Italy Gets in on the Trend: Apple and Amazon Fined
November 26, 2021
I spotted this ABC News item “Italian Competition Watchdog Fines Apple, Amazon $225M.” The “m” means million,” not macaroni, which is shaped like a small tube, not a big tube like the money pipes running into these estimable firms.
The ABC News report asserts:
Italy’s antitrust watchdog has fined Apple and Amazon a total of more than 200 million euros ($225 million) for cooperating to restrict competition in the sale of Apple and Beats branded products in violation of European Union rules.
Yep, headphones and “cooperating to restrict competition.” But headphones.
With Apple’s concern for the rights of its iPhone customers in the wake of the NSO Group’s unending publicity, it is delightful to note that Apple is a colluder.
What’s better? A friendly Amazon deal or a company which licenses its software to governments which pretty much do as they darn well please?
I think that the two actions are very much like a photo finish horse race? Too close to call.
Stephen E Arnold, November 25, 2021
Value Decisions and the Silicon Valley Approach to Business Ethics
November 26, 2021
I read “Neurobiologist Reveal How Value Decisions Are Coded into Our Brains.” This research project suggests that smart software might be infused with similar functionality. My question, “Who’s doing the training?” The research paper ignores this type of question.
The authors/researchers have focused on an area within the cerebrum called the retrosplenial cortex. The write up states:
The RSC they found, is the site that we use to make value choices such as which restaurant we decide to visit for tonight’s dinner. We then update the RSC with fresh information based on the new impressions of how much we enjoyed the evening’s soup and pasta.
A quick question: If scientists know the region, is it possible to plant a Musk-esque implant in the brains of certain Silicon Valley high technology luminaries. Then, using appropriate signals, could someone pump the contents of a small collection of books related to ethical behavior, moral choice, and judicious decision making?
It has been obvious to me for years that university educations or, in the case of some high tech luminaries, hanging out with people who did attend esteemed institutions like the Epstein funded Massachusetts Institute of Technology, don’t do a good job with the ethics and morality cognitive functions.
Greed is good is a snappy phrase, and it seems to be the mantra of a coterie of digital wizards who like to win when playing Monopoly with their family.
Let’s give the implant some thought and work on the morality input functionality. Oh, oh, one problem. What if these luminaries don’t have a well formed retrosplenial cortex? Bummer.
Stephen E Arnold, November 26, 2021
Facebook and Smoothing Data
November 26, 2021
I like this headline: “The Thousands of Vulnerable People Harmed by Facebook and Instagram Are Lost in Meta’s Average User Data.” Here’s a passage I noticed:
consider a world in which Instagram has a rich-get-richer and poor-get-poorer effect on the well-being of users. A majority, those already doing well to begin with, find Instagram provides social affirmation and helps them stay connected to friends. A minority, those who are struggling with depression and loneliness, see these posts and wind up feeling worse. If you average them together in a study, you might not see much of a change over time.
The write up points out:
The tendency to ignore harm on the margins isn’t unique to mental health or even the consequences of social media. Allowing the bulk of experience to obscure the fate of smaller groups is a common mistake, and I’d argue that these are often the people society should be most concerned about. It can also be a pernicious tactic. Tobacco companies and scientists alike once argued that premature death among some smokers was not a serious concern because most people who have smoked a cigarette do not die of lung cancer.
I like the word “pernicious.” But the keeper is “cancer.” The idea is, it seems to me, that Facebook – sorry, meta — is “cancer.” Cancer is A term for diseases in which abnormal cells divide without control and can invade nearby tissues. Cancer evokes a particularly sonorous word too: Malignancy. Indeed the bound phrase when applied to one’s great aunt is particularly memorable; for example, Auntie has a malignant tumor.
Is Facebook — sorry, Meta — is smoothing numbers the way the local baker applies icing to a so-so cake laced with a trendy substances like cannabutter and cannaoil? My hunch is that dumping outliers, curve fitting, and subsetting data are handy little tools.
What’s the harm?
Stephen E Arnold, November 26, 2021
Silicon Valley Journalism Turkey Day Delight
November 25, 2021
Okay, grandma has arrived in an ambulance, and she has a fresh oxygen tank. Rudy and Trudy, your brother’s twins, have turned up in sweatshirts with turkey leg prints on the front and back of the shirts, and the crazy neighbor has wandered over to just “be there.” Your sister’s three children aged 12, 16, and 19 have occupied the family room. Each is deep into their iPhones, which respect their privacy, of course. Your mom and dad are in the kitchen doing mom and dad things and exchanging silent eye signals about the disaster the turkey will be. Then…
The 16 year old shows anyone who will look this Wired article “Best Black Friday Deals on Sex Toys, Vibrators, and Harnesses.” Here’s the screen capture of this journalistic gem which captures the essence of the Silicon Valley ethos:
The 19 year old observes, “My roommate uses the turkey leg.”
The 12 year old notes, “My best friend has a whip and a slave chair.”
Grandma rips the iPhone from her beloved grandchild and says, “How do I order with this iPhone?”
Yes, be thankful for Silicon Valley real journalism. Any questions?
Stephen E Arnold, November 25, 2021
Quantum Supremacy Questioned
November 25, 2021
IBM is the quantum supremacist. Google was the previous quantum cage match PR champ. What’s up with quantum supremacy other than buzzwords, public relations hoo hah, and worry lines that encryption will die?
An interesting take on the Google quantum thing appears in “Math May Have Caught Up with Google’s Quantum-Supremacy Claims.” The article is a gilding of a tidy green sward with a couple of Swiss Fleckvieh contributions steaming in the morning sun.
The write up reports:
Google chose a very specific method of computing the expected behavior of its processor, but there are other ways of doing equivalent computations. Over the intervening time, a few options have been explored that do perform better. Now, Feng Pan, Keyang Chen, and Pan Zhang are describing a specific method that allows a GPU-based cluster to produce an equivalent output in only 15 hours. Run it on a leading supercomputer, and they estimate that it would outperform the Sycamore quantum processor.
Parse this and then summarize: Google pulled a high school science club method from its hip pocket.
I also noted this statement in the write up:
In our chat with Darío Gil, head of IBM research, he dismissed the idea of quantum supremacy and instead focused on getting to what he termed quantum advantage: where quantum computers consistently outperform classical ones on problems that are useful for companies. So, unless someone else wants to pay IBM to reserve the time needed to perform Google’s computations on IBM’s hardware, this is likely to get fairly academic.
One tiny problem: IBM seems to imply that it’s the big dog in quantum computing if I understand the information in “First Quantum Computer to Pack 100 Qubits Enters Crowded Race.”
Yep, got it.
Stephen E Arnold, November 25, 2021
Ask Jeeves Has a Younger Cousin, Ask Jarvis
November 25, 2021
Ask Jeeves.com was a “smart” online search engine. The name lives on in Ask.com. Who remembers? No one. No matter. The younger cousin is now available. Ask Jarvis is “an AI code assistant developed by Assistiv.ai.” The idea is that a hard working developer handling a full time job via Zoom and working on numerous side gigs needs help. Just ask Jarvis when you need a programming tip or a chunk of a manpage. You can find the Web page at https://askjarvis.io. Is it the rule based wonder of the original smart Ask Jeeves.com? Nope, this is an artificial intelligence / machine learning 2021 search system with natural language “powered by OpenAI codex, a descendant of GPT-3.” Years ago this would have been labeled a vertical search engine. Today? I am not sure.
Stephen E Arnold, November 25, 2021
Apple Cores the PR in PRivacy
November 24, 2021
I learned that Apple will allow a person purchasing an iPhone to try and repair it. Ho ho ho. Now Apple, which probably pays zero attention to the data flowing into its servers, wants to protect iPhone users’ privacy. (Are you paying attention, Google?) But there is a remarkable announcement.
Apple is taking NSO Group to court. Bold.
“Apple Sues NSO Group to Curb the Abuse of State-Sponsored Spyware” declares:
Apple today filed a lawsuit against NSO Group and its parent company to hold it accountable for the surveillance and targeting of Apple users. The complaint provides new information on how NSO Group infected victims’ devices with its Pegasus spyware. To prevent further abuse and harm to its users, Apple is also seeking a permanent injunction to ban NSO Group from using any Apple software, services, or devices.
NSO Group has been beavering away for a few years — 11 to be more precise. And where was Apple one or two years ago? Where was Apple five years ago? Yeah, Apple was not facing pressure from game developers, right to repair outfits, and elected officials.
Is it just my imagination or is Apple taking “bold” actions to demonstrate its true spirit and high moral standards?
Yeah, NSO Group and Apple. Litigation. Protecting iPhone users. I am not impressed yet. Good to its very core. Now how much is that weird little warmer thing one needs to unglue an iPhone? What about that outstanding iTunes software which just does not like old iPods? What about the iPad weirdness that wants to restore an iPad with an iPhone 8 back up? Yeah.
Stephen E Arnold, November 24, 2021
Apple Podcast Ratings: A Different Angle
November 24, 2021
I read “Apple Podcasts App Ratings Flip after the Company Starts Prompting Users.” The write up explains that Apple’s podcast application was receiving the rough equivalent of a D or D- from its users. How did Apple fix this? Some big monopolies wou8ld have just had an intern enter the desired number. This works with search results pages on some Web and enterprise search systems. Not Apple. The write up reports:
The iPhone maker told The Verge that iOS 15.1 started prompting users for ratings and reviews “just like most third-party apps.” However, many people thought they were rating the show they were listening to, not the app — and that led to a flood of scores and reviews for podcasts.
Two points:
- Users were confused
- Prompts sparked ratings.
I interpreted this information to mean that users are not too swift even thought Apple’s high priced products are supposed to appeal to the swift and sure. Second, the prompts caused an immediate user reaction at least for some of the app’s users.
My takeaway: Online services can cause behaviors. Power in the hands of the just and true or evidence of the impact of digital nudges? Do higher ratings improve the app? Probably not.
Stephen E Arnold, November 24, 2021
Recognition (People and Things) Not 100 Percent Yet
November 24, 2021
It may sound like a good idea—use technology to find illegal images, like those of child sexual abuse, and report the criminals who perpetuate them. Apple, for example, proposed placing such a tool on all its personal devices but postponed the plan due to privacy concerns. And some law enforcement agencies are reportedly considering using the technology. However, researchers at the Imperial College London have found “Proposed Illegal Image Detectors on Devices Are ‘Easily Fooled’.” Reporter Caroline Brogan writes:
“Researchers who tested the robustness of five similar algorithms found that altering an ‘illegal’ image’s unique ‘signature’ on a device meant it would fly under the algorithm’s radar 99.9 per cent of the time. The scientists behind the peer-reviewed study say their testing demonstrates that in its current form, so-called perceptual hashing based client-side scanning (PH-CSS) algorithms will not be a ‘magic bullet’ for detecting illegal content like CSAM [Child Sexual Abuse Material] on personal devices. It also raises serious questions about how effective, and therefore proportional, current plans to tackle illegal material through on-device scanning really are. The findings are published as part of the USENIX Security Conference in Boston, USA. Senior author Dr Yves-Alexandre de Montjoye, of Imperial’s Department of Computing and Data Science Institute, said: ‘By simply applying a specifically designed filter mostly imperceptible to the human eye, we misled the algorithm into thinking that two near-identical images were different. Importantly, our algorithm is able to generate a large number of diverse filters, making the development of countermeasures difficult. Our findings raise serious questions about the robustness of such invasive approaches.’”
The write-up includes several examples of (innocuous) images before and after such cloaking filters were applied. They are less crisp, to be sure, but still clear as day to the human eye. The research team has wisely decided not to make their filtering technique public lest bad actors use it to fool PH-CSS algorithms. Their results do make one wonder if the use of these detection tools is worth the privacy trade-off. Perhaps not, at least until the algorithms learn to interpret filtered photos.
Cynthia Murrell, November 23, 2021
YouTube: Helping Out TikTok
November 23, 2021
I read “YouTube Co-Founder Predicts Decline of the Platform Following Removal f Dislikes.” The write up includes information from “co founder Jawed Karim.” Here’s a statement I circled in blue:
Jawed Karim, the third co-founder of YouTube, has condemned the platform’s removal of public dislike counts on videos, suggesting that the change will lead to YouTube’s decline.
There’s other information in the write up. However, I think the decline of YouTube may take a long, long time. Don’t get me wrong. The Google is annoying me and maybe one or two other people with some of its “business” actions; for example:
- Advertising on YouTube videos. More ads are appearing and soon some YouTube content will take less time to view than the ads.
- Advertising which is off the mark. I know that some thing my ability to write is terrible. Nevertheless, displaying ads for Grammarly multiple times a day is unlikely to have a return for anyone other than Google. Also, I am a Liberty Mutual customers. Too bad Google YouTube shows me multiple Liberty Mutual ads a day.
- Flawed search function. Try finding videos about a specific retired legionnaire who makes videos in German. Let me know how that works out for you.
- Crazy recommendations. We did a project related to a certain high profile content creator. I was then bombarded with suggestions for videos created by females living together in a van. Yeah, too bad the project ended months ago, but the Google YouTube does not forget.
Net net: The death of YouTube is going to take a while to arrive. The major factor in the decline will be one neither Mr. Karim nor I have yet mentioned.
What will do in the Tube?
TikTok. That’s a prediction in which I have about 60 percent confidence.
Stephen E Arnold, November 23, 2021
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
