Leadership: The Google Way
April 14, 2018
Lead, follow, or get out of the way. Nope. Lead by keeping a low profile and tackling “projects” in a stealthy manner.
That’s how I interpreted the information in “Google is Pursuing the Pentagon’s Giant Cloud Contract Quietly, Fearing An Employee Revolt.” The write up states:
The Joint Enterprise Defense Infrastructure, or JEDI, program has since morphed into a single contract potentially worth $10 billion over a decade, to be awarded by year’s end…. Google has kept its own interest in the contract out of the press. Company leaders have even hidden the pursuit from its own workers.
Interesting Math Club / Silicon bro management method. Lead, follow, or get out of the way. Oh, don’t sign petitions asking your boss to turn down major military contracts. Trust is important in leadership.
Stephen E Arnold, April 14, 2018
Commercial Solutions for Government: A Path Forward
April 13, 2018
I often hear grumbling when I tell law enforcement and intelligence professionals to use commercial tools. Some LE and intel professionals are confident that open source tools like Maltego, a little midnight oil, and their in house technical staff can build a system better than commercial offerings. In my 50 year work career, that can happen. But it does not happen often. The 18f alternative to Squarespace is a good example of spending money for software which falls short of low cost, widely available commercial tools.
Cybercrime has become a serious hurdle for police. It seems that under-funded departments and agencies find that procurement cycles and technological advances by bad actors combine to make certain tasks difficult. We noted the PC Magazine story, “Feds Bust Black Market Forum Behind $530M in Cybercrimes.”
According to the article:
“The Department of Justice on Wednesday announced the indictments of 36 suspects allegedly responsible for the black market Infraud forum, which sold stolen credit card details, malware, and information that could be used for identity theft, including Social Security numbers.”
This is a win for cybercrime cops. Several of the American suspects have been arrested and several more international criminals are being extradited. However, we believe that only the private sector can adequately combat clever cybercrime. We recently heard about what seems to be a positive plan from Entrepreneur magazine.
Google’s new Chronicle cyber security company may offer LE a useful tool. The specialty for Chronicle is Zero Day Attacks, which are those sneaky cyber attacks that happen instantly—unlike ransomware, for example. This is just one small piece of a massive private sector puzzle that can help put cybercrime under control for good.
Combine the capabilities of Google with Recorded Future (a company in which Google has a stake), and the open source alternatives may come up short.
Patrick Roland, April 13, 2018
Social Media: Toxic for Children?
April 13, 2018
Facebook president’s marathon testimony sets the stage for some government action on the social media company. Bubbling beneath the surface, in my opinion, was the idea that Facebook influenced the 2016 presidential election, either wittingly or unwittingly. The math club culture, however, is pleased with its revenue, not the grilling.
Social media is a well-known grounds for toxic thought and behavior for adults. Shaming, bad mouthing, spreading rumors, and even more damaging acts have been attributed to Twitter, Facebook and the like. As bad as we know this world is, our children are experiencing just as nasty of an environment, one study suggests. We learned more in a recent Independent article, “Two in Five Children Made Anxious Every Week, When Using The Internet, Research Says.”
According to the story:
“Almost half of young people said that in the last year they had experienced someone being mean to them over the internet – or they had been excluded online, new research has revealed…. “Meanwhile, eight per cent of schoolchildren surveyed said these negative experiences happened to them all or most of the time, according to the poll.”
Sadly, this has become an unavoidable part of adolescence. It is impossible to shield children from this kind of behavior, but the Independent story doesn’t really offer a solution. Some experts have an interesting one: stay online. Much like standing up to a schoolyard bully in past years, this psychologist says children should not ignore or block a bully, but push back. Stand up for themselves and hopefully others will too, which will drive the bully off. It’s a bold thought for a problem that is dominating young minds today.
After more than a decade of “let them go,” some changes may be difficult because social media has transformed some hearts and minds.
Stephen E Arnold, April 13, 2018
Google Aims to Get More Precise by Open Sourced Maps
April 13, 2018
Google Maps is the king of direction finding but the king wants to know if it can go further. The already decently accurate system wants to use open sourcing to get a better handle on addresses and businesses you have on your map. We learned about the interesting method for pulling this off from a Tech Radar story, “Finding an Address on Google Maps Becomes Easier with Plus Codes.”
So, what are these miracle open sourced tools?
“Plus Codes are basically an open sourced solution that represents an easy to understand addressing system that works at any part of the world. It allocates address based on dividing the geographical surface into tiny ’tiled areas’, attributing a unique code to each of them.”
Seems like an interesting move by Google. However, we are skeptical about the ability to improve maps through this method. Other open source mapping tools, like OpenStreetMap, have recently come under fire for not being very accurate and turning away users. We already know that Google will have an accuracy edge here, but we simply don’t see the appeal for users overall. Look back in a year or two and this will be in the famous Google Graveyard with Glass and other swing-and-miss ideas.
Patrick Roland, April 13, 2018
Quote to Note: Statistics May Spoil Like Bananas
April 13, 2018
I noticed this synopsis for a talk by Andrew Gelman, a wizard who teaches at Columbia University. You can find the summary in “Do Statistical methods Have an Expiration Date?” Here’s the quote I noted:
The statistical methods which revolutionized science in the 1930s-1950s no longer seem to work in the 21st century. How can this be? It turns out that when effects are small and highly variable, the classical approach of black-box inference from randomized experiments or observational studies no longer works as advertised.
What happens when these methods are bolted into next generation data analytics systems which humans use to make decisions? My great uncle (Vladimir.I. Arnold and his co worker Andrey Kolmogorov could calculate an answer I assume?)
Stephen E Arnold, April 13, 2018
Making Informed Decisions Less Like Guessing
April 12, 2018
Psychic powers may not be able to bend spoons. Hunches? Well, those are as common as microbes in one’s gut.
With just a little Internet research, it becomes easy recognize the tricks psychics use to fool unsuspecting people. Despite psychic tomfoolery, humans have not stopped for ways to predict the future and AI software has somewhat breached that capability. Computer software is as limited as the humans that program it, but Newsweek reveals that: “Human Brains Are Able To Predict The Future Before The Eye Can Tell It What Happened.” Before you start trying to develop your innate sixth sense, the article explains how eyeballs moves faster than the brain can respond, so the brain uses that gap to predict what we will see next.
Scientists at the University of Glasgow discovered how this process works. The scientist…
“…used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and optical illusions to better understand what’s going on in our brain when we see. Whereas the eyes usually send information to the brain about what the surroundings look like, known as feedforward input, this study focused particularly on brain feedback input, the neurological process where the brain sends information to the eyes.
Study co-author Gracie Edwards, who specializes in neuroscience and psychology at the University of Glasgow, explained that the brain creates predictions based on memories of similar actions. ‘Feedforward and feedback information interact with one another to produce the visual scene we perceive every day,’ said Edwards.”
It sounds like the scientists discovered an explanation for déjà vu, but humans experience this process more regularly than that odd “done it before” feeling. AI programs are actually adapted from how neuroscience. AI algorithms already have the feedforward mechanism, but they lack the feedforward predictive mechanism.
Elon Musk’s fear of smart software may be an example of the grip of guessing. Season with predictive analytics and one can peer into the future with renewed confidence.
Whitney Grace, April 12, 2018
When Employees Protest, Management Has to Manage
April 12, 2018
The online information drum has been pounding out messages about the Google employees who don’t want Google to do evil. The issue pivots on the GOOG’s tie up with the US government. The application? Smart software for DoD type challenges.
What if innovation didn’t come down to who had the brightest mind, but who has the biggest collection of data? That’s an interesting thought that is gaining steam in the tech community, especially among venture capitalists. We got a hint of this growing world from the Harvard Business Review article, “Are The Most Innovative Companies Just The Ones With The Most Data?”
According to the story:
“[I]nnovation is founded on data rather than human ideas, the firms that benefit are the ones that have access to the most data. Therefore, in many instances, innovation will no longer be a countervailing force to market concentration and scale. Instead, innovation will be a force that furthers them.”
Google’s employee push back warrants observation as the company tries to guide itself through choppy high technology water.
Patrick Roland, April 12, 2018
Yikes! Google Kiddie YouTube a Target
April 12, 2018
I thought Google and its kiddie YouTube had figured out how to show age appropriate videos to children. If the information in the story “Child Advocates Ask FTC to Investigate YouTube” is accurate, the GOOG may face some PR challenges. Nothing is quite as volatile as an online advertising site displaying videos which can be perceived as inappropriate. Because the write up is branded “AP” which once meant Associated Press, I am unwilling to quote from the write up. If my understanding of the assertions in the “news” story are accurate, I recall learning:
- “Child advocate groups” — no, I don’t know what outfits these are — want Google to be “investigated.”
- Google apparently profits from showing ads to children. (Who knew?)
- Google has an app but it is not too popular with parents. (I don’t know who does not use the app because the AP story did not tell me as I recall.)
- Google has channels aimed at children. One of these may be named ChuChuTV. (Nifty spelling of “choo”.)
- Advertisers can get access to children but if the child says, “Googzilla, I am not 13” some content is blocked. (If I were a child, I would probably figure out how to get access to the video about unicorn slime pretty quickly.)
Among the entities I recall seeing identified in the article are:
- Georgetown University law clinic
- Jeff Chester, The Center for Digital Democracy
- Josh Golin, Campaign for a Commercial Free Childhood
- Senator Edward Markey
- Juliana Gruenwald Henderson, an FTC professional
- Kandi Parsons, once an FTC lawyer
What’s missing? Links, examples of bad videos, data about what percent of kiddie YouTube programming is objectionable, and similar factual data.
I don’t want to be suspicious, but regardless of filtering method, some content may be viewed as offensive because subjective perception is not what smart software does well at this point in time.
In March 2018 I was appointed to a Judicial Commission focused on human trafficking and child sex abuse. My hope is that the documents and data which flow to me do not include assertions without specific entities being identified or with constraints that make me fearful of quoting from these documents in my writings.
After 50 years of professional work, I am not easily surprised. Therefore, I am not surprised that online ad vendors similar to Google would focus on generating revenue. I am not surprised that videos vetted by smart software may make mistakes when “close enough for horseshoes” or “good enough” thresholds may be implemented for decision making. I am not surprised that individuals who spend time watching kiddie videos find content which is inappropriate.
Perhaps follow up stories from the “Associated Press” will beef up the details and facts about Google’s problems with kiddie YouTube. Quotes from folks are what “real” journalists do. Links, facts, and data are different from quotes. Make enough phone calls, and one can probably get a statement that fits the “real” news template.
Net net: I think more specifics would be helpful particularly if the goal is to find Google “guilty” of breaking a law, wrong doing, or some other egregious behavior. For now, however, the matter warrants monitoring. Accusations about topics like trafficking and child sex abuse and related issues are inflammatory. Quotes don’t cut it for me.
Stephen E Arnold, April 12, 2018
Correlation the SEO Way. Maybe Not?
April 11, 2018
Here is a fact about Hollywood: They love to boil movies down to a formula and regurgitate every movie into said formula over and over again. Some examples are Disney animated films, superhero films prior to the Disney Marvel franchise, and the Roman/Greek epics circa mid-twentieth century. Instead of focusing on how to tell a good story, Hollywood focuses on the auxiliary components like location, actors, and special effects.
Micheal Martinez from SEO Theory recently wrote, “Google Correlation Studies Are Sham Search Engine Optimization” and expressed that trying to learn anything from Google correlation studies is worthless. It is like Hollywood trying to develop a formula that delivers absolutely nothing. Martinez explains that Google changes it search rankings based on an algorithm. That algorithm is updated in real time from Google’s search index, so trying to create a formula to guarantee top hits is useless:
“The illusion of the power of correlation studies was driven by the popularity of one or two well-known “SEO” blogs — but I don’t want to single anyone out because, frankly, this problem didn’t arise due to the popularity of anyone’s blog. This problem arose because people in the SEO industry are too gullible and willing to accept any bullshit that is embedded in a Power Point presentation or infographic. That is, 100% of us put too much credence into presentation and insufficient analysis into methodology. I can’t exclude myself from that — not because I have ever believed any of these “correlation does not equal causation (wink wink)” arguments but because I find it too easy to point to what someone else says and use that as a reference for something I want to believe. I catch myself doing this all the time.”
There is not a reliable way to track and measure Google’s algorithm data. The only people who know that information are Google employees and they are not about to share their secrets. It is smart to be aware of SEO practices to develop good content, just do not follow them religiously.
Whitney Grace, April 11, 2018
Facial Recognition for a Certain Type of Bro
April 11, 2018
Male white privilege is a topic that pervades social and cultural discourse, but according to The Seattle Times the bias exists in facial recognition technology, “Facial-Recognition Technology Works Best If You’re A White Guy, Study Says.” AI’s ability to recognize people is improving more and more each day. The technology’s developers improve the technology by feeding AI data that help it learn to discern between physical differences such as gender, skin color, facial features, and other traits. It seems, however, that the data groups are overwrought with white men.
Apparently facial recognition software is 99 percent accurate in identifying white men, but the darker a person’s skin is the more errors that arise. MIT researcher Joy Buolamwini discovered the disparities and said it was a reflection of real word biases. The AI is only as smart as the people that program it:
“In modern artificial intelligence, data rules. AI software is only as smart as the data used to train it. If there are many more white men than black women in the system, it will be worse at identifying the black women. One widely used facial recognition data set was estimated to be more than 75 percent male and more than 80 percent white, according to another research study.”
Another alarming factor is that facial recognition and related technologies have a high adoption rate, such as companies that use them to target social media ads and automated decisions such as hiring people and money lending. Do not forget that law enforcement officials are relying more on the technology and minorities are more likely to singled out in databases.
While this information is disparaging, it makes a bigger issue out of something that can be easily remedied. Yes, the data is skewed towards white males, because, based on statistics, more white men work in the technology field so they draw on data they have ready access to. It is the same with the genetics field, European and Asian genes are more accurately represented than African DNA, because these countries are more developed than the mother continent. To resolve this conundrum, they need to start feeding facial recognition technology data with more females and people with darker skin. It is probably not that hard to find the data, just visit social media or an image library, then download away.
Whitney Grace, April 11, 2018
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
