Sillycon Valley Antics: Hulk, Hillary
June 13, 2016
I noted two items which reminded me why I enjoy Sillycon Valley techno wizardry. The first item concerns the Hulk Hogan Gawker matter. The story “Gawker Files for Bankruptcy and Says It Will Sell the Company to Ziff Davis or Someone Else” converted to a quasi emoji in my addled goose brain; to wit:
My hunch is that anyone who wants to annoy the founder of Palantir Technologies, may want to consider the risks. That splat is ugly and may be blended with an aniline dye.
The other item makes clear that the Alphabet Google thing is an objective algorithmic construct, kissed by the golden Sillycon Valley sun. Navigate to “There’s No Evidence That Google Is Manipulating Searches to Help Hillary Clinton.” Therein resides the truth. I learned:
Apparently, Google has a policy of not suggesting that customers do searches on people’s crimes. I have no inside knowledge of why it runs its search engine this way. Maybe Google is just uncomfortable with having an algorithm suggesting that people search for other people’s crimes. In any event, there’s no evidence that this is specific to Hillary Clinton, and therefore no reason to think this is a conspiracy by Google to help Clinton win the election.
Definitely rock solid from a person whose brother works at Google. Even more reason to accept the Sillycon Valley objectivity argument.
Stephen E Arnold, June 13, 2016
BA Insight Asserts Government Transformation for Information Access
June 6, 2016
This is a bold, bold assertion. In my limited experience with the US government’s entities, I can attest that certain systems and methods do not change. That obviously does not match the marketing message from BA Insight, a search and retrieval vendor with a Microsoft focus and competence in all sorts of interesting buzzwords.
Navigate to “BA Insight and MD Tech Solutions Join Forces to Transform the Way Government Agencies Find and Work with Content.” I read:
BA Insight today announced a partnership with MD Tech Solutions, a technology services company located in Fredericksburg, Virginia specializing in Custom SharePoint Development, Administration, Design and Architecture. As a reseller of BA Insight’s software portfolio, MD Tech can now provide its customers with a solution that quickly connects SharePoint users to the essential knowledge they need to be productive, while providing an internet-like search experience that users will love.
Love in the government entities with which I had experience when I labored in the vineyards in Congress, the executive branch, and some other outfits was, in my experience, in short supply. There were numerous search and retrieval systems. There were legacy systems which did magic things to information. Anyone remember the baked in search system with SharePoint? Maybe Fast Search? What about the components in Oracle? Palantir? IBM i2?
I find the notion of transforming the government interesting. Even more fascinating is the notion of users loving a search system. Love in the government. Hmmm.
Stephen E Arnold, June 6, 2016
In a Two Class Society: Which Is the Target?
June 2, 2016
I read two articles this morning. The first was, I thought, a bit of factoid candy. Your view may be different. Navigate to “Apple, Microsoft and Google Hold 23% of All U.S. Corporate Cash, As Tech Sector Accumulates Wealth.” The meaning of “all” and “wealth” are not defined. Who worries about the definition of terms? Ted Cruz maybe? Another member of a high school debate team? Interesting. Money in quantity is bad. Interesting.
The main point of the write up is, in my opinion:
For the first time, the top five companies on the Moody’s cash ranking are tech companies, with Cisco and Oracle following Apple, Microsoft and Google. Technology companies overall held $777 billion in cash, or 46 percent of the total cash across all non-financial industries.
So what? I worked for Halliburton years ago, and my recollection is that it had cash then. No once seemed too concerned, even Halliburton knowledge workers.
I then read “We Need to Challenge the Myth That the Rich Are Specially-Talented Wealth Creators.” Hold those horses. The idea that Thomas Edison types a “specially talented” seems at odds with what I have learned with my close encounters of the third kind with the individuals who have oodles of money—at least on paper.
There is the arrogance thing. There is the confidence that trivial problems like death and mass transit visionaries are going to solve. There is the spending for parties like a Yahoo Christmas, a Google off site, Palantir warm up jackets, and other high technology “investments.”
The write up states:
We need a finance sector that is fit for purpose as a servant to the economy instead of a master. Currently, most of what it funds is not productive industry but lending against existing assets: in the UK lending by the financial sector to productive businesses declined from 30 per cent in 1996 to 10 per cent in 2008, and has stayed low since, while lending to other financial institutions and the property market grew. But then, to the financial sector, £1 million profit from useless speculation is no different from £1 million from any other source. Yet the difference matters to the economy as a whole and hence to us.
There is a shift to a somewhat parental attitude:
There are other reasons why we can’t afford the rich: their undemocratic and indeed antidemocratic influence in politics (witness Davos and TTIP), their excessive and wasteful consumption, their bloated carbon footprints and the fact that many are in effect betting on unsustainable economic growth in the rich countries and have interests in continued fossil fuel use. I deal with all these in my book, but above all, we need to challenge the myth that the rich are specially-talented wealth creators; it is time to halt the flood of unearned income that goes to the top and reassert democracy in facing the challenge of organizing economies that stop rather than accelerate global warming.
When I think about the big outfits with cash and the sentiment about those with cash harboring “undemocratic” and “antidemocratic Influence”, I have a question:
What’s the fix?
I recall that in the Dark Ages, unruly peasants could make life unpleasant for the dukes, earls, and barons.
Today I assume the “fix” is to stop using online devices, flip open manifestos about social and technology policies that eliminate that rich poor gap, and get some folks in office who can pass more effective regulations.
I am okay with my computers, smartphone, and muddling along with my Palantir and Dark Web notebook projects. It seems evident that some folks have a different orientation. Maybe “dad” will curtail online access, implement filters, and put an end to the big outfits’ success? I am delighted I have a manual typewriter.
Stephen E Arnold, June 2, 2016
Speculation About Beyond Search
June 2, 2016
If you are curious to learn more about the purveyor of the Beyond Search blog, you should check out Singularity’s interview with “Stephen E Arnold On Search Engine And Intelligence Gathering.” A little bit of background about Arnold is that he is an expert specialist in content processing, indexing, online search as well as the author of seven books and monographs. His past employment record includes Booz, Allen, & Hamilton (Edward Snowden was a contractor for this company), Courier Journal & Louisville Times, and Halliburton Nuclear. He worked on the US government’s Threat Open Source Intelligence Service and developed a cost analysis, technical infrastructure, and security for the FirstGov.gov.
Singualrity’s interview covers a variety of topics and, of course, includes Arnold’s direct sense of humor:
“During our 90 min discussion with Stephen E. Arnold we cover a variety of interesting topics such as: why he calls himself lucky; how he got interested in computers in general and search engines in particular; his path from college to Halliburton Nuclear and Booze, Allen & Hamilton; content and web indexing; his who’s who list of clients; Beyond Search and the core of intelligence; his Google Trilogy – The Google Legacy (2005), Google Version 2.0 (2007), and Google: The Digital Gutenberg (2009); CyberOSINT and the Dark Web Notebook; the less-known but major players in search such as Recorded Future and Palantir; Big Brother and surveillance; personal ethics and Edward Snowden.”
When you listen to the experts in certain fields, you always get a different perspective than what the popular news outlets gives. Arnold offers a unique take on search as well as the future of Internet security, especially the future of the Dark Web.
Whitney Grace, June 2, 2016
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
GAO DCGS Letter B-412746
June 1, 2016
A few days ago, I stumbled upon a copy of a letter from the GAO concerning Palantir Technologies dated May 18, 2016. The letter became available to me a few days after the 18th, and the US holiday probably limited circulation of the document. The letter is from the US Government Accountability Office and signed by Susan A. Poling, general counsel. There are eight recipients, some from Palantir, some from the US Army, and two in the GAO.
Has the US Army put Palantir in an untenable spot? Is there a deus ex machina about to resolve the apparent checkmate?
The letter tells Palantir Technologies that its protest of the DCGS Increment 2 award to another contractor is denied. I don’t want to revisit the history or the details as I understand them of the DCGS project. (DCGS, pronounced “dsigs”, is a US government information fusion project associated with the US Army but seemingly applicable to other Department of Defense entities like the Air Force and the Navy.)
The passage in the letter I found interesting was:
While the market research revealed that commercial items were available to meet some of the DCGS-A2 requirements, the agency concluded that there was no commercial solution that could meet all the requirements of DCGS-A2. As the agency explained in its report, the DCGS-A2 contractor will need to do a great deal of development and integration work, which will include importing capabilities from DCGS-A1 and designing mature interfaces for them. Because the agency concluded that significant portions of the anticipated DCSG-A2 scope of work were not available as a commercial product, the agency determined that the DCGS-A2 development effort could not be procured as a commercial product under FAR part 12 procedures. The protester has failed to show that the agency’s determination in this regard was unreasonable.
The “importing” point is a big deal. I find it difficult to imagine that IBM i2 engineers will be eager to permit the Palantir Gotham system to work like one happy family. The importation and manipulation of i2 data in a third party system is more difficult than opening an RTF file in Word in my experience. My recollection is that the unfortunate i2-Palantir legal matter was, in part, related to figuring out how to deal with ANB files. (ANB is i2 shorthand for Analysts Notebook’s file format, a somewhat complex and closely-held construct.)
Net net: Palantir Technologies will not be the dog wagging the tail of IBM i2 and a number of other major US government integrators. The good news is that there will be quite a bit of work available for firms able to support the prime contractors and the vendors eligible and selected to provide for-fee products and services.
Was this a shoot-from-the-hip decision to deny Palantir’s objection to the award? No. I believe the FAR procurement guidelines and the content of the statement of work provided the framework for the decision. However, context is important as are past experiences and perceptions of vendors in the running for substantive US government programs.
Hewlett Packard Enterprise: Cut It Up and Sell Off the Parts
May 28, 2016
Someone called me to alert me to Hewlett Packard Enterprise was doing the mitosis approach to financial goodness. As you recall, gentle reader, Hewlett Packard chopped itself in half, emulating Solomon’s approach to shared custody. One part was printers and ink. The other part was everything not part of the printers and ink deal.
The resulting non ink outfit was dubbed Hewlett Packard Enterprise. The solution to HP’s revenue problems was to create two companies, make bankers happy, and ponder what to do next. The answer according to “Hewlett Packard Enterprise Surges on Move to Merge Services Unit with CSC,” is to create an HP outfit and a spinoff/merger deal.
The write up states:
The union will create a “a pure-play, global IT services powerhouse,” said HP Enterprise in a statement.
The HPE entity will sell hardware. The HP-CSC entity which seems to be called Spinco. Spinco suggests spin off or spin out and reminds me of PR spin. HPE is now free to become a big dog because the annoying little puppies like printers and ink and the thrilling EDS operation are at a minimum an arm’s length away.
I recall a series of MBA type paragraphs published by ZDNet. Hey, a listicle dragged out over six weeks is ideal for the mobile phone researcher. Navigate to ”Worst Tech Mergers and Acquisitions.” Number one with a bullet was HP and Compaq. HP also made the list at Number four with its purchase of Autonomy. Not bad 40 percent of the top five worst deals of all time in the eyes of the really expert ZDNet researchers.
I once tracked Autonomy closely. I have included information about IDOL in the forthcoming Palantir Notebook we are finalizing. In the last couple of years, Autonomy faded from my radar. Obviously it is not a giant blip on the HPE control room either.
Several questions/observations are warranted:
- Is it now time for the top brass at HPE to withdraw from the field of battle now that the corporate aircraft carrier has been refitted and once again sea worthy?
- What happens to those luck licensees of various Autonomy technologies?
- Will HPE continue to grow its revenues and once again hit the $100 billion in revenue mark?
- Will People Magazine cover the party the legal eagles, accountants, and financial institutions which worked on the deal will hold at the La Quinta in South San Francisco?
From my vantage point in Harrod’s Creek, Kentucky, I am not sure that the newly painted HPE will be able to match the performance of other, more modern money machines.
Stephen E Arnold, May 28, 2016
Quotes to Note: The Thiel-Hulk Matter
May 26, 2016
The downsizing New York Times is channeling the Gawker thing. I read “Tech Billionaire in a Secret War with Gawker.” [Note: You may or may not be able to view this. Speak to the Gray Lady, not me.] The billionaire is Peter Thiel, a founder of PayPal and a number of other high profile and wildly successful companies. He is, I learned, a member of the PayPal mafia. Who knew?
I was not sure what a “demigod” was. I turned to Google. The first hit is this illustration apparently from a video game. Who knew?
I am not interested in the news story about a person who wants to fight for truth, justice, and the Silicon Valley way. I am not sure who Hulk Hogan is. That’s okay. The write up contained some quotes to note. I don’t want to lose track of these. I might want to spice up a report or a lecture with these allegedly accurate statements made by a powerful, rich wizard. Here you go:
- The story is not a story. It is a “bizarre and astounding back story.” [The New York Times] I once read similar headlines in the IGA store waiting for a human to check out my toothpaste and sparkling water purchases. Who published stories with these words? I think it was the National Enquirer.
- “I refuse to believe that journalism means massive privacy violations.”—Peter Thiel
- “We wanted flying cars, instead we got 140 characters,” is the Founders Fund tag line.—The New York Times quoting a Web site.
Great stuff. I wonder how Palantir Technologies, a company founded by Mr. Thiel, who is characterized as having “demigod status”, about the leaks to Buzzfeed. Should that reporter be concerned about legal action? I hope not.
Stephen E Arnold, May 26, 2016
MarkLogic Tells a Good Story
May 25, 2016
I lost track of MarkLogic when the company hit about $51 million in revenue and changed CEOs in 2006. In 2012, another CEO changed took place Since Gary Bloom, a former Oracle executive took over, the company, according to “Gary Bloom Interview: Big Data Driving Sales Boom at MarkLogic,” the company is now “topping” $100 million in annual revenue.
MarkLogic is one of the outfits laboring in the DCGX / DI2E vineyard. The company may be butting heads with outfits like Palantir Technologies as the US Army’s plan to federate its systems and data move forward.
MarkLogic opened for business in 2003 and has ingested, according to Crunchbase, $175 million in venture funding. With a timeline equivalent to Palantir Technologies’, there may be some value in comparing these two “startups” and their performance. That is an exercise better left to the feisty young MBAs who have to produce a return for the Sequoia and Wellington experts.
The interview contained two interesting statements which I found surprising:
The driver is Big Data: large corporations are convinced there is an El Dorado of untapped commercial opportunities — if only they can run their reports across all their data sources. But integrating all that data is too costly, and takes too long with relational databases. The future will be full of data in many forms, formats, and sources and how that data is used will be the differentiator in many competitive battles. If that data can’t be searched it can’t be used.
That is indeed the belief and the challenge. Based on what I have learned via open sources about the DCGS project, the reality is different from the “all” notions which fill the heads of some of the vendors delivering a comprehensive intelligence system to US government clients. In fact, the reality today seems to me to be similar to the hope for the Convera system when it was doing the “all” approach to some US government information. That, as you may recall, did not work out as some had hoped.
The second statement I highlighted is:
Although MarkLogic is tiny compared to Oracle there are some interesting parallels. “MarkLogic is at about the same size as Oracle was when I began working there. It took a long time for Oracle to get security and other enterprise features right, but when it did, that was when company really took off.”
The stakeholders hope that MarkLogic does “take off.” With more than 12 years of performance history under its belt, MarkLogic could be the next big thing. The only hitch in the git along is that normalization of information and data have to take place. Then there is the challenge of the query language. One cannot overlook the competitors which continue to bedevil those in the data management game.
With Oracle also involved in some US government work, there might be a bit of push back as the future of MarkLogic rolls forward. What happens if IBM’s data management systems group decide to acquire MarkLogic? Excitement? Perhaps.
Stephen E Arnold, May 25, 2016
Big Data and Value
May 19, 2016
I read “The Real Lesson for Data Science That is Demonstrated by Palantir’s Struggles · Simply Statistics.” I love write ups that plunk the word statistics near simple.
Here’s the passage I highlighted in money green:
… What is the value of data analysis?, and secondarily, how do you communicate that value?
I want to step away from the Palantir Technologies’ example and consider a broader spectrum of outfits tossing around the jargon “big data,” “analytics,” and synonyms for smart software. One doesn’t communicate value. One finds a person who needs a solution and crafts the message to close the deal.
When a company and its perceived technology catches the attention of allegedly informed buyers, a bandwagon effort kicks in. Talks inside an organization leads to mentions in internal meetings. The vendor whose products and services are the subject of these comments begins to hint at bigger and better things at conferences. Then a real journalist may catch a scent of “something happening” and writes an article. Technical talks at niche conferences generate wonky articles usually without dates or footnotes which make sense to someone without access to commercial databases. If a social media breeze whips up the smoldering interest, then a fire breaks out.
A start up should be so clever, lucky, or tactically gifted to pull off this type of wildfire. But when it happens, big money chases the outfit. Once money flows, the company and its products and services become real.
The problem with companies processing a range of data is that there are some friction inducing processes that are tough to coat with Teflon. These include:
- Taking different types of data, normalizing it, indexing it in a meaningful manner, and creating metadata which is accurate and timely
- Converting numerical recipes, many with built in threshold settings and chains of calculations, into marching band order able to produce recognizable outputs.
- Figuring out how to provide an infrastructure that can sort of keep pace with the flows of new data and the updates/corrections to the already processed data.
- Generating outputs that people in a hurry or in a hot zone can use to positive effect; for example, in a war zone, not get killed when the visualization is not spot on.
The write up focuses on a single company and its alleged problems. That’s okay, but it understates the problem. Most content processing companies run out of revenue steam. The reason is that the licensees or customers want the systems to work better, faster, and more cheaply than predecessor or incumbent systems.
The vast majority of search and content processing systems are flawed, expensive to set up and maintain, and really difficult to use in a way that produces high reliability outputs over time. I would suggest that the problem bedevils a number of companies.
Some of those struggling with these issues are big names. Others are much smaller firms. What’s interesting to me is that the trajectory content processing companies follow is a well worn path. One can read about Autonomy, Convera, Endeca, Fast Search & Transfer, Verity, and dozens of other outfits and discern what’s going to happen. Here’s a summary for those who don’t want to work through the case studies on my Xenky intel site:
Stage 1: Early struggles and wild and crazy efforts to get big name clients
Stage 2: Making promises that are difficult to implement but which are essential to capture customers looking actively for a silver bullet
Stage 3: Frantic building and deployment accompanied with heroic exertions to keep the customers happy
Stage 4: Closing as many deals as possible either for additional financing or for licensing/consulting deals
Stage 5: The early customers start grousing and the momentum slows
Stage 6: Sell off the company or shut down like Delphes, Entopia, Siderean Software and dozens of others.
The problem is not technology, math, or Big Data. The force which undermines these types of outfits is the difficulty of making sense out of words and numbers. In my experience, the task is a very difficult one for humans and for software. Humans want to golf, cruise Facebook, emulate Amazon Echo, or like water find the path of least resistance.
Making sense out of information when someone is lobbing mortars at one is a problem which technology can only solve in a haphazard manner. Hope springs eternal and managers are known to buy or license a solution in the hopes that my view of the content processing world is dead wrong.
So far I am on the beam. Content processing requires time, humans, and a range of flawed tools which must be used by a person with old fashioned human thought processes and procedures.
Value is in the eye of the beholder, not in zeros and ones.
Stephen E Arnold, May 19, 2016
Listen Up. Hear and Know Enables Information Access in an Innovative Way
May 18, 2016
Improbable as it sounds I found myself a short distance from the offices once housing the Exalead search company. Once I used Google Maps to find my way from Opéra to the Rue Royale where Exalead had its office. GPS did not do the job. Exalead was located next to a food shop behind intrepid Parisians who parked their Smart Cars, bicycles, and motos on the sidewalk.
On this trip to Paris I was going to learn about a company with technology that performed some GPS type functions without GPS.
In addition to tracking hardware and firmware, the company called Hear and Know has a database system which sends out emails and SMS alerts to inform the team tracking an object of interest exactly where that said object is in real time. Based on my concerns about the precision of GPS centric systems, I wanted to understand the Hear and Know approach. (Yes, “hear” refers to the company’s approach to capturing audio.)
Instead of search, the company Hear and Know developed systems and methods to have information flow directly to a person who needs to know who, what, where, and when events take place. This is practical, real time, and actionable information. None of that keyword search and fuzzy geo-location implementation.
Like Google, Exalead was anchored in the world of Alta Vista, Hotbot, and Lycos. A failure to recognized the impact of mobility, pervasive connectivity, and an insatiable appetite for gizmos or firmware that leapfrog the keyword approach locked the door on traditional search. At the same time, mobile and wireless kicked open the door to new ways of thinking about information. Here and now, real time, flows, and the potential of embedding smart technology in miniaturized components.
Times change.
On the dot, Jean Philippe Lelièvre, founder of Hear and Know, walked in the door of my so-so hotel not far from the Madeleine metro stop in Paris. M. Lelièvre sat down, ordered a Badoit, and reminded me that he and I had met at a conference in a country soon to be named “Czechia.
With my studied Kentucky suaveness, I asked: “What’s up?”
The answer was that Lelièvre’s company continues to attract customers from government sectors as well as commercial operations. Hear and Know works in the technical space described as “radio solutions for traceability and security.” Founded in 2012, Hear and Know tackled the problem of imprecise location of objects like cargo or persons of interest. GPS is okay for finding one’s way to Opéra from Madeleine to the Sorbonne. For many information tasks more precise geo-location coordinates are necessary. Examples range from tracking shipments of nuclear material, persons of interest, individual packages within containers, fire and rescue, and myriad other use cases. GPS is okay, just not as precise as many assume.
The company’s technology combines a miniature radio transmitter which fulfills requirements of traceability, geolocation, and secure data transmissions by authentication and encryption. The system transmits its ID. The “tag” allows the user to find the asset, the vehicle, the person or the package on which the miniaturized component is attached. The firm’s engineers have designed the device to perform other functions; for example, temperature, pressure, and audio. What makes the hardware interesting is that a Hear and Know device can function as what Lelièvre calls an “effector.” I interpreted the concept as making a Hear and Know device function as an “alarm” or a signaling device for another hardware or software system.
In addition to tracking hardware and firmware, the company called Hear and Know has a database system which sends out emails and SMS alerts to inform the team tracking an object of interest exactly where that said object is in real time. Based on my concerns about the precision of GPS centric systems, I wanted to understand the Hear and Know approach. (Yes, “hear” refers to the company’s approach to capturing audio.)
In my talk with Lelièvre we did not discuss military applications of the company’s technology. During my flight from Paris to Kentucky, I thought about the value of embedding Lelièvre’s devices into weapon systems. If those weapon systems find themselves “out of bounds,” the devices can activate a disabling mechanism of some type. A smart weapon that becomes stupid without the intervention of a human struck me as an application worth moving to a prototype.
Lelièvre described a use case in which Hear and Know’s radios are deployed for a person of interest. The locations and other details flow into the Hear and Know data center and allow an investigator to formulate a statement of fact along the lines:
John Doe was on MM/DD/2016 at HOUR:MINUTE at the address LATITUDE/LONGITUDE.
Another application is the use of the Hear and Know devices to monitor individuals with a medical condition; for example, people with Lyme disease allows the family to know the family member’s location and support them if help is needed.
These data can be displayed on a map in the same way Geofeedia presents tweets or Palantir shows the location of improvised explosive devices. The difference is that Hear and Know provides:
- Nearly undetectable radio form factors
- Adjustable transmission frequencies
- Multi-month operational autonomy
- Email and SMS alerts about location of tracked object or person.
Hear and Know has remarkable technology. At this time, the company is best known in Europe. It customers include:
- Atos
- BPIFrance
- Esiglec
- Mov’eo
- Thales
US law enforcement, intelligence, and commercial enterprisers are wrestling with pinpoint tracking in real time. My view is that the Hear and Know technology might lead to some hefty revenue opportunities. The company has begun to probe the US market. In January 2016 , Hear and Know received a silver medal certificate for innovation at the January 2016 Consumer Electronic Show in Las Vegas.
Hear and Know will be participating in the Pioneers festival in Vienna May 23 to 25, 2016 and in the Connected Conference in Paris, May 25 to 27, 2016. This summer, their next step will be looking for partners and fundings in the US.
To contact Hear and Know, write sales@hearandknow.eu.
Stephen E Arnold, May 18, 2016
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
