Wikipedia in the last 10 years has reached $75. million tax deductible dollars. Source: Wired
- 81 percent. The percentage of Amazon’s facial recognition systems’ accuracy. Source The New York Times
- Number five. The rank of Apple among smartphone vendors in China. Source: Macrumors
- 50 percent. The number of fake Facebook users. Source: Zerohedge
- $1.27 billion. amount spent by mobile users for the top 10 video streaming apps in 2018, a 62 percent increase. Source: Sensor Tower
- Four percent. The percentage of Monero mined by bots in 2018. Source: ZDNet
- 57 percent. The percentage of Netflix subscribers who would quit the service if Netflix ran commercials. Source: Net Imperative
- $60 billion. Amount of money Apple spent with American manufacturers in 2018. Source: Apple Insider
Stephen E Arnold, January 30, 2019
Factualities for January 23, 2019
January 23, 2019
Statistics, statistics—More plentiful than snowflakes. Believe these or not.
- 8,600. The number of molly tabs a drug dealer in Tacoma, Washington, had in his possession. Source: The News Tribune
- 16 million. The number of US households receiving over-the-air TV. Source: TechCrunch
- $56 million. The amount of “dark net market” transactions in a single month. Source: Reuters
- 77 million. The number of Americans who talk to their vehicles. Source: Recode
- $500 million. The amount Microsoft is “providing” to address housing issues in Seattle. Source: Quartz
- 773,000,000. Number of email addresses offered for sale. Source: Wired
- $1 billion. The amount Disney lost in 12 months with its video streaming endeavors. Source: CNBC
- 20 to 40 percent. The percentage price increase for Tesla recharges. Source: The Verge
- 74 percent. The percentage of Facebook users in a Pew sample who did not know that Facebook keeps track of user interest and clicks in order to sell ads. Source: TechCrunch
Stephen E Arnold, January 23, 2019
Facebook User Awareness: Two Views
January 17, 2019
What happens when Silicon Valley centric “real” journalists contemplate the question, “How much do Americans know about data slurping, reusing, and monetizing.
For one view, navigate to “Most Facebook Users Still in the Dark about Its Creepy Ad Practices, Pew Finds.” The headline tells the story. I learned:
Pew found three-quarters (74%) of Facebook users did not know the social networking behemoth maintains a list of their interests and traits to target them with ads, only discovering this when researchers directed them to view their Facebook ad preferences page.
Now for another view. Navigate to “Don’t Underestimate Americans’ Knowledge of Facebook’s Business Model.” I learned from this write up:
But let’s take another look at the numbers. According to Pew, 26 percent of Americans are aware that Facebook records a list of their interests and uses it to target ads at them. There are roughly 214 million Americans with Facebook profiles. If that’s the case, then over the past decade, 55.6 million people have educated themselves about how ad targeting works. Facebook itself has played no small role in this effort, regularly describing their ad targeting system in software and marketing materials, and recently even started building pop-up events around it.
And to add beef to the argument:
Pew surveyed more than 3,400 U.S. Facebook users in May and June, and found that a whopping 44 percent of those ages 18 to 29 say they’ve deleted the app from their phone in the last year. Some of them may have reinstalled it later. Overall, 26 percent of survey respondents say they deleted the app, while 42 percent have “taken a break” for several weeks or more, and 54 percent have adjusted their privacy settings.
Nothing like interpreting data from a survey from the left coast.
Stephen E Arnold, January 17, 2019
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
