Big Data Teaches Us We Are Big Paranoid
November 18, 2016
I love election years! Actually, that is sarcasm. Election years bring out the worst in Americans. The media runs rampant with predictions that each nominee is the equivalent of the anti-Christ and will “doom America,” “ruin the nation,” or “destroy humanity.” The sane voter knows that whoever the next president is will probably not destroy the nation or everyday life…much. Fear, hysteria, and paranoia sells more than puff pieces and big data supports that theory. Popular news site Newsweek shares that, “Our Trust In Big Data Shows We Don’t Trust Ourselves.”
The article starts with a new acronym: DATA. It is not that new, but Newsweek takes a new spin on it. D means dimensions or different datasets, the ability to combine multiple data streams for new insights. A is for automatic, which is self-explanatory. T stands for time and how data is processed in real time. The second A is for artificial intelligence that discovers all the patterns in the data.
Artificial intelligence is where the problems start to emerge. Big data algorithms can be unintentionally programmed with bias. In order to interpret data, artificial intelligence must learn from prior datasets. These older datasets can show human bias, such as racism, sexism, and socioeconomic prejudices.
Our machines are not as objectives as we believe:
But our readiness to hand over difficult choices to machines tells us more about how we see ourselves.
Instead of seeing a job applicant as a person facing their own choices, capable of overcoming their disadvantages, they become a data point in a mathematical model. Instead of seeing an employer as a person of judgment, bringing wisdom and experience to hard decisions, they become a vector for unconscious bias and inconsistent behavior. Why do we trust the machines, biased and unaccountable as they are? Because we no longer trust ourselves.”
Newsweek really knows how to be dramatic. We no longer trust ourselves? No, we trust ourselves more than ever, because we rely on machines to make our simple decisions so we can concentrate on more important topics. However, what we deem important is biased. Taking the Newsweek example, what a job applicant considers an important submission, a HR representative will see as the 500th submission that week. Big data should provide us with better, more diverse perspectives.
Whitney Grace, November 18, 2016
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
Verizon AOL May Allow 500 People to Find Their Future Elsewhere
November 17, 2016
With or without Yahoot — sorry, I meant, Yahoo — is a darned exciting outfit for a Baby Bell. I read “Verizon Owned AOL to Layoff 500 Employees, Mostly in Corporate Unit: Source.” With all the chatter about fake news, let me state that I believe everything I read about Verizon, AOL, and every other online centric outfit in the datasphere. No distortion exists in bizarro world. Unnamed sources are the only type of source that has any traction today.
The write up says:
Digital media company AOL, owned by Verizon Communications Inc, will lay off five per cent of its workforce, or about 500 employees, a source familiar with the situation said.
Pundits, Brahmins, and former middle school teachers have been reporting about this RIF or reduction in force. Hey, there’s nothing like a Thanksgiving treat to make folks feel really great about their job. On the bright side, a certain president elect is hiring.
AOL may become two mini businesses:
- Media, search and communications
- Advertising technology and other assorted infrastructure enabled products and services.
Another rumor is that something called “Be On” may be reshaped. A copy of the Xoogler Tim Armstrong’s message to employees appears on Business Insider. Variety points out that the RIFs are “unrelated to Verizon’s Yahoo Bid,” which raises the question, “Why is AOL dumping staff?” No answer, of course.
Fortune Magazine recycles a Silicon Valley “real” news outfit with this second hand statement from the Xoogler Tim Armstrong:
“The layoffs are related to a 2017 strategy where we will add to our business. These are super targeted by area and we will be re-growing especially in video and mobile.
Yep, Happy Thanksgiving.
Stephen E Arnold, November 17, 2016
Hard and Soft Clustering Explained
November 17, 2016
I read “An Introduction to Clustering and Different Methods of Clustering.” Clustering, it seems, remains a popular topic among the quasi-search and content processing crowd. What’s interesting about this write up is that it introduces hard clustering and soft clustering. I had assumed that clustering was neither hard nor soft. Here’s the distinction:
- In hard clustering, each data point either belongs to a cluster completely or not. For example, in the above example each customer is put into one group out of the 10 groups.
- In soft clustering, instead of putting each data point into a separate cluster, a probability or likelihood of that data point to be in those clusters is assigned.
The write up then highlights these go-to methods of clustering:
- K means clustering
- Hierarchical clustering.
The write up introduces the idea of supervised learning. I noted that the article did not point out that training is a time consuming and often expensive exercise. The omission complements the “quick look” approach in the write up.
I am not sure that a person interested in clustering will be able to make a giant leap forward. Perhaps the effort will result in a hard soft landing?
Stephen E Arnold, November 17, 2016
Alphabet Google Spells Out Clueless for EU
November 17, 2016
I read “Google: EU Commissioners Don’t Understand Antitrust Law.” The main point of the write up is that the Googlers perceive the regulatory folks in the European Union as have a problem with their reading skills and logical thought. Who knows if this is true? I just love the idea of a Sillycon Valley company informing government officials that they are, in a word, clueless. Ah, the confidence of the online advertising outfit.
The write up informed me that:
In an effort to soften the European Commission’s inquiry into business practices, Google has claimed that those bringing charges against it do not fully understand antitrust law.
The source for the insight was a write up in a Google blog penned by a real live Googler called “Improving Quality Isn’t Anti Competitive, Part II.” The write up points out that online shopping is “robustly competitive.”
What’s interesting is that the European Union does not agree with the Googler it seems. Is it possible that the clueless wonders will take umbrage at Google’s view of their inquiry? Nah, I bet those EU folks are darned forgiving. The regulators have given Google extensions so that the company could respond to the allegations about Google’s putting its thumb on the scale when weighing cheese.
I do love the idea that regulators do not understand the laws they are charged with interpreting and enforcing. Let’s see. Yes, I remember that Google took a similar approach to its China business. How has that been working out for Google? The Alphabet Google thing may face a similar type of push back with the EU no matter how much those folks love Google search. Well, there’s always Qwant.com and Yandex mail if the EU folks get too frisky.
Stephen E Arnold, November 17, 2016
Hacking the Internet of Things
November 17, 2016
Readers may recall that October’s DoS attack against internet-performance-management firm Dyn, which disrupted web traffic at popular sites like Twitter, Netflix, Reddit, and Etsy. As it turns out, the growing “Internet of Things (IoT)” facilitated that attack; specifically, thousands of cameras and DVRs were hacked and used to bombard Dyn with page requests. CNet examines the issue of hacking through the IoT in, “Search Engine Shodan Knows Where Your Toaster Lives.”
Reporter Laura Hautala informs us that it is quite easy for those who know what they’re doing to access any and all internet-connected devices. Skilled hackers can do so using search engines like Google or Bing, she tells us, but tools created for white-hat researchers, like Shodan, make the task even easier. Hautala writes:
While it’s possible hackers used Shodan, Google or Bing to locate the cameras and DVRs they compromised for the attack, they also could have done it with tools available in shady hacker circles. But without these legit, legal search tools, white hat researchers would have a harder time finding vulnerable systems connected to the internet. That could keep cybersecurity workers in a company’s IT department from checking which of its devices are leaking sensitive data onto the internet, for example, or have a known vulnerability that could let hackers in.
Even though sites like Shodan might leave you feeling exposed, security experts say the good guys need to be able to see as much as the bad guys can in order to be effective.
Indeed. Like every tool ever invented, the impacts of Shodan depend on the intentions of the people using it.
Cynthia Murrell, November 17, 2016
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
Dark Web Marketplaces Are Getting Customer Savvy
November 17, 2016
Offering on Dark Web marketplaces are getting weirder by the day. Apart from guns, ammo, porn, fake identities, products like forged train tickets are now available for sale.
The Guardian in an investigative article titled Dark Web Departure: Fake Train Tickets Go on Sale Alongside AK-47s reveals that:
At least that’s the impression left by an investigation into the sale of forged train tickets on hidden parts of the internet. BBC South East bought several sophisticated fakes, including a first-class Hastings fare, for as little as a third of their face value. The tickets cannot fool machines but barrier staff accepted them on 12 occasions.
According to the group selling these tickets, the counterfeiting was done to inflict financial losses on the operators who are providing deficient services. Of course, it is also possible that the fake tickets are used by people (without criminalistics inclinations) who do not want to pay for the full fares.
One school of thought also says that like online marketplaces on Open Web, Dark Web marketplaces are also getting customer-savvy and are providing products and services that the customers need or want. This becomes apparent in this portion of the article:
The academics say the sites, once accessed by invitation or via dark-web search engines (there’ll be no hyperlinks here) resemble typical marketplaces such as Amazon or eBay, and that customer service is improving. “Agora was invitation-only but many of these marketplaces are easily accessible if you know how to search,” Dr Lee adds. “I think any secondary school student who knows how to use Google could get access – and that’s the danger of it.
One of the most active consumer group on Dark Web happens to be students, who are purchasing anything from fake certificates to hacker services to improve their grades and attendance records. Educational institutions, as well as law enforcement officials, are worried about this trend. And as more people get savvy with Dark Web, this trend is going to strengthen creating a parallel e-commerce, albeit a dark one.
Vishal Ingole, November 17, 2016
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
Is IBM Watson Like Microsoft Windows and Google Android? What? Huh?
November 16, 2016
Short honk. As we approach the end of 2016, I am paying attention to the prognostications for the future. I noted a stunner which I want to highlight. The source is Data Science Central’s “What Can Modern Watson Do?” (This is a heck of a question by the way. I will comment about the article in more detail next week.) For today, I want to present this statement from a mid tier consulting firm’s guru wizard savant human. Here’s the statement made in reference to IBM Watson:
David Schubmehl, an analyst at IDC compares IBMs new playbook in AI with Microsoft’s Windows in personal computing and Google’s Android OS in mobile. “IBM is trying to do the same thing with Watson,” he said, “open up a platform, make it available for others, and democratize the technology.”
Dave Schubmehl, IDC, allegedly compared IBM’s “playbook” to Microsoft Windows in personal computing and Google Android’s operating system in mobile. The hedge is the word “trying.” Yep, trying includes paying mid tier consultants to toot the Watson tuba. The premise strikes me as something a day worker in Harrod’s Creek might say; for example, the democratization of technology makes IBM Watson’s future great, maybe huge, or Number One. Yep, a day worker says this stuff frequently in rural Kentucky.
A couple of observations.
- A playbook is not what Microsoft Windows or Google Android are. But for the fact that a “playbook” is not widely used software for consumers, the IDC logic warrants the creation of a new word for this type of logical misstep: Schubmehlian. I like that word Schubmehlian.
- Windows has revenue. Watson does not have Windows-scale global reach, a comparable “brand,” or a subscription revenue model producing real billions every quarter. The lawyers use the phrase “but for” to help explain this type of logic. Watson is great “but for” its lack of scale, brand value, and revenue. The metaphor looks shaky, Mr. Mid Tier Consultant guru.
- Google Android OS has market reach. The last figure I recall is that Android is the operating system on more than 80 percent of the world’s mobile devices. (The source for this magic number is none other than IDC, the same folks who generate pretty crazy numbers like how much time a professional spends looking for information each day.) Watson is great “but for” its lack of market share.
Yep, those “but fors” can be a problem. However, mid tier consultants are not paid to be right, just to sound right. Tuck this away for future reference. Watson is the new Windows AND the new Google Android OS.
Will the anti trust issues tag along? Not for a while. You can hire IDC and get this type of logic by filling out the form at this link. The result will be — how can I say it? — Schubmehlian.
Stephen E Arnold, November 16, 2016
Info-Distortion: Suddenly People Understand
November 16, 2016
I have watched the flood of stories about misinformation, false news, popular online services’ statements about dealing with the issue, and denials that disinformation influence anything. Sigh.
I have refrained from commenting after reading write ups in the New York Times, assorted blogs, and wild and crazy posts on Reddit.
A handful of observations/factoids from rural Kentucky:
- Detection of weaponized information is a non trivial task
- Online systems can be manipulated by exploiting tendencies within the procedures of very popular algorithms; most online search systems rely on workhorse algorithms that know their way to the barn. Their predictability makes manipulation easy
- Textual information which certain specific attributes will usually pass undetected by humans who have to then figure out a way to interrelate a sequence of messages distributed via different outlets
There is some information about the method at my www.augmentext.com site. The flaws in “smart” indexing systems have been known for years and have been exploited by individual actors as well as nation states. The likelihood of identifying and eliminating weaponized information will be an interesting challenge. Yep, I know a team of whiz kids figured out how to solve Facebook’s problem in a short period of time. I just don’t believe the approach applies to some of the methods in use by certain government actors. How do you know an “authority” is not a legend?
Stephen E Arnold, November 16, 2016
Microsoft Factoid of the Month: A Browser Downdraft
November 16, 2016
Most people think in terms of uptake. The approach is a sign of a healthy mind. Uptake means good things.
I read “Microsoft Loses about 40 Million Internet Explorer Users in One Month.” Let’s assume that the data are spot on, which is risky these days.
The write up states:
…In October alone, Microsoft shed some 40 million users, with the likes of Chrome and Firefox scooping them up.
What’s the outlook for Microsoft’s browser market share? The write up reports:
At the end of 2015, Microsoft’s total browser share was comparable to Chrome’s now and yet as we close out 2016, it has been reduced to barely a quarter. While it is unknown whether Firefox’s share can continue its upswing it has experienced lately, it seems Microsoft’s overall share will continue to diminish.
Let’s ask Tay what’s up?
Stephen E Arnold, November 16, 2016
Xoogler Interviews Facebooker about Smart Software
November 16, 2016
I read “Facebook’s Yann LeCun On Everything AI”. I cannot resist write ups that purport to cover “everything” in a 400 word write up. The main point of the article in my opinion was:
since 95% of today’s AI training is done under supervised learning, the amount of information a machine has is limited and it is therefore not able to escape set boundaries. He also stated, however, that it’s too early to make predictions and he wouldn’t rule out the possibility that this status quo remains unchanged in 30-50 years from now.
The write up points to a video of the 18 minute lecture.
My reaction was that it was interesting to me that Dr. Thrun, a Stanford professor and a Google VP and Google Fellow, conducted the softball interview.
Stephen E Arnold, November 16, 2016
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
