Webb Wobbles: Do Other Data Streams Stumble Around?
October 4, 2022
I read an essay identified as an essay from The_Byte In Futurism with the content from Nature. Confused? I am.
The title of the article is “Scientists May Have Really Screwed Up on Early James Webb Findings.” The “Webb” is not the digital construct, but the space telescope. The subtitle about the data generated from the system is:
I don’t think anybody really expected this to be as big of an issue as it’s becoming.
Space is not something I think about. Decades ago I met a fellow named Fred G., who was engaged in a study of space warfare. Then one of my colleague Howard F. joined my team after doing some satellite stuff with a US government agency. He didn’t volunteer any information to me, and I did not ask. Space may be the final frontier, but I liked working on online from my land based office, thank you very much.
The article raises an interesting point; to wit:
When the first batch of data dropped earlier this summer, many dived straight into analysis and putting out papers. But according to new reporting by Nature, the telescope hadn’t been fully calibrated when the data was first released, which is now sending some astronomers scrambling to see if their calculations are now obsolete. The process of going back and trying to find out what parts of the work needs to be redone has proved “thorny and annoying,” one astronomer told Nature.
The idea is that the “Webby” data may have been distorted, skewed, or output with knobs and dials set incorrectly. Not surprisingly those who used these data to do spacey stuff may have reached unjustifiable conclusions. What about those nifty images, the news conferences, and the breathless references to the oldest, biggest, coolest images from the universe?
My thought is that the analyses, images, and scientific explanations are wrong to some degree. I hope the data are as pure as online clickstream data. No, no, strike that. I hope the data are as rock solid as mobile GPS data. No, no, strike that too. I hope the data are accurate like looking out the window to determine if it is a clear or cloudy day. Yes, narrowed scope, first hand input, and a binary conclusion.
Unfortunately in today’s world, that’s not what data wranglers do on the digital ranch.
If the “Webby” data are off kilter, my question is:
What about the data used to train smart software from some of America’s most trusted and profitable companies? Could these data be making incorrect decisions flow from models so that humans and downstream systems keep producing less and less reliable results?
My thought is, “Who wants to think about data being wrong, poisoned, or distorted?” People want better, faster, cheaper. Some people want to leverage data in cash or a bunker in Alaska. Others like Dr. Timnit Gebru wants her criticisms of the estimable Google to get some traction, even among those who snorkel and do deep dives.
If the scientists, engineers, and mathematicians fouled up with James Webb data, isn’t it possible that some of the big data outfits are making similar mistakes with calibration, data verification, analysis, and astounding observations?
I think the “Webby” moment is important. Marketers are not likely to worry too much.
Stephen E Arnold, October 4, 2022
Google Quirks Identified
October 3, 2022
Stadia went away. The Hacker News thread “Stadia Died Because No One Trusts Google” included some comments which identified what some perceive as inherent Google defects. My hunch is that these defects can be stretched to cover other Google services, maybe the firm’s approach to advertising and “artificial intelligence.”
Here are a handful of comments which I found interesting:
h0l0cube: Google, Facebook, etc. are victims of early success. They made their billions on low hanging fruit, by throwing a lot of resources at problems with very high demand for a solution that weren’t yet tackled well (e.g. query the internet, keep in touch with friends). So it’s no wonder that in this day in age they are incapable of understanding product market fit, innovating, or competing in a market with competent players and a lower barrier to entry.
vxNsr: Google isn’t especially excited by OS, because their bread and butter is all in the cloud they just don’t have the institutional energy to care about consumer software for the consumer’s sake.
marcinzm: Even Google’s more public attempts at innovation are toys rather than useful products.
bitcharmer: These days their [Google’s] DNA is ads.
chopface: … Googlers just don’t care about people. They care about puzzles and systematicity.
josephg: Every time Google shuts down a product, they hurt their reputation. They’re pissing in the pool that future Google products need to survive. At this point I don’t know if Google can make successful new products because nobody trusts their follow through.
hinkley: IMO, Google died the day they announced they weren’t going to work on anything with less than a billion dollar revenue potential. It sounds like a financially smart thing to do but it cuts your legs out because nobody is doing research anymore, and you select for people with half a billion potential and an eagerness to lie.
Interesting to me, probably not to Alphabet Google YouTube DeepMind, definitely not to DeepMind. I can hear this echoing in my mind, “Senator, thank you for the question.”
Stephen E Arnold, October 3, 2022
Google: Fraying Comes with Graying
September 28, 2022
At a conference last week, I had to work hard to avoid getting annoyed at 20 somethings: Fiddling with mobiles, looking bored, and tapping on laptops. I stayed on course.
Not at the Google apparently. “Google CEO Pichai Tells Employees Not to ‘Equate Fun with Money’ in Heated All-Hands Meeting.” I have zero idea if this news story is spot on, nor do I care. The factoids might be disinformation bought and paid for by a disgruntled lobbying or a person unhappy with Google’s objective search results spiel.
But the write up is entertaining and it is suggestive, at least to me.
First, I chuckled at the “heated” all hands meeting. I have heard that in the Brin Page do no evil era, meetings were often fun. Heck, I have reasonably accurate information about Mr. Brin’s arriving at a meeting with Sumner Redstone. Mr. Brin exuded fun because he had been roller blading and arrived with skates on and fruit bootin garb. Mr. Redstone was not amused too much. If the write up’s headline reflects reality and not a quest for clicks, “heated” does not refer to sweaty wizards. Heated means angry, annoyed, maybe out of control? Huh, not cool.
Second, I spotted this comment in the write up:
Pichai admitted that it’s not just the economy that’s caused challenges at Google but also an expanding bureaucracy at Google.
High school science club management appears to fall short of what’s needed to make the Alphabet Google YouTube DeepMind entity walk like a neurological digital dinosaur should. Wobblies and poor coordination do not send positive signals to big time Wall Street wolves.
Third, this compensation point resonated with me:
Pichai dodged employee questions asking about cost-cutting executive compensation. Pichai brought in total pay last year of $6.3 million, while other top executives made more than $28 million.
Is “dodged” the right word? Probably not, but to a wizard manager getting plastered with the word “dodged” is not positive PR. But, hey, this is the outfit which fired Dr. Timnit Gebru for pointing out one type of error association with Google’s smart software. Does that lack of intelligence extend to the managing humanoids at the Google? What about Google’s compensation plan for leadership versus a young programmer working on single sign on? Good question maybe?
Fourth, I found this passage thought provoking:
“I’m a bit concerned that you think what we’ve done is what you would define as aggressive cost saving,” he said. “I think it’s important we don’t get disconnected. You need to take a long-term view through conditions like this.” He added that the company is “still investing in long-term projects like quantum computing,” and said that at times of uncertainty, it’s important “to be smart, to be frugal, to be scrappy, to be more efficient.”
I think this illustrates what I would call a disconnect between the life in carpet land and the programmer-eat-marketer environment of the Foosball table. Disconnects? Is Android fragmented? Does Google have what it takes to catch up with Amazon and Microsoft in cloud space?
Has AGYD solved death? I know that Google may be looking a bit like a senior citizen struggling with the reality of arteriosclerosis. Will walkers, crutches, and wheelchairs be on display at the next big time all hands meeting?
That would be a significant signal in my opinion.
Stephen E Arnold, September 28, 2022
Palantir Technologies: Not Intelware, Now a Leader in Artificial Intelligence
September 27, 2022
I spotted this rather small advertisement in the Wall Street Journal dead tree edition on September 22, 2022. (I have been on the road and I had a stack of newspapers to review upon my return, so I may have the date off by a day or two. No big deal.)
Here’s the ad:
A couple of points jumped out. First, Palantir says in this smallish ad, “Palantir. The industry leader in artificial intelligence software.” That’s a very different positioning for the intelware centric company. I think Palantir was pitching itself a business intelligence solution and maybe a mechanism to identify fraud. Somewhere along the line there was a save the planet or save the children angle to the firm’s consulting-centric solutions.
For me, “consulting centric solutions” means that software (some open source, some whipped up by wizards) is hooked together by Palantir-provided or Palantir-certified engineers. The result is a dashboard with functionality tailored to a licensee’s problem. The money is in the consulting services for this knowledge work. Users of Palantir can fiddle, but to deliver real rock ‘em sock ‘em outputs, the bill by the hour folks are needed. This is no surprise to those familiar with migrations of software developed for one thing which is then, in a quest for revenues, is morphed into a Swiss Army knife and some wowza PowerPoint presentations and slick presentations at conferences. Feel free to disagree, please.
The second thing I noticed is that Palantir presents other leaders in smart software; specifically, the laggards at Microsoft, IBM, Amazon, and the Google. There are many ways to rank leaders. One distinction Palantir has it that it is not generating much of a return for those who bought the company’s stock since the firm’s initial public offering. On the other hand, the other four outfits, despite challenges, don’t have Palantir’s track record in the money department. (Yes, I know the core of Palantir made out for themselves, but the person I know in Harrod’s Creek who bought shares after the IPO: Not a good deal at this time.
The third thing is that Google, which has been marketing the heck out of its smart software is dead last in the Palantir list. Google and its estimable DeepMind outfit is probably not thrilled to be sucking fumes from Microsoft, IBM, and the outstanding product search solution provider Amazon. Google has articles flowing from Medium, technical papers explaining the magic of its AI/ML approach, and cheerleaders in academia and government waving pom poms for the GOOG.
I have to ask myself why? Here’s a breakdown of the notes I made after my team and I talked about this remarkable ad:
- Palantir obviously thinks its big reputation can be conveyed in a small ad. Palantir is perhaps having difficulty thinking objectively about the pickle the company’s sales team is in and wants to branch out. (Hey, doesn’t this need big ads?)
- Palantir has presented a ranking which is bound to irritate some at Amazon AWS. I have heard that some Palantir clients and some Palantir’s magic software runs on AWS. Is this a signal that Palantir wants to shift cloud providers? Maybe to the government’s go-to source of PowerPoint?
- Palantir may want to point out that Google’s Snorkeling and diversity methods are, in fact, not too good. Lagging behind a company like Palantir is not something the senior managers consider after a morning stretching routine.
Net net: This marketing signal, though really small, may presage something more substantive. Maybe a bigger ad, a YouTube video, a couple of TikToks, and some big sales not in the collectible business would be useful next steps. But the AI angle? Well, it is interesting.
Stephen E Arnold, September 27, 2022
Ballmer Versus Smit: Hooper Owner Versus Suit
September 27, 2022
I learned that Steve Ballmer — former, much loved leader of Microsoft for 14 culturally rewarding years — allegedly said something like “Google is a one-trick pony.” Okay, where’s the supporting data? One liners are not hyperlinked to Mr. Ballmer’s detailed, Harvard-infused spreadsheet about the Google’s business. Nah, Google sold online ads. Its inspiration came from outfits most 20 somethings struggle to associate with innovation; specifically, GoTo.com, Overture.com, and Yahoo.com. (The yodel might spark some awareness in young wizards, but probably not too many will think of the Big Bear creative who crafted the sound. (Factoid: The creator of the Yahoo yodel was the same person who did the catchy Big Mac jingle with the pickle on top. But you knew that, right?)
I thought of Mr. Ballmer and his understated, low energy style when I read “Gerrit Smit on Alphabet’s Underappreciated Growth Drivers.” Mr. Smit is a senior financial whiz at Stonehage Fleming. The company’s objective is to get paid by people with money for services, which including advice. The firm’s Web site says:
Supporting many of the world’s leading families and wealth creators across generations and geographies
Since I live in rural Kentucky, it will not surprise you that I interpret this sentence to mean, “We advise and get paid whether the investment pays off or falls into the Mariana Trench.”
The thesis of the article is that Alphabet Google YouTube DeepMind will grow no matter what happens to advertising, whether regulators keep nicking the estimable firm, or competitors like Amazon and TikTok continue to bumble forward with their lame attempts to get big and prosper.,
Mr. Smit offers:
Alphabet is one of the scarcer quality technology-driven companies with free options on further future organic growth drivers. It invests heavily in artificial intelligence, quantum computing, self-driving cars (Waymo) and biotechnology (Verily Life Sciences). It is particularly active in healthcare, having last year alone invested US$1.7-billion in visionary healthcare ideas, earning it fifth position of all companies in the Nature index (which tracks the success of scientific analysis in life sciences). It recently also completed the acquisition of Fitbit.
My instinct is to point out that each of these businesses can generate cash, but it is not clear to me that the volume of cash or its automated, bidding magic will replicate in these areas of “heavy” investment. Smart software continues to capture investor interest. However, there are some doubts about the wild and crazy claims about its accuracy, effectiveness, and political correctness. I like to point to the problem of bias, made vivid by AGYD’s handling of Dr. Timnit Gebru and others employees who did not get with the program. I also enjoy bringing up Google’s desire to “solve death” which has morphed into forays into America’s ethically and intentionality-challenged health care sector. Perhaps Google’s senior executives will find subrogation more lucrative than ad auctions, but I doubt it. Self driving cars are interesting as well. An errant WayMo will almost certainly drive demand for health care in some circumstances and may increase sales of FitBits in the event the person injured by a self-driving car follows a rehabilitation routine.
But these examples are “bets,” long shots, or as AGYD likes to say “moonshots.”
Yeah, great.
Here’s another statement from Mr. Smit’s “buy Google stock now” and “let us buy that stock for you” essay:
While Alphabet keeps reinvesting actively and last year spent over 12% of sales on research and development, it has built a strong record of generating excess free cash flow – in our view the main reason for investing in a stock, and the main determinant of the fundamental value of a business. Alphabet’s free cash flow sometimes takes a large step upwards and then stabilises, but seldom takes a large step backwards. This clearly is of comfort to investors.
But Mr. Smit is hedging his rah rah:
The current economic outlook is particularly uncertain, and the overall advertising market may not impress for a while. Although Alphabet can easily “manage” its financial results by holding back investment in, say, Google Cloud, it is not so short-sighted. Regulatory risks have been looming for a long time, in essence resulting from the company’s effectiveness.
Net net: Buy shares in AGYD… now. Monopolistic businesses have that special allure.
Stephen E Arnold, September 27, 2022
Is Fresh Thinking about ISPs and Network Providers Needed?
September 14, 2022
Today (September 14, 2022) I reviewed some of our research related to what I call the “new” Dark Web. Specifically, I called attention to Internet Service Providers and Network Providers who operate mostly as background services. What gets the attention are the amazing failures of high profile systems like Microsoft and Google Cloud, among others. When I hear talk about “service providers”, the comments fall into two categories:
- The giant regulated outfits some of which are government controlled and owned and others which are commercial enterprises with stakeholders and high profiles. The question, “Does cloud provider X allow its platform to deliver CSAM or phishing attacks?” is not top of mind.
- Local Internet operations which resell connectivity provided by outfits in Category 1 above or who operate servers or lease “virtual” servers on Category 1’s equipment. Most of these outfits have visibility in a specific geographic area; for example, Louisville, not far from my hovel in a hollow.
Are these two categories sufficient? Do bad actors actually do bad things on systems owned, operated and managed by Category 1 companies? Is that local company really hosting CSAM or delivering malware for a client in Hazard County, Kentucky?
The answer to these questions is, “Yes.” However, technology is available, often as open source or purpose built by some ISP/network providers to make it difficult to determine who is operating a specific “service” on third party equipment. Encryption is only part of the challenge. Basic security methods play a role. Plus, there are some specialized open source software designed to make it difficult for government authorities to track down bad actors. (I identified some of these tools in my lecture today, but I will not include that information in this free blog post. Hey, life is cruel sometimes.)
I mention the ISP/Network Provider issue because the stakes are rising and the likelihood of speeding up some investigative processes is decreasing. In this post, I want to point you to one article, which I think is important to read and think about.
Navigate to “Naver Z Teams Up with Thai Telecom Giant to Build Global Metaverse Hub.” Naver is in South Korea. True is in Thailand. South Korea has some interesting approaches to law enforcement. Thailand is one of the countries with a bureaucratic method that can make French procedures look like an SR 71 flying over a Cessna 172. (Yes, this actually happened when the SR 71 was moving at about three times the speed of sound and the Cessna 172 was zipping along at a more leisurely 120 knots.)
The write up states:
Naver Z, the metaverse unit of South Korean internet giant Naver, has partnered with Thai telecom conglomerate True to build a global metaverse hub for creators.
The new service will build on the Zepeto metaverse platform. Never heard of it? The service has 20 million monthly active users.
Here’s a key point:
The platform is particularly attractive for K-pop fans. Zepeto recently collaborated with Lisa, a member of the popular South Korean girl group Blackpink, to host a virtual event where her fans could take selfies with her avatar on Zepeto.
So what?
What if a CSAM vendor uses the platform to distribute objectionable materials? What if the bad actor operates from the US?
What type of training and expertise are required to identify the offending content, track the source of the data, and pursue the bad actor?
Keep in mind that these are two big outfits. The metaverse is a digital datasphere. Much of that environment will be virtualized and make use of distributed services. Obfuscation adds some friction to the investigative processes.
For those charged with enforcing the law, the ISPs/and Network Providers — whether large or small — will become more important factors in some types of investigations.
Is CSAM going to find its way into the “metaverse”?
I think you know the answer to the question. Now do you know what information is needed to investigate an allegation about possibly illegal behavior in Zepeto or another metaverse?
Think about your answer, please.
Stephen E Arnold, September 14, 2022
The Stochastic Terrorism Loophole: A Hidden Dimension?
September 7, 2022
Now that’s an interesting way to describe the actions of network providers / ISPs who look like “good guys” but may have a less visible suite of services on offer. I think stochastic terrorism is information warfare designed to achieve specific goals. You may disagree, but this notion is okay for me.
I read “How Cloudflare Got Kiwi Farms Wrong.” The write up states:
Most casual web surfers may be unaware of Cloudflare’s existence. But the company’s offerings are essential to the functioning of the internet. And it provided at least three services that have been invaluable to Kiwi Farms.
That’s a fair statement … as far as it goes. I would suggest that the world of network providers / ISPs — what the source article calls infrastructure — is not well understood even by those who are the senior managers of Cloudflare-type companies. This willful unknowing produces statements like, “Senator, thank you for the question. I will get the answer to your office…” My hunch is that Cloudflare is large enough to have a plethora of apologists and explainers, PR professionals and lawyers, to make clear that Cloudflare is working overtime to be wonderful.
The cited article asserts:
… it’s notable that for all its claims about wanting to bring about an end to cyberattacks, Cloudflare provides security services to … makers of cyberattack software! That’s the claim made in this blog post from Sergiy P. Usatyuk, who was convicted of running a large DDoS-for-hire scheme. Writing in response to the Kiwi Farms controversy, Usatyuk notes that Cloudflare profits from such schemes because it can sell protection to the victims.
Is this what I call the saloon door approach? The idea is that technology like a saloon door can admit anyone who can stagger, walk, or crawl. Plus the saloon door swings both ways, just like a flow of zeros and ones.
Also, Cloudflare is visible, has many customers, and positions itself as a champion of truth, justice, and the American way. Is this a new tactic? Has the rhetorical positioning be used by other network providers / ISPs; say, for instance, Amazon, Google, Microsoft, and some others? Are there network providers and ISPs which most people know nothing about? Is there such an operation in Bulgaria, Germany, or Moldova? (Next week I will share some details with those attending my lecture to a couple of cyber professionals who are affiliated with the US government. Sorry. That information is not appropriate for my free blog about stuff that sort of intrigues me.
Let me try to share how I translated the the Silicon Valley real news essay about Cloudflare and KiwiFarms. I think the point beneath the surface of 2,000 word essay is something along the lines of:
No one understands too much about these network providers / ISPs, their business models, their customers, and their services. Wow. Wow. Wow.
May I ask a couple of questions?
Who is responsible for paying attention to the plumbing? Is it the government, the local police department’s cyber investigators, the folks at Interpol, the companies’ boards of directors, the Silicon Valley real news people, or those zapped by weaponized information and services?
I think you know the answer.
No one.
The nifty phrase stochastic terrorism loophole is a consequence of the Wild West, revenue-any-way- one-can-get-it, apologize-and-never ever-ask-for-permission mentality that is having a few trivial social consequences. How are those YouTube content creators in Russia dealing with network providers / ISPs? One could ask Bald and Bankrupt I suppose as he modifies his life in the face of IRL.
News flash: There are thousands of network providers and ISPs in North America. There are some interesting outfits in Iceland and Romania. There are countries not aligned with American processes providing plumbing, including an almost unknown outfit in northern India.
The fancy phrase makes clear that a good understanding of network services / ISPs is not part of the equipment for living. The current dust up has captured the hearts, minds, and clicks of some observers.
There’s more to learn but when one does know what one does not know, the stochastic terrorism loophole does not provide what a day time drama tried to deliver: A guiding light. Who sponsored that program anyway?
Stephen E Arnold, September 7, 2022
ISPs and Network Providers: The Big Warming
September 5, 2022
On September 14, 2022, I will be sharing some of my team’s research about ISPs and network providers. Coincidentally, the “open” information services are providing interesting — but as yet not yet rock solid information — about the ISP and network provider world. In a sense, figuring out what ISPs and network providers are doing is like looking at distant star data in the Webb space telescope data stream. There is information flowing, but making those data speak clearly is not an easy job.
I read “I Ran the Worlds Largest DDOS for Hire Empire and CloudFlare Helped.” The write up struck me as quite interesting. I circled this pass as interesting but not backed up with footnotes or cheerful hyperlinks:
As the infrastructure provider for over 20% of all www traffic traversing the internet today, CloudFlare is in a position to enforce it’s beliefs on a global scale. Most of the time this isn’t a problem, lots of nefarious websites try to take advantage of the services CloudFlare offers and are rightfully kicked off. The problems arise in a small category of websites that blur the line.
The “blur” seems to say to me: Hey, we are big and well known, and maybe some bad actors use our service.”
Here’s another sentence which may catch the attention of legal eagles:
As someone who has previously justified their actions by saying “I am not directly causing harm, the responsibility flows downstream to my end users” I can tell you it is a shaky defense at best. The situation would be different if CloudFlare was unaware of the booter websites they are offering protection to, but that is not the case. CloudFlare knows who they are protecting and chooses to continue doing so, being fully cognizant of the end result their actions will have. Let’s talk about that end result because the hypocrisy of it all stings like a slap in the face as I type this. CloudFlare is responsible for keeping booter websites online and operating, the very same websites who’s sole purpose is to fuel CloudFlare’s very own business model, selling DDoS protection.
I am no lawyer and I certainly don’t understand anything other than my dinobaby world. However, it seems as if a big company is allegedly in a position to do more to protect truth, justice, and the American way than it may be doing. Oh, the American way means operating without meaningful oversight, regulation, and the invisible ethical hand that makes stakeholders quiver with glee.
Worth watching what other ISP and network provider examples emerge as the real journalists reach their coffee shops and begin working this subject.
Stephen E Arnold, September 5, 2022
Open Source: Everyone Uses It. Now Bad Actors Know Where to Aim
September 2, 2022
Peace of mind is a valuable thing, a commodity one might think worth allocating some funds to ensure, particularly when one is engaged in permanent cyber warfare. Yet, according to BetaNews, “80 Percent of Enterprises Use Open Source Software and Nearly All Worry About Security.” A recent report from Synopsys and based on research by Enterprise Strategy Group found 80% of enterprises use open source software (OSS), and 99% of those are concerned about related security issues. Apparently one percent is not paying attention—such worry is justified because few in the IT department know what’s in the open source libraries or know how to find manipulated or rogue instructions. Reporter Ian Barker tells us:
“In response to high profile supply chain attacks 73 percent of respondents say they have increased their efforts significantly to secure their organizations’ software supply chain. Steps taken include the adoption of some form of multi-factor authentication technology (33 percent), investment in application security testing controls (32 percent), and improved asset discovery to update their organization’s attack surface inventory (30 percent). Despite those efforts, 34 percent of organizations report that their applications have been exploited due to a known vulnerability in open source software within the last 12 months, with 28 percent having suffered a previously unknown zero-day exploit found in open source software.
Pressure to improve software supply chain risk management has shone a spotlight on software Bills of Materials (SBOMs). But exploding OSS usage and lackluster OSS management has made the compilation of SBOMs complex — the ESG research shows that 39 percent of survey respondents marked this task as a challenge of using OSS. … [The study also found] 97 percent of organizations have experienced a security incident involving their cloud-native applications within the last 12 months.”
All this, and the use of open source software is expected to jump to 99% next year. It seems those who hold organizational purse strings care more about saving a few bucks than about their cybersecurity teams’ sleepless nights. If they suffer a breach, however, they may find that metaphoric purse has acquired a large hole. Just a thought, but an ounce of prevention may be warranted here.
Cheap and easy? Yep.
Cynthia Murrell, September 2, 2022
Google: Errors Are Not Possible… Mostly
August 29, 2022
In my upcoming talk for a US government law enforcement meeting, I talk about some of the issues associated with wonky smart software. I spotted a fantastic example of one quasi-alleged monopoly deals with tough questions about zippy technology.
As I understand “Google Refuses to Reinstate Man’s Account after He Took Medical Images of Son’s Groin,” an online ad company does not make errors… mostly. The article, which appeared in a UK newspaper, stated:
Google has refused to reinstate a man’s account after it wrongly flagged medical images he took of his son’s groin as child sexual abuse material…
The Alphabet Google YouTube DeepMind entity has sophisticated AI/ML (artificial intelligence/machine learning) systems which flag inappropriate content. Like most digital watch dogs, zeros and ones are flawless… mostly even though Google humans help out the excellent software. The article reports:
When the photos were automatically uploaded to the cloud, Google’s system identified them as CSAM. Two days later, Mark’s Gmail and other Google accounts, including Google Fi, which provides his phone service, were disabled over “harmful content” that was “a severe violation of the company’s policies and might be illegal”, the Times reported, citing a message on his phone. He later found out that Google had flagged another video he had on his phone and that the San Francisco police department opened an investigation into him. Mark was cleared of any criminal wrongdoing, but Google has said it will stand by its decision.
The cited article quotes a person from the US American Civil Liberty Union, offering this observation:
“These systems can cause real problems for people.”
Several observations:
- Google is confident its smart software works; thus, Google is correct in its position on this misunderstanding.
- The real journalists and the father who tried to respond to a medical doctor to assist his son are not Googley; that is, their response to the fabulous screening methods will not be able to get hired at the Alphabet Google YouTube Alphabet construct as full time employees or contractors.
- The online ad company and would be emulator or TikTok provides many helpful services. Those services allow the company to control information flows to help out everyone every single day.
- More color for this uplifting story can be found here.
Net net: Mother Google is correct… mostly. That’s why the Google timer is back online. Just click here. The company cares… mostly.
Stephen E Arnold, August 23, 2022
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
