High School Science Club Management Method Number Three: Lay Low
April 10, 2019
I spotted a business related post in the article “Google Founders Have Skipped All Of The Company’s 2019 Town Hall Meetings.” The write up states:
Google cofounders Larry Page and Sergey Brin have yet to make an appearance at any of the company’s weekly “TGIF” town halls in 2019.
The “real news” story opines that transparency may not be a Google core competency. I noted this passage:
Their withdrawal isn’t entirely unexpected, according to a company source. The cofounders planned to step back their Google involvement when they formed Alphabet in 2015 — a holding company that contains Google proper along with “other bets” in areas such as Waymo’s self-driving cars, and companies focused on life science and anti-aging. The idea was to give Google CEO Sundar Pichai the ability to assert his own leadership during a tumultuous time. The cofounders remain actively involved with the other bets.
Okay, a reorganization, creating a new “face” for the company, and avoiding any type of spotlight which might lead to awkward questions about business practices—these are part of the standard operating procedure for those embracing the high school science club approach to management.
“Bro” culture doesn’t capture the spirit of HSSCMM or H2CS2. That is unfortunate because a failure to recognize the hallmarks of perceive entitlement makes it difficult to realize that the leaders of Facebook are going to be scrutinized. Google is simply more skilled at H2CS2.
Stephen E Arnold, April 10, 2019
Virtual Private Networks: Is Free Good?
April 10, 2019
VPNs are the new wonder tool in Internet security and privacy. Want one? Download Opera.
DarkCyber has noted that Vladimir Putin is not a fan of digital tunneling. In our weekly news program, we have mentioned that some VPNs are not providing the security the user wants. In some enforcement circles, use of a VPN is a red flag.
It seems logical to assume that anything free on the Internet comes with a catch. Free VPNs come with with a special extra. Tech Radar explores free VPNs in, “Four Ways That A Free VPN Can Profit From Its Users.”
Paid VPNs manage to stay on top of their game by having their users pay a monthly subscription fee. Free VPNS do offer comparable services, but in order to do that they have to make money somehow. There are four ways free VPNs can make a profit from their users. The first one is called a “gateway” VPN, because it is a free trial or tier associated with a paid VPN The hope is that the trial users will become monthly subscribers when they discover the free version’s limitations, such as low bandwidth.
Another alternative involves free VPN selling information about your Internet habits. This information would usually be collected by ISPs, but the VPN blocks them. ISPs sell the information to the highest bidder, but the VPNs do that instead. Free VPNs can also share and reroute bandwidth amongst its various users:
“Yet with one free VPN provider, HolaVPN, this is exactly what happened. HolaVPN doesn’t have its own network of servers, but effectively crowd sources, with everyone using the service providing them bandwidth – not only for the free HolaVPN offering, but also for a related paid product known as Luminati. In addition, your device could become the exit node for another user’s activity, making you potentially liable for their actions.”
Then there is the tried and true method of selling advertising on the VPN network, including targeted ads. The VPN might block the ISPs from collection information, but the VPN collects it and makes a profit from the user’s information.
Yep, free.
Whitney Grace, April 10, 2019
Factualities for April 10, 2019
April 10, 2019
Yes, data, information, anecdata, and good old marketing. Believe these outputs… or not.
74. Number of groups on Facebook selling hacking tools, stolen credit card information, and other products associated with the Dark Web. Source: Cisco Talos
$900,000. Apple’s losses after two student in Oregon sold fake iPhones. Source: Business Telegraph
$45 million. Amount generated by an accountant by selling iPhones and iPads in an illegal manner. Source: Apple Insider
$44.1 million. The amount by which the accountant’s scam exceeded the students’ scam. Source: DarkCyber
$600 billion. The value of images stolen every day by online users. Source: Techdirt
60,000. Number of Android users whose phones had software which allowed a stalker to follow the target. Source: IT Wire
145,000. Number of data items in a UK police unit’s gang matrix. Source: The Register
$12 million. The amount Motel 6 will pay to the US government after improperly giving guest data to the US Government’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement unit. Source: NPR
300. Number of days since the Pentagon held a news conference. Source: National Interest
95 percent. The accuracy of IBM’s Watson technology when predicting when employees will quite. Source: CNBC
590 million. Number of résumés leaked by Chinese personnel firms. Source: Slashdot
190,410. Number of US people who lost their jobs in the first quarter of 2019. Axios
700,000. Number of people released from US prisons each year. Source: Big Think
$334 million. The amount VCs invested in blockchain startups in the first quarter of 2019. The amount invested in 2017 was $5.5 billion. Source: Technology Review
44. The number of banks “researching” blockchain technology. Source: Crypto Economy
2.7 million. Number of Americans getting Netflix DVDs via the US mail. Source: CNN
3,236. Number of Internet-delivering satellites Amazon will launch…soon. Source: Digital Trends
490,000. Number of MySpace tunes the Internet Archive recovered. Source: Digital Reader
$20. Amount paid to a person in Louisville, Kentucky, who allows a DNA sample to be taken. Source: Wave 3 TV News
26 minutes. The average amount of free time each day enjoyed by Americans. Source: Study Finds
Stephen E Arnold, April 10, 2019
DarkCyber for April 9, 2019, Now Available
April 9, 2019
DarkCyber for April 9, 2019, is now available at www.arnoldit.com/wordpress and on Vimeo at https://vimeo.com/328921981
The program is a production of Stephen E Arnold. It is the only weekly video news shows focusing on the Dark Web, cybercrime, and lesser known Internet services.
This week’s story line up includes: Predictive Policing at the LAPD; How to spoof PDF signatures; How teens can hold secret chat sessions in front of parents and teachers; Tips for creating a credible online persona; and phishing lures that work.
This week’s feature examines the Los Angeles Police Department’s audit of its data-driven policing programs. In what will be a three part series about this report about advanced law enforcement technology, DarkCyber examines the evaluation of Predictive Policing’s system. This software analyzes data from field interviews and automated systems and produces maps of hot spots. Those with access to the system can plan patrol routes or take other preventive actions. DarkCyber explains the basics of the system and the challenges PredPol and similar systems face in a dynamic law enforcement environment. Sophisticated data analysis requires accurate, consistent data to generate high-value outputs.
The “cybershots” in this week’s program cover these four topics:
- Digitally-signed Adobe Portable Document Formats are presumed to be authentic. DarkCyber explains that a student in Europe has found ways to compromise the security of these widely-used files.
- Google Docs, used by middle school and high school students, can conduct chats within school work online. Teachers and parents may monitor this activity and be unaware that the school software makes it possible for users to exchange messages, set up drug deals, and disseminate the location of parties in a way that neither teachers nor parents are monitoring. The system allows these chat messages to be deleted with a single mouse click. DarkCyber explains how.
- Predators and con artists create false personas or online identities. What is needed to craft a credible online identity. DarkCyber reveals the methods used by bad actors outside the US.
- What are the five best subject lines to use in an email intended to steal a user’s password or other information? DarkCyber reveals the top five phishing lures. The research, conducted by Barracuda networks, was performed by analyzing 300,000 phishing emails.
A new blog Dark Cyber Annex is now available at www.arnoldit.com/wordpress. Cybercrime, Dark Web, and company profiles are now appearing on a daily basis.
Kenny Toth, April 9, 2019
Facial Recognition: In China, Deployed. In the US, Detours
April 9, 2019
Amazon faces push back for its facial recognition system Rekognition. China? That is a different story.
Chinese authorities seem to be fond of re-education camps and assorted types of incarceration facilities. China is trying to become the recognized (no pun intended) technology capital of the world. Unlike Chile and Bolivia which have somewhat old school prison systems, the Chinese government is investing money into its prison security systems. Technode explains how Chinese upgraded its security system in, “Briefing: Chinese VIP Jail Uses AI Technology To Monitor Prisoners.”
One flagship for facial recognition is China’s Yancheng Prison, known for imprisoning government officials and foreigners. The facility has upgraded its security system with a range of surveillance technology. The new surveillance system consists of a smart AI network with cameras and hidden sensors that are equipped with facial recognition, movement analysis The system detects prisoners’ unusual behavioral patterns, then alerts the guards and it is included in daily reports.
Yancheng Prison wants to cut down on the number of prison breaks, thus the upgrade:
“Jointly developed by industry and academic organizations including Tianjin-based surveillance technology company Tiandy, the system is expected to provide blanket coverage extending into every cell, rendering prison breaks next to impossible. The company is also planning to sell the system to some South American countries for jails with histories of violence and security breaches. The use of technology to monitor prisoners prompted concern over negative effects on prisoners’ lives and mental state from one human behavior expert who also suggested that some prisoners may look find ways to exploit the AI’s weaknesses.”
China continues to take steps to put technology into use. The feedback to the engineers who develop these systems can make adjustments. Over time, China may become better at facial recognition than almost any other country.
Whitney Grace April 9, 2019
Looking Back: Facebook and Live Streams
April 9, 2019
Many have asked how Facebook could allow it—during the tragic mass shooting in New Zealand on March 15, the alleged perpetrator live-streamed the horror for 17 minutes. Now, CNET shares, “Facebook Explains Why its AI Didn’t Catch New Zealand Gunman’s Livestream.” Writers Erin Carson and Queenie Wong cite a post from Facebook VP Guy Rosen, and say the company just wasn’t prepared for such an event. They report:
“In order for AI to recognize something, it has to be trained on what it is and isn’t. For example, you might need thousands of images of nudity or terrorist propaganda to teach the system to identify those things. ‘We will need to provide our systems with large volumes of data of this specific kind of content, something which is difficult as these events are thankfully rare,’ Rosen said in the post. In addition, he noted that it’s a challenge for the system to recognize ‘visually similar’ images that could be harmless like live-streamed video games. ‘AI is an incredibly important part of our fight against terrorist content on our platforms, and while its effectiveness continues to improve, it is never going to be perfect,’ Rosen said. Facebook’s AI challenges also underscore how the social network relies on user reports. The social network didn’t get a user report during the alleged shooter’s live broadcast. That matters, Rosen said, because Facebook prioritizes reports about live videos.”
The first user report about this video came in 12 minutes after the stream ended. The company says fewer than 200 users viewed the video in real time, but that more than 4,000 views occurred before it was taken down.
With no vetting, no time delay, and just smart software, the shooting video was available.
Rosen does tell us how Facebook plans to address the issue going forward: continue to improve its AI’s matching technology; find a way to get user reports faster; and continue working with the Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism. Do these plans seem a nebulous to anyone else?
Three of the five eyes are taking steps to put sheriffs in the social media territory.
Cynthia Murrell, April 9, 2019
IEEE Spectrum Embraces Business Analysis: IBM Watson and Health
April 8, 2019
I spotted a link to “How IBM Watson Overpromised and Under delivered on AI Healthcare.” I read the article and found it reasonably balanced. What surprised me was the fact that the editors of IEEE Spectrum believed that this particularly collection of information should be published for the magazine’s and online audience. My suspicion is that IBM was promoting its technology in a manner that was egregious. IEEE was reminding its readers about veering from technical facts into the wild and crazy world of toothpaste and dandruff shampoo marketing. Then I realized the IEEE Spectrum was explaining an example digital snake oil:
I circled in Big Blue marker this passage:
Outside of corporate headquarters, however, IBM has discovered that its powerful technology is no match for the messy reality of today’s health care system. And in trying to apply Watson to cancer treatment, one of medicine’s biggest challenges, IBM encountered a fundamental mismatch between the way machines learn and the way doctors work.
Translation: Reality is different from a demo. When demos are built on software which has proven problematic for decades, one wonders how the square peg in the round hole gets funded.
I circled this statement:
… Even today’s best AI struggles to make sense of complex medical information. And encoding a human doctor’s expertise in software turns out to be a very tricky proposition. IBM has learned these painful lessons in the marketplace, as the world watched. While the company isn’t giving up on its moon shot, its launch failures have shown technologists and physicians alike just how difficult it is to build an AI doctor.
IEEE Spectrum does not use the word “desperation” but it applies. The reality, from my point of view, is that finding information and answering questions is difficult. Google pulls off a version of question answering by hooking relevance to behavior and possibly relevant advertisements. Precision and recall are not part of Google or other commercial search vendors’ vocabulary today.
But answering questions doesn’t work all that well today. Sorry Google.
“Regular” search— particularly search based on open source software, some home brew code, and acquired technology — is difficult to make work across different types of content and use cases. The dust up between HP and Autonomy is one example of what happens when “logical” explanations don’t apply to search and retrieval. There are other examples too. Just ask a Fast Search & Transfer executive who skirted serious jail time.
IEEE Spectrum’s article drives home failure this way:
In a final blow to the dream of an AI super doctor, researchers realized that Watson can’t compare a new patient with the universe of cancer patients who have come before to discover hidden patterns.
Translation: Watson doesn’t work. But the article finds some sparkles in the mine tailings. Note: A few sparkles.
The print version of the article is titled, “Watson, Heal Thyself.”
The title should be: “IBM: Stick with What Works”. The mainframes are okay. The i2 and Cybertap technology is pretty good.
The Watson thing. Wow, pretty crazy expensive and sufficiently off the rails to motivate IEEE Spectrum to embrace the baloney making methods of the Harvard Business Review.
My take on the essay? IEEE Spectrum is saying, “EEs, don’t do this hyperbole charged approach when pushing your technology toys.” News flash: The EEs will ignore this plea when big money is on the table.
Stephen E Arnold, April 8, 2019
Making, Not Filtering, Disinformation
April 8, 2019
I spotted a link to this article on Sunday (April 7, 2019). The title of the “real news” report was “Facebook Is Asking to Be Regulated but Wants to Choose How.” The write ostensibly was about Facebook’s realization that regulation would be good for everyone. Mark Zuckerberg wants to be able to do his good work within a legal framework.
I noted this passage in the article:
Facebook has been in the vanguard of creating ways in which both harmful content can be generated and easily sent to anyone in the world, and it has given rise to whole new categories of election meddling. Asking for government regulation of “harmful content” is an interesting proposition in terms of the American constitution, which straight-up forbids Congress from passing any law that interferes with speech under the first amendment.
I also circled this statement:
Facebook went to the extraordinary lengths of taking out “native advertising” in the Daily Telegraph. In other words ran a month of paid-for articles demonstrating the sunnier side of tech, and framing Facebook’s efforts to curb nefarious activities on its own platform. There is nothing wrong with Facebook buying native advertising – indeed, it ran a similar campaign in the Guardian a couple of years ago – but this was the first time that the PR talking points adopted by the company have been used in such a way.
From Mr. Zuckerberg’s point of view, he is sharing his ideas.
From the Guardian’s point of view, he is acting in a slippery manner.
From the newspapers reporting about his activities and, in the case of the Washington Post, providing him with an editorial forum, news is news.
But what’s the view from Harrod’s Creek? Let me share a handful of observations:
- If a person pays money to a PR firm to get information in a newspaper, that information is “news” even if it sets forth an agenda
- Identifying disinformation or weaponized information is difficult, it seems, for humans involved in creating “real news”. No wonder software struggles. Money may cloud judgment.
- Information disseminated from seemingly “authoritative” sources is not much different from the info rocks from a digital slingshot. Disgruntled tweeters and unhappy Instagramers can make people duck and respond.
For me, disinformation, reformation, misinformation, and probably regular old run-of-the-mill information is unlikely to be objective. Therefore, efforts and motivations to identify and filter these payloads is likely to be very difficult.
Stephen E Arnold, April 8, 2019
Facial Recogntion: An Important Technology Enters Choppy Waters
April 8, 2019
I wouldn’t hold my breath: The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) declares, “Governments Must Face the Facts About Face Surveillance, and Stop Using It.” Writers Hayley Tsukayama and Adam Schwartz begin by acknowledging reality—the face surveillance technology business is booming, with the nation’s law enforcement agencies increasingly adopting it. They write:
EFF supports legislative efforts in Washington and Massachusetts to place a moratorium on government use of face surveillance technology. These bills also would ban a particularly pernicious kind of face surveillance: applying it to footage taken from police body-worn cameras. The moratoriums would stay in place, unless lawmakers determined these technologies do not have a racial disparate impact, after hearing directly from minority communities about the unfair impact face surveillance has on vulnerable people. We recently sent a letter to Washington legislators in support of that state’s moratorium bill.
EFF’s communications may be having some impact.
DarkCyber noted that Amazon will be allowing shareholders a vote about sales of the online bookstore’s facial recognition technology, Rekognition. “AI Researchers Tell Amazon to Stop Selling Facial Recognition to the Police” does not explain how Amazon can remove its FAR from those entities which have licensed the technology.
DarkCyber believes that the US is poised to become a procurement innovation center. Companies and their potential customers have to figure out how to work together without creating political, legal, and financial disruptions.
A failure to resolve what seems to be a more common problem may allow vendors in other countries to capture leading engineers, major contracts, and a lead in an important technology.
Stephen E Arnold, April 8, 2019
Internetting with the New York Times: Print Instead of Video
April 8, 2019
What happens when one converts an idea for a video about hot Internet topics into print on standard newspaper? The answer is, “Internetting.”
My dead tree edition of the gray lady included a supplement called “Internetting.” There was on Sunday, April 7, 2019, a fan’s tweet about the 11 page section:
Frankly, I am not sure what the heck the section was designed to convey. I did spot an info bubble that informed me: A video print adventure through a Jacques Derrida-inspired project.
I went through the unconnected printed sheets and noted that the word “video” was struck out. To me that meant, “This is a paper version of a video.” Okay, the information appeared on paper; therefore, the 11 printed sheets were not a video. A strike out? Would I be confused? Was the Internetting information a bit of humor. A Saturday Night Live sketch gone wrong?
I looked at each of the sheets and scanned the information on each page. I was baffled by “Dogs Took Over the Internet. Our Souls Are at Stake.” I thought cats owned the Internet. If not, felines should be the lions of digital.
One thing is sure: I am glad I no longer work in New York City and am exposed to this type of hip new thinking when I left my lousy apartment on 39th and went to the dark, semi clean deli, rode in the weird elevators at 245 Park Avenue, and tried to get to the Thai joint on 7th Avenue.
Video into print, printed in a way different from a “regular” newspaper, and filled with definitely odd ball information. No fake news here, gentle reader. Just an artifact of a newspaper adrift in a digital sea. Strike out video. Tell that to Twitch and YouTube consumers. My hunch is that popular YouTubers and Twitchers may not have seen the printed Intenetting thing.
These people were busy doing videos, not paper.
Stephen E Arnold, April 8, 2019
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
