Zuck Hunting: Investors Want to Blast a Clay Pigeon
April 14, 2019
I read “Facebook Investors Desperate to Boot Mark Zuckerberg from Chairmanship.” I wonder if these senior business professionals realize that the Zuck (Mark Zuckerberg) has taken anticipatory steps to remain in control of the Facebook privacy grinder.
The write up reports this sentence from an April 12, 2019, Securities & Exchange Commission filing:
[Zuckerberg’s] dual-class shareholdings give him approximately 60% of Facebook’s voting shares, leaving the board, even with a lead independent director, with only a limited ability to check Mr. Zuckerberg’s power,” reads the statement supporting the proposal. “We believe this weakens Facebook’s governance and oversight of management.
The write up summarizes some of the concern stakeholders have in the Zuck’s decision making.
Zuck (the “face” of Facebook) may not embrace the idea of a small step toward knocking his clay pigeons from the sky.
I learned that “Facebook isn’t a fan” of this idea.
From my vantage point in rural Kentucky, the situation seems to be:
- A lack of meaningful regulatory oversight and control on a company which has demonstrated a willingness to say “I am sorry.” Each time I hear these words from a Facebook professional, I think of John Cleese’s character being held upside down out of a window in “A Fish Called Wanda.”
- A desire to continue chugging forward in order to maintain what I call “HSSCMM” or high school science club management methods. (If you are not sure what this means, ask a high school science club student at an institution near you.)
- Confidence that the company’s team and its users can continue to bring the world together despite some modest evidence that Facebook causes a small amount of disruption.
The push back strikes me as an example of too little, too late. But at least there is some questioning of the HSSCMM’s efficacy.
I hear the call “pull” but that clay pigeon is flying free. The prized Zuck sails forward unscathed.
Stephen E Arnold, April 14, 2019
Crazy Consulting Baloney: Ambient Data Governance
April 13, 2019
I spotted this phrase in the capitalist’s tool. That would be Forbes Magazine, an outfit which publishes some pretty crazy management recipes. Navigate to “How To Prepare Your Company For Ambient Data Governance.” Click thorough the ads and the pop ups. The reward is a write up about “ambient data governance.” I must admit that I don’t have a clue why this phrase is necessary. Governance by itself is a limp noodle. What company has governance today? Wells Fargo, Facebook, or another one might wish to nominate? You pick. Management of most companies takes short cuts; for example, killing products after announcing them and putting the name of the product in advertisements (a nifty play at Apple, a company with governance one presumes).
Here’s a passage I noted:
Forrester recently issued a prediction for 2019, saying, “Ambient data governance will take the trauma out of old-school governance,” and predicting that “ambient data governance will prevail as a strategy to automate and intelligently scale data policy deployment while learning and adapting policies based on data consumer interaction.”
Okay, Forrester. Selling reports and consulting or is it consulting which yields reports? I just don’t know.
What does one do to become adept at “ambient data governance”? Easy. How about these astounding recommendations:
Appoint a chief data officer. Make sure this person can walk. This is the “ambient” I deduce.
Become data literate. Okay, what’s data? What’s literate mean in this context?
Evolve to an insights driven organization. Yeah, anyone at Forbes read Darwin? Intent-driven evolution is an interesting concept. The method does not work too well.
There you go. A recipe for governance. More like a recipe to write an article in the capitalist tool and hook a crazy buzzword to Forrester. SEO at work. Rev your Harley’s engine, Malcolm. Speed away from this management jargon accident.
Stephen E Arnold, April 13, 2019
Follow Intelligence? Watch the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency
April 12, 2019
I read “Is Geospatial Intel the New Framework for Civilization? The NGA’s New Director Speaks His Mind.” The article contains several points which DarkCyber has identified as important. Are you into geo-fencing? If not, you may want to learn a bit more about this function.
Stephen E Arnold, April 12, 2019
Jason and Darpa-Nauts
April 12, 2019
If you are not up to speed on the Jason Group, Wikipedia, for now, has a write up about the organization of academics who provide input and other support to the US government. Yes, you can become a member. The trick is to identify people who are Jasons, lobby a couple, and wait until you are voted in. A Nobel prize is a useful award. High level contacts at Mitre can be a plus too.
So who cares about Jasons aside from some Washington insiders? Fewer DoD types than in the 1960s and 1970s.
According to Government Executive:
Pentagon officials are killing JASON in all but name. Last month, they sent the bad news to MITRE, the nonprofit corporation that runs the program. “The Pentagon Is Killing a Key Independent-Research Program” reported:
They [government COTRs] don’t have to “terminate” the contract to kill the program, since it was set to expire at the end of March. By changing the contract from IDIQ to a single contract, other agencies will no longer be able to commission studies, essentially killing the program without technically terminating it.
This is a nice way of saying, “So long for now.”
What’s the conclusion Government Executive drew from this announcement:
Bottom line: the Pentagon is spending more on new science and tech initiatives but will be spending less on independent academic research into how those initiatives will fare.
DarkCyber believes that other research avenues are more likely to deliver the type of outputs that the DoD and its units require. Good news or bad news? Consulting firms are likely to benefit. Some academics will have to chase RFQs with more diligence.
Stephen E Arnold, April 12, 2019
A Grain of Salt for Zuckerberg Suggestions
April 12, 2019
Given the pressures Facebook has been under to better regulate harmful content on its platform, it is no surprise Mark Zuckerberg has weighed in with a blog post on the matter. However, writer Mark Wyci?lik-Wilson scoffs at the Facebook founder’s ideas in the BetaNews write-up, “Mark Zuckerberg’s Calls for Internet Regulation Are Just an Attempt to Shift the Blame from Facebook.” The article outlines Zuckerberg’s “four ideas to regulate the internet,” noting that, coming from anyone else, they might be plausible suggestions: First, there’s the concept of privacy regulations like those in Europe’s GDPR. Zuckerberg also says he wants more control over hate speech, and to exert tighter standards over political advertising, especially near election time. Finally, he counsels data portability.
We’re reminded nothing is actually standing in the way of Facebook implementing these ideas on its own—and this is what makes Wyci?lik-Wilson suspicious of Zuckerberg’s motives. He also notes a couple tendencies he has observed in the Facebook CEO: to pass the buck when something goes wrong, and to spin any attempts to address users’ concerns as a PR positive. He writes:
Whilst admitting that ‘companies such as Facebook have immense responsibilities’ it seems the Facebook founder would rather have rules and guidelines handed down to him rather than having to do the hard work himself. This is understandable. It would help to absolve Facebook of blame and responsibility. If things go wrong when following regulations set out by the government or other agencies, it’s easy to point to the rulebook and say, ‘well, we’re were just doing as we were told’. At the moment it’s all too easy for Facebook to make a lot of noise about how it wants to improve things while simultaneously raping users’ privacy, and benefiting from the fake news, extremist content and everything else the social network claims not to want to be a platform for. But at the end of the day, a signed-up user is a signed-up user, and acts as a microscopic cog in the advertising-driven money-machine that is Facebook. Facebook has shown time and time again that it can do something about objectionable content and activity — be that political extremism, racism, election interference or whatever. But it doesn’t do anything until it faces insurmountable pressure to do so.
Wyci?lik-Wilson urges Facebook to just go ahead and implement these suggestions already, not wait to be told what to do outside forces. “Less talking, more doing,” he summarizes.
Cynthia Murrell, April 12, 2019
Bad Actors Include Russian Crime Oligarchs: Wosar Speaks Out
April 12, 2019
Hollywood romanticizes computer hacking and other digital crimes. There is some truth to what happens on the screen, but the action is usually more downbeat and usually does not keep the bad actors at the edge of their seats. While the bad actors get a lot of screen time, the good guys, those who protect the average person, from cyber attacks rarely get praised. The BBC took the time to praise one digital hero’s actions in the article, “Hated And Hunted.”
Perhaps the most vicious type of malware is ransomware. Ransomware is a computer virus that once downloaded onto a computer, it scrambles all of the data and delivers a ransom note stating the user must pay a certain amount of money or all of their data will be deleted. Fabian Wosar is a good actor, because he understands the virus code and knows how to hack the hacker. In other words, he knows how to outsmart the hackers and beat them at their own game. The hackers are so upset with Wosar that they actually write mean notes to him in their virus code.
Wosar is an introverted individual, who loves to design anti-virus code for his cyber security company, Emsisoft. He spends hours working and often binges long hours at his job, often giving away his ant-ransomware away for free. Wosar compares writing code to writing a novel and how he can tell who wrote specific code based on individual styles. He also believes that he stopped over 100 different cyber gangs from their illegal activities.
Ransomware is one of the most profitable cyber crimes and its perpetrators can evade authorities for years, especially if they are smart about it. Ransomware victims often pay hundreds of thousands of dollars and pounds to the criminals, especially if they decide paying the ransom is considered cheaper than replacing a system. Cyber criminals are also quite intimidating:
The most successful cyber-crime gangs are run like mafia organizations with specific structures and divisions of labor.There are the virus coders, the money launderers, the protection heavies and the bosses who decide on targets and sometimes funnel the money into other, potentially more serious, criminal enterprises.Catching these gangs is extremely challenging. One of the most prolific recent ransomware gangs, responsible for two major ransomware families – CTB-Locker and Cerber – made an estimated $27m and eluded police for years.It took a global police operation involving the FBI, the UK’s National Crime Agency, and Romanian and Dutch investigators to bring them down. In December 2017, five arrests were made in Romania.
Wosar keeps his identity hidden and moves around to keep himself safe. While he does enjoy his work, he does suffer from health problems due to his sedentary lifestyle and might get a dog to force himself outside. Outside, however, may pose risks.
Whitney Grace, April 12, 2019
Natural Language Processing: Will It Make Government Lingo Understandable
April 11, 2019
I noted a FBO posting for a request for information for natural language processing services. You can find the RFI at this link on the FBO Web site. Here’s a passage I found interesting:
OPM seeks information on how to use artificial intelligence, particularly natural language processing (NLP), to gain insights into statutory and regulatory text to support policy analysis. The NLP capabilities should include topic modeling; text categorization; text clustering; information extraction; named entity resolution; relationship extraction; sentiment analysis; and summarization. The NLP project may include statistical techniques that can provide a general understanding of the statutory and regulatory text as a whole. In addition, OPM seeks to learn more about chatbots and transactional bots that are easy to implement and customize with the goal of extending bot-building capabilities to non-IT employees. (Maximum 4 pages requested.)
The goal is to obtain information about a system that performs the functions associated with an investigative software system; for example, Palantir Technologies, IBM i2, or one of the numerous companies operating from Herzliya, north of Tel Aviv.
I am curious about the service provider who assisted in the preparation of this RFI. The time window is responding is measured in days. With advanced text analysis systems abounding in US government agencies from the Department of Justice to the Department of Defense and beyond, I wonder why additional requests for information are required.
Ah, procurement. A process in love with buzzwords so an NLP system can make things more clear. Sounds like a plan.
Stephen E Arnold, April 11, 2019
The EU, the Internet Archive Dust Up: One Fact Overlooked
April 11, 2019
I read “EU Tells Internet Archive That Much Of Its Site Is ‘Terrorist Content’.” The main point is that Europol’s European Union Internet Referral Unit pointed out that the Internet Archive contains problematic information. The article explains that the Internet Archive explains:
there’s simply no way that (1) the site could have complied with the Terrorist Content Regulation had it been law last week when they received the notices, and (2) that they should have blocked all that obviously non-terrorist content. [emphasis in the original]
DarkCyber wants to point out a fact that may be of interest to the EUIRU and the Internet Archive; to wit: The site has information, but the site’s search system and interface make it very difficult to locate information. For EUIRU, the inadequate search system makes finding the potentially harmful information a challenge. For the Internet Archive, the findability system makes it equally difficult for IA staff to locate items so each can be reviewed.
What will the Internet Archive do? The options are limited and some are unpalatable: Fight the EU? Ignore the request? Block access from Europe? Go out of business? Address the issue head on? Worth watching how this develops.
Stephen E Arnold, April 11, 2019
IBM and Oracle: Losers?
April 11, 2019
I found a bit of irony in the revelation that IBM and Oracle are big losers in the US government’s JEDI procurement. If there ever were an old school, doddering outfit, it is the New York Times. Yet without much self awareness, the dead tree crowd puts a jab at IBM and Oracle in their report that two horses are approaching the finish line. “Amazon and Microsoft Are 2 Finalists for $10 Billion Pentagon Contract” makes this point:
IBM and Oracle had also bid for the project, known as the joint enterprise defense infrastructure, or JEDI. But the Defense Department concluded that they did not meet the minimum requirements for the program.
After looking at the NYT’s “Internetting” section, the newspaper, I asked, “What’s the minimum requirement for technology related information?” No one from Amazon, Microsoft, IBM, or Oracle would comment? Former employees out too? What about one of the Beltway Bandits? How about an IBM Federal Systems’ retired person? A former DoD officer?
What about IBM and Oracle? Any business impact of this negative information about these companies? A business school professor? A Beltway bandit?
Forget interviews.
What about the also ran when the US government goes with Microsoft and its cloud confection or Amazon with its bulldozer approach to online?
Which does one short? The NYT does the “Internetting” thing. Not even particularly well.
Stephen E Arnold, April 11, 2019
Amazon Moved a Knight. Google Pushes a Pawn
April 10, 2019
If you care about search and retrieval, you may be interested in the chess game underway between Amazon and Google. Amazon seized the initiative by embracing the open source Elasticsearch. Google, an outfit whose failures in search are known to anyone who licensed a Google Search Appliance, has responded. The pawn Google nudged forward is Elastic, the outfit which has been a big dog in search and retrieval for several years.
According to “Elastic and Google Cloud Expand Elasticsearch Service Partnership”:
Elastic (NYSE: ESTC) and Google Cloud (GCP) announced the expansion of their managed Elasticsearch Service partnership to make it faster and easier for users to deploy Elasticsearch within their Google Cloud Platform (GCP) accounts. Building upon the partnership to deliver Elastic’s Elasticsearch Service on GCP, the companies announced a fully managed, cloud-native integration for discovery, billing, and support for Elasticsearch Service within the GCP Console.
We also circled this statement, which is quite fascinating when interpreted in the context of Amazon’s open source tactic:
Elastic’s Elasticsearch Service on GCP gives users a turnkey experience to deploy powerful Elastic Stack features of Elasticsearch and Kibana, including proprietary free and paid features such as security, alerting, machine learning, Kibana spaces, Canvas, Elasticsearch SQL, and cross-cluster search. In addition, users can deploy new curated solutions for logging, infrastructure monitoring, mapping and geospatial analysis, and APM; optimize compute, memory, and storage workloads using Elastic’s customizable deployment templates such as hot-warm architecture for the logging use case; and upgrade to the latest version of Elasticsearch and Kibana as soon as it is released with a single click.
The chess timer is Amazon’s. Will the company make a lucid move?
Stephen E Arnold, April 10, 2019
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
