The Fatal Flaw in Rules-Based Smart Software
December 17, 2024
This blog post is the work of an authentic dinobaby. No smart software was used.
As a dinobaby, I have to remember the past. Does anyone know how the “smart” software in AskJeeves worked? At one time before the cute logo and the company followed the path of many, many other breakthrough search firms, AskJeeves used hand-crafted rules. (Oh, the reference to breakthrough is a bit of an insider joke with which I won’t trouble you.) A user would search for “weather 94401” and the system would “look up” in the weather rule the zip code for Foster City, California, and deliver the answer. Alternatively, I could have when I ran the query looked out my window. AskJeeves went on a path painfully familiar to other smart software companies today: Customer service. AskJeeves was acquired by IAC Corp. which moved away from the rules-based system which was “revolutionizing” search in the late 1990s.
Rules-based wranglers keep busy a-fussin’ and a-changin’ all the dang time. The patient mule Jeeves just wants lunch. Thanks, MidJourney, good enough.
I read “Certain Names Make ChatGPT Grind to a Halt, and We Know Why.” The essay presents information about how the wizards at OpenAI solve problems its smart software creates. The fix is to channel the “rules-based approach” which was pretty darned exciting decades ago. Like the AskJeeves’ approach, the use of hand-crafted rules creates several problems. The cited essay focuses on the use of “rules” to avoid legal hassles created when smart software just makes stuff up.
I want to highlight several other problems with rules-based decision systems which are far older in computer years than the AskJeeves marketing success in 1996. Let me highlight a few which may lurk within the OpenAI and ChatGPT smart software:
- Rules have to be something created by a human in response to something another (often unpredictable) human did. Smart software gets something wrong like saying a person is in jail or dead when he is free and undead.
- Rules have to be maintained. Like legacy code, setting and forgetting can have darned exciting consequences after the original rules creator changed jobs or fell into the category “in jail” or “dead.”
- Rules work with a limited set of bounded questions and answers. Rules fail when applied to the fast-changing and weird linguistic behavior of humans. If a “rule” does know a word like “debanking”, the system will struggle, crash, or return zero results. Bummer.
- Rules seem like a great idea until someone calculates how many rules are needed, how much it costs to create a rule, and how much maintenance rules require (typically based on the cost of creating a rule in the first place). To keep the math simple, rules are expensive.
I liked the cited essay about OpenAI. It reminds me how darned smart today’s developers of smart software are. This dinobaby loved the article. What a great anecdote! I want to say, “OpenAI should have “asked Jeeves.” I won’t. I will point out that IBM Watson, the Jeopardy winner version, was rules based. In fact, rules are still around, and they still carry like a patient donkey the cost burden.
Stephen E Arnold, December 17, 2024
The Starlink Angle: Yacht, Contraband, and Global Satellite Connectivity
December 16, 2024
This blog post is the work of an authentic dinobaby. No smart software was used.
I have followed the ups and downs of Starlink satellite Internet connectivity in the Russian special operation. I have not paid much attention to more routine criminal use of the Starlink technology. Before I direct your attention to a write up about this Elon Musk enterprise, I want to mention that this use case for satellites caught my attention with Equatorial Communications’ innovations in 1979. Kudos to that outfit!
“Police Demands Starlink to Reveal Buyer of Device Found in $4.2 Billion Drug Bust” has a snappy subtitle:
Smugglers were caught with 13,227 pounds of meth
Hmmm. That works out to 6,000 kilograms or 6.6 short tons of meth worth an estimated $4 billion on the open market. And it is the government of India chasing the case. (Starlink is not yet licensed for operation in that country.)
The write up states:
officials have sent Starlink a police notice asking for details about the purchaser of one of its Starlink Mini internet devices that was found on the boat. It asks for the buyer’s name and payment method, registration details, and where the device was used during the smugglers’ time in international waters. The notice also asks for the mobile number and email registered to the Starlink account.
The write up points out:
Starlink has spent years trying to secure licenses to operate in India. It appeared to have been successful last month when the country’s telecom minister said Starlink was in the process of procuring clearances. The company has not yet secured these licenses, so it might be more willing than usual to help the authorities in this instance.
Starlink is interesting because it is a commercial enterprise operating in a free wheeling manner. Starlink’s response is not known as of December 12, 2024.
Stephen E Arnold, December 16, 2024
China Good, US Bad: Australia Reports the Unwelcome News
December 13, 2024
This write up was created by an actual 80-year-old dinobaby. If there is art, assume that smart software was involved. Just a tip.
I read “Critical Technology Tracker: Two Decades of Data Show Rewards of Long-Term Investment.” The write up was issued in September 2024, and I have no confidence that much has changed. I believe the US is the leader in marketing hyperbole output. Other countries are far behind, but some are closing the gaps. I will focus on the article, and I will leave it to you to read the full report available from the ASPI Australia Web site.
The main point of this report by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute is that the US has not invested in long-term research. I am not sure how much of this statement is a surprise to those who have watched as US patents have become idea recyclers, the deterioration of US education, and the fascinating quest for big money.
The cited summary of the research reports:
The US led in 60 of 64 technologies in the five years from 2003 to 2007, but in the most recent five year period, it was leading in just seven.
I want to point out that playing online games and doom scrolling are not fundamental technologies. The US has a firm grip on the downstream effects of applied technology. The fundamentals are simply not there. AI which seems to be everywhere is little more than word probability which is not a fundamental; it is an application of methods.
The cited article points out:
The chart is easy to read. The red line heading up is China. The blue line going down is the US.
In what areas are China’s researchers making headway other than its ability to terminate some US imports quickly? Here’s what the cited article reports:
China has made its new gains in quantum sensors, high-performance computing, gravitational sensors, space launch and advanced integrated circuit design and fabrication (semiconductor chip making). The US leads in quantum computing, vaccines and medical countermeasures, nuclear medicine and radiotherapy, small satellites, atomic clocks, genetic engineering and natural language processing.
The list, one can argue, is arbitrary and easily countered by US researchers. There are patents, start ups, big financial winners, and many fine research institutions. With AI poised to become really smart in a few years, why worry?
I am not worried because I am old. The people who need to worry are the parents of children who cannot read and comprehend, who do not study and master mathematics, who do not show much interest in basic science, and are indifferent to the concept of work ethic.
Australia is worried. It is making an attempt to choke off the perceived corrosive effects of the US social media juggernaut for those under 16 years of age. It is monitoring China’s activities in the Pacific. It is making an effort to enhance its military capabilities.
Is America worried? I would characterize the attitude here in rural Kentucky as the mascot of Mad Magazine’s catchphrase, “What, me worry?”
Stephen E Arnold, December 13, 2024
China Seeks to Curb Algorithmic Influence and Manipulation
December 5, 2024
Someone is finally taking decisive action against unhealthy recommendation algorithms, AI-driven price optimization, and exploitative gig-work systems. That someone is China. ”China Sets Deadline for Big Tech to Clear Algorithm Issues, Close ‘Echo Chambers’,” reports the South China Morning Post. Ah, the efficiency of a repressive regime. Writer Hayley Wong informs us:
‘Tech operators in China have been given a deadline to rectify issues with recommendation algorithms, as authorities move to revise cybersecurity regulations in place since 2021. A three-month campaign to address ‘typical issues with algorithms’ on online platforms was launched on Sunday, according to a notice from the Communist Party’s commission for cyberspace affairs, the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, and other relevant departments. The campaign, which will last until February 14, marks the latest effort to curb the influence of Big Tech companies in shaping online views and opinions through algorithms – the technology behind the recommendation functions of most apps and websites. System providers should avoid recommendation algorithms that create ‘echo chambers’ and induce addiction, allow manipulation of trending items, or exploit gig workers’ rights, the notice said.
They should also crack down on unfair pricing and discounts targeting different demographics, ensure ‘healthy content’ for elderly and children, and impose a robust ‘algorithm review mechanism and data security management system’.”
Tech firms operating within China are also ordered to conduct internal investigations and improve algorithms’ security capabilities by the end of the year. What happens if firms fail? Reeducation? A visit to the death van? Or an opportunity to herd sheep in a really nice area near Xian? The brief write-up does not specify.
We think there may be a footnote to the new policy; for instance, “Use algos to advance our policies.”
Cynthia Murrell, December 5, 2024
Listary: A Chinese Alternative to Windows File Explorer
December 5, 2024
For anyone frustrated with Windows’ built-in search function, Lifehacker suggests an alternative. “Listary Is a Fast, Powerful Search Tool for Windows,” declares writer Justin Pot. He tells us:
“Listary is a free app with great indexing that allows you to find any file on your computer in just a couple of keystrokes. Tap the control key twice, start typing, and hit enter when you see what you want. You can also use the tool to launch applications or search the web. … The keyboard shortcut brings up a search window similar to Spotlight on the Mac. There is also a more advanced version of the application which you can bring up by clicking the tray icon for the application. This lets you do things like filter your search by file type or how recently it was created. This view also notably allows you to preview files before opening them, which I appreciate. You’re not limited to searching on your computer—you can also start web searches from here.”
That Web search function is preloaded with a few search engines, like Google, Wikipedia, IMDB, and YouTube, but one can add more platforms. The free version of Listary is for personal use only. The company, Bopsoft, makes its money on the Pro version, which is $20. Just once, not monthly or annually. That version offers network-drive indexing and customization options. Bopsoft appears to be based in Zaozhuang, China.
Cynthia Murrell, December 5, 2024
Legacy Code: Avoid, Fix, or Flee (Two Out of Three Mean Forget It)
December 4, 2024
In his Substack post, “Legacy Schmegacy,” software engineer David Reis offers some pointers on preventing and coping with legacy code. We found this snippet interesting:
“Someone must fix the legacy code, but it doesn’t have to be you. It’s far more honorable to switch projects or companies than to lead a misguided rewrite.”
That’s the spirit: quit and let someone else deal with it. But not everyone is in the position to cut and run. For those actually interested in addressing the problem, Reis has some suggestions. First, though, the post lists factors that can prevent legacy code in the first place:
- “The longer a programmer’s tenure the less code will become legacy, since authors will be around to appreciate and maintain it.
- The more code is well architected, clear and documented the less it will become legacy, since there is a higher chance the author can transfer it to a new owner successfully.
- The more the company uses pair programming, code reviews, and other knowledge transfer techniques, the less code will become legacy, as people other than the author will have knowledge about it.
- The more the company grows junior engineers the less code will become legacy, since the best way to grow juniors is to hand them ownership of components.
- The more a company uses simple standard technologies, the less likely code will become legacy, since knowledge about them will be widespread in the organization. Ironically if you define innovation as adopting new technologies, the more a team innovates the more legacy it will have. Every time it adopts a new technology, either it won’t work, and the attempt will become legacy, or it will succeed, and the old systems will.”
Reiss’ number one suggestion to avoid creating legacy code is, “don’t write crappy code.” Noted. Also, stick with tried and true methods unless shiny a new tech is definitely the best option. Perhaps most importantly, coders should teach others in the organization how their code works and leave behind good documentation. So, common sense and best practices. Brilliant!
When confronted with a predecessor’s code, he advises one to “delegacify” it. That is a word he coined to mean: Take time to understand the code and see if it can be improved over time before tossing it out entirely. Or, as noted above, just run away. That can be an option for some.
Cynthia Murrell, December 4, 2024
Point-and-Click Coding: An eGame Boom Booster
November 22, 2024
TheNextWeb explains “How AI Can Help You Make a Computer Game Without Knowing Anything About Coding.” That’s great—unless one is a coder who makes one’s living on computer games. Writer Daniel Zhou Hao begins with a story about one promising young fellow:
“Take Kyo, an eight-year-old boy in Singapore who developed a simple platform game in just two hours, attracting over 500,000 players. Using nothing but simple instructions in English, Kyo brought his vision to life leveraging the coding app Cursor and also Claude, a general purpose AI. Although his dad is a coder, Kyo didn’t get any help from him to design the game and has no formal coding education himself. He went on to build another game, an animation app, a drawing app and a chatbot, taking about two hours for each. This shows how AI is dramatically lowering the barrier to software development, bridging the gap between creativity and technical skill. Among the range of apps and platforms dedicated to this purpose, others include Google’s AlphaCode 2 and Replit’s Ghostwriter.”
The write-up does not completely leave experienced coders out of the discussion. Hao notes tools like Tabnine and GitHub Copilot act as auto-complete assistance, while Sourcery and DeepCode take the tedium out of code cleanup. For the 70-ish percent of companies that have adopted one or more of these tools, he tells us, the benefits include time savings and more reliable code. Does this mean developers will to shift to “higher value tasks,” like creative collaboration and system design, as Hao insists? Or will it just mean firms will lighten their payrolls?
As for building one’s own game, the article lists seven steps. They are akin to basic advice for developing a product, but with an AI-specific twist. For those who want to know how to make one’s AI game addictive, contact benkent2020 at yahoo dot com.
Cynthia Murrell, November 22, 2024
Marketers, Deep Fakes Work
November 14, 2024
Bad actors use AI for pranks all the time, but this could be the first time AI pranked an entire Irish town out of its own volition. KXAN reports on the folly: “AI Slop Site Sends Thousands In Ireland To Fake Halloween Parade.” The website MySpiritHalloween.com dubs itself as the ultimate resource for all things Halloween. The website uses AI-generated content and an article told the entire city of Dublin that there would be a parade.
If this was a small Irish village, there would giggles and the police would investigate criminal mischief before they stopped wasting their time. Dublin, however, is one of the country’s biggest cities and folks appeared in the thousands to see the Halloween parade. They eventually figured something was wrong without the presence of barriers, law enforcement, and (most importantly) costume people on floats!
MySpiritHalloween is owned by Naszir Ali and he was embarrassed by the situation.
Per Ali’s explanation, his SEO agency creates websites and ranks them on Google. He says the company hired content writers who were in charge of adding and removing events all across the globe as they learned whether or not they were happening. He said the Dublin event went unreported as fake and that the website quickly corrected the listing to show it had been cancelled….
Ali said that his website was built and helped along by the use of AI but that the technology only accounts for 10-20% of the website’s content. He added that, according to him, AI content won’t completely help a website get ranked on Google’s first page and that the reason so many people saw MySpiritHalloween.com was because it was ranked on Google’s first page — due to what he calls “80% involvement” from actual humans.”
Ali claims his website is based in Illinois, but all investigations found that its hosted in Pakistan. Ali’s website is one among millions that use AI-generated content to manipulate Google’s algorithm. Ali is correct that real humans did make the parade rise to the top of Google’s search results, but he was responsible for the content.
Media around the globe took this as an opportunity to teach the parade goers and others about being aware of AI-generated scams. Marketers, launch your AI infused fakery.
Whitney Grace, November 14, 2024
The Yogi Berra Principle: Déjà Vu All Over Again
November 7, 2024
Sorry to disappoint you, but this blog post is written by a dumb humanoid. The art? We used MidJourney.
I noted two write ups. The articles share what I call a meta concept. The first article is from PC World called “Office Apps Crash on Windows 11 24H2 PCs with CrowdStrike Antivirus.” The actors in this soap opera are the confident Microsoft and the elegant CrowdStrike. The write up says:
The annoying error affects Office applications such as Word or Excel, which crash and become completely unusable after updating to Windows 11 24H2. And this apparently only happens on systems that are running antivirus software by CrowdStrike. (Yes, the very same CrowdStrike that caused the global IT meltdown back in July.)
A patient, skilled teacher explains to the smart software, “You goofed, speedy.” Thanks, Midjourney. Good enough.
The other write up adds some color to the trivial issue. “Windows 11 24H2 Misery Continues, As Microsoft’s Buggy Update Is Now Breaking Printers – Especially on Copilot+ PCs” says:
Neowin reports that there are quite a number of complaints from those with printers who have upgraded to Windows 11 24H2 and are finding their device is no longer working. This is affecting all the best-known printer manufacturers, the likes of Brother, Canon, HP and so forth. The issue is mainly being experienced by those with a Copilot+ PC powered by an Arm processor, as mentioned, and it either completely derails the printer, leaving it non-functional, or breaks certain features. In other cases, Windows 11 users can’t install the printer driver.
Okay, dinobaby, what’s the meta concept thing? Let me offer my ideas about the challenge these two write ups capture:
- Microsoft may have what I call the Boeing disease; that is, the engineering is not so hot. Many things create problems. Finger pointing and fast talking do not solve the problems.
- The entities involved are companies and software which have managed to become punch lines for some humorists. For instance, what software can produce more bricks than a kiln? Answer: A Windows update. Ho ho ho. Funny until one cannot print a Word document for a Type A, drooling MBA.
- Remediating processes don’t remediate. The word process itself generates flawed outputs. Stated another way, like some bank mainframes and 1960s code, fixing is not possible and there are insufficient people and money to get the repair done.
The meta concept is that the way well paid workers tackle an engineering project is capable of outputting a product or service that has a failure rate approaching 100 percent. How about those Windows updates? Are they the digital equivalent of the Boeing space initiative.
The answer is, “No.” We have instances of processes which cannot produce reliable products and services. The framework itself produces failure. This idea has some interesting implications. If software cannot allow a user to print, what else won’t perform as expected? Maybe AI?
Stephen E Arnold, November 7, 2024
Microsoft 24H2: The Reality Versus Self Awareness
November 4, 2024
Sorry. Written by a dumb humanoid. Art? It is AI, folks. Eighty year old dinobabies cannot draw very well in my experience.
I spotted a short item titled “Microsoft Halts Windows 11 24H2 Update for Many PCs Due to Compatibility Issues.” Today is October 29, 2024. By the time you read this item, you may have a Windows equipped computer humming along on the charmingly named 11 24H2 update. That’s the one with Recall.
Microsoft does not see itself as slightly bedraggled. Those with failed updates do. Thanks, ChatGPT, good enough, but at least you work. MSFT Copilot has been down for six days with a glitch.
Now if you work at the Redmond facility where Google paranoia reigns, you probably have Recall running on your computing device as well as Teams’ assorted surveillance features. That means that when you run a query for “updates”, you may see screens presenting an array of information about non functioning drivers, printer errors, visits to the wonderfully organized knowledge bases, and possibly images of email from colleagues wanting to take kinetic action about the interns, new hires, and ham fisted colleagues who rolled out an update which does not update.
According to the write up offers this helpful advice:
We advise users against manually forcing the update through the Windows 11 Installation Assistant or media creation tool, especially on the system configurations mentioned above. Instead, users should check for updates to the specific software or hardware drivers causing the holds and wait for the blocks to be lifted naturally.
Okay.
Let’s look at this from the point of view of bad actors. These folks know that the “new” Windows with its many nifty new features has some issues. When the Softies cannot get wallpaper to work, one knows that deeper, more subtle issues are not on the wizards’ radar.
Thus, the 24H2 update will be installed on bad actors’ test systems and subjected to tests only a fan of Metasploit and related tools can appreciate. My analogy is that these individuals, some of whom are backed by nation states, will give the update the equivalent of a digital colonoscopy. Sorry, Redmond, no anesthetic this go round.
Why?
Microsoft suggests that security is Job Number One. Obviously when fingerprint security functions don’t work and the Windows Hello fails, the bad actor knows that other issues exist. My goodness. Why doesn’t Microsoft just turn its PR and advertising firms lose on Telegram hacking groups and announce, “Take me. I am yours!”
Several observations:
- The update is flawed
- Core functions do not work
- Partners, not Microsoft, are supposed to fix the broken slot machine of operating systems
- Microsoft is, once again, scrambling to do what it should have done correctly before releasing a deeply flawed bundle of software.
Net net: Blaming Google for European woes and pointing fingers at everything and everyone except itself, Microsoft is demonstrating that it cannot do a basic task correctly. The only users who are happy are those legions of bad actors in the countries Microsoft accuses of making its life difficult. Sorry. Microsoft you did this, but you could blame Google, of course.
Stephen E Arnold, November 4, 2024
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
