Smart Software: Automating Duplicitous Behavior
August 31, 2020
Dark patterns in software can be found. What about dark patterns in artificial intelligence libraries and apps? The problem is likely to be difficult if not impossible, particularly if those trying to figure out the AI’s process are not well informed.
“All That Glitters Is Not Gold: Misuse of AI by Big Tech Can Harm Developing Countries” provides some information into a facet of smart software not often considered by users, API users, or regulators. The write up states:
The biggest concern with AI is a lack of governance, which gives large companies (popularly called as the “Big Tech”) unlimited access to private data.
That’s a safe statement. The write up continues:
In his study, Dr, Truby [Qatar University] discusses three examples to show how unregulated AI can be detrimental to SDGs. To begin with, he focuses on SDG 16, a goal that was developed to tackle corruption, organized crime, and terrorism. He explains that because AI is commonly used in national security databases, it can be misused by criminals to launder money or organize crime. This is especially relevant in developing countries, where input data may be easily accessible because of poor protective measures. Dr Truby suggests that, to prevent this, there should be a risk assessment at each stage of AI development. Moreover, the AI software should be designed such that it is inaccessible when there is a threat of it being hacked. Such restrictions can minimize the risk of hackers obtaining access to the software.
According to the write up, Dr. Truby asserts:
He concludes, “The risks of AI to the society and the possible detriments to sustainable development can be severe if not managed correctly. On the flip side, regulating AI can be immensely beneficial to development, leading to people being more productive and more satisfied with their employment and opportunities.”
Scrutiny is likely in some countries. In others, the attitude is, “How are my investments doing today?”
Stephen E Arnold, August 31, 2020
Google: We Are the Web. You Really Did Not Know, Did You?
August 31, 2020
Years ago I wrote three monographs about Google. The publisher, now defunct, sold these books after I recycled research paid for and delivered to several clients. The books explored the technologies was developing to redefine what in 2004 to 2008 was the World Wide Web. I included diagrams of a Google walled garden. I explained how Google’s page reconstruction inventions cobbled together data from different sources to create a Google version of content. Heck, I even included the dossier example from a Google patent.
The figure comes from US20070198481. Note that the machine generated dossier includes nicknames, contact information, ethnicity, and other interesting items of information culled from multiple sources and presented in a police report format. The “Maps and Pictures” label is linked to Google Maps.
The patent drawing presented a photo, key facts, and other information about an entity (in this case a person Michael Jackson, the songster). No one paid much attention. One book was circulated within a government agency, but the “real” journalists who requested review copies did zippo with the information.
I spotted a post on Slashdot titled “Brave Complains Google’s Newly Proposed Web Bundles Standard Would Make URLs Meaningless.” Welcome to the reality of the walled garden concept I explained about 15 years ago. The Slashdot post is here and the Brave post is here.
The hiding of PDF urls was one “enhancement” Google introduced several years ago. Researchers who need to document the location of a source document have to use services like URL Clean in order to identify the source of a document, including documents created by US government agencies like DARPA and the CIA. Hey, that’s helpful, Google.
The url masking was little more than an experiment, and it provided the Google with useful data which allows the next “walled garden” architectural enhancement to be scheduled.
Urls from Google are the source.
Why the time lag of a decade? Despite the perception that Google is a disorganized, chaotic outfit, there are some deeper trends which persist through time. These Brin-Page ideas, like the Elliott wave theory, Google becoming the Web is reaching another crest.
Is it too late? Gentle reader, it was too late a decade ago. A lack of meaningful regulation and the emergence of an information monoculture has ceded provenance to Google and a handful of other companies. One does not live in a country. One lives in a dataverse owned, shaped, and controlled by a commercial enterprise.
That’s why it makes zero difference what government officials try to do, the Google is in place and simply enhancing its walled garden, its revenue capability, and its control. Since few online consumers know how to vet sources and validate information, why not trust Google?
And where do the regulators get their information? Why from Google, of course. Logical. And logic is right.
Stephen E Arnold, September 3, 2020
Another Data Marketplace: Amazon, Microsoft, Oracle, or Other Provider for This Construct?
August 31, 2020
The European Union is making a sharp U-turn on data privacy, we learn from MIT Technology Review’s article, “The EU Is Launching a Market for Personal Data. Here’s What That Means for Privacy.” The EU has historically protected its citizens’ online privacy with vigor, fighting tooth and nail against the commercial exploitation of private information. As of February, though, the European Commission has decided on a completely different data strategy (PDF). Reporter Anna Artyushina writes:
“The Trusts Project, the first initiative put forth by the new EU policies, will be implemented by 2022. With a €7 million [8.3 million USD] budget, it will set up a pan-European pool of personal and nonpersonal information that should become a one-stop shop for businesses and governments looking to access citizens’ information. Global technology companies will not be allowed to store or move Europeans’ data. Instead, they will be required to access it via the trusts. Citizens will collect ‘data dividends,’ which haven’t been clearly defined but could include monetary or nonmonetary payments from companies that use their personal data. With the EU’s roughly 500 million citizens poised to become data sources, the trusts will create the world’s largest data market. For citizens, this means the data created by them and about them will be held in public servers and managed by data trusts. The European Commission envisions the trusts as a way to help European businesses and governments reuse and extract value from the massive amounts of data produced across the region, and to help European citizens benefit from their information.”
It seems shifty they have yet to determine just how citizens will benefit from this data exploitation, I mean, value-extraction. There is no guarantee people will have any control over their information, and there is currently no way to opt out. This change is likely to ripple around the world, as the way EU approaches data regulation has long served as an example to other countries.
The concept of data trusts has been around since 2018, when Sir Tim Berners Lee proposed it. Such a trust could be for-profit, for a charitable cause, or simply for data storage and protection. As Artyushina notes, whether this particular trust actually protects citizens depends on the wording of its charter and the composition of its board of directors. See the article for examples of other trusts gone wrong, as well as possible solutions. Let us hope this project is set up and managed in a way that puts citizens first.
Cynthia Murrell, August 31, 2020
Dark Patterns: Is the Future of Free Video Editing Software Duplicity, Carelessness, and Indifference?
August 31, 2020
One of the DarkCyber team suggested a run down of three free video editing software solutions. We had just finished a couple of our for-fee write ups about technology related to warfighting, and I concluded that the group wanted a break from million watt beam weapons.
I said, “Okay, just use a machine we don’t rely on for real work.” Stephanie was thrilled when Ben said he would help. The three “free” software solutions these two set about installing were:
DaVinci Resolve, allegedly “the standard for high end post production and finishing on more Hollywood feature films, television shows and commercials than any other software.” You can get a free copy at this link. (There is a $300 version too.)
HitFilm Express, allegedly “a free video editing software with professional-grade VFX tools and everything you need to make awesome content, films or gaming videos.” You can get a free copy at this link.
Shotcut, a free, open source, cross platform video editor. You can get a copy at this link.
We never got to the review. We were trapped in what sure looks like the FXHome / HitFilm Express dark pattern. It was a swamp populated by creatures dependent on auto reply email, bizarre instructions, and names like “Dibs” and “Joe.” So wholesome, yet so frustrating despite the friendly monikers.
This blog post is about dark patterns, not the video editing software. Sorry, Stephanie (the team member who cooked up the idea for the story.) Read on to find out why DarkCyber cares about a single firm and its enthusiastic pursuit of dark patterns.
The illustration below is a depiction of Dante’s Inferno. About eight layers down is the Dark Pattern of FXHome. That’s better than spending every day, all day with Beelzebub and the gang.
What’s a dark pattern?
The phrase means, according to the ever reliable Wikipedia, “A user interface that has been carefully crafted to trick users into doing things, such as buying insurance with their purchase or signing up for recurring bills.”
Stephanie tried to install the software and was greeted with a Web page presenting her with options to upgrade the free software by purchasing $25 to $50 dollar bundles of macros and pre-sets. Puzzled, she retrieved the details for the accounts we use to purchase software, pay for subscriptions, and buy crap from Amazon.
I ignored her grumbling, but I noticed when two of my engineers were standing behind her staring at the screen and getting that weird look in their eyes when something does not compute. I walked over to the group and said, “When will you finish your reviews of these three tools?”
Stephanie said, “I am running behind. I spent yesterday and today trying to get the software to work. Apparently someone installed a version of HitFilm Express last year, and now FXHome took the money, sent a series of steps, and nothing works.”
I said, “Okay, write the company. Explain what happened and get help to install the software.”
My two engineers nodded and walked away. This, in my experience, meant that the HitFilm Express software was something that presented numerous challenges. Researching and analyzing EMP technology was more appealing than not-so-free software.
I told Stephanie to give me the user name and password she used to buy the software. I happily logged in from a different machine, created a user name and password, saw the same difficult to evade plea to buy add-in packs, and I bought a $39 pack. The video editor came up but no add in software.
Now I was intrigued. Two installations. Almost $80US down a rat hole and no special add in packs. I told my engineers to log in, get the install information, and see if each could get the software to work.
Nope. FXHome has a system to take money. FXHome does not have a functional, reliable system to deliver what the customer purchased.
Now I am thinking cyber fraud. Call me silly, but I am a suspicious person, and when we write about next generation weapons, what type of customers do we have? Certainly not the Vatican or Green Peace.
I found a customer support email which is managed by “smart” software. The email to which I was directed is support@fxhome.com and along the line of a series of email exchanges over the span of nine days a human included his/her name. That individual identified himself/herself as Dibs McCallum.
The dark patterns we believe the user interface implements for the free software includes these elements:
- Blandishments to purchase upgrades before allowing downloads
- Instructions for installing software which do not install software
- Customer service interfaces intended to frustrate those seeking information; for example, the FXHome system strips attachments even though people or bots like Dibs McCallum request them and your truly attaches them. Even more dutifully I resend the attachments and receive zero acknowledgement or information about the failure.
Where am I? Well, definitely there is no review of FXHome. It is tough to write about software which does not function. The upside is that I have an anecdote for my next cyber crime lecture. As we were editing this story, PayPal reported a refund of $39. FXHome still has $39 and we have no functioning software.
When I step back and look at this series of events involving three of my team and the ever helpful Dibs McCallum, who insisted that attachments showing the unhelpful error messages HitFilm Express displayed, did not arrive.
Then there was this email:
Allow me to explain. You buy from us. If you want a refund within 14 days you get one.
That is why I have refunded both your order 0000000000000 for $39 that you made by credit card under the email seaky2000@yahoo.com and also your order 0000000000000 for $39 that you made via PayPal that you made under the email 00@arnoldit.com. Both amounts will appear in your prospective credit card and PayPal statements within the next 5-10 working days. Though most likely far sooner. This does mean your software packs will no longer work of course. Those effects will be deactivated and you are left with the free HitFilm Express without the extra content. It is always best to remember what email you use for purchases as it can be confusing if you habitually use more than one email. We are always dealing with this confusion with customers. Very common.
Best Regards, Joe Gould, Business Coordinator
Notice the phrase “We are always dealing with this confusion”.
Yeah, Joe said, “Always.” What’s that old saw about doing the same thing over and over? Was it ground hog day or one of Dante’s circles of Hell?
The dark pattern is apparently accidental. A situation exists which creates an “always” situation. Why not figure out changes to the system to eliminate an “always” problem. Why not think through making the interface work with a customer, not against the customer. Why not skip the “buy more add in packs”? Just charge people money.
What’s free mean? Upsells, confusing purchase options, and a “system” designed to make the craziness of Microsoft customer support for non-installable $0.99 HEVC codecs look like a paragon of lucidity.
One answer is that it earned this write up in Beyond Search and DarkCyber. It has converted sweet Stephanie into a termagant and HitFilm Express hater. (Good work that.)
Observations:
- Generating sustainable revenue is difficult. If a product is “good,” people will pay for it. If a product is not so good, carelessness, indifference, or laziness generates “buy this, then that” solutions. Helpful? Not so much. Suggestion for FXHome: Less weird orange color and more begging for dollar options like Indiegogo or Patreon, among others?
- Competing against Adobe, Apple, Magix, and other for-fee video editing programs is difficult. Yes, DarkCyber understands that FXHome needs revenue. Suggestion: Why not sell a subscription to upgrades?
- Relying on an interface and the people who conceived it may not be a winning tactic. Staff changes and additional inputs may provide the creative spark that moves beyond what sure look like dark patterns. Suggestion: Skip the hear, speak, and see no evil approach to your current upgrade interface. Listen and fix the problem. “Always”. Wow, that’s an endorsement of clear thinking.
Is DarkCyber suspicious? Yep. FXHome could be a YouTube video titled UXMoan.
Stephen E Arnold, August 31, 2020
No Return of the JEDI for Amazon
August 31, 2020
i read “Conflict of Interest? We’ve Heard of It. AWS on Selection Panel to Choose UK.gov’s Chief Digi [sic] Officer.” The main point of the article, which I assume is accurate, is that AWS UK top dog Doug Gurr will sit on a committee responsible for choosing the UK’s next chief digital officer. The Register article provides links and contextual information. Helpful.
However, the write up does not address what DarkCyber’s research team is the reason for the SugarDaddy.com approach to providing input. Is it possible that Amazon’s top dogs remember the significant and somewhat humiliating defeat delivered right between the eyes of the tag team of Jeff Bezos and Teresa Carlson, world’s richest human and former head of Microsoft governmental sales respectively?
Losing that work has already had a negative impact on Amazon’s policeware business and dims its hoped for incursions into adjacent services; for example, processing IRS tax returns to identify possibly fraudulent claims. Microsoft has had the original idea of stepping up competitive pressure in Middle Eastern countries which AWS has worked hard to move to these nation states’ technological futures. Yikes.
Net net: Amazon is doing what it can to make sure there will be no return of the JEDI.
Stephen E Arnold, August 31, 2020
Xoogler Awakes to a Reality: How about That?
August 30, 2020
Navigate to “Eric Schmidt: China Could Be AI’s Superpower If We Don’t Act Now.” The point of the write up seems to be to overlook the obvious. Mr. Schmidt was the “adult” at Google. He is now the technical advisor to the board of Alphabet where he was formerly the executive chairman. As executive chairman, he was responsible for the external matters of all of the holding company’s businesses, including Google Inc., advising their CEOs and leadership on business and policy issues.
Based on the information in the article, he seems to be going into full pundit mode.
Google and China. Advisor to Alphabet’s Board. Yep, telling the US China could be a leader in artificial intelligence. Perfect for 2020, a year of novelties.
I want to point out that an AI hot spot in China is Tsinghua University. This means that if the information in “Tsinghua University Plans to Open AI Research Center in China, Names Google’s AI Chief as Advisor” is accurate, Mr. Schmidt may want to focus on sending his message directly to Google.
The interview is just about as 2020 as Palantir’s insistence that it is not a Silicon Valley type outfit.
Yes, 2020. A good year for insights and interesting information.
Oh, Jeff Dean? He’s one of the serious engineers at the Google. BigTable, Chubby, and more, particularly in the smart software realm. Perhaps he is advising Tsinghua University on recipes, once an interest of the person who may be the smartest Googler in the collection of wizards.
This AI thing. Is Google helping out China in its AI efforts? Good question. Maybe a Sillycon Valley journalist will do some investigative reporting? Nah, it’s 2020. Redefine reality.
Stephen E Arnold, August 30, 2020
Forget Structured Query Language Commands? Yeah, Not Yet
August 29, 2020
One of the DarkCyber team spotted a demonstration service called NatualSQL.com. The idea is that the system will accept natural language queries of information stored in structured databases. According to the DarkCyber person, the queries launched into the natural language box were:
Sheva War with Whom
Sheva Frequency
The sparse interface sports a Content button which displays the information in the system.
How did this work?
Not well. NLP systems pose challenges still it seems.
Interesting idea but some rough edges need a bit of touch up.
Stephen E Arnold, August 29, 2020
Technical Debt: Nope, It Exists and That Debt Means Operational Poverty, Then Death
August 28, 2020
“Technical Debt Doesn’t Exist” is an interesting view of software. The problem is that “technology” is not just software. The weird behavior of an Adobe application like Framemaker can be traced to the program’s Unix roots. But why, one asks, is it so darned difficult to manage colors in a program intended to print documents with some parts in color? What about the mysterious behavior of Windows 10 when a legal installation collects $0.99 cents for an HEVC codec only to report that the codec cannot be installed? What about the enterprise application from OpenText cannot display a document recently displayed to the user of the content management system? Are these problems due to careless programming?
According to the article:
There is no such thing as technical debt. There is work to do, that we can agree on, but it’s not debt payment.
The punch line for the write up is that technical debt is just maintenance.
Let’s think about this.
The constraints of Framemaker result from its Unix roots. Now decades later, those roots still exist. Like the original i2 Analyst’s Notebook (a policeware system), some functions were constrained by the lovely interaction of the hardware, the operating system, and the code. The Unix touches remain today: Enter Escape O P C and the list of styles pop up. Yep, commands from 40 years ago are still working and remain inscrutable to anyone trying to learn the program. Why aren’t there changes? Adobe tried and ended up with InDesign. I would suggest that the cost of “fixing up” Framemaker were too high if Adobe could corral engineers who could do the job. Framemaker, therefore, is still around, but it is an orphan and a problematic one at that.
What about Microsoft and a codec? The fact that Microsoft makes a free version available for a person willing to put in the time to locate the HEVC download is one thing. Charging $0.99 for a codec which cannot be installed is another. Figuring out the unknown and unanticipated interactions among video hardware, software in the Windows 10 fun house, and third-party software is too expensive. What’s the fix? Ignore the problem. Put out some marketing baloney and tell the human doing customer support to advise the person with the failed codec to reinstall Windows. Yeah, right. A problem exists that will be around for exactly as long as there is Windows 10.
What about the OpenText content management system? We encountered this problem when trying to figure out why users of the system could not locate a file which had been saved the previous day. We poked around the hardware; we poked around the content management system; we poked around the search system which turned out to be an Autonomy stub. Yep, Autonomy search was “in” the OpenText system. The issue was the interaction of the Autonomy search system first crafted in the late 1990s, the content management system which OpenText bought from a vendor, and the hardware used to run the system. Did OpenText care? Nope, not at all. Open a file and wait 15 minutes. And what about the missing file? Updates sat in a queue and usually took place a couple of days after the Save command was issued. The fix? Ho ho ho.
Let me be clear: When a system is coded and it sort of works, that system is deployed. If a problem surfaces quickly, the vendor will have someone fix it. If it is a big problem, maybe two or three people will work on the issue. Whatever must be done to get the phone to stop ringing, the email to stop arriving, and angry customers to stop having their lawyers write nasty grams will be done. Then it is over. No one will go back and figure out what went wrong, make fixes, and dutifully put the ship in proper shape. The mistake is embedded in digital amber and the “fix” is part of the woodwork. How often do you look at the plumbing connections from the outside water line to your hot water heater. What happens when there’s a leak? A fix is made and then forget it.
What about technical debt? The behaviors I have described mean that systems persist through time. The systems are not refactored or “fixed”. The systems are just patched. Amazon enshrines this process in its two pizza teams. And how about the documentation for the fixes made on Saturday morning at 3 am? Ho ho ho.
Let me offer some observations:
- Significant changes to software today are mostly cosmetic, what I call wrappers. The problems remain but their pointy parts are blunted.
- The cost of making fundamental changes are beyond the reach of even the largest and most resource rich organizations.
- The humans required to figure out where the problem is and make structural changes are almost impossible for most technologies.
The article calls this maintenance. I think that’s an okay word, but the reality is that today’s software, particular software based on recycled libraries, existing systems accessed via application programming interfaces, and hardware with components with checkered or unknown pasts are not going to be “fixed.”
We live in an era of “good enough.”
The technical debt is going to catch up to those who sell and develop products. Users are already paying the price.
What happens if one pushes technical debt into tomorrow or next week?
That’s an easy question to answer. The vaunted “user experience” becomes more like a carnival act while the behind the scenes activity is less and less savory. How about those mandatory updates which delete photos, kill a Mac desktop, or allow a mobile phone to go dead because of a bug? The new normal.
It’s just maintenance. We know how much bean counters like to allocate cash for maintenance. Operational poverty, then the death of innovation.
Stephen E Arnold, August 28, 2020
About Process IBM and Intel Chips: Lame and Lamer?
August 28, 2020
AnandTech published “TSMC Details 3nm Process Technology: Full Node Scaling for 2H22 Volume Production.” Most people don’t know a nanometer from a Gen X tweeter. No crazy physics required for this post. What’s important are these two “big” announcements from US technology companies who are in the CPU business.
The first announcement is from Intel. That’s the outfit with the Horse Collar quantum computing thing. No, you can’t get one yet, maybe ever. Who really knows? Intel is now going to ship CPUs using 10 nm process technology with modern with it process technology scheduled for 2021. Let’s go with 7nm. I like assuming that Intel will catch up with AMD Ryzen 3000s. For “color”, you may enjoy this NYT write up about the Intel Inside crowd. Prepare to pay for “all the news,” of course.
The second announcement is from Big Blue. That’s the outfit with IBM Watson which also sells mainframes. (Thank goodness for the RedHat acquisition.) You can now purchase the really popular Power9 CPUs fabbed at 14nm.
So what?
If TSMC does move to 3nm in 2022, will IBM and Intel have a horse in the race? Moving the wonderful Intel architecture to parity with AMD has been — how shall I phrase it — a long, painful journey in a Yugo.
IBM has to move from 14nm to 3nm. Hey, just ask Watson how to pull this off.
With ARM, Amazon, and Chinese CPU outfits pushing in new directions, perhaps one should consult the oracle at Delphi about the future business opportunities for IBM and Intel. Pigeons work. Moving to more modern, energy efficient, and sometimes speedier CPUs may be a challenge. Where did that pigeon go? Taiwan and South Korea where the fabs are?
Stephen E Arnold, August 28, 2020
Google: High School Science Club Management Method Disclosed
August 28, 2020
Navigate to “Unredacted Suit Shows Google’s Own Engineers Confused by Privacy Settings.” I remember my high school science club in 1958. Quite a group of bright, entitled, arrogant, and clueless individuals. Of course, I was a member, and I had zero idea why the seniors wanted to set off stink bombs in the chemistry lab, splice into the loud speaker system to play rock and roll at 7:45 am, and rig the auditorium microphones to generate chuckle inducing feedback. Ho, ho, ho.
If the information in the referenced article is accurate, a similar approach is operative at the Google. I suppose one could view the statements about confusing interfaces, words that mean one thing to a normal human and something else to a wizard, and the panic which sets in when the Science Club is caught in a dark pattern.
I’m not amused. The article documents how running a company which controls information behaves… just like a high school science club. Ho ho ho. Isn’t this amusing? Actually. No. The Twitter clown car may be pulling into the drive in front of the Google dinosaur skeleton right now.
Stephen E Arnold, August 28, 2020
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
