Heads Up, Dark Overlord: Annoying the FBI May Not Be a Great Idea
November 19, 2021
Well this is embarrassing. The New York Post reports, “FBI Server Hacked, Spam Emails Sent to Over 100,000 People.” Writer Patrick Reilly tells us:
“The FBI’s email server was apparently hacked on Friday night to send threatening spam emails to over 100,000 people, the agency said. Authorities have not determined the sender or motive behind the rambling, incoherent emails, filled with technological nonsense. The emails warned receivers that their information may be under attack by Vinny Troia, famous hacker and owner of cybersecurity company Night Lion Security, in connection with notorious cybersecurity group TheDarkOverlord. The FBI confirmed the incident on Saturday, but said the hacked systems were ‘taken offline quickly,’ after it had been reported. ‘The FBI and CISA are aware of the incident this morning involving fake emails from an @ic.fbi.gov email account,’ the agency said in a statement. ‘This is an ongoing situation and we are not able to provide any additional information at this time. The impacted hardware was taken offline quickly upon discovery of the issue. We continue to encourage the public to be cautious of unknown senders and urge you to report suspicious activity ic3.gov or cisa.gov.’”
First reported by European nonprofit the Spamhaus Project, the emails came from an FBI server. Readers may recall TheDarkOverlord stole Netflix videos in 2017 and released them online as torrents after the streaming platform refused to pay the ransom. A year before that, the same outfit stole patient information (though, thankfully, not medical records) from three medical databases. Those groups also refused to give in to demands, so the hacker(s) sold the data from hundreds of thousands of patients on the Dark Web. If this attack is indeed the work of TheDarkOverlord, we wonder what the outfit expects will happen when annoying a quite capable entity. I have an anecdote for my lectures. That’s a plus for me.
Cynthia Murrell November 19, 2021
Enough of the Meta, Meta, Meta Stuff, Please
November 19, 2021
Facebook recently decided to rename itself Meta in an attempt to appeal to younger demographics. The move has not been met with positive results, but Facebook is hoping a new move with its ads will. Market Beat explains the new change with Facebook’s ads in, “Facebook Parent Meta To Remove Sensitive Ad Categories.” Meta wants Facebook to remove the its targeted ad option for health, ethnicity, political affiliations, religions, and sexual orientations.
The current ad system tracks user activity and sends users targeted ads on the platform based on topics that interest then. Meta will definitely lose profits:
“Meta Platforms Inc. said in a blog post Tuesday that the decision was ‘not easy and we know this change may negatively impact some businesses and organizations.’ Shares of the company closed at $335.37 Tuesday, down almost 1%. ‘Some of our advertising partners have expressed concerns about these targeting options going away because of their ability to help generate positive societal change, while others understand the decision to remove them,’ wrote Graham Mudd, vice president of marketing and ads. ‘Like many of our decisions, this was not a simple choice and required a balance of competing interests where there was advocacy in both directions.’”
Facebook’s ads have generated negative publicity in the past. Facebook ads notoriously upset the 2016 US presidential election and spread misinformation regarding vaccinations. Meta Platforms does not want Facebook’s targeted system to discriminate against all individuals.
Why is Meta being more responsible than Facebook? Was a name change the only thing required to overhaul a poor ad system? Meta might be rushing to fix problems now, but the company is already facing lots of lawsuits for its fast indiscretions.
Whitney Grace, November 19, 2021
Is Patent Law Transparency Is an Oxymoron?
November 18, 2021
Here’s a quote for you:
patent examiners were being guided to flout the Supreme Court.
Who is writing this? A crazed and unappreciated patent attorney? A mechanical engineer who thought working on patents would be fun? A zonked out MBA who thought that cutting and pasting from random patents would result in an award?
Nope.
The statement comes from the Public Interest Patent Law Institute. You can read the article with that statement on the Piplius Web site or just click this link: “Patent Office Secrets Revealed!”
I have looked at a handful of patents, and I thank my lucky stars for blunting my interest in becoming a legal eagle. But even a clueless person like myself marvels at some of the patents granted. Let me cite one example. Banjo (now SafeX) went on a patent filing spree. Some of those patents explain the fancy math used in the Banjo / SafeX system. Does the patent cover the information in those novel inventions? My reaction is, “What the heck?”
The Piplius (I love that made up word) write up says:
The secret guidance concerns the application of the part of the Patent Act that prohibits patents on abstract ideas, laws of nature, and natural phenomena. The Supreme Court has repeatedly upheld this prohibition. Each time, it has emphasized that patents combining these categories of subject matter with generic or conventional components are invalid.
So what? The write up says:
The Patent Office cannot retract unlawfully granted patents, but it can and must prevent such patents from being granted in the future. It can do so easily by re-instating the guidance the last Director unilaterally rescinded. That guidance is consistent with Supreme Court precedent and fully open to the public. The next Patent Office Director can and must restore it.
How many patents may have been processed so that laws were allegedly violated? My thought is that an eager first year at one of the estimable law schools might look into this question. On second thought, nah, who cares unless it is billable. But I chuckle at the notion of secret procedures.
Stephen E Arnold, November 18, 2021
Quantum Supremacy Is a Thing and IBM Now Has It
November 18, 2021
I read “IBM Achieves Quantum Supremacy: Announces 127-qubit “Eagle” Quantum Processor at Quantum Summit 2021.” Maybe this is indeed accurate. I would like to ask IBM Watson, “Is this IBM marketing talk, or has Big Blue aced the Google and legions of Chinese quantum engineers?”
The write up reports:
IBM expects to achieve a 1,121-qubit quantum processor – and quantum advantage – by 2023.
This statement seems different from the headline. In fact, I expect to be named the next 77 year old analyst flying into space in 2023. The problem is that “expect” and “do” are quite different things to me.
Not to IBM, at least according to the article which quotes and IBM’er as saying:
“The arrival of the ‘Eagle’ processor is a major step towards the day when quantum computers can outperform classical computers at meaningful levels,” said Dr. Darío Gil, Senior Vice President, IBM and Director of Research. “Quantum computing has the power to transform nearly every sector and help us tackle the biggest problems of our time. This is why IBM continues to rapidly innovate quantum hardware design, build ways for quantum and classical workloads to empower each other, and create a global ecosystem that is imperative to the adoption of quantum computing.”
Yep, marketing talk based on some lab experiments. That means no quantum computer on your desk in the near future. Quantum supremacy is here at least in IBM’s view of its capabilities.
Okay, Google and Chinese engineers. Back to work. The amusing but somewhat bittersweet IBM news has been lost in the endless flow of content marketing.
Stephen E Arnold, November 18, 2021
Google Knows How to Make You Smart. No, Really.
November 18, 2021
Think you’re pretty clever, do you? According to a recent study you may be mistaken, especially if you use Google often. MSN declares, “Googling Everything Making Us Think We’re Smarter than We Really Are.” Reporter Dan Avery explains:
“According to a new study out of the University of Texas at Austin, when people use Google to find information they become more confident in their ability to provide correct answers even without using the search tool. Researchers tested subjects on general knowledge, allowing them to answer questions using their own recollection or by googling the answers. Those who used Google didn’t just get more answers right—they were more certain they’d instinctively know the answers to other questions. In some cases, subjects would later believe they had just recalled information from memory when they had actually googled it. ‘When we’re constantly connected to knowledge, the boundaries between internal and external knowledge begin to blur and fade,’ study author Adrian Ward, a marketing professor at UT Austin’s McCombs School of Business, said in a release. ‘We mistake the internet’s knowledge for our own.’ … While humans have relied on books and other resources for information since the dawn of the written word, Ward said, the speed and seamlessness of googling can cause us to confuse information found online with stuff we had stored in our gray matter.”
Yikes—talk about fooling oneself. Avery frames the findings as a modern version of the Dunning-Kruger effect. For the study, Ward had subjects answer some questions with or without access to an online search. It is no surprise those who looked up the answers were more confident in their accuracy than those who had not. However, the googlers were also more confident in their own memories. Suspecting the speed of search may play a role, Ward built a 25-second delay into a version of Google. Those participants did not demonstrate the same overconfidence as the first group. Interesting.
Another tweak was to compare subjects searching with Google to those using the more wordy and context-rich Wikipedia. The Google users were less accurate, but more importantly they were more apt to attribute their answers to their own brains than to the search engine. Ward’s theory is the additional time spent discerning an answer at Wikipedia means users actually remember where the information came from. In his alarming words, “We’re seeing that [Google users] even forget that they googled a question.” Not good—as the researcher notes, such overconfidence in one’s own knowledge can lead to poor life decisions or to students spending less time studying than they should. Let’s consider social steering, the Google way.
Cynthia Murrell November 18, 2021
Metazuck Portal Go Is Yet Another Innovation for Kiddies
November 18, 2021
Facebook designed a new triangle shaped Portal Go for kids. The selling gimmick is that children can easily use it for video calling friends and family. There is one big drawback, Buzzfeed says in the article, “Facebook’s New Portal Go Is Nearly Perfect, Except It’s Horrible For Kids.” The biggest drawback is that it is yet another way for children to access unlimited, binge content through Facebook.
Video binging is a problem that kids have been doing since TV and movies were invented. The only problem with today’s binge videos is that they never stop. YouTube, Vimeo, and Facebook stream an endless supply of worthless content. The new Portal Go has a Watch feature where video callers can simultaneously watch the same thing. Binge watching can be disabled when the Portal Go is changed to Household Mode. During video calls, however, the Watch feature is still available. Facebook does plan to have a disable feature when it updates the Portal Go’s software, but:
“This is a perfect encapsulation of a recurring Facebook problem. The company creates a compelling product, something to like even if you don’t “like” Facebook (let me count the reasons why: 1, 2, 3…never mind). And then it tries to cram some other dreadful Facebook product down your throat along with it. Force-feeding Portal Go users a dogshit Watch experience is just another version of putting the Reels button in the center of Instagram, where the button to post a photo used to be, or prompting you to repost your Instagram Stories to Facebook Stories.”
Facebook does create reoccurring nightmares. Facebook new Portal Go needs a moral compass like every new piece of technology.
Whitney Grace, November 18, 2021
Giants of Social Media, Out of Touch, Are We?
November 17, 2021
Just a short item. I read “How to Hit the Top on Each Social Media Platform.” I ignored the how to part. I don’t want to hit the “top” on any social media platform. Not for this 77 year old, nope.
In the write up was a very suggestive item of information. Of course, I believe everything I read on the Internet. The statement which caught my attention was:
According to an Axios analysis of the top 50 most-followed accounts on each platform, TikTok is especially unique in minting its own stars who don’t blow up on other platforms.
- The top five most-followed accounts on TikTok — Charli D’Amelio, Khaby Lame, Addison Rae, Bella Poarch and Zach King — do not rank in the top 50 of any other social media network.
- Collectively, those five stars have 480 million followers on TikTok, but less than half of that amount of followers across Twitter, Instagram, YouTube and Facebook combined.
- Top TikTok personalities have been able to land massive Hollywood deals across film, TV and podcasts, without building audiences on other platforms.
If these data are accurate, it follows that “peak” US social media has come and is now officially going. The data, if on the money, suggest:
- Those with access to TikTok data have a valuable trove of signals. These can be used for many things; for example, which individual is most likely to have a predisposition to resist authority.
- A split between old school social media and new school social media is similar to the technical and intellectual bifurcation between those with traditional college educations and those who prefer short video content. Does this presage a new approach to thinking and decision making which outsiders may struggle to understand.
- The social damage sparked by old school social media platforms may be accelerated by the “velocity” and algorithmic steering of the TikTok type environment.
Now who owns TikTok? What outfits have access to these real time data? What managers have direct access to the stars identified as bright sparks in the TikTok universe? Time for some academics, real journalists, and researchers not accepting China centric funding to do some objective analysis.
Stephen E Arnold, November 17, 2021
Facebook: A Buckeye for Good Luck or Bad Zuck?
November 17, 2021
Facebook is an excellent example of what happens when a high school science club “we know a lot” mentality. The company has been quite successful. Its advertising is thriving. Its ageing user base shows no reluctance to check out pictures of their grandchildren. Enterprising vendors have found Facebook classifieds an idea way to sell a wide range of products.
The Ohio Attorney General, however, does not see these benefits as material. “Attorney General Yost Sues Facebook for Securities Fraud after Misleading Disclosures, Allegations of Harm to Children.” The write up states:
Zuckerberg and other company officials, the lawsuit maintains, knew that they were making false statements regarding the safety, security and privacy of its platforms. Facebook admitted in those internal documents that “We are not actually doing what we say we do publicly.”
Was their harm? The write up says:
In roughly a month, those revelations caused a devaluation in Facebook’s stock of $54.08 per share, causing OPERS and other Facebook investors to lose more than $100 billion. Yost’s lawsuit not only seeks to recover that lost value but also demands that Facebook make significant reforms to ensure it does not mislead the public about its internal practices.
The case will take time to resolve. Several observations:
- Other “funds” may find an idea or two in the Ohio matter. Science club wizards are not comfortable when the non-science club people pile on and try to take their lunch money and their golden apple. Maybe more AG actions?
- The focus on money is more compelling than harming Facebook users. Money is the catnip for some, including OPERS-type outfits.
- Quoting the Zuck may signal that luck is running out for the pioneer of many interactions.
Net net: Worth monitoring this matter. It may come to nothing. On the other hand it may come to some settlement, just smaller than $100 billion. Jail time? Interesting question.
Stephen E Arnold, November 16, 2021
Teens Protest Online: Social Media Feels the Chill
November 17, 2021
Facebook has created problems from the moment Zuckerberg released the social media platform. Facebook has contributed to human trafficking, child pornography, teen suicides, and widespread misinformation related to vaccines and politics. Facebook has also seen its users age with fewer young people interested in using the platform. Teen Vogue details how teens planned to protest Facebook’s bad acts in, “Facebook Log Out Campaign Aims To Hold Social Media Companies Accountable For Protecting Users.”
On November 10, the Kairos Fellowship encouraged Instagram and Facebook users to log out of their accounts. The movement called the Facebook (and Instagram) Log Out. The purpose is to remove users from the social media platforms’ profit streams. In other words, hurt the companies in the wallet in an attempt to gain their attentions. The protestors want effective content moderation, algorithm transparency, and direct accountability to the people on the platform:
“But here’s the thing: Social media users are not powerless. In Facebook’s case, 98% of their revenue comes from advertising, much of which is hyper-targeted towards each and every user. So when I say Facebook is nothing without users and user data, I literally mean it. We make or break platforms like Instagram and Facebook, and, together, we can begin the process of reimagining what these spaces could look like and how they can run. It’s because I see the importance of social media platforms in our society and for marginalized communities that I’m proud to be leading the Facebook (and Instagram) Logout.”
November 10 has come and gone, but there was little reported on the Logout’s impact. It is great for protests like the Logout to exist and gain the social media companies’ attentions. It would be even greater if they worked with politicians and more advertisers to make their voices heard. It is hard to get a message across unless something goes viral, but they need social media for that. Catch-22 anyone?
Whitney Grace, November 17, 2021
You: Just Bake in Search
November 17, 2021
Google has a new rival, a search engine built with developers in mind: You.com. The platform, now in beta, uses AI to summarize information while supplying links. It also promises never to track queries, sell user data, or push targeted advertising. A couple test searches reveal results neatly tailored to the subject. My first two searches produces Wikipedia articles at the top, followed by general Web results, then topic-specific selections (News, Music, Shopping, etc.), a customized “quick facts” section, and more. When I typed in “pecan pie,” it was smart enough to lead with recipes.
Though the page itself does not emphasize the creator’s focus on developers, he discusses it on the Y Combinator post, “You.com, Private Search Engine that Summarizes the Web—Built for Devs.” He announces:
“My name is Richard Socher, and I’m the founder of you.com, the world’s first open search engine platform that summarizes the web for you. We launched our public beta today, and are excited to share it with you. If you’re a developer, we have several ‘search-apps’ such as StackOverflow (with code snippets), W3Schools, MDN, Copilot-like Code Completion, json checkers, and more. All of them geared to help you code faster. Let us know if you have other app ideas for how to make your coding life better. … We wanted to create a search engine that delivers relevant content, not ads or SEO’d pages, and do it in a whole new interface that puts you in control through personalized preferences.”
We learn more from an article at Venture Beat, “AI-Driven Search Engine You.com Takes on Google with $20M.” Writer Kyle Wiggers reveals that substantial funding is led by Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff. His publication asked Socher about his inspiration for the platform:
“As the economy moves online, it’s You.com’s assertion that the internet is becoming more centralized and controlled by a few powerful, ill-meaning tech corporations. … ‘I had the original idea [for You.com] eight and a half years ago,’ Socher told VentureBeat via email. ‘Today, there’s too much information, and no one has time to read it, process it, or know what to trust. [A] single gatekeeper controls the vast majority of the search market, dictating what you see: too many advertisements and a flood of search-engine-optimized pages … On top of that, 65% of search queries end without a click on another site, which means traffic stays within the Google ecosystem.’
That is a good point. See the Venture Beat article for details on how Socher uses AI to underpin You’s search, the site’s approaches to customization and privacy, and a comparison to its rivals.
Cynthia Murrell November 17, 2021
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
